TOWN OF HINESBURG

PLANNING COMMISION

 

June 13, 2007

Approved June 27, 2007

 

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

 

Commission Members Absent:  Joe Donegan, Nancy Norris.

 

Also Present: Alex Weinhagen (Director of Planning and Zoning), Karen Cornish (Recording Secretary), Carla Munson, Wayne Bissonette.

 

The meeting began at approximately 7:45 p.m.  The group discussed a statewide proposal that will require a town’s regulations to comply with their Town Plan by the year 2011.

 

I. Village Growth Project – May 23 Public Forum

The group reviewed a list of questions and feedback they received from the forum:

 

Community infrastructure and public spaces

Alex said there was a lot of feedback in this area.  Jean said phasing the proposed zoning changes would give the PC more time to address public spaces.  Alex agreed, stating other issues such as storm water could be addressed.  Carrie and Johanna both felt a master plan or “Town Map” was an important exercise.  George felt town residents did not yet know what they wanted.  Kay said she felt it was not fair to give landowners anything less than fair-market value for their property.  Alex explained the Town Map process (as defined by state statute): public infrastructure and spaces are planned for specific properties; when the property comes up for development, a developer is required to build the infrastructure/space; if they pass on developing it, the town is given first opportunity to purchase the land and undertake the project itself, or the land moves on.  Jean said the need for services is increased when development is increased.  Kay said she felt there were mixed messages from the meeting, that many people want the village area to grow while others want its size and character to stay the same.  Fred agreed, stating development must meet the needs of the community but not cause the loss of the rural feel of the village.

 

Proposed vs. existing densities, and village character concerns

Alex discussed feedback from the Village Steering Committee.  Joe I. felt a specific plan with green and public spaces would help people visualize the proposed densities.  Jean said she heard a comment that there was not enough discussion on the effects of increased population.  George reminded the group the community school is not full.  Alex said he felt a lot of comments were not about regulations but about general planning.  Joe I. thought there was much concern about densities.  Alex thought the visual aids used at the meeting were geared more towards maximum buildouts; he thinks people may have transferred that to all areas of the village growth area, not just the core.  Fred felt buildouts would reflect less units if based on more realistic scenarios.  Joe I. felt the only area with the potential for a 100% buildout is the Village NW.  Alex discussed comments regarding densities on areas with wetlands or other limitations, the concern being developments would be even more closely clustered on available property.

 

(Return to community infrastructure and public spaces)  Jean asked if a committee could be established to work on a plan and/or a consultant hired.  Alex said he thought the group put a lot of work into this difficult planning previously and felt a consultant may aid the process now.  Carrie liked the idea of “pocket” green spaces that are connected with pathways; she thought some logical paths already existed along town waterways.  Carla Munson mentioned the open area behind Commerce Park as a possibility for space(s).  Alex said he would invite an official from South Burlington to talk to the Commission, as that town utilized such a Town Map in their planning process.

 

Carrie reviewed a proposal by the Multi-Generational Community Center Task Force involving two town-owned parcels located behind the fire station.  Alex displayed a map of a 1.6-acre parcel that showed public spaces and buildings including a recreation field, a skate park, a small playground, a volleyball court, and parking.  A park-and-drive would be located next to the fire station.  It also showed the expansion of the fire station to include the police station.  The community center would be located in a new building off Route 116.  The group discussed the plan; suggestions included combining the center with the municipal building or the library.  The current library location was discussed, most feeling it was located too far from the town center.

 

New town roads and snowplowing issues with on-street parking

The group discussed public roads, noting the town has not historically taken over roads, but was about to take on more.  They felt it was more a Select Board issue.

 

Rate of growth – consider controls once new zoning and wastewater became available

Alex asked whether development should be phased once the wastewater upgrade came online.  Fred thought certain key infrastructure items should be planned and prioritized as new developments came online, and felt mapping would help accomplish that.  Carrie asked about the bike path planned to/from CVU; Alex said work is planned to begin in 2008.  Joe I. questioned what the word “connected” meant – does a bike path count?  Carla Munson pointed out many areas in the town core that are not served by sidewalks now; she said, for instance, even if the new southern gateway area were planned with sidewalks they had no place to connect to on the southern edge of town.  The group discussed green/public space planning again, and whether (a) densities should be brought down or (b) the group should do a better job of explaining the proposed densities.  The group discussed differences and similarities of neighboring towns, especially Bristol.  George talked about a past discussion regarding the building of a road that would have served as an alternate corridor for Rte. 7.  Wayne Bissonette remembered the same discussion, and added his comments.

 

On the issue of changing or keeping the proposed densities, Johanna and Carrie felt densities should go down.  Joe I. felt although each district needed to be reviewed separately, the 6 + 6 unit density was probably too high.  George felt if that density were reduced then more land (such as wetland areas) should be included in calculations.  Wayne Bissonette asked about village boundaries proposed for his property.  Alex said they were designed around federal flood plain designations.  Wayne said about 1/3 to 1/2 of what was put into the NW district is wetlands, which would limit development there.  He said the areas to the west and north are not wetlands, but are not included in the new district.  Alex and Wayne reviewed a map; Alex said the land in question was a flood plan that could not be developed on according to FEMA (a federal agency).  George thought more green space could be achieved if development could happen further west.  Alex explained the mitigation process and impact ratios.

Specific Comments

A number of residents’ specific comments were discussed.  Alex explained the issue regarding Ballards Corner.  Wayne expressed his views and also those on behalf of Tony Cairns; they would like to move the Jiffy Mart over to the NW district.  The group discussed wastewater permits (commercial permits are still available) and how/if planning for the NW area could be accomplished.  Alex talked about allowed uses in that district and how to blend residential into it.  Carla Munson questioned whether it was fair to allow development there first, rather than in the current Residential I and II districts.  Carrie asked if the Select Board would consider changing the residential to commercial permit ratios; Alex thought probably not.  He added there is little residential wastewater left, but some reserved for institutional use.  Fred wanted to ensure that key infrastructure is built; George thought the DRB would require it.  The group talked about what that development would likely provide in terms of infrastructure.  Joe I. was not confident that town residents were going to approve adding sewer capacity.  He felt if the sewer upgrade did not go through but this proposal was approved anyway, it would leave a new commercial property in the field, and the old one (possible unused) across the street.  The group discussed the sewer upgrade voting process, allocations, phasing and how to prioritize infill in the town core.  Alex said although a few personal comments were received from Select Board members; he felt members of the PC should attend the next SB meeting to get feedback.  The group agreed to review/revise their proposal first.

 

More discussion of the Bissonette property took place.  George thought the developer had every reason to site the new business in a way that allowed for future development on the rest of the property.  Joe I. said he did not want to see just a gas station in the field in case the upgrade did not happen.  Wayne said eventually more allocation is going to have to come up, that federal authorities would require it.  Alex explained this federal “trigger”.  The gas station was discussed, along with the history of the property.  Wayne discussed his point of view on owning/selling the land and its future, and encouraged the PC to start making decisions now on a new Town Map.

 

Minutes of the May 9th and May 23rd, 2007 PC Meetings

George MOVED to approve the minutes as amended.  Kay SECONDED the motion. The motion PASSED 7 – 0.

 

The next Planning Commission meeting is scheduled for June 27, 2007.

 

The meeting adjourned at approximately 10:15 p.m.

 

Respectfully Submitted:

Karen Cornish

Recording Secretary