TOWN OF HINESBURG

PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES

June 28, 2006

Approved July 12, 2006

Commission Members Present: Joe Iadanza, Carrie Fenn, Nancy Norris, Johanna White, Joe Donegan, George Bedard.

Commission Members Absent: Fred Haulenbeek, Jean Isham, Kay Ballard.

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

The meeting began at approximately 7:50 p.m.

Alex distributed the Hinesburg Excess Treatment Capacity Report as of June of 2006. It indicated that fifty-five new dwellings could be granted a sewer allocation this year.

Minutes of the June 7^th PC Meeting

Carrie MOVED to approve the June 7^th meeting minutes as written. George SECONDED the motion. The motion PASSED 4 – 0 with Nancy abstaining.

**Note: Johanna White joined the meeting after this vote.

I. Village Growth Project – Commerce Park

Alex provided a map with a tracing paper overlay of Commerce Park so that the board could discuss development possibilities in this area. The commission briefly discussed the wetlands delineation that had been done on the unoccupied 4 acre parcel and noted that a large portion of the area is in the wetlands. The regulatory limitations placed on wetlands was discussed as well as the Army Corp of Engineers input in the process. Carrie suggested that perhaps the town could encourage a wetlands restoration project on this parcel to create more usable space. Joe D. asked if it would be possible for a library to be placed on these soils. George B. thought they could. Alex suggested that someone should speak with the library trustees to see if moving the library would be something they would be interested in.

Joe D. suggested that perhaps the canal could be re-routed into a detention pond on this lot but was concerned that a pond with standing water would not be park-friendly. Alex explained that this concept would entail working with the stream alteration division at the state level. George also noted that they would need to talk to the owners of the canal (Saputo) about giving up or altering their rights to the canal. He was concerned that the cost of moving the canal and keeping it flowing would be prohibitive. He added that he did not think the Army Corp of Engineers would want to see a pond in a wetlands area. Alex explained that wetlands restoration projects are usually funded through municipal grants but there is also a new tax increment financing option which would allow the town to designate a tax district. The tax district can be used to allow the town to take out loans against future tax revenues from development in that tax district.

Alex suggested that perhaps structures could be placed in the north east corner of the lot that were smaller and could be supported by the existing soils. He also added that an attractive location for affordable housing might be south of the auto businesses on 116. Joe D. thought the commission should consider re-zoning this area to make it a more attractive location to develop in multiple ways. Alex explained that currently residential housing is only allowed on the 2^nd floor of buildings in Commerce Park. Joe D. suggested that allowing commercial use-buildings on the front part of the lots in Commerce Park and residential use on the back section might be a good use of space. Carrie thought that re-zoning the area for mixed use was a good idea to see what could happen there.

The commission discussed adding a dead-end road into Commerce Park to allow access to the back sections of the existing lots. It was also noted that the National Bank of Middlebury has plans to build on the lot next to the proposed street access location. Joe I. thought the zoning in this area should allow for the minimum lot size to give owners the most flexibility in their development options. Joe Iadanza and George Bedard explained to Alex that when dealing with multiple principal uses on one lot, lot coverage is or should be the limiting function, rather than minimum lot size. They added that attractive PUD density bonuses could encourage growth in this area.

Joe I. said that he thought the commission needed to describe the new zoning districts clearly. He added that it seemed they might be designing micro-districts. Alex added that there is a section in the zoning regulations that describes the purpose of a district and that this would be a good place to clarify the function of the different districts.

In addition the commission discussed additional development on the Village Center Plaza and Telecom lots. It was also suggested that more flexible zoning in this area could allow Andrea Morgante and her neighbors to subdivide their properties if they wished, to create more opportunities for infill in the village.

David Lyman was concerned that the commission was concentrating too much on creating opportunities for in-fill and not enough of retaining and/or creating new green spaces in town. He noted that retaining and creating new green spaces in town had been high on the list of wants and needs of townspeople at the village forums held earlier this year. He was concerned that any possible green spaces seemed to be getting filled with proposals for potential house-sites.

The commission then briefly discussed how the decisions of the Army Corp of Engineers will affect a great deal of development in Hinesburg. Carrie suggested that perhaps a representative from the Army Corp of Engineers should be invited to speak with the Planning Commission to determine the limitations they are working with. George said that this could be a problematic meeting as they could end up limiting development on private landowners property by involving the Army Corp before any options are proposed. Alex added that the town will be working with the Army Corp on the Creekside Soccer field and that perhaps he can get more input from them at that time.

II. Wetlands Delineation Project

Alex explained that he had hired a wetlands consultant to complete a delineation on lot 31 in Creekside to see if the soccer field is possible. In addition the consultant will be spot-checking sections on the West side of 116 to see if the 1995 wetland delineation on this piece of land is accurate. George was concerned that this is not a good time of year to perform a wetlands delineation since everything is so wet. Alex said that at this point it is difficult to know when to have this work done, and that waiting for the weather to cooperate could become problematic in their own planning timeline.

III. Transfer Development Rights (TDR)

Joe D. said that he had done some research on TDR and thought the commission should work to provide more information to the townspeople about TDR as that seemed to be the consensus at the community forums. The commission discussed the concept of a Development Rights Bank and Alex said this is how the town currently handles prime agricultural soils in Hinesburg. Carrie said that she had spoken with Andrea Morgante about the Hinesburg Land Trust serving as the 'Bank'. Andrea thought this was a good idea, but thought the town should thoroughly examine the TDR system used before they move forward.

George said he was concerned with the idea of taking properties off the tax rolls without providing any benefit to the town. He suggested the board should examine how this will affect Hinesburg landowners as a whole. Alex said there are many misconceptions about the tax implications of removing the development rights from land parcels and that it would be good to make everyone aware of the real implications.

George added that due to the physical limitations on the West Side of 116 (the most probable place for village expansion) he did not think TDR for this area would provide a large benefit. Joe I. added that using TDR and subsequent density bonuses makes it more difficult to zone area for the most acceptable density given the range of minimum and maximum lot number possibilities.

George thought that getting some input from structural engineers on what might be possible to build on the West Side of 116 would be helpful. Alex suggested that the commission should do some research on TDR's prior to the next meeting. In addition, he asked that the board take some walks around the village so that they are familiar with the village landscape. At the next meeting on July 12^th he had hoped that the commission would be able to start reviewing Mechanicsville Road and the West Side areas. George thought this review should occur before the discussion of TDR.

George MOVED to adjourn. Nancy SECONDED the motion. The motion PASSED 6 – 0.

The meeting adjourned at approximately 10:00 p.m.

Respectfully Submitted:

Heather Stafford

Recording Secretary