TOWN OF HINESBURG
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Commission Members Present: Jean Isham, Kay
Ballard, George Bedard, Joe Donegan, Carrie Fenn, Fred Haulenbeek, Joe Iadanza,
Nancy Norris, Johanna White
Commission Members Absent: none.
Also Present: Alex
Weinhagen (Director of Planning and Zoning), Karen
Cornish (Recording Secretary), George Munson, Karla Munson, Mark Gonyea, Nancy
Goddard, David Lyman, Barbara Lyman, Donna Constantineau.
The meeting began at approximately 7:45 p.m.
I. Inclusionary Zoning Provision
Commission members discussed the draft document “Hinesburg Inclusionary Zoning Provision”, dated 1/19/07. Alex compiled information by reviewing examples of affordable housing (AH) ordinances, as well as considering input from the Affordable Housing Committee.
Jean asked about including a statement giving priority to Hinesburg residents who wished to purchase AH units in Hinesburg. Alex said that although this was a common provision in other ordinances, such a phrase could present a legal issue as it may have the effect of discrimination. He opted not to include it, either for Hinesburg or Vermont State residents. He also felt our housing projects would be small, with few available AH units.
George felt a bonus structure as an incentive for developers was preferable to an inclusionary zoning provision. He felt Hinesburg had enough AH units and that the obstacle to developing more was due to a cumbersome permit process. He mentioned Bill Hockey as a developer in the 1950’s who built affordable homes in Hinesburg when the process had been less regulated. George felt the Planning Commission had many goals, perhaps too many and some in competition with each other.
The “unit trigger” was discussed (pg. 1, 1st box); Joe I. felt the number should not be low, to avoid interfering with families’ wishes to subdivide property for their children. He thought 10 was a good number; Carrie agreed, adding that the financial burden of building AH units would then be spread across a larger number of market value units.
Alex said he would draft language on smaller projects (pg. 1, 2nd box); the group agreed. The group then discussed whether the provision should be restricted to the village area. Alex said the Village Steering Committee said no, as they did not feel the village should have excessive, special zoning. Joe I. felt it depended on infrastructure costs, noting individual units would be more costly if they did not share infrastructure as they do in the village. He asked about the section on page 4 that allowed for the creation and /or renovation of a project’s AH units offsite (i.e. in a different location than the project’s market-value units). Joe I. did not want to see renovation projects that could count towards those AH units to be penalized or restricted. Carrie gave the example of an old farmhouse with existing infrastructure that could be renovated and sold as an AH unit.
The group discussed the general requirements section (pg. 2, bottom paragraph); Joe I. said a developer would want to build market value units on the more desirable lots (those with a view, for example) within a development, to garner higher prices for those units and offset the costs of AH units. Alex thought the intent of the statement was clear, that AH units should not be placed on substantially poorer lots. Joe I. disagreed and felt the statement was too open for interpretation. Alex said the statement could be removed but that some measure should be taken to avoid the obvious segregation of units within the same development.
George suggested the town subsidize affordable housing by purchasing land for the projects. Alex said the town was contributing by allowing density bonuses that otherwise would not have been approved. Jean said studies indicate that without inclusionary zoning, developers do not commonly pursue AH projects on their own and communities go without it.
Joe I. asked about the Champlain Housing Trust (CHT) 180-day option to purchase (pg. 4, last paragraph); he felt it was too burdensome for the developer to wait that long; George agreed. Alex asked the Munsons about their recent building project; George Munson said it took 90 days to construct their modular home. Alex said CHT coordinates with developers and will bring buyers to the process who are qualified and understand the waiting period. Donna Constantineau, a loan specialist with CHT, confirmed there is always a pool of people who are screened and ready to buy. She said for every available property, there are always many people vying for it. Joe D. asked what the time period was for a typical closing; George said it was 30-60 days from signing a contract to the exchange of money between buyer and seller. Alex said he did not know how critical the 180-day number was to CHT, but said he would address it with them. He also suggested adding a statement stating CHT had the option to purchase unless a developer could demonstrate they had a buyer. CHT would still prove the eligibility of the buyer and be the steward of the property going forward
Donna said resales were a bit more complicated due to the appraisal process; Alex suggested making the option period different for new and resale properties. George felt the fastest way to sell the house was to put it on the market. He reiterated his position on the AH concept, stating it was well intended but too cumbersome.
Jean asked about loans; Donna said people purchasing Hinesburg units could apply for rural development loans, in addition to other loans. She gave more insight into the CHT program, mortgage loans, and financial assistance available to participants should they need it later.
Joe I. asked about the rent increases section (pg. 5, #3); he asked if the town would be involved with supervising rent amounts; Alex said the town dictated the provision of perpetual affordability, but that CHT managed the process for each rental unit. Barb Lyman asked when and under whose authority the town would partner with CHT. Alex said the Select Board would enter into a legal agreement with CHT.
Joe D. asked at what point houses typically sell, noting a sometimes long development review process. George said a developer could start projects using bank financing, but that financing was often contingent on having committed sales. Alex clarified that the 180-day CHT option waiting period is tied to the building permit process.
Alex passed out examples of standard covenants that run on the deeds of AH properties. Nancy stated she would like to see more detail provided for how a landlord deals with delinquency issues; Donna gave some insight into how CHT helps renters and homeowners deal with financial difficulties.
II. Village Growth Project - Design Standards
Rolf Kielman, a member
of the Village Steering Committee, said the committee had been asked to assess historic
buildings in town and to create an educational guide. He presented a draft entitled “Architectural Design Guidelines”, dated
12-3-06. Rolf said it could be used to support
planning, renovation and new building efforts in the village district. Jean asked if this guide could be referenced
in regulatory documents; Rolf felt the guide was more an educational tool,
providing, but not necessarily mandating, design guidelines and suggestions. He then highlighted key points within sections
of the document:
He said a build-to line,
rather than a setback line, should be established. Buildings should be built to the same distance from the
road, within a small range of feet. A
minimum building frontage as a percentage of the overall width should be sited at
the build-to line, not just a small portion of the structure.
Building height was
discussed; Rolf felt a building height limit could be established based on a
visible, architectural point of reference such as a steeple or tower; building would
not be built higher than that point. He
said building height needed further research, particularly with respect to fire
safety regulations.
Lot coverage and
setbacks were discussed. Alex said
zoning for those might be relaxed substantially in the village area in order to
achieve density goals. Rolf agreed that
a property’s value could be higher when more of its area could be maximized. Rolf said street elements such as trees and
curbs both reinforce the village character and promote traffic calming. Building orientation was discussed, as well
as planning for a village green area.
The build-to line was
discussed further; Alex asked if a standard measurement would be established zone-wide,
or if it could vary street by street; Rolf said different streets or parts of
streets could have different build-to ranges.
He felt ranges should be small, however, around 10 feet.
Rolf passed out a
conceptual drawing showing a village green area situated behind Lantmans in fields
currently used for school sports. The
area was conceived as a carousel, accessed by roads in and around Lantmans, and
surrounded by the Lyman Meadows residences and the church. He spoke of the planning process required to
bring about such infrastructure, that it needed to be thought out in the long-term. He said that although the drawing was not
perfect, it was a start. He added the Village
Steering Committee would keep working on the placement of a village green, noting
strong community support for one at the town forums.
Minutes of the January 10, 2007 PC Meeting
George MOVED to approve the minutes as written. Fred SECONDED the motion. The motion PASSED 8
– 0, with Joe D. abstaining.
There was a discussion of the Vermont Homebuilders Association presentation on January 18th. Alex commented that although the Affordable Housing Committee has not met since that date, he did not believe their position was changed as a result of attending the presentation.
Nancy
said she felt the town should have a financial stake in affordable housing,
such as building AH units on town-owned land.
Joe D. felt that the town showed its support by its willingness to
change zoning and allowing higher densities than may be preferred. Alex said various proposals could be
presented to the public in an effort to gain support for such a project, and
that the AHC is looking into the possibilities of such a project.
The next Planning Commission meeting is Wednesday, January 31th,
2007.
The meeting adjourned at approximately 9:45 pm.
Respectfully Submitted:
Karen Cornish
Recording Secretary