TOWN OF HINESBURG

PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES

August 4, 2004

Approved August 18, 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, Lynn & Marie Gardner, Jon Trefry, Howdy Russell, David Lyman, Barbara Forrest, Ted White, Joe Donegan, Elizabeth Lee, Deb Howard, Ken Brown, Peter Erb, Wayne Bissonette, Bill Marks, Susan Frisch-Mead, Roger Kohn, Kim Hazelrigg, Scott Shumway, Missy Ross, George Dameron, Chuck Reiss, Lexi Reiss.

The meeting began at approximately 7:35pm.

Town Plan Revision Public Hearing:

Jean opened the public hearing on the proposed Town Plan revision. Lynn Gardner said he would like the last 2 sentences in the Starksboro portion of section 1.6 deleted. He felt these sentences implied that the existing Hinesburg businesses in the Industrial 1 zoning district (e.g., Clifford Lumber, Hinesburg Sand & Gravel) were not desirable. Alex explained the rationale behind this section, but Lynn still felt these sentences should be deleted.

Ken Brown suggested adding a glossary to the Plan to help people with all the acronyms (e.g., PRD) and planning terms.

Ted White said that Shelburne Falls Road is heavily used and speeding is problematic. He said the Plan should recognized this and recommend a lower speed limit on this road. Lynn said that the Selectboard is looking into conducting a speed study (via the CCMPO) on a variety of Town roads, in order to have the data to back up any decisions to modify speed limits. Lynn said that a speed study is required before speed limits can be adjusted.

Peter Erb suggested changing recommendation 4.3.2 b (storm water runoff) by striking the word “subdivision”. Peter said stormwater issues come up in a variety of developments, including some that don’t involve subdivision. He felt the Commission should be looking at both zoning and subdivision regulations when it comes time to make provisions for stormwater runoff. He also asked if the current Plan language would allow the Commission to develop regulatory guidelines or standards for innovative “low impact development” stormwater techniques that minimize runoff by designing for maximum absorption on-site. Fred felt that 4.3.2 a provides the flexibility to explore innovative solutions.

David Lyman said that the Plan advocates for expanding the village area along the Mechanicsville Road corridor. He asked where new development would go in this area. Jean and George Bedard described the current village zoning district boundary, and explained the Commission’s desire to explore the Mechanicsville Road corridor further because of its proximity to the existing village core and its access to existing Town water and sewer lines. Jean said the Quinn property represents most of the undeveloped land in this area, but redevelopment of existing properties may also be more attractive to landowners under new zoning.

Howdy Russell strongly encouraged the Commission to consider the Mechanicsville Road corridor for future village growth. He felt this corridor has potential, and doesn’t suffer from being divided by a state highway as is the Route 116 corridor north of the existing village core. He would actually like stronger language in the Plan regarding consideration of the Mechanicsville Road area.

Ted White said that he wants the West Side Road designed to best protect the LaPlatte River. He also felt that the road design should emphasize traffic calming and slower speeds.

Wayne Bissonette said he is not clear on what the results of the Commission’s earlier discussions were regarding potential development and re-zoning of the West Side area. He said that he asked both the Selectboard and the Commission to consider rezoning the southern portion of Ballard’s Corner as commercial. He doesn’t think the draft Plan mentions this possibility at all. Jean said the village land use section of the Plan does have language to support the creation of a unique zoning district to allow mixed use development (including commercial) in the West Side area. Fred said the process is slow and deliberate, and the Commission is taking the 1^st step with the broad recommendations in the Plan. Wayne felt the Plan doesn’t have enough specifics for the area. He thought the Plan would have more detail on this front, given the Commission’s earlier discussions. Fred said that in the municipal planning process, the Town Plan simply serves as a vision for the future, which is then implemented through regulatory (e.g., zoning) and non-regulatory techniques. He said the Commission fully intends to explore all the possible zoning options for this area, once the vision expressed in the Plan is adopted. He said this follow up work will take time and involve more public input to ensure that the community has a chance to participate in the re-zoning and important growth center planning process.

George Dameron said that as he understood it, the Town Plan comes first and then the details are discussed further during the Zoning revision process. Bill Marks said the Plan language appears to be an attempt to carefully work through these issues in a deliberate way.

Scott Shumway said the Plan recommendations are very broad and far reaching, with few specifics on how to implement them. He pointed out a few recommendations (e.g., section 3.3.1), and asked how, where, and when would these be accomplished. He also said that the Plan should include some cost estimates to implement these recommendations. He felt that without cost estimates, the Town won’t really understand what is possible, and without details on how, where, and when, the recommendations will likely be forgotten. Jean said she wasn’t sure how to put cost values on all of these recommendations. Scott said the Commission could talk to the various Town committees to get more input on potential costs. Jon Trefry said the Plan should be construed as more of a vision than a project with tight timelines and budgets. He said it is up to all of us to make sure the Plan’s recommendations are acted on. He said these goals will stand a good chance of being realized, only if there are concerned citizens that advocate for that issue. He felt that active citizens and citizen groups are often the driving force behind important town initiatives and projects. Carrie said that it is the Town Planner and the Planning Commission’s job to continually revisit the Plan, and ensure that progress is being made on the recommendations.

Lynn asked if the Commission will make the zoning changes that the Selectboard recommended during the zoning revision process last year. Carrie said those issues will be considered when the Commission begins work on zoning changes to implement the new Plan. Carrie and Jean made it clear that while those changes will definitely be discussed, the Commission can’t make guarantees about how those suggestions will shake out in any new zoning.

Ted White said he really wants the Plan to be an active, working document that doesn’t simply sit on the shelf, especially given all the time and energy that has gone into it. He said that the Planning Commission’s work on the Plan was inspiring and well thought out. He recommend caution about recommendation 3.2.2 a with regard to curbing. He said curbing can have a negative effect on stormwater runoff because it can further channel and speed up the runoff. Joe said the Commission understands this concern, but must balance it with the effectiveness of curbing with regard to pedestrian safety.

George Dameron agreed with Ted that the Commission clearly has put a lot of good time and effort into the Plan. He said he is much happier with the current draft when compared to the previous one, and appreciates that the Commission made substantial changes based on the public input from earlier this year. He felt that the Mechanicsville Road intersection should also be included in the list of Route 116 intersections in the village that need improvement (recommendation 3.2.2 a). He asked who is the agent that will oversee the village improvements mentioned in the Plan. Joe said the implementation section at the end of the Plan shows that the top 4 priority goals/recommendations have to do with the village. Joe said this section indicates that the primary agents for the village improvements will be the Selectboard and the proposed Village Steering Committee.

Deb Howard said this draft of the Plan is a marked improvement from the last draft, and she appreciates the Commission’s willingness to incorporate the public’s feedback. She felt that the Plan should recommend finding a way to get more professional planning assistance. She said that most of the Town boards are volunteers, and that a single part-time planner isn’t enough given all the challenges raised in the Plan.

Elizabeth Lee said the Plan should give greater emphasis to the need for elderly and disabled housing and services. She felt that the demographics point to an aging population, and that Hinesburg needs to think ahead to ensure we have adequate housing and even assisted living facilities. Jean pointed out that section 5.8 of the Plan does deal with this issue. Elizabeth would also like the Plan to encourage housing developments that have a mix of market prices, so as not to have one development area for rich people and another for low-income people. She also asked for clarification on section 4.8.1 related to ridgelines. She asked what is properly planned ridgeline development? Jean said the specifics of this issue will be discussed in greater depth when the zoning regulations are revised. Elizabeth also felt that the proposed 3-year timeframe for conservation and open space planning was too long.

Bill Marks thanked the Commission for adding language that will consider lower densities in the rural agricultural and forest areas. He said he is already working on natural resource maps for the Commission to consider when the regulations are revised.

Howdy Russell appreciated the priority list of goals/recommendations in section 9 of the Plan. Furthermore, he agrees with the majority of them. He hopes the Commission will work closely with the proposed Village Steering Committee on any village area zoning changes. He felt that the Commission would benefit by getting perspective from people who reside in the village. He wondered if there was some way to control or design the types of businesses that will eventually go in the West Side area. He said the Commission should remember the current village residential core, and plan with consideration of these areas. He also hopes that future zoning changes will be based on the Town Plan instead of from individual landowners or special interests.

Elizabeth Lee said that pedestrian issues are not exclusive to the village area. She said that many kids walk or bike along the Richmond Road back and forth from the trailer parks and developments in that area. She said these pedestrians have no place to go when traffic situations develop because of the ditches on either side of the road. She felt this was an unsafe situation that needed attention. Deb Howard seconded that sentiment. Elizabeth also felt that the Plan should recommend consultation with Efficiency Vermont as a way to conserve on energy. Carrie discussed the energy section and where language to this effect could be inserted.

Peter Erb said that the Town’s biggest recreational features are the Town roads, especially for adults. He said the class 3 and 4 dirt roads are used extensively for walking, biking, etc. He felt that section 5.4.1 (Town recreational facilities & programs) should include this important resource. Missy Ross agreed, and said that past Town surveys showed that walking is a key recreational component. She said we need to recognize that our dirt roads are not just there for moving vehicles.

Chuck Reiss was happy that creating interconnected trail networks throughout town was on the list of the top 10 priority goals and recommendations. He thought that the Conservation Commission could be added as a responsible party on this topic. He also suggested the formation of a steering committee to organize the work.

Wayne Bissonette said that Brian Busier (owner of Lantman’s IGA) is worried about space for Lantman’s, and that there is concern that a large supermarket chain could move into a neighboring town and out compete Lantman’s. Alex said that it doesn’t really matter what Hinesburg does on this front, because we don’t have any control over development in surrounding towns. Deb Howard said the community needs to decide what Hinesburg wants and what is right for Hinesburg.

Kim Hazelrigg wondered if the Plan could say that we don’t want large superstores. Jean said this kind of specificity would be handled in zoning. Kim understood, but still felt that the Plan could express a distaste for very large retailers. George Dameron agreed with Kim, and said that this language could be developed by looking at examples from other towns. Deb Howard and Ken Brown both agreed with this sentiment, and Ken felt the Plan should be changed so as to emphasize that new development be at a scale appropriate for Hinesburg. Elizabeth said the easiest way would be to come up with a square footage criteria. Jean reiterated that defining square foot limitations should really be done in the Zoning Regulations, rather than the Plan. Chuck Reiss said that square footage limits may not be appropriate. He used the new NRG facility as an example, since the building itself is something like 40,000 square feet (i.e., large), but is also very attractive, desirable, and at a scale appropriate for Hinesburg.

Ted White said that developers plan to develop up to the limit of the regulations; therefore, the Commission should be careful to clearly lay out these limits. Barbara Forrest said that recommendation 3.2.5 c was too mild, and that the Plan should more forcefully advocate for the clean up of underutilized, abandoned, or unsafe properties.

Chuck Reiss asked for a description of the village core versus the greater village area. Alex explained by reading the 2^nd paragraph in section 3.2 of the Plan. Chuck asked if it was fair to say that the Plan advocates for development in the core area first. Alex said no, because the Plan actually wants to do both redevelopment in the core and some expansions in the greater village area concurrently. Lynn said he was afraid that too much redevelopment in the village would change the historic character and streetscape. Deb Howard suggested burying the existing utility lines in the village as part of the main street work and redevelopment contemplated in the Plan.

Joe Donegan said he doesn’t want the agricultural lands that frame the village to be compromised or become an after thought. He thinks that these natural resources as well as rural recreational opportunities near the current village are assets that shouldn’t be ignored.

George Dameron said he still feels that the Plan should include some language to guide limitations on the square footage of potential big box retailers. George Bedard disagreed. He said that square feet limits should not be in the Plan. He thinks these limits could unnecessarily burden existing businesses impossible for them to compete or grow. Missy Ross said she doesn’t want a large 50,000 square foot grocery store. She thinks the Town should encourage Lantman’s to stay in its current location by working on innovative access and site planning changes to help meet the business’s needs.

Missy also said section 5.5 should be corrected since the Town Clerk’s office does not have 2 part-time assistants. She also recommended taking another look at the 2004 population number shown in the first part of the plan. She said the number looks low.

Ken asked if the Plan addressed fragmentation of agricultural/forest lands. Fred said it does and advised doing a word search on “overlay” (e.g., overlay districts). Jean and Joe referred to sections 3.4.3 and 3.4.4.

The Commission will discuss this feedback and potential changes to the draft Plan at the August 18 meeting. Alex will develop some language to address the Town’s interest in the future of the VELCO transmission lines.

Minutes of the July 21, 2004 Meeting:

George MOVED to approve the July 21, 2004 meeting minutes. Joe SECONDED the motion. The motion PASSED 8-0 with Fred abstaining.

Other Business & Announcements:

None.

The meeting adjourned at approximately 9:45pm.

Respectfully Submitted,

___________________________________/____________

Alex Weinhagen, Town Planner Date