TOWN OF HINESBURG

PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES

 

June 14, 2006

Approved July 12, 2006

 

Commission Members Present:  Jean Isham, Joe Iadanza, Carrie Fenn, Fred Haulenbeek, Nancy Norris, Kay Ballard, Johanna White, Joe Donegan.

 

Commission Members Absent:  George Bedard.

 

Also Present: Alex Weinhagen (Director of Planning and Zoning), Heather Stafford (Recording Secretary), Karla Munson, George Munson, David Lyman, Barbara Lyman.

 

The meeting began at approximately 7:40 p.m.

 

I. Village Growth Project – The Village Core

Jean said that she felt the Center Road concept should be titled Center Lane to give a better idea of the size and proposed usage of the road. The commission agreed that the Center Lane should spur off from Kelly's Field to keep traffic from getting too close to the buildings. It was discussed whether the road should be one-way or two-way. A one way road would probably generate less traffic but be less useful in providing easy access. Commission members also felt a two-way lane would be beneficial for people coming from the south who wanted to get to Lantman's. It was noted that a 2-way lane could also alleviate traffic congestion in front of the school during drop-off and pick-up times. Jean asked if having a 2-lane road with a detached sidewalk would make the lane too large and out of character with the surrounding town. Since there is no other road like the Center Lane in Hinesburg, commission members did not feel this would be a concern.

 

Alex asked what is the goal of creating a Center Lane. The commission members listed the following benefits:

·          Alleviating traffic congestion on 116 by providing alternative access.

·          Freeing up on-street parking space on 116.

·          Providing affordable housing (town parcel).

·          Remove one access to the church.

·          Encourage unification of the parking lots.

·          Utilizing more in-fill space.

·          Give Lantman's more of a foothold in Hinesburg.

 

The commission felt it was important to maximize development on the Center Lane to justify the expense of the road. Some members were concerned that the lack of visibility from 116 will hinder some commercial business' success on Center Lane. Alex provided a map with an overlay of tracing paper which allowed the commission members to lay out the proposed location of the Center Lane as well as several other proposed development areas. Some possible future development ideas included:

·          Cottage-style housing on the Russell Property

·          Additional senior living housing at Kelly's Field

·          Clinic near Kelly's Field

·          Affordable multi-housing complex on town land.

 

There was some concern about making sure that there is space for the Soccer Field at Lyman Park. The commission proposed turning the orientation of the field but this did not allow a great deal of space between the field and Center Lane. Alex suggested that the re-orientation of the field could be addressed using an impact fee. Several commission members thought the soccer field could serve as a good draw for businesses on Center Lane since this is a busy area during the soccer and little league seasons. The commission hoped to create an area at Lyman park where the soccer field, baseball diamond and a park-like area can co-exist with benches and picnic tables.

 

The commission also discussed the space behind Papa Nick's and making it possible for landowners in this area to develop on the back of their lots if they wish to. Joe D. suggested that creating a dead-end road behind these lots would make in-fill possible. Eventually the road could be completed as a loop back out to 116 to create a 4-way intersection with Friendship Lane.

 

The commission also discussed the fact that if most of the multi-use in-fill takes place behind the development already existing on 116, it would allow the town to to preserve the historic view of the village core. Alex added that in order for a lot of this development to take place, setback limitations will need to be adjusted. The commission briefly discussed the difference in setbacks on 116 between Charlotte Road and Silver Street and the rest of the town. It was agreed that a goal would be to provide higher density development in the village while preserving green space for shared usage. Alex suggested that it could be helpful to do a comparison of current and proposed green space area based on the Village Core plan.

 

II. The Southern Approach

All commission members agreed that locating a large 'Welcome to Hinesburg' sign with landscaping close to the road would help to remind drivers to slow down because they are entering a village. Allowing a residential development on the triangle to the west of 116 was also discussed as a viable idea and a good way to slow traffic as well. Alex thought that if the triangle were zoned correctly they could encourage some more creative higher density development in this area. Joe D. suggested creating a four-way intersection across from Buck Hill Road into this new proposed development. It was also thought that this four-way intersection would help to slow traffic and create more of a village feel. Jean thought a separate zoning district should be created for this area that would allow higher density residential development without allowing any commercial development in this area.

 

The commission also discussed Chuck Reiss' hope to utilize a barn on his new development's property for community use. There was some concern about how the board would use zoning to allow this use on a residential property. Using the conditional use permitting process was decided to be the best method to handle this issue. It was agreed that based on the community sessions it was clear that the town residents did not want to see commercial development along the southern approach.

 

Alex suggested that allowing space for a soccer field to the south of the triangle may be a good way to give the school more athletic field space. A walking trail could be constructed from the school to the field.

 

Encouraging higher density development in the triangle was the consensus of the commission. Streetscape-like housing close to 116 was suggested as well as townhouse-style housing set-back from the road with a central green space. George M. noted that the topography of the land drops down significantly from the level of 116 which would make development close to 116 difficult. Jean suggested that perhaps Bob White could use his creativity to come up with a zoning/housing concept for this area. George M. said the triangle is 4 acres in size with a road on two sides and a waterway on the other which results in multiple constraints. He agreed that an innovative development concept would be necessary for this space.

 

Other Business:

 

Next Meeting

The next Planning Commission meeting will be on June 28th.

 

Minutes of the June 7th PC Meeting

Commission members decided to wait and vote on the minutes at the June 28th meeting.

 

The meeting adjourned at approximately 9:50 p.m.

 

Respectfully Submitted:

 

Heather Stafford

Recording Secretary