TOWN OF
PLANNING
COMMISSION
May 14,
2008
Approved May 28, 2008
Commission Members Present: Jean Isham, Rodman
Cory, Carrie Fenn, Fred Haulenbeek, Will Patten, Johanna White.
Commission Members Absent: Kay Ballard, George Bedard, Joe Iadanza.
Also Present: Alex
Weinhagen (Director of Planning and Zoning), Karen Cornish (Recording
Secretary).
Village Growth Rezoning Update
Alex gave a recap of changes to
the Village Growth Rezoning proposal being considered by the Select Board. There have been three meetings, with another
scheduled in June. Some of the major
proposed revisions are:
The stream setback buffer – Alex said the Planning Commission had suggested a general reduction
of setback buffers in the village area to maximize development potential, and also
to recognize that some streams don’t need a big setback. The proposal contained setbacks of 25 ft. –
50 ft. – 100+ ft. for small, medium and major waterways respectively. The SB generally agreed with lowering setbacks
but not in undeveloped areas with the potential for future development; the
village northwest area and the canal area north of
Carrie said she agreed with that proposed
change, particularly in the southern gateway area where she noted much water
and wildlife. She also agreed with a
larger setback on waterways within the Bissonette property (Village Northwest). She did not think the buffer needed to be
expanded on the Russell property as she thought the stream there was not likely
to meander in the future. Alex suggested
PC members speak directly to Andrea Morgante about specific areas.
Small-scale manufacturing – Alex said the original proposal used the same zoning for small-scale
manufacturing in Village Core and Village Northwest, which include limiting
businesses to no more than 3 employees and no new buildings. Alex said the SB wished to reduce some of
those restrictions for the Northwest district.
Will said light manufacturing does not have to be defined by employee
numbers. Rodman asked what the limiters
would be; Alex said a building footprint limitation could be imposed along with
a statement about adherence to performance standards such as noise, odor,
exhaust, time of business, etc. Will
thought it was OK to focus on the impact as long as businesses were allowed to
grow. Carrie agreed with a limit on building
footprints. Rodman suggested limits on
hours of operation.
Regarding the Village Northwest
district, Alex said the SB wants more certainty that mixed-use (residential and
commercial) development will occur, similar to the Village Core, with significant
public (not necessarily neighborhood) spaces. He described Creekside as an
example of a project that has both. Alex
said the SB had no specific recommendations.
Carrie said she followed a development in
Purpose sections – the
proposal included language, for each section, that referred back to the Town
Plan. The SB appreciated this but wants to
see this language filled out.
Maximum lot size -
Alex said Ken Brown noted a discrepancy with residential districts and the
maximum lot coverage proposed at 25%. He
said if small lots with higher densities were allowed the town would not achieve
the desired densities; Alex suggested raising the max. lot coverage to 60%. There was a question regarding zoning for a densely
settled area, whether a developer would be allowed to build larger homes on
larger lots (rather than follow the proposed higher density for a district). Fred suggested a minimum density, offering a
developer the flexibility to have a mix of large and small lots. Carrie said the proposal was drafted in such
a way as to allow a large compact building on a large lot to get the same desired
density. Stream setbacks were discussed
again and how those impact densities.
Minimum densities for non-residential uses were discussed as something
difficult to mandate. It was agreed that
master planning would be an important piece in any implementation of minimum
densities.
Senior Elderly Housing
Johanna said she had done some
preliminary work on this topic; she said the first step for the board would be
to understand what kinds of needs, or perceived needs, there are for this type
of housing. She said we need a plan, one
that addressed various questions such as dwelling size(s), meals, etc. She thought housing for Hinesburg would be of
moderate size (smaller than Wake Robin), for example, separate cottages perhaps
connected to an apartment building with some apartments and a common area for
meals. She said Chuck Reiss said he is
considering the barn on his development property for senior housing. Carrie asked how a market study would work. Alex said the group could do a quick survey
(a “reality check”) or a more rigorous one that included focus groups, census
data and perhaps a consultant. Will
asked if there were benchmarks or a community overlay that suggests what percentage
of this type of housing is needed. Carrie
reported on the community center task force, noting they have been looking at a
parcel in Creekside that was set aside for a multi-use building. Fred said the community may be more amenable
to approving the sewer upgrade if they could see these kinds of proposals that
upgrade could make possible. Carrie said
there is a need to provide daycare for seniors.
Alex said there were a number of people that were suggested as experts
on the subject with whom the PC could meet.
Fred said getting the proposal out to developers may get a large
developer interested enough that they would contribute to sewer costs. The stop light at the corner of
Other Business
Rodman MOVED to approve the April 23, 2008 meeting minutes
as written. Fred SECONDED the
motion. The motion passed 5—0, with Will
abstaining.
The next Planning Commission meeting is scheduled for May 28, 2008.
The meeting adjourned at approximately 9:05 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted:
Karen Cornish