TOWN OF HINESBURG

PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES

October 2, 2002

Approved October 16, 2002

Commission Members Present: Jean Isham (Chairperson), George Bedard, John Mace, John Buckingham, Joe Iadanza, Nancy Norris, Carrie Fenn, Will Patten

Commission Members Absent: Fred Haulenbeek

Also Present: Alex Weinhagen (Town Planner), Andrea Morgante, Kristen Underwood, Marty Illick

The meeting began at approximately 7:35pm.

Lewis Creek Build-out Presentation by Lewis Creek Association:

Andrea Morgante and Kristen Underwood, representing the Lewis Creek Association, gave a presentation on the Community Buildout Analysis software, which is capable of showing potential build out (e.g., maximum number of structures) in Hinesburg using existing data in a Geographic Information System (GIS). Andrea gave an overview of the software and why it was created. It gives volunteer and professional planners an easy-to-use tool to investigate the impact of various planning and zoning scenarios on potential build out. The software allows the user to visually investigate these build out scenarios via maps. It also allows the user to quantify this information through tabular results.

Kristen gave the Commission a demonstration of the software by showing maximum build out for Hinesburg using different scenarios. She showed that the software can be more realistic than other, more simple, build out programs because the software allows the user to remove those portions of the Town that are unlikely to be developed due to ownership or site restrictions. This makes the final build out analysis under various scenarios less prone to wild overestimates.

Andrea left a binder with information on the software and the Association’s work on this front both in Hinesburg and surrounding communities. She also left a CD with the software on it, and encouraged Commissioners and the Town Planner to use it. The software runs on top of ArcView GIS software, and she reminded the Commission that the Town has ArcView GIS on the Town Planner’s computer. She felt it could be especially helpful given the Commission’s current effort to revise the Town Plan as well as the Zoning and Subdivision Regulations.

Jean expressed hope that the Community Buildout Analysis software could help the Commission in its current work. Alex indicated that he would be happy to work with any of the Commissioners if they would like to use the software in the Town Office.

Discussion of Town Plan Issues and Vision for Future:

Each Commissioner shared their thoughts on issues that should be taken up in the new Town Plan, as well as their vision for the future of Hinesburg.

John Buckingham presented a potential/draft preface to the new Town Plan.

Carrie reviewed her vision that included:

Village Center

1. Encourage creation of new West Side Road and focus on mixed use development including affordable housing, park and ride lot, small town park with playground.
2. Extension of the Village Center Zoning District into area North of Commerce Park and South of the Village Heights Condos if topography and wetlands allow.
3. Encourage rehabilitation of dilapidated buildings along RT 116 leading into the Village from the North.
4. Extend sidewalks and toughen landscaping requirements.

Commercial

1. Extend commercial district into the area across from Ballards, and make this commercial area totally off-street and well buffered with landscaping.

Natural Resources

1. Upgrade flood hazard maps and identify aquifers. Town needs clearer maps of these.
2. Create a Conservation Overlay Zoning District that includes: a) Statewide significant natural areas; b) Deer wintering areas; c) Significant wetlands; d) 200 foot riparian corridor along all streams, brooks, creeks, rivers, and tributaries – 100 feet from top of bank.
3. Encourage creation of a biking/hiking trail along the LaPlatte River and away from roads.

Will’s comments:

1. He wants to craft a plan that fits Hinesburg into the overall Chittenden County picture. He feels that Hinesburg is not simply a bedroom community. Hinesburg is part destination community and part bedroom community to the greater Burlington area.
2. Hinesburg needs to provide enough jobs to keep people working in town. We need to track and pay attention to the jobs to resident ratio.
3. Although agriculture is important, the current Plan’s focus on preserving agriculture may be outdated.
4. Overlay Zoning Districts in the forested upland areas are a good idea as long as they allow for additional, denser development in other areas.

John Mace comments:

1. We need better ways to measure and/or track the goals and objectives that we put in the Town Plan. We should have a way to gauge progress towards most if not all the goals and objectives.
2. Residents need to be made more aware of what is happening in town, especially how development is affecting the Town.
3. We need to track what is happening so that we know what we are doing, while we are doing it.

Nancy’s comments:

1. We need a clearer plan for the Village.
2. She would like to see a mix of uses with a balance between the kinds of commercial and industrial development. Strip development focusing on commercial uses that provide primarily minimum wage jobs should be avoided.
3. We should find out how many people travel through town.
4. We need more planning around the RT 116 corridor and the gateway to the Village from the North.

George’s comments:

1. Agrees with many of the previously mentioned concerns.
2. Many of the things needing protection already have some protection in the current regulations.
3. We should keep the Town Plan and the regulations simple.
4. The focus should be on incentives for responsible growth and development rather than restrictions on potentially “bad” development.
5. We need to keep in mind what people want and where they want to live. A vision for residential growth via clustered housing may not agree with how most people want to live.

Joe’s comments:

1. Definition between and within towns hinges on separation. In other words, you know you’ve entered a new community or area when you pass through an “empty” area (i.e., area of low use/density).
2. He would like to see agriculture in the transition areas mentioned above.
3. Clustered housing should help preserve “active” open land, in part to support transition areas, - i.e., active open land primarily as agriculture or forestry.
4. We should craft incentives to keep active agriculture and forestry going in conserved areas near/around development.
5. We should encourage existing landowners to work collectively (i.e., with neighbors) to conserve and actively manage larger tracts of forest and agricultural lands.

Jean’s comments:

1. We should encourage light manufacturing along with commercial, as opposed to developing purely commercial areas.
2. We should track existing commercial/industrial parcels in town to determine how many are active and how many are vacant. Maybe the business community can do this.
3. She supports the open space concepts Joe mentioned, and feels some open areas around development could also be used for community gardens.
4. We should conserve additional areas for recreational uses, both for kids and adults. The Russell property offers potential for development near the Village Center, but also offers significant recreational opportunities (e.g., sugarhouse, etc.).

Joe said that if we increase residential density, we need to be sensitive to the transition areas between residential and business uses. Jean said that this sensitivity may depend more on the type of business rather than just the zone.

Jean said it is important for the Commission to understand the future of the Town’s municipal water and sewer services. The Commission needs to know the limitations to plan realistically. Andrea said that much is possible on this front, but the community needs to identify its goals before the Town pursues extensive water & sewer upgrades.

The Commission then discussed some of the issues facing the Town. Some of the larger issues include: transportation and traffic flow, especially as it relates to safety in the village and alternative transportation; jobs; density of development, housing needs.

Discussion of the Chittenden County Regional Planning Housing Task Force Report:

Will felt that the report addresses the symptoms of the housing crisis rather than providing solutions to the real causes. Will thinks there should be a broader treatment of the issue, and that the proposed solutions should address the real causes. He felt the housing crisis is due to a number of factors, permitting playing only a small role. The crisis is really due to a booming housing market, low interest rates, and our outstanding quality of life that is drawing more and more people.

Jean feels that the bottom of page 11, Regulatory Reform section, does not make sense. She feels that if a municipality is limited by infrastructure capacity, it should be authorized to limit building permits through quotas and other means. She also feels that the report does not adequately address transportation improvements that will be necessary given rapid growth in housing development. She also feels that every municipality should be represented on any committee developing a “Regional Workforce Housing Allocation” program.

Carrie and Alex indicated that the report seemed reasonable after reading it once. But upon a second reading, there are “how to” problems with the implementation of many of the recommendations. Some recommendations do not contain enough detail to allow a meaningful evaluation, and some recommendations seem impractical or not feasible.

Alex will craft and send a response to the CCRPC based on this discussion and his review of the document.

Minutes of the September 18, 2002 Meeting:

George MOVED to approve minutes for the September 18, 2002 meeting. Will SECONDED the motion. The motion PASSED 8-0.

Other Business:

Alex passed along an update on the Mt. Pritchard (St. George) tower issue prepared by Jerry Wetzel. The St. George DRB is expected to make a decision soon. The Commission will wait until the decision is made before pursuing the matter any further.

The Selectboard adopted the revised Town Plan on September 23, and the CCRPC approved/adopted it on the same day.

The draft Final Scoping Report on the RT 116 Hinesburg Corridor Study is ready and will be presented to staff in the next week or two. The final version will be circulated to the Commission in November.

The Orton Family on-line planners training will cost more than the standard group rate for multiple boards. Jean instructed Alex to sign up individually to further his work.

The Selectboard will hold a public hearing on the proposed Zoning Regulations changes (i.e., creation of the Industrial V Zoning District). Various Commissioners indicated they would attend the hearing.

Regulation housekeeping changes schedule. Joe has made some progress, and will continue. Will will start working on it as well. Carrie is working on the home occupation sections. Nancy and Jean will work on definitions for veterinary clinics and kennels. This will be an agenda item for the October 16 meeting.

John Mace indicated that he will not be at the October 16 meeting. He also asked Alex to start e-mailing him agendas for the Development Review Board meetings.

John Mace MOVED to adjourn the meeting. Nancy SECONDED the motion. The motion PASSED 8-0. The meeting adjourned at approximately 10:56pm.

Respectfully Submitted,

______________________________/____________

Alex Weinhagen Date