TOWN OF HINESBURG
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Approved March 17, 2004
Commission Members Present: Jean Isham (Chair), Joe Iadanza, John Buckingham, Nancy Norris, George Bedard, Fred Haulenbeek.
Commission Members Absent: Carrie Fenn, Deb Howard.
*** Note
– John Mace resigned from the Planning Commission on Feb. 23 ***
Also Present: Alex Weinhagen (Town Planner), David Spitz (Planning Consultant), George & Karla Munson.
The meeting began at approximately 7:33pm.
Minutes of the February 4 and February 18, 2004 Meetings:
George MOVED to approve the February 4 and February 18, 2004 meeting minutes, as amended. John SECONDED the motion. The motion PASSED 6-0.
Town Plan Revision – Review of Draft 1:
David discussed the components and organization of draft 1 of the new Town Plan. He noted that his goal in this draft was to include all of the goals and recommendations made by the Commission. He asked the Commission to review both the organization of the Plan as well as the substance. Chapter 5 on Community Facilities & Services is still in the works, and the Commission should pay special attention to the Land Use and Natural Resources sections.
The Commission went through draft 1 from start to finish. David said the Vision Statement and General Goals section was left blank, so the Commission could discuss this further. David provided the Commission with example vision statements and goals from other Town Plans, and recommended the overall format (not specific substance) in Milton’s Plan. Jean suggested the Commission delay this topic to the next meeting, in order to focus David’s time on other areas.
Population & Housing Section
David indicated that a number of tables and charts are still in need of updating and formatting, and that he will work on this with Alex and John Mace. Although John Mace has resigned from the Commission, he would still like to provide technical assistance on tables, charts, maps, etc. Nancy suggested showing projections for both population and age distribution. She suggested projecting out 20 years if possible. George Bedard was surprised that Hinesburg had fewer families below the poverty level than Charlotte. David noted that we need 2002 and 2003 data for the building permit chart. Nancy questioned the categories in the “Occupied Housing Units by Type” table. David said this information came from Census data, and that he will get better definitions of the categories. David said the section describing earnings, housing costs, and affordability (bottom pg 9) needs substantial updating. This language is from the old Plan and is now out of date. George Bedard volunteered to get more current MLS statistics for this section. David said the recommendations for this section include a fair amount of descriptive language that he will pull out and put into the discussion section.
George Bedard said that his intent in developing these recommendations was not to focus them entirely on affordable housing in the strict sense (i.e., State/Federal definitions) of lower income housing. His intent was to encourage the provision of a wide range of housing that is reasonably priced. The rest of the Commission agreed that we shouldn’t use the term “affordable housing” when we’re referring to all housing types. The Commission agreed that the first few recommendations should have a wider focus than simply lower income or strictly defined “affordable” housing. David will update the language to reflect this.
Land Use Section
David said the “Pattern of Development” section from the old Plan is still relevant, and provides a good introduction to the Land Use section. The Commission discussed the general policies in this section, and decided that these were so broad that they should be shifted to the General Goals section at the beginning of the Plan.
Village – George said that the regulatory framework for wetlands is based on the NWI maps and classification, so this should be recognized. Nancy suggested recommendation 4c regarding the evaluation of taking over Route 116 through the Village should be expanded to include the entire village area. Joe agreed and suggested deleting the parenthetical reference to a particular stretch of road in favor of simply saying the village area. Nancy said recommendation 5b regarding the West Side Road is incomplete since the road could potentially go all the way to the Shelburne Falls Road. Alex will delete the specific route since this is in the discussion section.
Commercial-Industrial – David will update the data in the 2nd paragraph of page 19 regarding census data on commuting. Jean will update the 3rd paragraph on businesses in Hinesburg.
Rural Regions – David said that most of this section is as originally crafted by Joe; however, some of the natural resource goals/recommendations that have a land use focus were added here. Joe has not had time to review David’s work on this section. He will review it to make sure David’s changes and reorganization still works.
Natural Resources Section
David explained that this is a large section, and much of the language comes directly from the existing Plan. As noted above, he said that some of the goals/recommendations developed by Carrie, Deb, John Mace, Jean were moved to the Rural Regions section. Jean volunteered to update table 10 on page 26, which lists the type and number of farming operations. Alex suggested getting Andrea Morgante’s help with descriptive language regarding stormwater issues. David will work on this. The Commission discussed the Greenways/Corridors section, and decided that much of this should be reworded and relocated to the Transportation section. Portions that deal with wildlife corridors should be discussed in the Wildlife Habitat section.
Transportation & Energy Sections
David said that this section was essentially verbatim from the language Joe and Carrie had developed. The Commission felt these sections were in good shape.
Overall
David asked the Commission to continue looking over draft 1 for possible changes. He also said that Carrie and Deb need to take a hard look at the Natural Resources section. Alex will contact them on this. Nancy volunteered to draft a vision statement, so the Commission can discuss this and the general goals section at the next meeting. Alex reminded everyone to send in their brief summaries of major changes in their section of the Plan. Alex will create a single summary document that explains these changes, and get it to the Commission to review at the next meeting. David will complete work on chapter 5 (Community Facilities & Services) and continue work on other aspects of the Plan.
Munson Re-zoning Request & Possible Rural Residential
1 District Modifications:
Fred explained the change to the Rural Residential 1 (RR1) zoning district that he brought forward at the last meeting. In a nutshell, the change would allow multi-family dwellings, and possibly other non-residential uses, in that portion of the RR1 district that is within the sewer service area (soon to be adopted by Selectboard). George Bedard said that density for multi-family units in the RR1 district should be the same as that for single-family dwellings (i.e., 1 dwelling unit per acre, on town sewer). In other words, the higher density allowances for multi-family units in the Village district should not be utilized in RR1 district. The Commission discussed how the density would work, and how multi-family dwellings could be located either via a conventional subdivision or a planned residential development (PRD).
George Munson explained his plans for his property, and reviewed the history of his dealings with the Selectboard and the Planning Commission regarding sewer allocation and re-zoning considerations. He said that at this point he is putting together a sketch plan application to develop a portion of his property under the existing zoning. He said that he needs to secure the necessary sewer allocation from the Town, and cannot get this until he has an approved sketch plan. George Bedard explained that the Commission has been discussing a gateway district to buffer the current village area. He felt the Munsons should be made aware of the Commission’s discussions on this topic, so that they have a better idea of what future zoning changes might be coming for their area. The Commission briefly discussed the current proposal mentioned above as well as the longer-term strategy of establishing gateway areas to the village.
Jean asked the Commission if they wanted to proceed with the zoning change that Fred was proposing. Alex said that the Commission hasn’t addressed Fred’s earlier suggestion to consider other commercial uses now allowed in the village in addition to multi-family dwellings. Nancy said expanding commercial uses in the portion of the RR1 district in the sewer service area would include many areas not immediately adjacent to the village core or village zoning district. Joe agreed that quite a bit more thought and time would be needed before allowing other commercial uses in this area. Jean said we should proceed with a very limited change to the allowed uses in the RR1 district, which simply adds multi-family dwellings within the sewer service area. Alex said that he is very busy with the Town Plan work, and would like to delay even this simple zoning change until May. There appeared to be consensus from the Commission, that they should proceed with the zoning change sooner than May, but that the Town Plan revision project should take precedence.
The meeting adjourned at approximately 10:00pm.
Respectfully Submitted,
______________________________ ___________
Alex Weinhagen, Town Planner Date