Duxbury Planning Commission Community Discussion
September 20, 2005
Planning Commission Members in Attendance: Catherine Gjessing, Chair; Alan Quackenbush, and Wayne Walker.
Community Members in Attendance: Jo Ann Berno, Mo Lavanway, Kelly and Robert Hurd-Burnell, Audrey Quackenbush, Jill Smith, and Stan Walker.
Alan Quackenbush opened the meeting at 7:10 p.m. He explained the purpose was to update the townspeople on zoning changes and kick start the rewriting of the Town Plan. Wayne Walker reviewed the highlights of the changes to Title 24, Chapter 117 as a result of legislative changes. The changes are mostly administrative and were effective September 1. The goal of the changes was to streamline the zoning process. Wayne acknowledged Catherine for making the majority of changes to the current ordinance. 
Highlights of changes:
1. No permit is required for any farm structure. The farm has to be registered as an agricultural entity with the State.
2. The number of interested persons who can appeal to the Environmental Board has been reduced. An interested person must participate at each step, beginning at the local level. Interested persons must demonstrate that they are neighbors and adjoiners.
3. There is an increase in the early notice provision requiring more public postings. The notice must be a mailed to all adjoiners and the permit posted on the applicant''s premises within public view.
4. There must be equal treatment of affordable housing. Central VT Regional Planning Commission has data on town income levels.
5. Accessory apartments, no greater than 30% of the main dwelling, must be allowed in all districts where single family homes are permitted and, as a conditional use in the Timber Management and Wildlife District where single family homes are a conditional use. 
6. Greater consistency must be provided regarding notice requirements and the roles of the Development Review Board (DRB) and Planning Commission. Mo asked whether the date of the site plan review should be included in the notice. The DRB may want to revise its letter to announce decisions within forty-five days of the close of evidence.
Planning Commission Community Discussion 9/20/05 Page 2
7. Requirements for minor projects should be simplified. 
8. ""Character of the area"" in each district must be clarified. A project must have an undue adverse impact on the neighborhood character to be denied.
9. Adoption for separate site plan and conditional use review should be allowed.
10. Zoning regulations must comply with the town plan.
11. Requirements to phase in development in a project must be changed. 
12. The procedures for permit review must be clarified for greater predictability. Mo commented that the DRB is currently working on its procedures.
13. ACT 250 criteria takes precedence in reviewing applications at the local level.
14. Flood plain and telecommunications sections should be updated. Stan commented that the zoning ordinance has a stand-alone section on telecommunications, which should be incorporated into the zoning ordinance.
15. Waivers for DRB review should be allowed for minor changes that increase accessibility.
16. Planned Residential (PRD) and Planned Unit Development (PUD) will be consolidated so that the PUD will be used for both types of multi-unit development.
17. Planning commission reporting requirements will be updated. Procedures for the public notice, timing and approval of zoning regulations will be clarified. The PC must deliver a report to the Select Board regarding changes and the Select Board has the power to approve changes.
18. A zoning overlay for special districts, i.e. down towns, should be permitted.
19. The official map should be modified to increase its usefulness as a planning tool. 
Alan mentioned that the tax mapping project will update the zoning map and include overlays. It will be more accurate and help the DRB and applicants. It was agreed that the maps should be more accessible to the boards and applicants. Jo Ann and Jill suggested that a dot be placed on the zoning map to indicate where permits have been approved. Mo suggested that this could be done at the monthly DRB meetings. There are between ten and fifteen permits issued per month.
Planning Commission Community Discussion 9/20/05 Page 3
Catherine offered to do a report to explain the changes and will have the draft ordinance available at the Town Clerk''s office after the October Planning Commission meeting. The draft can also be put on the Town''s web site. 
There was a discussion about capital budgets. Developing a capital budget is a formal process that projects long-term spending for capital improvements. Jill mentioned that the Select Board is working on a capital budget for roads. 
The pros and cons of having zoning changes approved by the Select Board instead of the voters was discussed. Alan suggested that housekeeping changes be approved by the Select Board and substantive issues continue to be approved by the voters. Stan advised that the law requires that all changes be done one way, either by the Select Board or by the voters. The Select Board could be authorized to approve and then have the change put before the voters to get a sense of the Town''s sentiment. This issue needs to be placed on a Select Board agenda with Planning Commission representation to discuss it further.
The zoning review was completed at 8:05 p.m.
Catherine initiated the discussion on the Town Plan. The current plan touches on all statutory requirements, but needs to address affordable housing. Mo recommended that the Planning Commission send a simple survey to townspeople to get their input. The rapid growth of Duxbury and where it is occurring was also discussed. Stan stressed the need for incentives, such as a density bonus, for developers to create PUDs. Mo would like the Town to require a master plan for long-term developments. Stan recommended adding ""continuing jurisdiction"" on permits so that the DRB could reevaluate earlier decisions on long-term projects. Wayne sees an incentive for a developer to meet with the DRB before he/she spends money on consultants.
The meeting adjourned at 8:45 p.m. 
Respectfully Submitted,

Audrey Quackenbush
Clerk Pro Tem