Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - Planning Commission - 08/23/2022South Burlington Planning Commission 180 Market Street South Burlington, VT 05403 (802) 846-4106 www.southburlingtonvt.gov Meeting Tuesday, August 23, 2022 City Hall, 180 Market Street, Auditorium 7:00 pm Members of the public may attend in person or digitally via Zoom. Participation Options: • In Person: City Hall Auditorium, 180 Market Street • Interactive Online: https://us06web.zoom.us/j/89533611415 • Telephone: (929) 205 6099; Meeting ID: 895 3361 1415 AGENDA: 1. Welcome, instructions on exiting the building in the event of an emergency (7:00 pm) 2. *Agenda: Additions, deletions or changes in order of agenda items (7:02 pm) 3. Open to the public for items not related to the agenda (7:03 pm) 4. Announcements and staff report (7:10 pm) 5. Discussion of each Planning Commission member’s vision for the City (7:15 pm) 6. Commissioner idea session for Comprehensive Plan and City goals (7:50 pm) 7. *Discuss Comprehensive Plan outreach plan (8:10 pm) 8. *Minutes: August 8, 2022 (8:35 pm) 9. Other Business (8:40 pm) a. *South Burlington BESS 1 LLC Proposed Battery Energy Storage Project 45-Day Notice of §248 Petition to be filed with Vermont Public Utilities Commission, Community Drive 10. Adjourn (8:45 pm) Respectfully submitted, Paul Conner, AICP, Director of Planning & Zoning * item has attachments South Burlington Planning Commission Virtual Meeting Public Participation Guidelines 1. The Planning Commission Chair presents these guidelines for the public attending Planning Commission meetings to ensure that everyone has a chance to speak and that meetings proceed smoothly. 2. In general, keep your video off and microphone on mute. Commission members, staff, and visitors currently presenting / commenting will have their video on. 3. Initial discussion on an agenda item will generally be conducted by the Commission. As this is our opportunity to engage with the subject, we would like to hear from all commissioners first. After the Commission has discussed an item, the Chair will ask for public comment. 4. Please raise your hand identify yourself to be recognized to speak and the Chair will try to call on each participant in sequence. To identify yourself, turn on your video and raise your hand, if participating by phone you may unmute yourself and verbally state your interest in commenting, or type a message in the chat. 5. Once recognized by the Chair, please identify yourself to the Commission. 6. If the Commission suggests time limits, please respect them. Time limits will be used when they can aid in making sure everyone is heard and sufficient time is available for Commission to complete the agenda. 7. Please address the Chair. Please do not address other participants or staff or presenters and please do not interrupt others when they are speaking. 8. Make every effort not to repeat the points made by others. You may indicate that you support a similar viewpoint. Indications of support are most efficiently added to the chat. 9. The Chair will make reasonable efforts to allow all participants who are interested in speaking to speak once to allow other participants to address the Commission before addressing the Commission for a second time. 10. The Planning Commission desires to be as open and informal as possible within the construct that the Planning Commission meeting is an opportunity for commissioners to discuss, debate and decide upon policy matters. Regular Planning Commission meetings are not “town meetings”. A warned public hearing is a fuller opportunity to explore an issue, provide input and influence public opinion on the matter. 11. Comments may be submitted before, during or after the meeting to the Planning and Zoning Department. All written comments will be circulated to the Planning Commission and kept as part of the City Planner's official records of meetings. Comments must include your first and last name and a contact (e-mail, phone, address) to be included in the record. Email submissions are most efficient and should be addressed to the Director of Planning and Zoning at pconner@sburl.com and Chair at jlouisos@sburl.com. 12. The Chat message feature is new to the virtual meeting platform. The chat should only be used for items specifically related to the agenda item under discussion. The chat should not be used to private message Commissioners or staff on policy items, as this pulls people away from the main conversation underway. Messages on technical issues are welcome at any time. The Vice- Chair will monitor the chat and bring to the attention of Commissioners comments or questions relevant to the discussion. Chat messages will be part of the official meeting minutes. 13. In general discussions will follow the order presented in the agenda or as modified by the Commission. 14. The Chair, with assistance from staff, will give verbal cues as to where in the packet the discussion is currently focused to help guide participants. 15. The Commission will try to keep items within the suggested timing published on the agenda, although published timing is a guideline only. The Commission will make an effort to identify partway through a meeting if agenda items scheduled later in the meeting are likely not be covered and communicate with meeting participants any expected change in the extent of the agenda. There are times when meeting agendas include items at the end that will be covered “if time allows”. 180 Market Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sb vt.gov MEMORANDUM TO: South Burlington Planning Commission FROM: Paul Conner, Director of Planning & Zoning SUBJECT: Planning Commission Meeting Memo DATE: August 23, 2022 Planning Commission meeting 1. Welcome, instructions on exiting the building in the event of an emergency (7:00 pm) 2. Agenda: Additions, deletions or changes in order of agenda items (7:02 pm) 3. Open to the public for items not related to the agenda (7:03 pm) 4. Announcements and staff report (7:10 pm) Staff announcements: • We are very excited to welcome Marty Gillies to the Planning & Zoning team starting on Wednesday 8/24. Marty has a degree in Environmental Sciences from the University of Vermont and comes to us after most recently working with the City of Rapid City, SD. • I-89 Bike Ped Bridge public forum #2 August 31st, 6:30 pm. Come provide your feedback on initial concepts. Details here: https://www.southburlingtonvt.gov/residents/city_center_tif_district/east-west- crossing.php • Illuminate Vermont event December 15-16! Our Recreation Department is hard at work setting up our first-ever Illuminate Vermont event on Market Street. “Mitten hands wrapped around hot drinks. Warm the heart and soul; stroll the open air market, listen to live music. Twinkling white lights, snowflakes, fireworks, night sky. A magical evening for all highlighting Vermont artists!” www.illuminatevermont.com 5. Discussion of each Planning Commission member’s vision for the City (7:15 pm) Each Commission is invited to share their vision for the future of the City; we’ll start with 5 minutes for each Commissioner, with a discussion to follow. 6. Commissioner idea session for Comprehensive Plan and City goals (7:50 pm) Commissioners are invited to share their ideas for the 2024 Comprehensive Plan 7. *Discuss Comprehensive Plan outreach plan (8:10 pm) Commissioners Ostby and Engels will share their ideas for supplementing the outreach plan for the 2024 Comprehensive Plan. For reference, enclosed is the worksheet previously shared with the Commission earlier this spring about elements of the outreach. 8. *Minutes: August 8, 2022 (8:35 pm) 2 See enclosed draft minutes 9. Other Business (8:40 pm) a. South Burlington BESS 1 LLC Proposed Battery Energy Storage Project 45-Day Notice of §248 Petition to be filed with Vermont Public Utilities Commission, Community Drive This is a pre-application notice to the City. The proposed facility is a ~5 megawatt energy storage facility to be located off Community Drive. Its purpose is to store generated electricity for use during peak periods. The facility will be located on a 0.26 acre site, adjacent to a power transformer and behind a secured parking area. No natural resources or buffers regulated by the City are located on the site. Pursuant to 30 V.S.A. § 248(f) and PUC Rule 5.402(A), municipal and regional planning commissions “shall make recommendations, if any, to the Public Utility Commission and to the petitioner at least 7 days prior to filing of the petition with the Public Utility Commission.” In addition, the planning commissions are entitled to provide revised recommendations within 45 days of the date on which petitioner has filed a petition if the petition contains new or more detailed information that was not previously included in the petitioner’s filing with the municipal and regional planning commissions pursuant to Section 248(f). 10. Adjourn (8:45 pm) South Burlington Public Outreach Strategy 2022 Updated August 2022 Type Timeframe Purposes Purpose Status Online Poll 6/1/2022*-Initial contact on various topics -Feedback on direct questions -Preferences among options -Generate new ideas -Use "off-ramps" for deeper dives 1. Feedback on Values & Goals 2. Intro to key topics 3. New goals/Values ARPA Funding Poll and Climate Action Poll ongoing Committee & Organization Initial Input July-August 2022* -Solicit Committees' priorities -Hear from the community at the start -Welcome outside groups & individuals to share preliminary thoughts 1. Hear from organizations at the start Start expected Fall 2022 Initial In-Person events (~6) July-August 2022* -Direct person-to-person ideas -New ideas through discourse -Foster "champions" for action 1. Feedback on Values & Goals 2. Intro to key topics 3. City Priorities Climate Action n-person events ongoing Visioning Session Late September 2022 -Direct person-to-person ideas -New ideas through discourse -Foster "champions" for action 1. Feedback on Targets, Key Subject Areas, Policy Priorities Staff to identify facilitator Facilitated Subject Area Meetings Fall/Winter 2022-23 -Panel discussion, followed by facilitated discussion on key topics. [1 per policy committee, plus 2-3 topics identified outside committee structure] 1. Discuss current and future plans and opportunities within subject areas Staff to identify facilitator Facilitated Neighborhood Meetings [4-5] Fall 2022 -Hear from users of each quadrant about their needs, desires, interests -New ideas through discourse -Share citywide vision and its applicability to 1. Identify issues of neighborhood concern 2. Share citywide vision Planning Commission Listening Sessions Spring-Summer 2023 -Direct Feedback on drafts -Awareness of proposed policy -Opportunity to speak directly with policy-makers 1. Feedback on Drafts Formal Public Hearings Fall 2023 -Hear feedback before adopting City policy 1. Formal input on draft City Website & Feedback Form Throughout -Repository of information 1. Information library City Newsletter Semi-monthly -Build awareness via continual content -Build eventual voter understanding 1. Announce events 2. Brief stories; link to website * Schedule revisions to follow Other ideas Type Timeframe Purposes Purpose Status Library Discussion Series ? -Community conversations on topical issues -Raise awareness & engagement on community issues -Build sense of community 1. Facilitate discussion on important subjects Under consideration Other Paper columns ? -City policy-makers share their viewpoints 1. Engage directly with community Commissioners to discuss Kiosk at Library ? -Provide regular updates in a visually-engaging manner 1. Regular updates TBD Artwork at City Hall -Provide regular updates in a visually-engaging manner I-89 Walk/Bike Bridge display to be erected August 31st SOUTH BURLINGTON PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES AUGUST 8, 2022 1 The South Burlington Planning Commission held a special meeting on Monday, 8 August 2022, at 7:00 p.m., in the Auditorium, City Hall, 180 Market Street, and via Zoom remote technology. MEMBERS PRESENT: J. Louisos, Chair; T. Riehle, M. Ostby, M. Mittag, P. Engels, A. Chalnick ALSO PRESENT: P. Conner, Director of Planning and Zoning; K. Epstein, L. Bailey, S. Dopp, Z. Kahn, L. Murphy, D. Peters 1. Instructions on exiting the building in case of an emergency: Ms. Louisos provided instructions for emergency exit from the building. 2. Agenda: Additions, deletions or changes in order of agenda items: No changes were made to the agenda. 3. Open to the public for items not related to the Agenda: Mr. Epstein suggested it is time to update the rules regarding bicycle parking, in light of city goals, increasing use, and the growth in the e-bike market. Ms. Louisos suggested the Bike/Ped Committee look at this and see if they can provide some language. Mr. Epstein suggested they also look at what Local Motion has done on the subject. Mr. Conner said he would be happy to speak to the Bike/Ped liaisons about this. One challenge will be how e-bikes get stored because they are heavier. 4. Planning Commissioner Announcements and Staff Report: No announcements or reports were presented. 5. Public Hearing: Possible amendments to the Land Development Regulations: a. LDR-22-05 update to regulations of Transfer of Development Rights, including but not limited to expanding the receiving areas for TDRs, assigning value for TDRs, updating process for sending and receiving TDRs and clarifying existing applicability in receiving areas b. LDR-22-06 Minor and Technical Changes: • LDR-22-06A-E: clarify uses in 13.03 Table on Bicycle Parking • Move Section 15A.20 (Performance Bonds) to Article 17 • Renumber Section 13.05 to correct double “A” subsections • Delete 17.04C Subdivision Approvals headers • Correct Appendix E, submission requirements 2 Mr. Riehle moved to open the public hearing. Mr. Mittag seconded. Motion passed 6-0. Mr. Conner noted that there were a few minor changes made by legal counsel including clarifying language regarding TDRs in the Southeast Quadrant (SEQ): density increase that exceeds the assigned density of a parcel requires a TDR (Article 19). Ms. Bailey expressed concern with having a TDR policy. She said the city has made a large portion of the SEQ non-developable. Future residents are paying extra for their homes to people who didn’t want to develop their land anyway. Mr. Mittag said the city has an obligation to people who agree not to develop. Ms. Bailey said the right to develop has been sold, but the land it has been severed from can never be built on again. She was concerned that in 30 or 40 years, there will be different needs. She felt this should not be “in perpetuity” as it could be “stealing from our grandchildren.” Mr. Riehle asked if there were a time limit, would the property owners have to pay back the money. Ms. Bailey thought not because the benefit has happened. Ms. Dopp was glad TDRs can be transferred out of the SEQ. She felt it never made sense to transfer them with in the SEQ. She also felt that if landowners got money for TDRs and they were reversed, they should have to pay back the money. Mr. Conner explained the process for the use of TDRs in a development. He also showed a map of “sending” and “receiving” areas and identified locations and what is allowed in those locations. Mr. Mittag asked why they didn’t include Dorset St. north of Kennedy Dr. Mr. Conner said those are the R-4 districts like the Orchards, and the Commission decided not to apply TDRs there. Ms. Ostby felt that Comprehensive Plan discussions were the appropriate time to discuss these issues. This is a very specific public hearing. She suggested some strategic questions: why TDRS are in perpetuity and not the 30 years of State law, whether to add more protection for the easements so they are permanently protected, and discussing whether a TDR should be tied to a unit size. As there was no further public comment, Mr. Riehle moved to close the public hearing. Mr. Mittag seconded. Motion passed 6-0. Ms. Ostby said she was concerned with the possibility of having a whole building of studio apartments and not having diverse housing stock. Mr. Conner said the Commission had talked about a minimum percentage of 2-bedroom units or even more, but they did not want to hold things up. Ms. Ostby said they could require 2 or 3 different size units, but she felt that did not fit with this public hearing. Mr. Conner noted that a mix of 2 or more bedroom types is required in the general PUD. Mr. Mittag questioned whether “objectives” are defined. Mr. Conner noted that the City Attorney suggested removing that sentence entirely. Mr. Mittag asked the purpose of Section 20 and whether to define where “priority areas” are. Mr. Conner showed the new language proposed by the City Attorney to address that. 3 Ms. Ostby suggested including a map in this section. He was comfortable with referencing Table 19-1 which members felt was better than a map and suggested adding “as indicated in Table 19-1” to the language. Members agreed. 6. Possible action to approve LDR-22-05 and LDR-22-06 and submit to the City Council: Mr. Riehle moved to approve LDR-22-05 and LDR-22-06 as drafted and amended tonight and send to the City Council. Mr. Chalnick seconded. Motion passed 6-0. 7. Presentation of South Burlington commuting patterns, business district profiles and demographics prepared by Koleigh Vachereau: Mr. Conner said the commuting pattern in the city is very interesting with 2 main stories: a. It is very unlikely that people live and work in the same census block b. The majority of people live within 10 miles of work Mr. Conner said this suggests it is important to think of a 10-mile circle and to think of transportation with that in mind. Mr. Riehle said he hoped that CCRPC looks at this. Infrastructure should be based on 10 miles, but it is suicidal to drive on some road (e.g., Van Sicklen). Members briefly discussed where to possibly put park/rides. 8. Discuss initial request for possible zoning amendment in the Shelburne Road former Hannaford property: Mr. Murphy, representing Tesla, said his client wants to use the old Hannaford on Hannaford Drive which has been empty for 4 years. The issue is that the C-1 Auto zone ends just below this property, and there is no room within that zone for a new dealership. Mr. Murphy asked if it is possible to extend the zone 2 parcels to the north for a Tesla dealership. He noted that staff’s concern was that both properties could be used that way, and Mr. Conner had asked him to explore some possibilities for this use without extending the zoning boundary. He suggested the following possibilities: a. A more limited zone for “green products,” a C-1 Green Zone b. An EV only auto zone c. An “adaptive reuse” zone that could address buildings vacant for a long time if there is no increase in impervious surface d. Extension of the existing auto zone Mr. Kahn, Tesla’s Senior Policy Advisor said they are trying to bring Tesla to the Vermont market. This would help meet the goals of the Climate Action Plan. It would also assure Tesla owners that there is a place to get their vehicles serviced. 4 Mr. Conner reminded members to think about the use, not the user, and noted that he had discussed with Mr. Murphy that the Commission’s responsibility is to look at possible changes to zoning in their overall context. Mr. Riehle asked how many square feet Tesla is looking at. Mr. Kahn said they would take over the whole Hannaford building. The façade would look different, but they would lease the existing building, 40,000 sq. ft., for sales, service and distribution. Ms. Ostby asked if an EV auto zone would be permissible; if it is, could EV requirements be put on current auto zones. Mr. Conner said the Commission response is to consider why a use should/should not be allowed and why to allow it in one area and not in another. He asked members to consider the policy objective they would be trying to achieve. Mr. Murphy said the underlying zone would still be commercial. It would just be adding a use that is not there now. He said an added benefit is that the property is not on Route 7. Mr. Chalnick favored option 3 because it would reuse an empty building and be beneficial to climate action goals. Mr. Mittag said this would meet the objectives of the Climate Action Task Force: no new impervious, no new stormwater structure, increased tax revenue, new wage earners. In the interest of transparency, he noted that he is a Tesla owner. It would be good for him not to waste energy to get his car serviced. Mr. Riehle asked what kind of housing could be built there now. Mr. Conner said 15 units per acre. Mr. Riehle said the property is “screaming housing,” and if Tesla doesn’t come to South Burlington it will go somewhere else in Chittenden County. Mr. Murphy said if there were a legitimate possibility for housing, the property wouldn’t be sitting empty for 4 years. He also noted there are restrictions imposed by Hannaford on the property so that nothing competes with their use. Mr. Mittag asked if Tesla would consider building workforce housing behind Olive Garden. Mr. Kahn said they are not housing builders. He stressed that this is the one property that fits their needs. He also noted that when Tesla comes in, other dealerships start looking at EVs. Mr. Chalnick said it would be a “climate tragedy” to tear down the existing building and release all the carbon into the air. Mr. Murphy said the more complicated this becomes, the more difficult it will be for Tesla to move forward. He asked members to focus on a solution that is beneficial to the city. Mr. Kahn added that speed is important to them. 5 Mr. Chalnick asked about the possibility of solar on the roof and over parking spaces. Mr. Kahn said he would have to check on that. Mr. Conner said it sounds like there is Commission interest in further discussion and suggested doing some thinking and getting back to Tesla. Mr. Mittag suggested members submit their ideas to staff in writing. Mr. Chalnick invited Mr. Murphy to further refine his ideas, particularly option 3, the adaptive re-use. Ms. Louisos concurred that this would be ok. 9. Overview of City Council’s Bylaws for Committees: Mr. Conner noted the City Council has adopted bylaws for all committees. Most of them are standard. They have asked for a quarterly report on committee progress. The Council also gave thumbs up for residents age 15 and older to serve on committees. 10. Meeting Minutes of 14 June and 12 July 2022: Mr. Mittag noted that in the Minutes of 12 July, it was he who nominated Mr. Engels, not Ms. Ostby. Mr. Riehle moved to approve the Minutes of 14 June and 12 July as written or amended. Ms. Louisos seconded. Motion passed 6-0. 11. Other Business: Mr. Conner noted the next Commission meeting will be on 23 August. As there was no further business to come before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned by common consent at 9:15 p.m. ___________________________________ Clerk August 11, 2022 TO: City of South Burlington Selectboard City of South Burlington Planning Commission Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission RE: South Burlington BESS 1 LLC’s Proposed Battery Energy Storage Project in South Burlington, VT 45-Day Notice of §248 Petition to be filed with Vermont Public Utility Commission Dear Members of the Selectboard and Planning Commissions: Pursuant to 30 V.S.A. § 248(f) and Public Utility Commission Rule 5.402(A), South Burlington BESS 1 LLC (“South Burlington BESS”) is pleased to submit the following pre- application notice concerning its proposed 4.999-megawatt battery electric storage project in South Burlington, Vermont. Introduction South Burlington BESS, a special purpose entity created by Delorean Power, is preparing to file an application for a Certificate of Public Good (“CPG”) with the Vermont Public Utility Commission (“PUC” or “Commission”), requesting approval to install and operate a 4.999- megawatt Battery Energy Storage System (“BESS” or “Project”), to be sited on a parcel of land located off Community Drive in South Burlington, Vermont. This 45-day notice letter briefly describes South Burlington BESS’s plans for the Project, including (1) plans for construction and operation; (2) the Project’s expected benefits; (3) preliminary assessment of aesthetic and environmental impacts; (4) consideration of on-site alternatives; (5) the expected date a Section 248 petition will be filed with the PUC; and (6) the rights of the local and regional planning commissions to comment on the Project plans in accordance with PUC Rule 5.402(A). The following attachments are included with this letter: Attachment A – Location Map and Preliminary Site Plan Attachment B – Preliminary Natural Resources Map Attachment C - Preliminary Aesthetics Assessment 45-Day Notice Letter South Burlington Tech Park BESS Project August 11, 2022 2 I. Project Description and Construction Plans The 4.999 MW (alternating current, or “AC”) BESS facility will occupy approximately 0.26 acres (±) of a 11.2-acre (±) parcel of land off Community Drive in South Burlington, Vermont. The Project site is located behind an existing parking lot and adjacent to an existing GMP electrical substation off Community Drive, near Technology Park. See Attachment A – Location Map and Site Plan. The Project will consist of approximately twelve (12) containerized energy-storage systems connected to an inverter (to convert the power from AC to DC for storage, and then back to AC) and to a transformer. Energy will be withdrawn from GMP’s grid, typically during off- peak periods, and stored in the energy storage system. This energy will then be discharged back to GMP’s grid, typically during peak periods. The Project will be interconnected to GMP’s grid through the adjacent substation. The exact configuration of the interconnecting line will be included in the final site plan. A preliminary Site Plan is included in Attachment A. It illustrates the anticipated location of the Project’s components in relation to the surrounding area. South Burlington BESS chose the proposed location for this BESS based upon its accessibility to the GMP substation, and its minimal impacts on natural resources and the character of the area. While the attached site plan represents the current preferred layout, the layout that will be contained in the final application may vary somewhat based upon further engineering, environmental, or other siting considerations. The final layout will be within the overall site area where environmental and other impacts have been evaluated for the purposes of this 45-day notice. The basic parameters of the site plan include the following working assumptions: • Access to the BESS site will make use of the existing roads within the area, including Community Drive, and a short access drive will be added to connect the Project to Community Drive. • Construction will be performed in accordance with the Vermont Standards & Specifications for Erosion Prevention and Sediment Control (February 2020). • Year-round daily access to the BESS is not required. Therefore, no on-site septic or water supply systems will be constructed. The BESS will be monitored remotely and, if any abnormal conditions are detected, technicians will be dispatched as required. • The BESS will be enclosed by a perimeter fence that will meet applicable electric safety code standards. Site Access and Equipment Delivery Standardized trucking methods will be used to transport the battery and other Project components (e.g., inverters, transformers, and construction materials) to the site. Typical tractor - trailer and box truck vehicles will be used to transport materials to the site for construction. The 45-Day Notice Letter South Burlington Tech Park BESS Project August 11, 2022 3 Project will not require any oversized loads. Community Drive will be used for bringing in all construction-related equipment and machinery. Construction equipment will likely include a light-duty crane or similar equipment to lift the batteries, transformers, and other heavy equipment in place and a small trencher to install underground electrical wiring. BESS and Electrical Interconnection System The Project will utilize up to twelve 2-MW (±) battery containers, as shown in Attachment A. The BESS will be interconnected by electrical cable in conduit to the inverter, which converts the electricity from AC to DC when charging and DC to AC when discharging. From the inverter, the electricity will run to a three-phase transformer located within the project area. From the transformer, the electric interconnect line will run underground to the GMP substation. The final selection of all equipment will be made after a CPG is issued and contractors and vendors are selected. II. Project Benefits This Project will provide important benefits for Vermont and to the local community in South Burlington. Economic benefits include new state and municipal tax revenue from the energy storage facility, and lease payments to the landowner. South Burlington BESS will also seek to employ Vermont consultants for the development work and, where commercially feasib le, purchase equipment from Vermont companies and employ Vermont businesses for construction and installation of the Project. Additionally, the BESS is planning to participate in ISO-NE’s capacity, energy and ancillary service markets. These markets are what allows the regional grid operators to match energy supply and demand on a second-by-second basis. Systems like this proposed BESS allow for greater penetration of renewables onto the grid by providing the grid operators with dispatchable resources to compensate for the non-dispatchable renewables. III. Preliminary Impact Assessment South Burlington BESS has engaged local environmental and land use consultants Trudell Consulting Engineers (“TCE”) to conduct initial reviews of potential environmental and aesthetic impacts of the Project. Their work has included the use of online databases. TCE also engaged Gilman & Briggs Environmental, Inc. to conduct a site visit and assess rare and irreplaceable natural areas (“RINA”), rare, threatened, or endangered species (“RTE”), and necessary wildlife habitat (“NWH”). The Project’s location will either avoid or not cause undue 45-Day Notice Letter South Burlington Tech Park BESS Project August 11, 2022 4 adverse impacts to environmental resources and will not result in an undue adverse aesthetic impact. More detailed assessments will be provided with the forthcoming petition, which may include design/siting changes, if necessary, based on South Burlington BESS’s coordination with other parties. The key elements of the preliminary assessments are as follows: • A desktop review of the Agency of Natural Resources environmental database does not list any mapped resources, necessary wildlife habitat, or RTE species on the Project parcel. See Attachment B. • The Project has been sited to avoid or minimize activities within wetlands, streams, and buffers. No wetlands or streams have been identified on the Project site. See Attachment B. • The Project site consists of lawn/field habitat that would not constitute a rare and irreplaceable natural area or necessary wildlife habitat, and is unlikely habitat for any RTE species. • The Project will employ stormwater management practices that may be required under the State’s stormwater permitting program. • The Project will be designed to meet electric safety and utility interconnection standards for safe and reliable operation of energy storage electric facilities. • The Project will require no new municipal services and will not pose undue burdens on town fire, police, or water/sewer services. The Project will not impact the ability of the town to provide educational services. • Aesthetic impacts will be localized to the immediate surrounding area due to intervening structures, topography, and vegetation. The Project is effectively screened from the north, west, and east due to existing vegetation and the substation to the north. Potential visibility of the Project will be limited to locations near and adjacent to the site from specific viewpoints in the parking lot that abuts the site to the southwest, as there are potentially some very short view windows from Community Drive and Kimball Ave at the Muddy Brook Bridge. Given the proximity of the Project to the adjacent parking lot, some plantings are proposed along the southern Project fence line to provide visual mitigation. See Attachment C for more details. IV. Assessment of On-site Alternatives South Burlington BESS chose the specific location for the BESS facility due to its proximity to the GMP substation, its minimal environmental and aesthetic impacts, and its cost- effectiveness. South Burlington BESS is not aware of any other location on this parcel that serves these objectives as well as the proposed site. Moreover, the site parcel is the only property near this substation that South Burlington BESS has legal control over. 45-Day Notice Letter South Burlington Tech Park BESS Project August 11, 2022 5 V. Expected Petition Filing Date with Vermont Public Utility Commission South Burlington BESS intends to file a Section 248 Petition and supporting materials with the PUC soon after the 45-day notice period expires at the end of September. VI. Municipal and Regional Planning Commissions’ Comments to the Vermont Public Utility Commission Pursuant to 30 V.S.A. § 248(f) and PUC Rule 5.402(A), municipal and regional planning commissions “shall make recommendations, if any, to the Public Utility Commission and to the petitioner at least 7 days prior to filing of the petition with the Public Ut ility Commission.” In addition, the planning commissions are entitled to provide revised recommendations within 45 days of the date on which petitioner has filed a petition if the petition contains new or more detailed information that was not previously included in the petitioner’s filing with the municipal and regional planning commissions pursuant to Section 248(f). For additional information regarding this process, including your right to participate in the Commission proceeding, please refer to the “Citizens’ Guide to the Vermont Public Service Board’s Section 248 Process,” which can be found on the Public Utility Commission’s website at: https://puc.vermont.gov/sites/psbnew/files/doc_library/Citizens-Guide-2019.pdf. Thank you for your interest in this Project. We look forward to progressing through the Section 248 process and welcome your input and suggestions to make this a successful Project. Sincerely, Michael Herbert South Burlington Tech Park BESS LLC michaelherbert@deloreanpower.com 617.852.1686 1201 Wilson Blvd, FL 27 Arlington, VA 22209 45-Day Notice Letter South Burlington Tech Park BESS Project August 11, 2022 6 South Burlington Tech Park BESS LLC’s 45-Day Notice Letter for 4.999 MW Battery Storage Project Persons/Entities Entitled to Notice By ePUC: Vermont Public Utility Commission 112 State Street, 4th floor Montpelier, VT 05620-2701 Vermont Public Service Department Commissioner’s Office 112 State Street, 3rd Floor Montpelier, VT 05620‐2601 Vermont Agency of Natural Resources Secretary’s Office 1 National Life Dr., Davis 2 Montpelier, VT 05620‐3901 Natural Resources Board 1 National Life Drive Montpelier, VT 05602 Vermont Division for Historic Preservation 1 National Life Drive, # 6 Montpelier, VT 05620 Vermont Agency of Agriculture, Food and Markets 116 State Street Montpelier, VT 05602 Green Mountain Power 163 Acorn Lane Colchester, Vermont 05446 By First Class Mail: City of South Burlington Selectboard 180 Market Street South Burlington, VT 05403 City of South Burlington Planning Commission 180 Market Street South Burlington, VT 05403 Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission 110 West Canal Street, Suite 202 Winooski, Vermont 05404 TO POIMAIN SWITCHGEARAND METERINGBATTERY CONTAINER (12)COMMUNICATIONSENCLOSURESITE ACCESS PATH10.0150.0'DC COLLECTION (2)AUXILIARY TRANSFORMERINTEGRATED PCS/TRANSFORMER (2)10.0'75.0'15.0'050'201030 40SITE FENCE4.999 MW / 4-HR BESS12.47 KV INTERCONNECTIONPRELIMINARY SITE LAYOUTA1402-0001-DWG-003DAttachment A COMMUNITY DR.POISITE AREA0200'10020504.999 MW / 4-HR BESS12.47 KV INTERCONNECTIONPRELIMINARY SITE LAYOUT1402-0001-DWG-003AD 340 336 337 333 338 334 335339 341 342343 319318 317 316315314313 312311 310 309 308307 3063053 0 4 320321322323324 3253 2 6 327 32 8329 3303 3 1 332344345 3 4 6 347348 303 302301349 300299 29 8 297 296295350294 351352 293 292291 327 350 324 300 332 326 339 332 328 305 312329333 3 2 7 322320309309 33 4 297318302 335313332312317 345296332308307319 331 3 1 1 3 1 6 324 3 1 5 333 330343 330337 299 330310 325 338 330 332 3223 3 0 295 298334 328 329331 340317 333331 333335 2 9 8 314 316 300310 32 0 331 314 3 3 4 321323 336 321344319318313 325323332315313326 311 331 342 331 299 VeB ScA An VeC Lf VeD MuD VeE VeB HnA W HnE HnA AdA COMMUNITY DRKIMBALL AVEMARSHALL AVEVCGI Location Copyright:© 2013 NationalGeographic Society, i-cubed Contour (1') Project Area (19.8ac) Lease Area NRCS Soils NRCS Hydric Soils Surface Water SPA* VHD Stream VHD Open Water River Corridor State SignificantWetlands Wetlands Advisory FEMA Flood Zone A AE* No Data* Ground Water SPA* Floodway* Class A Watershed* Deer WinteringAreas* Indiana BatHibernacula* Uncommon Species* RTE Species* Significant NaturalCommunity* * = Layer does not occur within the map extent. ** = FEMA Flood Zone layer contains FEMA-digitized data only.Some locations may not have data. Sources: Aerial Imagery by VCGI (Various dates); Streams by VHD (2018); VTE911 Roads (2019); VT Significant Wetland by ANR (2021); Soils by NRCS (2021);Contours by VCGI & CCRPC (Various dates); RTE Species and NaturalCommunity by VT Fish & Wildlife (2020); Uncommon Species by VT Fish &Wildlife (2020). Tax Parcel Boundary compiled by VCGI; Deer Wintering Areaby ANR (2020); River Corridor by ANR (2019); Groundwater & SurfaceWater Protection Areas by ANR (2019); All other layers by TCE (2021). Disclaimer: The accuracy of information presented is determined by itssources.TCE is not responsible for any errors or omissions that may exist.Questions of on-the-ground location can be resolved by site inspections and/or surveys by a registered surveyor. This map is not a replacement forsurveyed information or engineering studies. Legend 802.879.6331 www.tcevt.com [0 150 300 450 60075Feet DeloreanCommunity DriveSouth Burlington, VT Natural Resource Map Project: 20-114Prepared By: BJL05/21/20211 inch = 150 feet Soil Key Soil Description Hydric Hydrogroup On Site Prime Ag Value An Alluvial land U not rated V NPSL 11MuD Munson and Belgrade silt loams, 12 to 25 percent slopes N C/D IIIe NPSL 8dVeB Vergennes clay, 2 to 6 percent slopes N D IIIc Statewide 6VeC Vergennes clay, 6 to 12 percent slopes N D IIId Statewide 7VeD Vergennes clay, 12 to 25 percent slopes N D IIIe NPSL 8W Water water water V NPSL 11 T2 T4-S2 T4-S1 T3-S1 T1-S1 T3-S2 T1-S2 c-9 e-4 e-2e-1 d-3d-2d-1 c-7 c-8 c-6 c-5 c-4c-2c-1c-0 b-4b-3 b-2 b-1 a-9a-8a-7 a-6a-5 a-4a-3a-2a-1 a-19 c-16 c-14 a-21a-20 c-15 c-13 c-11c-10 a-18a-17 a-16 a-15a-14a-13a-12a-11a-10 c-end VeB ScA An VeC Lf VeD MuD VeE VeB HnA W HnE HnA AdA VCGI Location ^_ Copyright:© 2013 NationalGeographic Society, i-cubed Tax Parcel Boundary Project Area (19.8ac) Storm DetentionPond E Sample Point #*Wetland Flagging TCE WetlandDelineation (2.66 ac) Class II (2.62 ac) Class III (0.4 ac) Class II WetlandBuffer (50 ft) Top of BankDelineation Top of Bank Buffer(50 ft) NRCS Soils NRCS Hydric Soils VHD Stream VHD Open Water River Corridor FEMA Flood Zone A AE* No Data* The Wetland Delineation shown on this plan was performed on 05/21/2021according to the standards of the 1987 US Army Corps of Engineers and the2012 Regional Supplement. This delineation was performed by Brittany LeBeau. * = Layer does not occur within the map extent. ** = FEMA Flood Zone layer contains FEMA-digitized data only.Some locationsmay not have data. Sources: Aerial Imagery by VCGI (Various dates); Streams by VHD (2018); VTE911 Roads (2019); VT Significant Wetland by ANR (2021); Soils by NRCS (2021);Contours by VCGI & CCRPC (Various dates); RTE Species and NaturalCommunity by VT Fish & Wildlife (2020); Uncommon Species by VT Fish &Wildlife (2020). Tax Parcel Boundary compiled by VCGI; Deer Wintering Areaby ANR (2020); River Corridor by ANR (2019); Groundwater & SurfaceWater Protection Areas by ANR (2019); All other layers by TCE (2021). Disclaimer: The accuracy of information presented is determined by itssources.TCE is not responsible for any errors or omissions that may exist.Questions of on-the-ground location can be resolved by site inspections and/or surveys by a registered surveyor. This map is not a replacement forsurveyed information or engineering studies. Legend 802.879.6331 www.tcevt.com [0 150 300 450 60075Feet DeloreanCommunity DriveSouth Burlington, VT Wetland D elineation Map Project: 20-114Prepared By: BJL05/21/20211 inch = 150 feet Soil Ke y Soil De s cr ipt ion Hydr ic Hydr ogr oup On Site Pr im e Ag V alue A n A lluv ial land U not r ated V NPSL 11MuDMunson and Belgrade s ilt loams , 12 to 25 perc ent s lopes N C/D IIIe NPSL 8dVeBVergennes c lay , 2 to 6 percent s lopes N D IIIc Statew ide 6VeCVergennes c lay , 6 to 12 percent slopes N D IIId Statew ide 7VeDVergennes c lay , 12 to 25 perc ent slopes N D IIIe NPSL 8WWaterwaterwaterVNPSL11 WetlandContinues WetlandContinues Page 1 of 5 MEMO To: Delorean Power, LLC From: Lucy Thayer, PLA Date: August 11, 2022 Re: Battery Storage Project, South Burlington, VT 45-Day Letter Preliminary Aesthetic Opinion Memo At the request of Delorean Power, LLC (the “Applicant”), TCE, Inc. was engaged to provide a preliminary aesthetic opinion of the proposed battery storage project (the “Project”) to be located off of Community Drive in South Burlington, Vermont in Chittenden County. A comprehensive assessment will be completed and submitted with the Section 248 Certificate of Public Good Petition. In the meantime, we have conducted a preliminary review of the Project using aerial photography, USGS topographic maps, Google Earth, and photographs taken by the client, as well as a brief review of the 2016 South Burlington Comprehensive Plan. The Project is proposed to be located next to a substation and parking lot in an area that is well buffered from most public views. To the east is Muddy Brook and a well-vegetated mature buffer between development on Marshall Ave. To the west are several commercial office buildings in Technology Park beyond a field. A substation is directly north of the Project, and a parking lot and green space are south of the Project, with an office building further south. Our preliminary analysis indicates that the Project impacts will be localized to the immediate surrounding area due to the intervening structures, topography, vegetation. Nearby structures include a substation directly north of the site, utility infrastructure, and a fence in the parking lot that abuts the Project to the west, which provide effective screening of the Project from the north and west along the road. The Project area is also screened from westerly views along Community Drive by the topography and vegetation – large street trees and a berm runs along Community Drive between the road/sidewalk and the Project, helping to screen and buffer the Project from view, see Images 1 and 2 below. Potential visibility of the Project will be limited to locations near and adjacent to the site from specific view points that include from the southwest while standing in the parking lot, and potentially a few very short view windows from Community Drive and Kimball Ave at the Muddy Brook Bridge. The topography of the Project area slopes to the from west to east, away from Community Drive, which will help to reduce visibility of the Project from the west, combined with the berm and vegetation. While the Project’s visibility is relatively limited, g iven the proximity of the Project to the adjacent parking lot, some plantings are proposed along the southern Project fence line to provide visual mitigation from this area, see Figure 2 below. These plantings would include approximately 6-7 medium to large deciduous shrubs in front of the fence – see preliminary planting plan below. A more detailed landscape mitigation plan will be provided during the comprehensive project analysis that will be included with the Section 248 Petition filed for the Project. Attachment C Page 2 of 5 Figure 1. Overall Preliminary Site Layout plan, provided by the applicant. Figure 2. Preliminary Landscape Mitigation Plan. Page 3 of 5 Image 1. View from Community Drive looking southeast towards the Project. Views are of the Project are screened from this view location by a berm and vegetation. Image 2. View from Community Drive looking easterly towards the Project. The Project is screened from the road by a berm, fence, and vegetation. Page 4 of 5 Image 3. View from Kimball Avenue looking south toward the Project. The Project will be screened from views north because of the substation, which is visible in the foreground. Image 4. View from the parking lot south of the Project looking north. The Project will have the most visibility from the parking lot and views directly south of the Project. Page 5 of 5 Image 5. View from inside the Project area facing north toward the substation and Kimball Ave. Image 6. View from inside the Project facing east at Muddy Brook and the vegetative buffer between the Project and commercial development on Marshall Ave.