HINESBURG PLANNING COMMISSION

Minutes of November 29, 2000

APPROVED

Present: Ted Bloomhardt, Roger Kohn, Jean Isham, George Bedard, Carrie Fenn, and Will Patten. Also Faith Ingulsrud, Town Planner

Members Absent: Fred Haulenbeek, George Munson and John Mace

Members of the Audience: none

1. Saputo and Phone Company Questions. In preparation for next week’s meeting, Faith handed out the supporting documentation for some of the items on the agenda. She pointed out Saputo had plans for a sidewalk.

Faith said Champlain Valley Telecom is willing to put in a sidewalk in front of their new site on Mechanicsville Road (the former health center), but they want to do it at the same time that the Town puts in the rest of the sidewalk. Champlain Valley Telecom doesn’t want to install it earlier and then have potential link up problems when the Town installs the other section. Faith noted that the Town’s sidewalk project has been delayed because a few landowners have not signed letters of intent to provide an easement. Roger Kohn said if the phone company is given an extension on building the sidewalk, then there needs to be a time frame. Faith was concerned that if the phone company builds their sidewalk now, there may have to be some reconstruction two years from now when the Town builds its portion.

Roger Kohn made the following motion:

The Hinesburg Planning Commission hereby amends the condition of the September 6, 2000 approval for Selectronics/Waitsfield and Champlain Valley Telecom to provide that additional landscaping beyond what is currently on the lot and the sidewalk shall be installed when the Town installs an adjacent sidewalk or by November 15, 2002, whichever first occurs.

Ted Bloomhardt seconded the motion, and it was unanimously approved.

2. Village District Uses and Boundaries. Ted noted that at one time the Planning Commission had discussed the need to look at David Lyman’s request for re-zoning his property as a whole village district issue and not a single lot. Faith suggested that since no one has said the Lyman request is a bad idea, why not make some minor adjustments in the zoning district uses in the village district north of the cheese factory, and then tackle the larger issues with steering committees, technical assistance from the MPO and public participation. Faith noted that storage units are not specifically addressed in zoning bylaws, but referred to as “light industrial/warehousing” in the commercial district (page 11 of zoning bylaws). The use is not mentioned in the village district.

Roger suggested creating a new district in that particular area, defining it by being within so many feet of Route 116. George Bedard asked how you would access this new district. Roger thought that the cheese factory’s parking area zoning could be redefined at the same time. George said that re-zoning the Lyman area would give the Town more commercial opportunities, which is a good thing. He added that if the Lyman area can’t be commercial, it may lose future opportunity for commercial zoning and revert back to agricultural because of wetland issues. Will Patten said that moving Lyman’s commercial zoning back a specific amount of feet would help the Lymans now and preserve back land for future uses. It would be a short term solution to let existing businesses expand. Faith suggested the Lymans just expand immediately behind the barn, and leave the village district boundaries as they are for now. Carrie Fenn noted that since the Planning Commission wants to accommodate one person’s request for a zoning change, we should re-zone only as little as necessary in good faith, knowing that an expansive study and changes will happen in the future. Ted noted that because it would be conditional use, the Lymans would have to obtain Zoning Board approval.

It was agreed that since no one had objections to expansion of the the storage barn, Faith will come up with some language for a motion to change the Lyman zoning, and will run it by Roger before the next work session.

Expansion of new and existing businesses was discussed in relation to other growth needs like housing. The availability of additional wastewater capacity and the policy on how that is allocated will be key issues in deciding how the village will grow.

Jean Isham asked about the status of the Park and Ride. Faith heard that until Williston can find a place for its Park and Ride, the smaller town’s projects will not be funded.

Faith said she had learned from the MPO staff that Hinesburg could obtain Technical Assistance funds from the MPO to conduct a feasibility study on a new street location on the west side of Route 116 in the Village, and to examine the funding and permitting issues in constructing the road. She recommended that a steering committee be formed to work on the road project. Faith hopes the new Town Plan can incorporate the results of the road study, and have concrete wording and maps showing proposed infrastructure. Will Patten warned of fragmented light industrial/commercial development along a new road. Will recommended a steering committee look not only at the new road, but potential uses and changing zoning. His goals for a new road would be to ease traffic, and provide residential growth. Designing a mixed-use area was discussed. Faith would like a road study well underway before the new town plan process begins.

It was agreed that Faith will write to the MPO seeking Technical Assistance for a road alignment study and project feasibility. Faith will also talk to the selectboard since it is a transportation issue. She also will provide the Planning Commission a time line for the process of creating a new town plan.

3. Rural Densities and Ridgeline Zoning. Faith was pleased to relay that the Planning Commission has a good chance to receive the planning grant to hire a consultant to help develop regulations to address rural densities and ridgeline zoning. The only problem is finding a planning consultant to hire. She will get a proposal out immediately. Both Ted and Will volunteered to help Faith select the planning consultant.

Faith noted that the town plan describes Hinesburg as a “working landscape”, but she is not hearing from the Planning Commission a concern to maintain agricultural/rural land with economic use. She added that the existing pattern of development in Hinesburg is working okay (small subdivisions, large lots, private roads), but how long can that pattern continue?

4. Engineering Review. Faith summarized her findings on the procedures other towns use for obtaining engineering expertise on subdivision and site plan reviews. Charlotte hires Spencer Harris to review on-site septic: test pits, design review, installation inspections. Georgia has independent review of complex projects and bills the applicant. Richmond hires an engineer on an hourly basis for roads and drainage for all developments. Richmond has a planning commission fee and also has the applicant open an account for the engineer to draw from.

The pros and cons of the differing approaches were weighed: complex vs. less complex projects; uniformity of engineering review for everything. Faith will continue on with researching other town’s procedures for both road and septic reviews.

5. Development Review Board. Everyone seemed warm to the concept. A development review board would give the Planning Commission time to plan and eliminate some of the redundancy between zoning and planning approvals. Jean was concerned about planning in a vacuum because you don’t see the applicants. Carrie said the some towns that have DRB’s have members that serve on both boards, so there is crossover and feedback. Faith said you could cycle people between the two boards so they would understand what the other board faces, and you could also keep staff in-the-know. Ted suggested planning commission members be alternates for the DRB. Faith will talk about DRB’s with Tom McGlenn of the Zoning Board.

Roger asked if the Planning Commission thought it was broke and wanted to get fixed. Faith said other planning commissions are working on a town plan and are having a very hard time trying to do both planning and review. Will thought maybe the Planning Commission needs to do more planning and less reviewing.

Faith expressed concerns about staffing issues with having both a DRB and Planning Commission. There would be two meetings a month for both boards. Different roles of the town planner were discussed. Roger likes the planner identifying problems before the meetings so the planning commission doesn’t have to wrangle with the applicant late into the meeting. Roger felt there should be more checklists to identify the issues/problems. George agreed, saying there would be better applicant presentations if there was a checklist.. Ted thought Faith’s staff memo prior to meetings works well. It was agreed Faith would work on a checklist, and will keep staff review procedures the same.