TOWN OF HINESBURG

PLANNING COMMISSION

August 27, 2008

Approved September 10, 2008

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

Commission Members Absent: George Bedard.

**NOTE: There is 1 vacancy due to Rodman Cory’s resignation on 8/17/2008.

Also Present: Alex Weinhagen (Director of Planning & Zoning)

The meeting began at approximately 6 p.m.

Geprags Park Parcel Sketch Plan Exercise:

The Planning Commission toured and developed hypothetical development sketch plans for the Town-owned Geprags Park parcel on Shelburne Falls Road as part of the rural area density & rezoning effort. The exercise is intended to serve as a learning experience for Commissioners and to produce some demonstration materials that we can use at fall public meetings to explain new rural area zoning provisions as these are hashed out. The Geprags Park site was selected because it is a sizable parcel (approx. 86 acres) in the Agricultural zoning district. A VT Fish and Wildlife parcel in the Rural Residential 2 zoning district was the focus of the last meeting.

Commissioners met briefly at the Town Office, and then proceeded to the site. After the site visit (somewhat inhibited by untold hordes of mosquitoes) the group returned to the Town Office to discuss the parcel’s natural resource features as well as development opportunities and challenges. Discussion ensued on possible development plans using the draft area-based density allowances prepared by the Director of Planning & Zoning – i.e., conventional/base density of 7 units, and a PUD/maximum density of 10 units. There was consensus that the western most portion of the parcel (stream, class 2 wetlands, VELCO transmission line, and associated fields) should be avoided. There was also consensus that the bulk of the hidden meadow and its agricultural soils should be largely retained, with houses placed along the eastern and northern edges of the meadow. Another set of house sites would be located immediately upslope (to the east) in the shrubby area near the north and south benches (along the figure 8 loop trail). This would concentrate development in a suitable area with minimal impact on resource areas, that also benefits from excellent westerly views of the Adirondacks. These areas can take advantage of southwesterly exposure for passive and/or active solar gain. Also, by focusing the development in these areas, the amount of new road and utility lines required would be more reasonable than a more spread out development plan. Furthermore, concentrating development in this area would keep it away from the better forested areas and the highly visible areas higher up on the parcel.

Fred noted that there are some flatter areas visible from Shelburne Falls Road in the vicinity of the Wainer property. He said this area might be suitable for 1 or more house sites, and that such a location would be consistent with the established development pattern along and across the road. Johanna pointed out that there are some real sight distance limitations along that portion of the property’s Shelburne Falls Road frontage. Fred agreed, and said this area would likely only be viable if access was routed from elsewhere on the parcel (e.g., from the west).

Those who attended the last meeting shared their sketches and ideas about the Lincoln Hill Road parcel. Fred felt the maximum allowed density for this parcel (15 units) was excessive primarily due to the topographic constraints, and likely impact development in such an area would have on the Town road and the surrounding streams. He said that multiple developments at these maximum densities would severely impact the function and maintenance cost of Lincoln Hill Road. Will agreed that it was a bit of a struggle to properly site 15 units of housing on the property in question, and that he shares Fred’s concerns about the impacts of a full build out. The Commission discussed the potential impact of development along the Town’s problematic hill roads, and they touched on the Town of Norwich approach that ranks road condition and adjusts allowed development density accordingly. Alex noted that Hinesburg’s current Rural Residential 2 zoning district encompasses this hill section of town, including all of the problematic hill roads – e.g., Sherman Hollow, Magee Hill, Texas Hill, Hayden Hill, Lincoln Hill. He said that even the current zoning (e.g., minimum lot size & maximum theoretical density) treats the RR2 district differently than the Agricultural district – i.e., RR2 = 3 acre lot size, AG = 2 acre lot size. Alex said that his initial draft of the sliding scale area-based density formula is “one size fits all”, and that separate formulas could be created for separate zoning districts. Joe and Fred suggested that the base density be reduced somewhat for the RR2 district relative to the AG district. Will said that perhaps the PUD bonuses could vary by district as well.

The Commission discussed next steps and their desire to discuss options with the Selectboard ahead of public forums. Johanna felt it would be helpful to have a joint meeting with the PC and Selectboard (and possibly the Conservation Commission and DRB) on this rural area development density issue. Alex explained his intention to convert the results of these sketch plan exercises into display material for public forums and any preliminary meetings with the Selectboard. Jean asked Alex if he would be able to have this material ready for the 9/10 PC meeting. He said that he is occupied for the next week or two working on the Selectboard’s revisions to the village growth re-zoning proposal. Jean said that a review of these revisions will be the primary focus of the next meeting. Alex encouraged Commissioners to contact him if there any other agenda items to add to that meeting.

The meeting adjourned at approximately 9 p.m. The next Planning Comm. meeting is scheduled for September 10, 2008.

Respectfully Submitted:

Alex Weinhagen

Director of Planning & Zoning