HINESBURG PLANNING COMMISSION
Minutes of January 17, 2001
APPROVED
Present:
Ted Bloomhardt, Roger Kohn, John Mace, George Bedard, Carrie Fenn, Fred
Haulenbeek, George Munson, and Will Patten. Also Faith Ingulsrud, Town
Planner
Members
Absent:
Jean Isham
Members of the
Audience:
none
1.
Ted White, Conservation
Commission. Ted Bloomhardt
opened the meeting by inviting Ted White to take the floor. Mr. White reminded the Planning
Commission members of the important role they play in determining what Hinesburg
will look like in the future. He
read three quotes from noted conservationist, Aldo Leopold, that were contained
in the Vermont Fish & Wildlife Calendar. He also referenced his December article
in the Hinesburg Record and his appreciation of the American Indian’s care of
the land. Mr. White gave the
Planning Commission members each a Fish & Wildlife calendar, which was
admired and appreciated by all.
2. Penrose Jackson, Chittenden County
Regional Planning Commission.
Penrose Jackson
also brought gifts for the Planning Commission - the newest Vermont Municipal
and Regional Planning and Development Act books. Ms. Jackson is Hinesburg’s new CCRPC
representative and she gave an update on Regional Planning Commission
activities. She described the
redrafting of the regional plan and said its impact would be neutral on
Hinesburg. There are four different
planning areas: urban/Burlington; villages (like Hinesburg); suburbia; and,
rural agricultural or forest. The
most controversial issue for Hinesburg will will be lot sizes recommended in the
rural agricultural areas. Ms.
Jackson sits on two committees (1) Budget and Administration, and (2) Community
Assistance/Communication Resource Support.
John Mace asked
about using GIS as a resource. Will
Patten asked how they were dealing with the housing shortage issue. Ms. Jackson mentioned using the point of
view of minimum densities, rather than maximum densities when thinking about the
housing shortage.
3. Planning Timeline and Development Review Board Faith described the planning
timeline that she had drawn up. She
described some of the upcoming projects that if done first, would help in the
Town Plan process. Faith felt the
labor-intensive Town Plan process would necessitate either the Planning
Commission meeting more often, or the Planning Commission reorganizing into a
Development Review Board.
The merits of a
Development Review Board were discussed.
It was noted that the Zoning Board would like the same level of staff
support that the Planning Commission currently receives. Carrie Fenn noted she has heard only
good things about DRB’s. She felt a
DRB would allow the Planning Commission to actually do some planning and give
planning the thought it really needs.
Faith added that DRB’s can make the quality of decisions better and also
make the process more efficient.
Ted had a positive opinion, based on a work-mate on the Berlin DRB. He did note that you will have new
people interpreting subdivision regulations and that current commission members
would have to “let go”. John also
felt positively. He thought it
would make sense to applicants as well, but the Zoning Board needs to agree
because their workload would increase.
George Munson
suggested looking at last Summer’s (a 4 month period) minutes to see how many
projects had to go through both boards for approvals. This would illustrate how a DRB would
help both in reducing staff time and applicant time and
fees.
How to use
alternates, and the size of the boards was discussed. Communication between the boards would
be provided by the staff members that serve both boards.
Ted Bloomhardt
made a motion that the Hinesburg Planning Commission investigate the suitability
of a Development Review Board with presentations and communications with the
Zoning Board and Selectboard.
Carrie Fenn seconded, and it was unanimously
approved.
Getting back to
the planning timeline, Faith felt that completion of three studies were key
before starting the Town Plan process.
They are (1) the sewer capacity study, (2) village road feasibility
study, and (3) the school/housing study.
She described the sewer capacity expansion study and the Revolving Fund
Program that would help finance it.
She said she
would be working with the other town staff on new Road Standards. The standards need to clearly define
public vs. private road needs and include construction standards. She briefly
summarized the history of road standards in Hinesburg.
Roger mentioned
that he had three ordinances from a Massachusetts planner from three different
towns on ridgeline zoning. He will
forward them to Faith.
4. Engineering Review would
involve hiring engineers to assist with reviewing certain development
projects. Faith explained how the towns of Richmond, Shelburne and Charlotte use
engineers to review projects for the Planning Commission. She said $1,000 has been added to next
year’s budget for this purpose. Ted
asked if the Planning Commission felt they were getting good information to work
from. The Truax subdivision and
Dynamite Hill were discussed.
George Bedard
was opposed to having engineers review projects, picking apart things. He thinks proper Road Standards would
avoid situations like Dynamite Hill.
Fred pointed out that the new Zoning Administrator will have more time to
inspect and enforce sites and conditions.
We shouldn’t over-react to one case of septic misrepresentation. Roger felt that engineer review is
important to have now. We caught
one problem, but there may be others we don’t know of. Roger thought an “engineering account”
used in Richmond is unnecessarily complicated. The engineer could spend a minimal
amount of time on each project to determine which have issues.
George Bedard
said that having roads and septic, staked out on the land during site visits and
preliminary plats as required in the Subdivision Regulations would have
prevented the difficult road at Dynamite Hill. He said we have enough expertise on the
board. If we require site visits
and stakes on the land, we can avoid using an engineer. Faith agreed with George about Dynamite
Hill, but she noted that the board does not have expertise on (1) road
alignment/traffic safety, and (2) drainage, where and how the water is going to
flow and water quality issues. It
is the less visible things that concern Faith. Ted wondered how some engineers could
find a septic site in an area where other engineers could not. There are good engineers and not so good
engineers. Roger added that’s why
you have a town engineer look at test pits and
installation.
Will Patten
wanted a middle ground, to define a fair, equitable point where the engineer
comes in. Fred suggested doing a
spot review every once in a while (every 5th project, for
example). It was noted that
Hinesburg’s fees are low compared to other towns. Will said if engineering fees are added,
Hinesburg’s fees would still be low.
Faith said most of the subdivisions are really simple and do not warrant
engineering review. She said there
may be a difference between how we treat site review vs. septic review in terms
of the procedures for engineering review.
Roger suggested Faith talk to some engineering firms to see what can be
done, and to come up with a process that makes sense. She will talk to engineering firms about
the criteria needed for engineering review, and not make it too onerous. It will be made clear that the purpose
is not give people a hard time.
Faith said that when it is done right, it basically becomes a peer
review, the engineers problem-solve together.
Carrie said she
was all for septic reviews, especially on lots over 10 acres. Everyone agreed they liked Spencer
Harris’ work, and it was suggested he do the septic reviews. Will also likes engineers helping to
select criteria for reviews. George
Bedard was totally against spot checks.
George Munson suggested having Spencer Harris take a look at camp
conversions septic policies. Faith
will pursue this in addition to talking with engineering firms about criteria.
Faith felt that if
Hinesburg is exposed without oversight, then Hinesburg will attract less than
good engineers.
5. Miscellaneous
Faith told the
Planning Commission that Howard Riggs forgot to file the mylar for
re-subdivision within the 90 days required by statute. His attorney, Joe Fallon, sent a letter
requesting that if possible the Planning Commission would choose to re-issue its
final plat approval. After checking
of the statute, it was clear to all that there has to be a public hearing (with
a warning).
Faith gave an
update on the sidewalk/bike path along Mechanicsville Road. She said the Selectboard is committed to
condemning the construction easements if necessary. She presented a map showing the
proposed project and described the issues the town needs to address before the
project can move to the next design phase.
Carrie asked for
the status of developing a program to track conditions and permits. Faith said there is money in the budget
to hire someone to do the job next year, and the town also has the asset of
Holly Russell’s mind. Holly has
been working hard making lists of approvals with conditions not yet met and
writing letters to inform former applicants of the requirements
.
Commission
members commented on the letter Faith had written to Rich Donato describing the
Commission’s requirements on access to his camp. George Bedard gave an update on the Rich
Donato camp conversion proposal.
George Bedard had gone out to look at the road to see if could be widened
to 18', and he talked with Lisa Carlson who owns the land the road is located
on. She does not want the road
widened to 18 feet. George Bedard
asked the Planning Commission how they would explain to Rich Donato why the
Woods Run/Lower Road site got approval, while his site (which Mr. Donato views
as similar) did not. Roger
suggested Faith find the minutes involving decisions on camp conversions at Wood
Run to see what the Planning Commission did and why. George Bedard showed everyone the two
different roads on a tax map.
Carrie noted
that Al Barber of the Fire Department told the Planning Commission the road to
Mr. Donato’s camp was fine, and in fact
it wasn’t. Roger said the
Planning Commission should figure out who in the Fire Department will look at roads and discuss with them
the road standards, it can’t be arbitrary.
The 15 year
statute of limitations on zoning violations provided in the Bianchi law was
discussed in relation to the unmet conditions at Travia’s. Roger asked if there were any other
violations that were close to being 15 years old. Faith mentioned camp conversions. She thought one good thing of camp
conversions is that it forces people to fix their septic system. If camps are not converted people will
just live in them year-round using failing septic systems. How to identify such camps was
discussed.
Faith described
lake water quality testing done by Conservation Commission member Martin
Peterson on Lake Sunset, showing high levels of bacteria in certain areas. Surprisingly the bacteria counts were
very low at the dam where water flows out of the lake. Roger suggested looking into grants to
do further lake water quality studies and to inventory the properties around the
lakes to determine the extent of illegal camp conversions. Fred agreed, this information was
essential to establishing clear standards for camp conversions. Faith will pursue.
6. Minutes of January 3,
2001 Carrie Fenn
moved to accept the minutes of January 3, 2001 as corrected. George Munson seconded and it was
unanimously approved.
The meeting
adjourned at 10:40
pm.
Respectfully
submitted,
Sally Kimball,
Recording Secretary