TOWN OF HINESBURG
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Approved August 6, 2003
Commission Members Present: Jean Isham (Chair), George Bedard, Nancy Norris, Fred Haulenbeek (arrived at 7:45pm), Joe Iadanza, John Buckingham, John Mace, Carrie Fenn, Deb Howard (arrived at 7:40pm).
Commission Members Absent: none.
Also Present: Alex Weinhagen (Town Planner), David Spitz (arrived 8:15pm), George St. Gelais, Jeff Couture, Gianetta Bertin, Peter & Christina Mead, Aaron Fogg, Mark Lelli, Shawn Lyman.
Minutes of the July 2 and July 8, 2003 Meetings:
George MOVED to approve the minutes for both the July 2 and July 8, 2003 meetings. John Buckingham SECONDED the motion. The motion PASSED 7-0.
Announcements and Citizens
to be Heard:
Alex updated the Commission on the Town’s progress on adopting revised road standards. A final draft will be developed based on input from the joint meeting of the Selectboard, DRB, and Planning Commission. The Selectboard will then hold one or more public hearings.
Industrial II Zoning District Change:
Shawn Lyman, representing Iroquois Manufacturing, discussed Iroquois’s need to expand, and why they are seeking a small expansion of the Industrial II (I2) Zoning District. Shawn explained that they would like to construct a new 21’ tall, 75’x250’ building (18,750 square feet) on the North side of Richmond Road. The long axis of the building would run roughly parallel to the road, and would extend westward beyond the existing I2 district into a vacant parcel that Iroquois owns in the Rural Residential I district. This building would replace a smaller existing building.
Shawn explained that Iroquois is seeking to redesign and improve its operations, by consolidating installation of its products (e.g., truck bodies) in the new building. This new structure would include 4 bays for installation, a product showroom, and office space. Manufacturing would continue in its facilities on the South side of the road. Shawn said this project would be beneficial to both the company and the Town because it would reduce the amount of equipment crossing Richmond road (currently this poses safety concerns), and allow Iroquois to clean up the site and store more equipment and vehicles out of sight from the road (e.g., behind the building). The project would allow Iroquois to improve its operations on the existing site, without the need to relocate entirely. Shawn explained Iroquois’s history in Town since the early 1900’s, and described both their current and expected future operation.
The Commission asked Shawn a variety of questions about the current operation and how it would change if this project went ahead. Shawn said the number of employees would stay relatively constant, with the possibility of 4-5 more employees in the future given the expanded installation facilities. Shawn indicated that there would likely be parking in front of the new building for customers, with employee parking behind the building. Manufacturing employees would continue to park on the South side of Richmond road. The Commission discussed possible I2 district expansion areas, and the pros and cons of each option with regard to the use and impact on surrounding residential properties.
Jean opened up the meeting for public comments and questions.
Peter Mead asked if there was a way to grant a variance to allow the new building rather than changing the boundaries of the I2 zoning district. George explained that this was unlikely, as variances are very difficult to justify. Alex explained that variances are reserved for situations beyond the landowner’s control that deny a reasonable use of the property. Additions and expansions to existing uses typically don’t qualify for variances.
Peter said he was concerned about the future of the new lands being added to the I2 district, especially if Iroquois runs into problems with their proposed project. Peter said he was comfortable working with Iroquois management, but would be concerned if he had to deal with another company. Peter also said he was concerned about the possibility that the parcel (tax map parcel 17-20-58.000) being added to the I2 district could be sold to another business for a 2nd industrial use. Peter reminded the Commission that his house is northwest (behind) the proposed building, so he will be looking at it from his deck. George said the Development Review Board’s (DRB) site plan review will be rigorous regardless of who the applicant is. Furthermore, George said that if an established business like Iroquois can’t secure site plan approval from the DRB, it is unlikely any other industrial operation would gain approval. George said that the DRB’s process would include ample opportunity for the Meads to secure appropriate screening, noise control, etc.
Mark Lelli asked for more information about the DRB. Alex explained what the DRB is, what it does, and the overall process for site plan approval.
Jeff Couture asked the Commission if this was just the 1st step in a possible future trend of increasing the I2 district to allow for expanded intensity and/or types of uses. George said the Commission is only interested in accommodating an existing business, not making room for more businesses. Joe said that based on input from the Town Plan survey and forums, townspeople want industrial uses in the village or Industrial I districts.
Peter asked if Iroquois really needs to expand the I2 district to the Mead property line at the full 415’ buffer distance from the road. Shawn said that he doesn’t really know, as this depends on further site plan engineering and the results of the site plan review process with the DRB. Shawn said he’d rather see the existing district line extended due West to the Mead’s property line to allow enough room for flexibility in the site planning process.
John Mace asked about preserving access to the shoreline and to the rest of the Iroquois property to the North, in the Rural Residential I (RRI) district. Shawn said that there is no public access to the shoreline via their property. George said that access to their remaining property in the RRI district would be possible via the business access road, and that this issue would likely be discussed further by the DRB.
John Mace asked the audience if there were any objections to expanding the district. No one voiced an objection. John Mace then MOVED to extend the westerly boundary of the I2 Zoning District boundary, on the North side of Richmond road, approximately 160 feet westerly to the Mead property line as shown on the map prepared by Alex and distributed with the abutting landowner meeting invitations. George SECONDED the motion. The motion passed 9-0. The Commission plans to hold a public hearing on all the bylaw changes at its September 3 meeting.
Town Plan Revision – Rural Area Land Use Goals & Objectives:
Joe began the discussion by passing out his outline of goals and recommendations for the land use in the rural areas of Town. The Commission discussed outline and asked Joe for clarification in certain areas. What follows is a partial list of discussion items and other recommendations:
· A village-edge zoning district could provide an important visual break between the rural areas, especially rural residential areas, and the village.
· Need to encourage trail connections in rural areas.
· Explore park & ride options near the edge of Town to help take traffic off rural roads.
· Develop practices for alternative zoning options that help preserve rural land – e.g., area-based zoning allocation, transfer of development rights (TDR), etc. Think about where TDR would send development rights. *Note that the Plan need not provide the rigorous details and procedures for these tools, as this will be done later as part of bylaw revisions.
· Encourage master planning of larger parcels, but don’t require it. Accomplish this by encouraging landowners to work with Town staff and by providing clear incentives (e.g., density bonuses via a planned residential development). Low cost subdivisions for family members may not want to do master planning; however, larger scale developments probably would if the incentives were right.
· Consider targeting rural residential growth in certain districts – i.e., RRI. Consider reshaping rural residential districts to better conform to expected growth areas (e.g., possible sewer).
· The Shoreline district should be considered separately from the rural districts (RRI, RR2, AG). The shoreline district is more recreational or residential in nature.
· Don’t focus all agricultural policies toward large farms. Support should also be given to small, niche farming operations. We need to preserve farming options even on smaller parcels.
· Encourage alternative uses of agricultural lands that allow for continued use of these lands after farming. Allowable uses should include those that introduce no more impact than the original farming operation, keeping in mind impacts from farming can include: tractor traffic on roads, noise from harvesting and processing, odor from manure spreading, long hours of operation.
· Consider working on or recommending the development of an Open Space Plan, perhaps as a project for the Conservation Commission. Such a plan could be used to identify important natural features in the rural areas.
Deb asked how detailed rural area land use recommendations can or should be with regard to issues like natural resources. David said the Plan should include general goals and recommendations, and some specifics, but not necessarily rigorous details on implementation. Alex said that the rural areas section can make general recommendations, while specific ones can be made in the natural resources section of the Plan.
Joe said we should mention something about telecommunication towers given that the Commission has done some work to develop bylaw language to regulate these. Deb said we should also be thinking about wind towers given the increased interest in this technology. Regulations on wind towers could discriminate between single towers for individual use and larger wind farm projects, since the impact varies.
Deb asked for more information on the Commission’s work on a Forest Conservation Overlay district. The rest of the Commission explained the history of this effort, and the feedback (mostly negative) received at the public hearing held in early 2002. Fred felt people reacted negatively to the proposal because they mistook it as stopping developing in some areas, when in fact the intent was simply to require a more careful review in these areas. Joe said the feedback helped the Commission realize that concentrating development along roads in the forested areas is not the answer to preserving working forests and protecting the ridgelines. Instead, the Commission realized that ensuring access to forest resources is integral to preserving a working forest.
Jean said she would be gone from July 19 to August 12, and would not have time to prepare an outline for the August 20 meeting. Alex will bump the discussion of commercial/industrial land use to a later meeting. Instead, Joe will fill out his ideas on rural area land use based on feedback from tonight, and the Commission will discuss this topic more on August 20 along with the discussion on economic development to be led by John Buckingham.
The meeting adjourned at approximately 10:15pm.
Respectfully Submitted,
______________________________ ___________
Alex Weinhagen, Town Planner Date