TOWN OF HINESBURG

PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES

 

February 21, 2007
Approved March 14, 2007

 

 

Commission Members Present:  Jean Isham, Kay Ballard, George Bedard, Joe Donegan, Carrie Fenn, Fred Haulenbeek, Joe Iadanza.

 

Commission Members Absent:  Nancy Norris, Johanna White.

 

Also Present: Alex Weinhagen (Director of Planning and Zoning), Karen Cornish (Recording Secretary), George Munson, Carla Munson, Samantha Tilton, Melanie Needle.

 

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

 

I. Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission (CCRPC) Community Viz Project

Alex reported that he and this evening’s guests, Melanie Needle and Samantha Tilton of the CCRPC, have been working on a build-out analysis for the village district using a software tool called Community Vis Scenario 360.  The software package provides summary statistical information as well as visualization and modeling tools.  This is a cooperative project supported by the CCRPC and the Orton Family Foundation, which accepted a proposal by the Town of Hinesburg for assistance with the Village Growth Project.  The following description of the project and software is taken from the 12/06 issue of the CCRPC newsletter Regional Review:


This fall CCRPC staff received training for Community Viz and began working with Alex Weinhagen, Hinesburg Town Planner, to develop a Scenario 360 decision-making framework to help the Town’s Planning Commission understand the impact of sewer capacity on full development potential.  For example, the framework will allow Planning Commissioners to change residential zoning assumptions via a slider bar and use graphs and charts to see if the change is within Hinesburg’s current allocation for residential development. Also, CCRPC staff will develop a 3D scene of growth areas that are of high concern to the Hinesburg village re-zoning effort. The 3D scene will show how the type, placement and quantity of buildings can be placed on the landscape to accommodate future growth and achieve village scale development making it possible for Planning Commissioners to visually explore whether potential build-out options of the revised zoning are consistent with Hinesburg’s vision for the greater village area.


Melanie distributed maps and statistics, showing both a current and future build-out analysis.  Alex explained that excluded red areas were isolation areas around public water sources, roads and other land areas not suitable for commercial use.  The village water overlay district was also removed.  Melanie explained that a residential analysis considered two factors in determining maximum units for any given district:  the zoning (units-per-acre) number and the percentage of residential versus commercial use in a district.  Fred asked about stacking units, as in multi-family housing.  Melanie said the analysis tool assumes each dwelling to be a single-family unit, but the modeling tool (the second part of the process) can be adjusted to differentiate between the two types of housing.  She gave a demonstration of the software, and also explained how the expected capacity of the sewer upgrade was tied into the analysis.

 

In a preliminary run, the maximum units calculated with the sewer upgrade were less than those calculated in the build-out analysis.  Alex said sewer allocations for residential use may be higher than the 45% set within the tool.  The group discussed the potential for businesses with high and low water and wastewater needs.

 

Fred suspects such analyses overestimate build-outs.  Alex agreed, stating that not every landowner will develop to a parcel’s potential or even at all.  Fred felt that if sewer capacity limited the number of units in the village, the group should try to focus that development.  Joe D. asked about a timeline for this build-out scenario.  Alex said although there was no timeline, other time modeling tools could be used to study historical information about building permits.  Joe I. felt it was difficult to make those assumptions.  He thought larger developers, for example, would be attracted to focused areas for development and accelerate building there.  Alex added the sewer upgrade would not happen for several years.

 

The group gave input data for each district and reviewed the results.  Alex said an efficiency factor could be added to the analysis, and that certain parcels could be examined more closely for their realistic development potential.  The group discussed the flood hazard, stream buffers and 20% slope areas.  Melanie said there might be 20% slope areas that can be developed in residential areas but the current analysis has removed those.  Joe D. questioned whether it was useful to keep some potential development in the analysis, as zoning, landowner or homeowner association decisions could change.  The group went through the exercise of adjusting numbers in districts.

 

Jean said the town does not have much light industrial zoning, that perhaps the zoning should be changed to create more.  The group discussed the Northeast district.  Fred raised the idea of a concentric pattern of development, that building could occur more densely at the village center than at its outer limits.  Joe D. felt the overall effect could be like that, but that concentrated clusters could happen instead of more spread out units.  George thought most development would happen outside the village center.

 

Melanie suggested the approach of starting with the maximum number of units available under the sewer upgrade and working backwards.  Alex did not think an expansion area should be down-zoned, rather core village areas could be prioritized for development, with development shut off in outer village areas until a later date.  George thought the entire village zone was the core (in relation to the other residential and agricultural districts).  Alex said it was more a big picture plan, implementing zoning changes gradually in phases.  Joe D. added that the sewer upgrade played into that plan.  George felt the changes should be proposed, with the sewer allocation areas dictating where the units could be built.  The Northwest and Northeast districts would be upgraded last.  Alex said coordination with the Select Board could influence which areas could be developed first.

 

The group discussed the potential for development in already built-out areas versus open areas, and how to differentiate that within the analysis.  Alex described an efficiency factor that could be applied to certain properties without changing the zoning per acre number, and that it could be done at parcel level or at a more broad-brush level.  The group discussed how to test these numbers against public input.  Alex explained the second phase of the project would provide maps with street level views.

 

A commercial analysis was reviewed; Melanie explained that a commercial analysis considered two factors in determining the maximum commercial square footage available for any given district:  the number of employees per square footage and the percentage number of commercial versus residential use in a district.  The group discussed how to tweak those numbers, particularly the balance between the residential and commercial percentages.  Joe I. thought the Northeast district should be treated differently based on allowable lot coverage and actual available square footage (due to solar energy sources).  George felt a 60 to 70% residential sewer allocation would allow for more creative planning on the residential side.  The group talked about areas for potential development based on soil types.

 

 

II. Other Business

 

The February 14, 2007 Planning Commission meeting was cancelled due to snow conditions. 

Alex reviewed the February 6th training workshop on PRD’s with guest speaker, Brian Shupe.

 

Minutes of the January 24, 2007 PC Meeting

George MOVED to approve the minutes as written.  Fred SECONDED the motion. The motion PASSED 7 – 0.

 

Minutes of the January 31, 2007 PC Meeting

George MOVED to approve the minutes as written.  Fred SECONDED the motion. The motion PASSED 7 – 0.

 

The next Planning Commission meeting is Wednesday, February 28, 2007.

 

The meeting adjourned at approximately 10:05 p.m.

 

Respectfully Submitted:

 

Karen Cornish

Recording Secretary