TOWN OF HINESBURG
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
July 7, 2004
Approved July 21, 2004
Commission Members
Present: Jean Isham (Chair), Fred
Haulenbeek, Carrie Fenn, John Buckingham, Joe Iadanza, George Bedard, Nancy
Norris, Johanna White, Daniel Greller
Commission Members Absent: none.
Also Present: Alex Weinhagen (Town Planner), George & Karla Munson.
The meeting began at approximately 7:37pm.
West Side Road Area
Vision:
The Commission discussed the broad vision and goals for the expanded growth center along the west side of Route 116 from the Cheese Factory to Shelburne Falls Road. Fred explained that laying out basic goals would help the planned design charette process that we hope to do after the new Town Plan is adopted. Fred began by briefly explaining the West Side Road feasibility study for the benefit of the new members – i.e., the purpose and results.
Fred said the Commission needs to decide how detailed the zoning provisions for this area should be. He said that the Town currently has limited wastewater capacity, which will likely not support a full build out of this expanded growth center concept. Therefore, the Commission needs to consider phasing, either via zoning or via wastewater allocation policies/ordinances. Jean, John, and Nancy said that we need more detailed zoning for this area versus other existing areas and/or areas with less density and numbers of uses.
George said we need to establish a clear time table and process for improvements to the Town’s wastewater treatment system, in order to make development realistic and marketable. He also described his general vision of uses in this area from previous Commission discussions: 1) Additional commercial uses near Ballard’s Corner; 2) Municipal land as recreation and open space (at least in the near term) south of Ballard’s Corner near 116; 3) Residential and mixed uses throughout the remainder, but away from Route 116. George said he favors fewer regulatory details for this new area. Joe countered that more detailed regulations are needed to ensure the community gets the right kind of development in this new area. Joe said he doesn’t necessarily want to nit-pick over paint color, but feels it appropriate to establish heights, 2nd or 3rd story uses, sectors within the zone for various uses, etc.
Fred reiterated that the Commission needs to discuss the basic framework of this area so those participating in the design charette will have some foundation on which to craft ideas and creative design alternatives. Johanna felt one important goal should be protection of the LaPlatte River and its overall water quality, including that of its tributaries. Fred suggested leaving the west side of any new west side road as open space, where stormwater treatment could be handled. He felt this could also create a distinct western edge to the new expansion area. George disagreed, stating that given the high cost of the infrastructure (road, sewer/water lines, etc.), likely to be borne by the developer, development would need to occur on both sides of any new road in order to be feasible.
Carrie suggested a greenway along Route 116 with a bike path, in part to preserve the viewshed into the village core from the north. Jean mentioned concerns raised by community members about commercial growth expanding near Ballard’s Corner rather than expanding slowly outward from the current village core. Dan said he was concerned about this sort of growth and the potential to drain business from the village core to the Ballard’s Corner area, which is more distant and harder to walk to. Fred and George said the original reason for putting more commercial up at Ballard’s Corner was because the soils are better (i.e., firmer, less depth to bedrock) in this area. George said the unconsolidated clay soils closer to the village core will not support large commercial structures and likely won’t support more than 2-story multi-family dwellings.
Dan said the west side area expansion worries him, and has the potential to turn into sprawling strip development that is too far removed from the existing village core. He would like to see improvements in the current village core along the lines of redevelopment, revitalization, and in-fill. Alex suggested doing both as he doubts that redevelopment and in-fill in the existing core will be able to keep pace with Hinesburg’s demand for housing and additional commercial opportunities. Alex said revitalizing the current village core is critical, but that the Commission has talked about doing this in concert with a master plan for an expanded growth center that will accommodate Hinesburg’s growth over the long term. Dan felt that there were a lot of possibilities in the existing village, and that until those were explored, no one knows what the potential is for absorbing future growth in the existing village core. There was discussion about possible opportunities and their limitations. Jean and Nancy said the Town has a responsibility to plan for the long term, and that it now has an exciting opportunity to work with 2 major landowners (Lyman, Bissonette) that would like to do something with their land in the west side area. Nancy said that these landowners are likely to develop it one way or the other, and now is the time for the Commission to lay out a plan so that the future development better serves the community. John suggested that a new village steering committee (recommended in the draft Plan) could focus on revitalization of the village core, while the Planning Commission focuses on master planning and new zoning for the west side area.
Johanna suggested defining desired percentages of various uses (residential, retail, commercial, municipal, etc.) for the west side area. Carrie felt the commercial and retail component could be a relatively small percentage – i.e., 15% commercial/retail. Joe suggested identifying sectors within the area to focus uses in certain areas with some areas reserved for truly mixed-use development (i.e., residential dwellings above commercial space). For example, perhaps we could cluster restaurants in one sector with some common green areas and landscaping to make it an attractive destination for pedestrians.
George and Fred said that dealing with stormwater will be extremely important for the success of any proposed development plan. Dan reiterated his concern about the pace of the proposed west side area expansion.
Alex discussed the process moving forward with the next step being the Town Plan public hearing on August 4 and hopefully adoption of the Plan by the Selectboard. Alex wants to wait to plan for a design charette on the west side area until after the public hearing. John said the Commission is not in a hurry, and should take the time necessary to do this right.
Minutes of the June 2 and June 16, 2004 Meetings:
George MOVED to approve the June 2 and June 16, 2004 meeting minutes as amended. Nancy SECONDED the motion. The motion PASSED 9-0.
Other Business &
Announcements:
Announcements included:
· CCRPC Regional Plan update process
· Habitat for Humanity project on Birchwood Lane
· Act 115 and Chapter 117 (local planning/zoning) statutory changes
· Municipal Planning Grant project ideas for September application
Alex mentioned that
Peter Erb’s 3-year term as Zoning Administrator is up in August, and that this
is the only municipal position that is actually appointed by the Planning
Commission (albeit with Selectboard approval).
George and Jean said that in the past, the Commission would make motion
to recommend someone to the Selectboard.
Alex will verify the proper process and put this on the next meeting
agenda for action or more discussion.
There was also
discussion about DRB process and staffing issues. George Bedard expressed his continued frustration with the new
DRB system and the involvement of the Zoning Administrator in the DRB
review. George said he would like the
Zoning Administrator to be separate and apart from DRB review process, and have
other or new staff members assist the DRB in its review process. George said the current process is flawed
for a number of reasons and doesn’t work for the applicants. Jean countered that her experience with the
DRB, as an applicant, was very straight forward and quite acceptable. She said that she was up front with all of
her plans and information, and the resulting process was very smooth. Alex noted that it is typically the
incomplete applications that raise unanticipated questions and concerns at the
DRB hearings.
The meeting
adjourned at approximately 9:45pm.
Respectfully Submitted,
___________________________________/____________
Alex Weinhagen, Town Planner Date