TOWN OF HINESBURG

PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES

 

December 13, 2006
Approved January 10, 2007

 

 

Commission Members Present:  Jean Isham, George Bedard, Joe Donegan, Carrie Fenn, Fred Haulenbeek, Joe Iadanza, Nancy Norris, Johanna White

 

Commission Members Absent:  Kay Ballard

 

Also Present: Alex Weinhagen (Director of Planning and Zoning), Peter Erb (Zoning Administrator), Karen Cornish (Recording Secretary), Karla Munson, George Munson, Donna Constantineau, Rocky Martin, Tom Hengelsberg, Linda Samter, Wayne Bissonette, Elizabeth Lee, Bill Marks, Charlie Marks, Julie Marks, Howard Russell, Chuck Reiss, Kirsten DeLuca.

 

The meeting began at approximately 7:35 p.m.

 

I. Ancient Road Mapping Project

 

Howdy Russell gave an update on a project to research and map roads that no longer appear on current maps but may be claimed as town roads.  Hinesburg has received a grant for setting up and training a committee of five appointed members to do the research.  The grant will also provide funds for surveys and legal consultation as needed.  Howdy and Ann Thomas attended a training session where they were advised to begin the project with a focus, such as looking for trail and future roadway connections.  Howdy spoke with the Conservation Commission who shared ideas about wildlife corridors.  He is looking for individuals interested in an appointment to the committee (they should contact Jeanne Wilson).  A town highway map with ancient roads identified (i.e. claimed by the town) must be submitted to the state by February 10, 2009. 

Alex added that, after an additional period of time, the town could no longer claim roads not identified.  This would eliminate future procedural issues with landowners.

 

Wayne Bissonette provided some history regarding the identification of class IV roads and the town’s obligation to keep them open in the winter, noting some work done on the issue around 1974-75.  Joe Donegan asked if the sole responsibility of identifying roads fell to this committee, and also if their findings had to be approved by the Select Board.  Howdy responded there would be an extensive public input process.  The Select Board would then choose which roads would be retained and which let go.  He noted that the town of Charlotte had approached this process by rating first the condition of the roads, then their desirability.

 

II. Village Growth Project

 

Affordable Housing Initiatives

Kirsten DeLuca from Champlain Housing Trust (CHT) presented information on her organization’s long-term affordable housing programs.  Her presentation, entitled “How Permanent Affordability Works” detailed the following key points:

 

-         CHT is a membership-based nonprofit organization formed to create and preserve perpetually affordable housing in northwest Vermont.

-         CHT becomes involved with an affordable home and its owners usually at initial sale, sometimes providing a subsidy for purchase.  At resale, CHT exercises 1st option to purchase the home at an affordable price and then resells the home to another income-eligible household. 

-         A resale formula sets the price: homeowners get approximately 25% of any appreciation that accrues to the property (plus 100% of any equity built by paying off their mortgage or making improvements).  CHT takes a fee at resale, and generally resells the property for what they bought it for plus the fee.

-         CHT HomeOwnership Centers provide counseling, education, and various loan products to prospective homeowners.  Centers provide a stream of income-eligible buyers.

-         Burlington’s inclusionary zoning ordinance allows Burlington’s Housing Trust to assign its options to purchase units to CHT, who then buys units (usually at 1st resale) and sells to eligible buyers, assuming administrative burden and ensuring permanent affordability.

Information can also be found at:

http://www.champlainhousingtrust.org

http://www.getahome.org

 

Joe Donegan asked what happens if a home goes down in value.  Kirsten replied that while land trust homeowners are at the same risk for depreciation as others, CHT sometimes provides an additional subsidy.  Donna Constantineau detailed some of the services provided at the CHT HomeOwnership Centers.  Joe D. asked about an assumption that wages needed to increase in order to preserve affordability.  Kirsten responded that homes were more affordable to households with a median or lower income than at original sale.  Fred asked about CHT’s relationship with builders; he also asked if CHT was the only organization in the area to provide this type of assistance.  Kirsten said CHT does not provide subsidies or technical assistance to builders; CHT typically steps in at resale.  She said a different model could be created for Hinesburg.  She noted other groups providing similar assistance such as Habitat for Humanity, but said CHT services were somewhat unique in the area.  Alex asked about Housing Vermont (HV); Kirsten replied that HV creates permanently affordable rental housing; CHT sometimes partners with HV on low income tax credit financing.

 

Joe D. asked about larger scale projects and builder obligations.  Kirsten said the town should set affordability targets (sale prices); CHT could help with this process.  Alex described how inclusionary regulations and a sale price formula could be created.  There was some discussion about inclusionary zoning in general, with Kirsten noting that incentive-based development of affordable housing was not usually successful.  Fred said one result of making zoning mandatory may be that developers stop short of zoning “triggers”, such as building only 7 units when 8 units would have required some form of affordable housing.

 

Jean asked about small affordable housing developments.  Kirsten said any project over 5 homes was workable.  Joe D. asked density bonus percentages.  Kirsten said communities have different models; Alex said we needed to think about units per acres, to fine-tune it to a number that is profitable for the builder and also satisfies the affordability goals.  Fred questioned the administrative burden on the town.  Alex thought we should defer responsibilities to an organization like CHT.  Kirsten said CHT would have a contractual relationship with Hinesburg as well as with the homebuyers.  Jean asked if preference would be given to Hinesburg residents.  Kirsten responded that Burlington gives preference to households below a certain income level and to Burlington residents.  Alex noted that provision would need to be checked for legal ramifications.

 

Joe D. asked about the mix of home types within development projects, stating he did not want to see larger square-footage homes within a development “floated” by smaller homes.  Kirsten suggested it’s more desirable to have smaller square footage homes within a high-density project.  Donna Constantineau gave more details of the assistance provided by CHT to homeowners.  Fred asked about the organization’s administrative capacity; Kirsten replied that CHT manages by bringing in outside assistance (such as a realty company to do marketing) as needed.

 

Alex asked for feedback from the committee before he drafted zoning language, noting the Affordable Housing Committee recommends including something in the current rezoning effort.  Jean suggested zoning could vary by district, that there could be different language for rural and village districts.  George wished to see other examples of ordinances before moving forward.  Joe Iadanza described what he felt were challenges to the building formula, anticipating builders would recoup the expense of providing affordable housing units by adding the cost to other units.  Kirsten provided clarification of CHT’s relationship with builders, stating it could not subsidize the house being built, but could be involved early on to assist in making the formula work.

 

George stated that sewer capacity needed to be considered in devising any programs.  Alex said more information regarding the sewer upgrade would be available in January.  Rocky Martin said that the hope is for a bond vote to take place in June.  There was more discussion regarding sites with good soils for higher density developments.

 

There was more discussion of density bonuses, and as to whether affordable housing should be voluntary or mandatory.  Most members agreed that language should be drafted differently for different zones, and that rural zoning could be reviewed at a later date.  Alex noted that developers have not taken advantage of the density bonuses in place for PRD’s (planned rural developments), stating it may be a matter of not wanting to build the extra units because the core units were sufficiently profitable.  Kirsten said she felt builders weren’t educated to the affordable housing market, that making programs mandatory required a greater learning process.  Bill Marks suggested delaying the addition of affordable housing language to the rural zoning district.  Jean thought the Commission was likely to focus on specific areas one at a time.

 

Green Building Initiatives

Chuck Reiss and Tom Hengelsberg were invited back from the November 29th meeting to answer questions from the Commission.  Fred wondered about conflicts that could arise by including both green building and affordable housing initiatives in new zoning, for example, higher up-front costs associated with building green.   He also questioned what measuring and compliance system the town would rely on if green building initiatives were required.  Chuck gave more information regarding the Vermont Energy Investment Corporation (VEIC) and Vermont Builds Green (VBG) and the VBG metric, or rating system.  Tom reviewed the VBG’s administrative services.  Chuck said services were available to builders for $1000 for an individual home, with discounts for multiple homes; he added that rebates could be up to $1300.

 

Joe Donegan thought certain aspects of green building could be adopted, such as a smaller square footage and roof orientation.  Tom said that Burlington had tried unsuccessfully to write standards piecemeal.  He thought the VBG’s guidelines were more comprehensive, addressing all facets of what makes an environmentally friendly house.  Joe asked about homes built by individuals (i.e. not within a larger development).  Chuck thought such a project was approachable, with assistance available through the VEIC.  Linda Samter, lead coordinator for the NRG project, added her thoughts about educating the public on green building.  Bill Marks noted the Conservation Commission fully supports and will adopt green building initiatives in their rural plan.  Fred thinks initiatives should be included in the village.

 

Chuck then described the Energy Star (ES) rating system and state energy code requirements.  He said the cost difference between homes built at the minimum code and a 5-star energy home was about $2000, before receiving a $1300 rebate.  He reminded the group that some aspects are free, such as orienting the broad, windowed side of a house to take advantage of southern exposure.

 

Fred suggested having volunteers assist builders and individuals with green initiatives, rather than making them mandatory.  Alex described different processes of applying for permits, stating they were different for one-lot residences and larger developments.  He thought initiatives should be reviewed during a kind of pre-application process.  Chuck did not think having volunteers provide information was feasible.  He suggested that a member of the VBG network could be hired as a consultant for a brief initial review of the project.  Alex said a review could be made during a subdivision review as part of that process, but that a zoning requirement would catch all building projects, not just those that go before the DRB.  The idea of creating an awareness program for the community was discussed, with Chuck offering assistance in that area.

 

Nancy asked if a high rating could be achieved without orienting a house to the south.  Chuck responded yes, that a home’s insulation could be increased to achieve higher R-values.  Bill Marks added that siting issues are broad, noting larger environmental issues that would be addressed within the Conservation Commission’s rural development plan.

 

II. Other Business

 

Minutes of the November 29 PC Meeting

Carrie MOVED to approve the minutes as amended.  Joe Iadanza SECONDED the motion. The motion PASSED 6 – 0, with Jean and Nancy abstaining.

 

Alex reported on the three workshops he attended during a smart growth conference: 1) the transfer of development rights; 2) form-based zoning, which seeks to zone based less on allowed use than on structure and orientation; and 3) 3-D visualization tools, notably Sketch-Up, which allows users to build 3-D objects and export them to maps.

 

Alex reported that the Trails Committee has a draft booklet with maps available for review.

 

The December 27th meeting of the Planning Commission is cancelled.

 

The next Planning Commission meeting is Wednesday, January 10th, 2007.

 

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

 

Respectfully Submitted:

 

Karen Cornish

Recording Secretary