TOWN OF HINESBURG

PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES

September 27, 2006

Approved October 11, 2006

Commission Members Present: Joe Iadanza, Joe Donegan, George Bedard, Fred Haulenbeek, Carrie Fenn.

Commission Members Absent: Johanna White, Jean Isham, Kay Ballard, Nancy Norris.

Also Present: Alex Weinhagen (Director of Planning and Zoning), Heather Stafford (Recording Secretary), Johanna Shal, George Dameron, David Lyman, Barbara Lyman, Corey Beach, Wayne Bissonette.

The meeting began at approximately 7:45 p.m.

I. Village Growth Project - Design Standards

Alex explained that he had compiled several different aspects of surrounding towns' zoning standards to provide examples of how Hinesburg could further utilize design standards within their regulations. He noted that several other towns more clearly explain the purpose of each of their districts. In addition, he had added a waiver option which would allow some flexibility to the DRB while still retaining the general concept of the design standards.

Fred said that several people at the forums had expressed interest in having the town determine a function for each green space in town. Alex added that it would be helpful for the commission to spell out what kinds of open space the board is looking for in each area. Having open spaces that compliment each other and don't duplicate functions would be the most beneficial to the town. He noted that it is difficult to dictate a private developments' usage of their open space.

Carrie said she was not sure how she felt about the wording in regards to mixed use buildings and percentages. She said she would like to see the size of commercial space within a building minimized. Alex said this section had been built off from what Milton had done. They were attempting to fill a mixed use area with commercial and residential without upsetting their intended balance between the two uses. He added that the wastewater allocation system in Hinesburg limits annual development of any type.

Joe I. said that the forces that drive the development of the West Side will be different from those that drive development in the village. He was concerned that residential use or commercial use may dominate over the other and asked how these two uses should be balanced in mixed use areas. He added that he liked the idea of not having to have commercial use in every building and rather focusing on a goal percentage that can be kept together in one building. Fred noted that mixing uses within a building may work against providing affordable housing. Alex said that the commission could also look into requiring residential development in the West Side to be completed as PRDs/PUDs.

Carrie suggested that the commission should support passive recreational use near the LaPlatte River and Patrick Brook. Alex said that this could be added in the revised stream setback regulations or the subdivision regulations. Carrie said she thought it would fit best in the zone purpose narrative.

Joe D. said that he thought special attention should be paid to storm water regulations beyond what the state requires. Alex said that the board had discussed supporting the creation of a storm water utility in Hinesburg. George B. thought that the state storm water standards were fine.

Alex asked the board what they thought of the description of the expanded village district. Carrie said she thought the wording was helpful and that it added value and background to the zoning regulations. The board briefly discussed the garage setback requirement in the village and how the waiver option was important. Alex noted that both the Greenstreet and Hinesburg Hillside developments had required waivers of this design standard based on topography issues.

Carrie said that she would like parking lots allowed only at the rear of buildings and at the side when adequate screening is provided. She clarified that parking lots to the rear of a building are preferable. George and Fred both thought that the activity in a parking lot and its visibility can contribute to the success of a business. Alex said he thought other indicators such as lights, people entering a business, and signs could help to bolster this affect without the use of an easily viewable parking area. David Lyman noted that the board has previously expressed support for on-street parking and were now concerned about parking visibility in lots. He asked what was the difference between the two. Alex said that on-street parking is more spread out, integrated into the streetscape, and serves to calm traffic.

Fred said he was still concerned that a business in this area may have problems if the parking lot is in the rear and if a greenspace is created along 116. This will set the business even farther back from 116. He noted that the buildings need to be easily visible and evident from 116. George said that the commission needs to be careful about the visibility message that it sends to the DRB since they already have issues with this concept. Fred added that Middlebury College does a good job of making parking less visible by using burms and landscaping. He felt that the town should be creative to meet the needs of businesses.

Carrie said that she thought commercial businesses should be locally owned and high density employment centers. George Dameron added that Montpelier is an attractive downtown that has many parking lots behind commercial buildings. They also have a very good sidewalk system that compliments this parking system and takes care of the businesses active visibility. George D. said that the commission should always keep pedestrian connectivity in mind. He also asked if the town has considered capping the square footage of grocery stores to prevent big box stores in the village. Alex said that the current regulations cap retail businesses in the village at 20,000 square feet. Fred mentioned the previous meeting's discussion in regards to allowing an exception for grocery stores if needed. George D. suggested that the commission speak with the Preservation Trust of Vermont to help determine what a town the size of Hinesburg will need in the future in regards to a grocery store. He explained that this organization is helpful in determining business sizes that are relevant for different communities. George D. said that he would return to the Commission on October 11th to present recommendations from the Village Steering Committee.

The commission briefly discussed the Lang Farm Area in Essex and how it utilizes mixed use buildings. Carrie said that this is a very lively place at night. Alex added that the addition of a movie theater definitely helped this area.

Alex asked what the members thought about the design standards that he had drafted. Carrie thought that some wording should be added to encourage solar orientation and utilizing renewable energy in the future. Joe I. thought that increased density and the goal to create a streetscape utilizing street trees would contend with the idea of encouraging solar collection. Joe D. thought there were ways to incorporate the two concepts; perhaps by placing the street trees behind the buildings. George B. thought the board should determine whether the streetscape design or spacing for solar gain is more important. Joe I. thought that efficiency standards should be written for the town and that perhaps they could encourage solar roof panels in this area.

Joe D. said that he thought unless the board has some good reasons for expanding the village district, it would not be supported by most Hinesburg residents. He did not understand why the board wished to pursue this option. Alex said that major reasons for the expansion included: accommodating growing housing needs, additional commercial space, and options for affordable housing. Joe I. said he supported the expansion but was concerned about what it would look like. Joe D. said that the longer planning takes, the better product the end result can be. He added that he did not want to make a mistake that he would regret zoning for in the future. George B. pointed out that as planners they would always need to take a chance to move forward.

Alex asked if the board agreed with the design standard in regards to steeply pitched rooves. Fred said that there had been a great deal of resistance to big box stores and that this design standard would address the 'look' of a big box store. Any stores that need a larger footprint may need to utilize facades to accommodate this design standard.

Evaluation of I5 Zoning District

Joe I. explained that he changed the name of this district to incorporate industrial-residential mixed use. Joe I's proposed new district name is the Alternative Energy District (AED). He added that he had moved the PUDs from a conditional use to a permitted use. George B. said that by wrapping the solar farm concept into the new district it allowed a better chance for it to occur. Joe I. thought that the solar farm could serve two purposes 1. provide energy and 2. serve as a type of branding for the town to associate Hinesburg with alternative energies. Joe D. said that the new district will take land that is currently permissible for conventional residential use and will add renewable energy conditions. He added that the area of land that is north-facing may not be ideal for utilizing solar energy. Joe I. said that there are alternative energy technologies that can be employed in this area (geothermal, hydrothermal). Alex noted that this area would have a much different development pattern than the area across the street. The west side will be a destination area while the east will not. Joe I. said he would like to see the energy concepts from this district applied to the district across the street as well so that the two areas can compliment eachother.

Carrie suggested that the town could utilize a green point system to allow increased density in developments where green points are used. George B. suggested that this idea should be discussed with Riggs and the Blittersdorfs to determine what level of compliance could be expected in this zone. He added that the board should also determine what level of compliance would be required to qualify for complying in this district.

Alex asked Joe I. what he envisioned in regards to 'small scale solar tracker farms'. Joe D. said that he could not see this area being able to exceed the concept of a small scale solar tracker farm. Joe I. said that he thought they would require no more than 100 trackers to support the number of houses that would fit in this area. George B. suggested that a percentage calculation be used to determine the size of the solar tracker farm in relationship to the number of houses built. Alex noted that energy efficiency is not mentioned in the description of the AED. Carrie thought that the building materials should be sustainable and highly efficient. Fred thought it would be good to establish an energy efficient 'theme' in town that could spread to the west side of 116 as well.

Carrie said that passive recreation should be encouraged in these lowlands as well. She further clarified that this space should be utilized by residents residing on that side of 116 since the commission agreed that pedestrian traffic attempting to cross 116 in this area would be problematic.

Affordable Housing

Fred said that he is currently working on gathering resource materials and he hopes to have conceptual information available at the next meeting. Alex said that the Affordable Housing Committee is having an additional meeting in October to provide some guidelines to the PC.

Open Spaces

The board then returned to the concept of open spaces in town. Fred asked how the commission can assign ideas about public land and incorporate this information into the regulations. Alex said that no one is stepping up to work on this issue. Fred said that he felt it was important to fit this concept into the master plan for the town as opposed to dealing with it in a more piecemeal fashion. Carrie said she thought the public green spaces should be worked out in conjunction with proposed streets to create an official map for the town. Alex said that at present the concept is too much of a blank canvas and consequently it is becoming a developer-driven topic. Town members need to discuss what public areas are needed in each area. The Selectboard could then adopt an official map with the related infrastructure. The board briefly discussed how an official map functions and the benefits that it can provide.

II. Other Business

Transfer Development Rights

Will be discussed at the next meeting.

Minutes of the September 13 PC Meeting

George MOVED to approve the minutes as written. Carrie SECONDED the motion. The motion PASSED 5 - 0.

Community Visit Project

Alex explained that this event will take place on October 10th. He asked the board to notify him if they are planning to attend the event, and if so, what session(s) they plan to attend. If possible he would like to space out the commissioners attendance as much as possible. Carrie suggested that they should email Alex the session they plan to attend and then he could notify the members if certain sessions will be attended by more than one commissioner.

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

Respectfully Submitted:

Heather Stafford

Recording Secretary