CHARLOTTE PLANNING COMMISSION
Minutes of Meeting
of
March 6, 2003
Charlotte Town Hall – 159 Ferry Road
Town Office – (802) 425-3533
Members Present: Chair Jeff McDonald
Al Moraska
Linda Radimer
Gene Diou
Gordon Troy
Members Absent Jim Donovan
Staff Present: Dean Bloch
Public Present: Ted Montgomery Peter Richardson Jenny Cole
Stephen Brookes Sylvia Sprigg Debbie Ramsdell
Marty Illick
Chairman McDonald called the meeting to order at 7:10 p.m.
Nothing was on Consent Agenda. Gordon Troy motioned to accept the agenda. Gene Diou seconded and the motion passed.
Stephen Brookes asked why the Policy Regarding the Distribution of Public Documents did not provide for e-mailing Minutes and Planners Notes to the public. It was explained that these are not usually e-mailed to the Planning Commission because they accompany application material that cannot be e-mailed. It was also explained that some materials are e-mailed to elected and appointed town officials, but that Vermont statute does not require that public documents be e-mailed, only that they be made available to the public for review and copying. It was further explained that the adopted policy is consistent with Vermont statute and advice from the Vermont Secretary of State.
Marty, Peter and Ted introduced themselves and their respective positions (Charlotte’s representative to the Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission-CCRPC, Charlotte’s alternate representative to CCPRC, and Charlotte’s representative to the Regional Housing Task Force).
Jenny Cole said that Charles Russell, who was originally scheduled to attend, had a conflict and she was representing the Selectboard.
Marty said she was concerned about population and housing projections being used by CCRPC, which the town has also used for the Town Plan and Village Plan. She also said she thinks she, Peter and Ted should periodically meet.
Jeff asked what products will be produced by the Regional Housing Task Force? Will there be a quota system? Jeff also feels that each town grows at a different rate and should not be tied to a regional rate or quota, and that this should be communicated. What’s appropriate for Colchester and South Burlington is not appropriate for Charlotte.
Ted feels that voluntary participation should be the goal, not mandatory participation.
Linda asked what’s available for resources for towns? Marty answered that Municipal Planning Grants are available from the State.
Gordon asked Ted if he’s looking for direction from the Planning Commission. Marty said that the Planning Commission should provide recommendations. Ted said that there will likely be commonalities between some of the towns.
Al asked if CCPRC can help with Transfer of Development Rights (TDRs). There was discussion regarding the pros and cons of local and regional TDRs. Marty said that CCPRC will probably not be a great source of help with TDRs. CCRPC’s strength is data collecting. Gordon said that local TDR is too limited a concept, and that TDR should be used to facilitate appropriate use of underutilized infrastructure in urban areas. Jeff said that the rest of the county probably looks at Charlotte as a “receiving zone.”
Jeff and Gordon said that small hamlets may be more applicable to Charlotte as “receiving zones” than the West Charlotte or East Charlotte villages.
Peter said that the quality of the West Charlotte Village Plan was more of an issue that the concept of “village”.
Debbie asked if there can be tax incentives, for example for multi-unit dwellings? Sylvia said that the town of Jericho has a local tax incentive program to encourage people to keep their land open.
Linda said that it seems that solutions will most likely be found at the neighborhood level rather than the village as a whole.
Stephen said that the Planning Commission should think of ways to limit development entirely, not think of ways to allow some kinds of growth.
Debbie said her kids can’t afford to live in Charlotte. Gordon said that a possible tool is inclusionary zoning. Gene asked how affordable housing is taxed? Linda asked what form of affordable housing does the town want? She referenced the dwelling units behind Lampman’s IGA as an example. Most people present said they didn’t like that form of affordable housing. Stephen said that developers will not voluntarily include affordable housing in high-end developments, because it won’t fit with their marketing plan.
Dean said the next Planning Commission meeting on March 25 will be with Burnt Rock, the consultants who are helping the town revise the land use regulations, with a particular eye towards facilitating development of affordable housing.
Jeff said that town and county population projections from three years ago are not accurate, and that the Housing Task Force’s claim that there’s a 20% deficit in the county’s housing supply is not substantiated. He said that new housing doesn’t necessarily need to be located within Chittenden County to serve the Chittenden County market. The City and Town of St. Albans, which both have existing infrastructure, are more appropriate locations for new development than rural towns in Chittenden County. He also said that resistance to expanding CCTA has undermined such a linkage between Chittenden and Franklin Counties.
Al asked if the task force is going to address elderly housing? Marty and Ted said they thought so.
Marty said that rate of growth is a very important issue.
Al said that the CCPRC Regional Plan doesn’t take agricultural land or open space seriously.
Marty said that the town’s boilerplate Open Space Agreement doesn’t identify specific resources, and this is a weakness for future monitoring and enforcement. Gordon said that all the agreements (ie: Roadway, Common Septic, Fire Pond) need revision. Jeff said that each situation is different, and that the agreements can be adjusted as necessary. Linda said that monitoring is an important issue.
Marty explained that the Charlotte Land Trust is creating a GIS database that will include more details than the databases currently used, and this can also be used for land conserved by other organizations, and can also assist with the delineation of resources in future easements.
Gordon suggested that each project be identified in way that will allow cross-referencing. Other suggestions were made to include the deed reference and the date of the project.
Reviewing of minutes was tabled to the next meeting.
REVIEW OF WRITTEN DECISIONS (deliberations)
Deeds & Converse Bay Trust – approved and signed.
Callery; Callery & Beams – reviewed; requires editing.
DISCUSSION OF COMMENTARY ON
VILLAGE PLAN
A draft commentary was reviewed, edited, and approved for release to local print media outlets.
ADJOURN
Gene Diou moved to adjourn; Mr. Moraska seconded. All were in favor and the motion was unanimously accepted. The meeting adjourned at 9:50 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Dean T. Bloch