Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - City Council - 11/21/2022AGENDA SOUTH BURLINGTON CITY COUNCIL South Burlington City Hall 180 Market Street SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT Participation Options In Person: 180 Market Street - Auditorium - Main Floor Assistive Listening Service Devices Available upon request Electronically: https://meet.goto.com/SouthBurlingtonVT/city-council-11-21-2022 You can also dial in using your phone. +1 (408) 650-3123 Access Code: 298-710-037 Regular Session 6:30 P.M. Monday, November 21, 2022 1.Pledge of Allegiance (6:30 PM) 2.Instructions on exiting building in case of emergency and review of technology options –Jessie Baker, City Manager (6:31 – 6:32 PM) 3.Agenda Review: Additions, deletions or changes in order of agenda items (6:33 – 6:34 PM) 4.Comments and questions from the public not related to the agenda (6:35 – 6:45 PM) 5. Councilors’ Announcements and Reports on Committee assignments and City Manager’s Report (6:45 – 6:55 PM) 6.Consent Agenda: (6:55 – 7:00 PM) A.*** Consider and Sign DisbursementsB.*** October FinancialsC.*** Receive the General Liability, Property, and Workers’ Compensation InsuranceRenewal Award to Hickok & BoardmanD.*** Approve the submittal of a Municipal Planning Grant application to develop anequity framework for planning projectsE.*** Appoint Marty Gillies as an Acting Zoning Administrative Officer and Acting CodeOfficer 7. Consider the appointment of Allison Lazarz to be South Burlington's alternate to the Chittenden Solid Waste Board of Commissioners – Jessie Baker, City Manager (7:00 – 7:10PM) 8.*** Warned for 7:00 PM: Public Hearing on amendments to the Land DevelopmentRegulations on expanding the Transferable Development Rights (LDR-22-05 and LDR-22-06)– Paul Conner, Director of Planning and Zoning (7:10 – 7:30 PM) 9.Potential action on amendments to the Land Development Regulations on expanding theTransferable Development Rights (LDR-22-05 and LDR-22-06) – Paul Conner, Director of Planning and Zoning (7:30 – 7:40 PM) 10.***First Reading of an ordinance to implement Education Impact Fees and set a Public Hearing – Paul Conner, Director of Planning and Zoning, Colin McNeil, City Attorney (7:40 –8:10 PM) 11.***Receive a proposed Encampment Ordinance and provide direction to staff – ColinMcNeil, City Attorney, Shawn Burke, Police Chief (8:10 – 8:40 PM) 12.***Receive the Annual Report from the Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission –Charles Baker, CCRPC Executive Director (8:40 – 9:10 PM) 13.***Discuss and possibly adopt a Policy on Delinquent Ambulance Billing Accounts – StevenLocke, Fire Chief (9:10 – 9:30 PM) 14.***Discuss and possibly approve a Resolution Amending the Ambulance Billing Rates –Steven Locke, Fire Chief (9:30 – 9:45 PM) 15.***Receive a proposal from the Climate Action Plan Task Force to put a charter change onthe Town Meeting Day ballot to regulate thermal energy systems in existing residential and commercial buildings – Climate Action Plan Task Force representatives (9:45 – 10:15 PM) 16.***Receive the annual presentation from Town Meeting TV including their FY24 budget request – Meghan O'Rourke, Town Meeting TV Channel Director (10:15 – 10:35 PM) 17.Opportunity for Councilors and the public to share information and resources on ClimateChange (10:35 – 10:45 PM) 18.Other Business (10:45 – 10:55 PM) 19.Consider entering executive session for the purposes of discussing: •Contract negotiations •Pending or probable litigation and confidential attorney-client communications made for the purpose of providing professional legal services to the Council 20. Adjourn Respectfully Submitted: Jessie Baker City Manager *** Attachments Included Champlain Water District Check/Voucher Register - Check Report by Fund From 11/22/2022 Through 11/22/2022 Check Date Check Number Vendor Name Invoice Description Check Amount Invoice Number 11/22/2022 4488 Bevins & Son Inc.Iby Street - Replace Fire Hydrant and Valve 7,000.00 19204 11/22/2022 4489 Champlain Water District - Retail Invoices 51,276.18 SBWD-391 11/22/2022 4490 Champlain Water District Invoices 985.30 SBWD-384 11/22/2022 Champlain Water District Water Consumption - October 2022 133,512.18 SBWDCONSUMPT-103122 11/22/2022 4491 E.J. Prescott Flags 24.36 6097617 11/22/2022 E.J. Prescott Hydrant 1,024.28 6098618 11/22/2022 E.J. Prescott Clamp 557.34 6102196 11/22/2022 E.J. Prescott Valve Box 434.34 6102883 11/22/2022 E.J. Prescott Bolt Pack 194.28 6102891 11/22/2022 4492 FirstLight Fiber Account 101167 21.19 12868669 11/22/2022 4493 F.W. Webb Company Beachwood Drive Hydrant Replacement 4,002.55 78172722 11/22/2022 F.W. Webb Company Spear Street Hydrant Replacement 3,367.39 78173146 11/22/2022 F.W. Webb Company Hydrant 1,749.83 78335261 11/22/2022 4494 South Burlington Sewer Department October 2022 Sewer Billings 326,721.39 SBSEWER-103122 11/22/2022 4495 South Burlington Stormwater Department October 2022 Stormwater Fees 323,413.65 SBSTORM-103122 11/22/2022 4496 Sunbelt Rentals, Inc.6 inch pump for U-Mall Tunnel 319.76 132767554-0001 Total 70 - South Burlington Water Department 854,604.02 Report Total 854,604.02 70 - South Burlington Water Department SOUTH BURLINGTON CITY COUNCIL Page: 1 City of South Burlington General Ledger Expenditure Report - GENERAL FUND Current Year Period 4 October % Budget Unencumbered FY-22/23 MTD Account Budget Expenditures Expended Balance Pd 4 Oct GENERAL GOVERNMENT EXP. CITY COUNCIL 149,798.00$ 65,199.00$ 43.52%84,599.00$ 545.00$ ADMINISTRATIVE INSURANCE 6,032,914.38$ 1,344,478.95$ 22.29%4,688,435.43$ 499,529.78$ CITY MANAGER 472,491.78$ 137,795.69$ 29.16%334,696.09$ 33,093.39$ LEGAL/ACCOUNTING ACTUARY 348,960.87$ 88,524.26$ 25.37%260,436.61$ 31,970.34$ ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES 990,075.74$ 214,212.53$ 21.64%775,863.21$ 116,646.63$ INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 397,768.47$ 110,311.86$ 27.72%287,518.26$ 33,613.82$ CITY CLERK 285,901.23$ 87,589.84$ 30.64%198,311.39$ 22,654.67$ GENERAL LEDGER/PAYROLL 434,004.36$ 150,695.71$ 34.72%283,308.65$ 48,959.13$ ASSESSING/TAX/FINANCE 403,043.52$ 116,224.21$ 28.84%286,819.31$ 26,929.71$ PLANNING/DESIGN REVIEW 563,713.28$ 111,108.26$ 19.71%452,605.02$ 31,513.87$ OPERATING TRANSFERS OUT 808,200.00$ -$ 0.00%808,200.00$ -$ Total GENERAL GOVERNMENT EXP.10,886,871.63$ 2,426,140.31$ 22.28%8,460,792.97$ 845,456.34$ PUBLIC SAFETY FIRE DEPARTMENT 3,698,663.25$ 1,225,937.17$ 33.15%2,472,726.08$ 324,556.73$ AMBULANCE 522,650.00$ 28,532.77$ 5.46%494,117.23$ 4,285.37$ POLICE DEPARTMENT 5,760,136.24$ 1,474,598.63$ 25.60%4,285,537.61$ 405,550.99$ Total PUBLIC SAFETY 9,981,449.49$ 2,729,068.05$ 27.34%7,252,381.44$ 734,393.09$ STREETS & HIGHWAYS HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT 3,346,938.68$ 604,615.41$ 18.06%2,742,323.27$ 176,182.25$ Total STREETS & HIGHWAYS 3,346,938.68$ 604,615.41$ 18.06%2,742,323.27$ 176,182.25$ CULTURE AND RECREATION RECREATION ADMINISTRATION 359,516.74$ 96,223.83$ 26.76%263,292.91$ 25,505.73$ % Budget Unencumbered FY-22/23 MTD Account Budget Expenditures Expended Balance Pd 4 Oct GENERAL GOVERNMENT EXP. PROGRAMS 50,000.00$ 29,284.92$ 58.57%20,715.08$ 2,954.34$ RED ROCKS PARK 14,924.80$ 8,351.47$ 55.96%6,573.33$ 39.63$ FACILITIES 139,150.00$ 14,347.32$ 10.31%124,802.68$ 8,143.21$ SENIOR PROGRAMS 33,311.57$ 3,662.50$ 10.99%29,649.07$ 800.68$ SPECIAL ACTIVITIES 101,500.00$ 23,232.45$ 22.89%78,267.55$ 6,140.73$ PUBLIC LIBRARY 866,629.70$ 213,455.82$ 24.63%653,173.88$ 61,680.73$ CAPITAL/PARK MAINTENANCE 399,642.54$ 137,699.22$ 34.46%261,943.32$ 33,772.01$ Total CULTURE AND RECREATION 1,964,675.35$ 523,320.05$ 26.64%1,441,355.30$ 139,216.66$ OTHER ENTITIES OTHER OPERATING ENTITIES 791,250.11$ 444,943.34$ 56.23%346,306.77$ 80,172.50$ Total OTHER ENTITIES 791,250.11$ 444,943.34$ 56.23%346,306.77$ 80,172.50$ CURRENT PRINCIPAL BONDS 1,211,203.30$ 625,021.00$ 51.60%586,182.30$ 435,021.00$ CURRENT INTEREST BONDS 279,090.00$ 141,442.10$ 50.68%137,647.90$ 123,157.33$ Total GENERAL FUND 28,461,478.56$ 7,494,550.26$ 26.33%20,966,989.95$ 2,533,599.17$ City of South Burlington General Ledger Expenditure Report - ENTERPRISE FUND/W.P.C. Current Year Period 4 October % Budget Unencumbered FY-22/23 MTD Account Budget Expenditures Expended Balance Pd 4 Oct W/POLLUTION CONTROL EXPS. Salaries-Permanent 672,300.45$ 187,205.63$ 27.85%485,094.82$ 50,082.63$ Payment to Highway-wages 250,000.00$ -$ 0.00%250,000.00$ -$ Leave Time Turn-In 7,000.00$ -$ 0.00%7,000.00$ -$ Salaries-Overtime 50,000.00$ 20,140.99$ 40.28%29,859.01$ 4,952.97$ Payment to Sick Bank Fund 6,677.02$ -$ 0.00%6,677.02$ -$ Payroll Service 1,796.41$ -$ 0.00%1,796.41$ -$ PAFO Certification 29,065.71$ 3,332.14$ 11.46%25,733.57$ 876.88$ Sick Bank Payouts 10,000.00$ -$ 0.00%10,000.00$ -$ Fringe Benefits 4,135.00$ 600.00$ 14.51%3,535.00$ -$ FICA/Medicare 58,780.01$ 16,450.23$ 27.99%42,329.78$ 4,364.66$ Payment to Highway-FICA/M 33,420.18$ -$ 0.00%33,420.18$ -$ Vision Plan 2,829.21$ 227.00$ 8.02%2,602.21$ 56.75$ Disability Insurance 2,175.17$ 677.14$ 31.13%1,498.03$ -$ Long Term Disability Insu 4,148.39$ -$ 0.00%4,148.39$ -$ Group Health Insurance 196,366.10$ 21,076.75$ 10.73%175,289.35$ 4,987.82$ Group Life Insurance 2,829.21$ 90.75$ 3.21%2,738.46$ -$ Group Dental Insurance 7,893.29$ 2,052.80$ 26.01%5,840.49$ 533.93$ Pension 85,733.42$ 20,363.54$ 23.75%65,369.88$ 20,363.54$ ICMA Match 29,065.71$ 6,898.19$ 23.73%22,167.52$ 1,810.26$ Pension Note Payment 39,075.00$ -$ 0.00%39,075.00$ -$ Office Supplies 2,000.00$ 44.41$ 2.22%1,955.59$ 12.23$ Plant Supplies 120,000.00$ 26,003.97$ 21.67%93,996.03$ 4,179.74$ Polymer 100,000.00$ 1,902.00$ 1.90%98,098.00$ -$ Sewer Line Maint/Supplies 25,000.00$ 2,910.04$ 11.64%22,089.96$ 1,612.55$ Pumping Station Supplies 25,000.00$ 21,709.88$ 86.84%3,290.12$ 7,772.04$ Laboratory Supplies 13,000.00$ 3,509.34$ 26.99%9,490.66$ 755.77$ Caustic Soda and Lime 120,000.00$ 40,512.34$ 33.76%79,487.66$ 16,434.86$ Alum 180,000.00$ 75,322.68$ 41.85%104,677.32$ 19,535.40$ % Budget Unencumbered FY-22/23 MTD Account Budget Expenditures Expended Balance Pd 4 Oct Water-Airport-B/B-Pump 1,600.00$ 543.94$ 34.00%1,056.06$ 310.35$ Generator Preventive Main 10,000.00$ 2,651.07$ 26.51%7,348.93$ -$ Clothing Supplies 4,250.00$ 1,203.80$ 28.32%3,046.20$ 357.70$ Truck Parts 12,500.00$ 2,370.22$ 18.96%10,129.78$ 161.63$ Gas - Diesel Fuel - Oil 12,000.00$ 7,247.65$ 60.40%4,752.35$ 1,764.89$ Fuel - Airport Parkway 60,000.00$ 17,158.70$ 28.60%42,841.30$ 8,845.53$ Fuel - Bartlett Bay 6,000.00$ 216.75$ 3.61%5,783.25$ 126.17$ Telephone and Alarms 6,500.00$ 1,625.95$ 25.01%4,874.05$ 713.33$ Memberships/Dues 20,000.00$ 954.25$ 4.77%19,045.75$ 750.00$ Discharge Permits 15,000.00$ 3,750.00$ 25.00%11,250.00$ -$ Workers Comp Insurance 22,127.75$ 9,027.05$ 40.80%13,100.70$ -$ Property Insurance 70,040.34$ 21,313.88$ 30.43%48,726.46$ -$ Unemployment Insurance 902.00$ -$ 0.00%902.00$ -$ Safety 5,000.00$ 6,246.65$ 24.93%(1,246.65)$ 239.00$ Billing Payment to CWD 69,342.00$ -$ 0.00%69,342.00$ -$ Soil/Sludge Management 135,000.00$ 57,865.67$ 42.86%77,134.33$ 6,303.53$ Landfill Fees 1,000.00$ -$ 0.00%1,000.00$ -$ HVAC Maintenance 35,000.00$ 5,089.38$ 14.54%29,910.62$ 4,765.00$ Auditing 4,246.55$ -$ 0.00%4,246.55$ -$ Engineering/Consulting 15,000.00$ 5,578.50$ 37.19%9,421.50$ 1,219.00$ Landfill Engineering 17,500.00$ 20,000.00$ 14.29%(2,500.00)$ -$ Administrative Services 149,344.05$ -$ 0.00%149,344.05$ -$ Burlington Sewer Lines 5,000.00$ 459.42$ 9.19%4,540.58$ -$ Travel & Training 6,000.00$ 190.00$ 3.17%5,810.00$ 175.00$ Utilities-Pumping Station 105,000.00$ 21,176.18$ 20.17%83,823.82$ 7,708.86$ Electric-Airport Parkway 200,000.00$ 64,047.32$ 32.02%135,952.68$ 21,090.51$ Electric-Bartlett Bay 145,000.00$ 36,361.47$ 25.08%108,638.53$ 12,782.13$ Replacement-Vehicles 220,000.00$ -$ 0.00%220,000.00$ -$ Building Improvements 2,500.00$ 874.10$ 34.96%1,625.90$ -$ Pumps Replacements 50,000.00$ -$ 0.00%50,000.00$ -$ Pump Repairs 40,000.00$ 19,649.80$ 49.12%20,350.20$ 600.00$ PMT to SW for Hadley Loan 73,000.00$ -$ 0.00%73,000.00$ -$ % Budget Unencumbered FY-22/23 MTD Account Budget Expenditures Expended Balance Pd 4 Oct Bartlett Bay Upgrades 400,000.00$ 41,928.50$ 10.48%358,071.50$ 31,542.00$ Hadley Sewer Project 111,786.54$ -$ 0.00%111,786.54$ -$ Loan for Airport Parkway 965,647.23$ -$ 0.00%965,647.23$ -$ Capital Improvements-CIP -$ 1,291.95$ 00.00%(1,291.95)$ -$ Total ENTERPRISE FUND/W.P.C.5,074,576.74$ 799,852.02$ 15.76%4,274,724.72$ 237,786.66$ City of South Burlington General Ledger Expenditure Report - STORM WATER UTILITIES Current Year Period 4 October % Budget Unencumbered FY-22/23 MTD Account Budget Expenditures Expended Balance Pd 4 Oct S/WATER UTILITIES EXPS Salaries-Permanent 545,117.10$ 104,583.25$ 19.19%440,533.85$ 22,619.52$ Payment to Highway-Wages 78,215.00$ -$ 0.00%78,215.00$ -$ Salaries-Overtime 23,000.00$ 923.54$ 4.02%22,076.46$ 26.51$ Payment to Sick Bank Fund 5,392.16$ -$ 0.00%5,392.16$ -$ Payroll Service 1,347.31$ -$ 0.00%1,347.31$ -$ Fringe Benefits 7,238.00$ -$ 0.00%7,238.00$ -$ FICA/Medicare 43,460.96$ 8,524.07$ 19.61%34,936.89$ 1,829.33$ Vision Plan 582.94$ 124.92$ 21.43%458.02$ 31.23$ Disability Income Insuran 4,878.93$ 595.23$ 12.20%4,283.70$ -$ Group Health Insurance 153,953.83$ 50,551.02$ 32.84%103,402.81$ 36,412.00$ Health Insurance FICA 2,080.03$ -$ 0.00%2,080.03$ -$ Group Life Insurance 2,360.28$ 79.75$ 3.38%2,280.53$ -$ Group Dental Insurance 5,930.59$ 1,304.40$ 21.99%4,626.19$ 338.06$ Pension 93,238.50$ -$ 0.00%93,238.50$ -$ ICMA Match 27,189.96$ 5,861.18$ 21.56%21,328.78$ 1,404.18$ Pension Note Payment 26,910.00$ -$ 0.00%26,910.00$ -$ Office Supplies 1,000.00$ 1,012.08$ 101.21%(12.08)$ -$ Small Equipment/Tools 2,000.00$ 641.76$ 32.09%1,358.24$ 43.82$ Uniforms/Supplies 6,500.00$ 1,744.10$ 26.83%4,755.90$ 461.86$ Gasoline 2,250.00$ 1,306.25$ 58.06%943.75$ 284.33$ Oil 250.00$ 63.75$ 25.50%186.25$ -$ Diesel Fuel 4,500.00$ 4,604.56$ 102.32%(104.56)$ 1,405.05$ Permit Requirement-Educat 7,000.00$ -$ 0.00%7,000.00$ -$ Telephone 2,000.00$ 683.02$ 34.15%1,316.98$ 275.12$ Membership/Dues 300.00$ -$ 0.00%300.00$ -$ Discharge Permits Renewal 18,000.00$ 1,928.37$ 10.71%16,071.63$ 1,273.97$ Workers Comp Insurance 19,554.75$ 5,838.58$ 29.86%13,716.17$ -$ Property Insurance 16,197.44$ 4,929.04$ 30.43%11,268.40$ -$ % Budget Unencumbered FY-22/23 MTD Account Budget Expenditures Expended Balance Pd 4 Oct S/WATER UTILITIES EXPS Unemployment Insurance 902.00$ -$ 0.00%902.00$ -$ GIS-Fees/Software 50,000.00$ 11,005.15$ 22.01%38,994.85$ 4,129.35$ Sediment & Depris Disposa 200.00$ -$ 0.00%200.00$ -$ Water Quality Monitoring 15,000.00$ 4,600.23$ 30.67%10,399.77$ 1,508.63$ Building/Grounds Maint 200.00$ -$ 0.00%200.00$ -$ Vehicle Maintenance 5,000.00$ 4,910.38$ 98.21%89.62$ 2,090.41$ Storm System Maint Materi 55,000.00$ 22,510.51$ 40.93%32,489.49$ 8,360.16$ Printing 100.00$ -$ 0.00%100.00$ -$ Legal Services 20,000.00$ 183.13$ 0.92%19,816.87$ -$ To GF-Audit and Actuary 6,180.66$ -$ 0.00%6,180.66$ -$ Engineering-Watershed 40,000.00$ -$ 0.00%40,000.00$ -$ Billing Payment CWD 69,342.00$ -$ 0.00%69,342.00$ -$ Office Equipment Maintena 2,500.00$ 474.95$ 19.00%2,025.05$ 166.47$ Equipment Rental 250.00$ -$ 0.00%250.00$ -$ Administrative Services 102,103.95$ -$ 0.00%102,103.95$ -$ Conference/Training Expen 8,000.00$ 23.00$ 0.29%7,977.00$ -$ S/W Bldg Utilities 3,250.00$ 325.50$ 10.02%2,924.50$ 57.55$ Stormwater Pumps Electric 300.00$ 64.61$ 21.54%235.39$ 22.39$ Vehicles/Equipment 421,000.00$ -$ 0.00%421,000.00$ -$ Stormwater Capital Projec 2,481,000.00$ 187,941.56$ 7.58%2,293,058.44$ 95,987.29$ Office Furniture/Equipmen 1,000.00$ 1,327.19$ 132.72%(327.19)$ -$ Flow Restoration Plan Ana 5,000.00$ -$ 0.00%5,000.00$ -$ Reim to Highway-Benefit 33,420.18$ -$ 0.00%33,420.18$ -$ Total STORM WATER UTILITIES 4,420,196.57$ 428,665.08$ 9.70%3,991,531.49$ 178,727.23$ City of South Burlington General Ledger                                      Revenue Report ‐ GENERAL FUND                                          Current Year Period 4 OctoberEstimated Received % Budget Uncollected FY‐22/23 MTDAccount Revenue To Date Received Balance Pd  4 OctTAX REVENUETAX REVENUE 18,202,812.57$    (7,959,257.97)$      43.73% 10,243,554.60$   (342,915.63)$       LOCAL OPTION TAXES 4,033,388.90$      (494,878.11)$          12.27% 3,538,510.79$      ‐$                      Total TAX REVENUE 22,236,201.47$   (8,454,136.08)$      38.02% 13,782,065.39$   (342,915.63)$      INTEREST/PENALTY ON TAX 379,000.00$         (98,964.88)$            26.11% 280,035.12$         (4,518.65)$           Other Health Services 247,346.40$         (80,807.56)$            32.67% 166,538.84$         (10,471.58)$         CITY MANAGER 1,463,078.08$      (221,643.45)$          15.15% 1,241,434.63$      (59,357.56)$         CITY CLERK 383,100.00$         (87,243.67)$            22.77% 295,856.33$         (19,878.57)$         PLANNING 383,100.00$         (149,206.14)$          38.95% 233,893.86$         (46,428.70)$         FIRE DEPARTMENT 489,000.00$         (298,688.75)$          61.08% 190,311.25$         (22,848.61)$         ELECTRICAL INSPECTION 65,000.00$            (112,212.74)$          72.63% (47,212.74)$          (7,640.00)$           AMBULANCE 721,000.00$         (304,157.11)$          42.19% 416,842.89$         (62,188.37)$         POLICE DEPARTMENT 517,997.24$         (68,076.98)$            13.14% 449,920.26$         (18,683.06)$         HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT 1,394,855.38$      (264,696.16)$          18.98% 1,130,159.22$      (101,508.43)$       Total RECREATION 171,500.00$         (71,635.20)$            41.77% 99,864.80$           (13,233.00)$         PUBLIC LIBRARY 10,300.00$            (4,508.72)$              43.77% 5,791.28$             (1,813.21)$           Total Departments 6,225,277.10$      (1,761,841.36)$      28.30% 4,463,435.74$     (368,569.74)$      Total GENERAL FUND 28,461,478.57$   (10,215,977.44)$    35.89% 18,295,101.13$   (711,485.37)$       City of South Burlington General Ledger                                       Revenue Report ‐ ENTERPRISE FUND/W.P.C.                                     Current Year Period 4 OctoberEstimated Received % Budget Uncollected FY‐22/23 MTDAccount Revenue To Date Received Balance Pd  4 OctCHARGES FOR SERVICESW.P.C. User Fees 3,783,418.00$              (1,298,799.30)$    34.33% 2,484,618.70$      (326,721.39)$       Sewer  Septage Revenue 25,000.00$                    ‐$                       0.00% 25,000.00$           ‐$                      Connection Fees 500,000.00$                 (298,288.76)$        59.66% 201,711.24$         (202,865.68)$       Enviromental Impact ‐$                                (11,738.00)$          00.00% (11,738.00)$          ‐$                      Total CHARGES FOR SERVICES 4,308,418.00$              (1,608,826.06)$    37.34% 2,699,591.94$     (529,587.07)$      BOND AND LOAN PROCEEDSColchester A/P Pkwy Pm 742,310.00$                 ‐$                       0.00% 742,310.00$         ‐$                      GF Note Repay‐Solar 12,004.68$                    ‐$                       0.00% 12,004.68$           ‐$                      Total BOND AND LOAN PROCEEDS 754,314.68$                 ‐$                       0.00% 754,314.68$         ‐$                      MISCELLANEOUSMiscellaneous Rev.‐W.P 10,000.00$                    ‐$                       0.00% 10,000.00$           ‐$                      Total MISCELLANEOUS 10,000.00$                   ‐$                       0.00% 10,000.00$           ‐$                      Total ENTERPRISE FUND/W.P.C. 5,072,732.68$              (1,608,826.06)$    31.72% 3,463,906.62$     (529,587.07)$       City of South Burlington General Ledger                                        Revenue Report ‐ STORM WATER UTILITIES                                     Current Year Period 4 OctoberEstimated Received % Budget Uncollected FY‐22/23 MTDAccount Revenue To Date Received Balance Pd  4 OctS/WATER UTILITIES REVENUEIntergovernmental Revenue 826,506.98$              ‐$                       0.00% 826,506.98$         ‐$                      S/W User Fees ‐ Water Bil 2,707,767.59$          (902,032.66)$        33.31% 1,805,734.93$      (323,413.65)$       Pmts from other towns 40,000.00$                ‐$                       0.00% 40,000.00$           ‐$                      Land Owner Payments 100,000.00$              ‐$                       0.00% 100,000.00$         ‐$                      Stormwater  Miscellaneous 30,000.00$                ‐$                       0.00% 30,000.00$           ‐$                      Hadley Sewer Proj‐Sewer f 73,000.00$                ‐$                       0.00% 73,000.00$           ‐$                      Reserve Transfer In 635,778.00$              ‐$                       0.00% 635,778.00$         ‐$                      Total STORM WATER UTILITIES 4,413,052.57$          (902,032.66)$       20.44% 3,511,019.91$     (323,413.65)$       MEMORANDUM TO: South Burlington City Council FROM: Andrew Bolduc, Deputy City Manager DATE: November 21, 2022 RE: General Liability, Property, and Workers’ Compensation Insurance Renewal - 2023 ______________________________________________________________________________ Background Back in 2016, the City was spending approximately $1.1 million in annual property, general liability, and workers’ compensation insurance premiums. At that time, city management went out to bid, and, after a competitive process, made the decision to change its long-time carrier to Travelers’ Insurance Co. brokered and administered through the insurance team at Hickok & Boardman (“H&B”). For the bottom-line, this decision netted the City approximately $500,000 in year 1 savings. Over the past 6 years, the City team has partnered with H&B and Travelers to implement a number of changes that have greatly improved workplace safety, reporting, training, and city liability overall. This partnership has helped gradually reduce total claims to what is an average 40% loss ratio over the 6-year term. In real numbers, that is an average of approximately $269,301 in realized losses per year vs a 2021 total premium of $856,518. These numbers are very strong regionally and represent hours of hard work and commitment to safety, creating what has become empirically, a leader in workplace safety. As with the City’s annual auditing services last year, management made the decision to re-bid insurance services this year. As in 2016, it was a competitive process with two finalists, VLCT-PACIF and H&B. Again this year, H&B/Travelers was the low bid. Because of the City’s impressive loss ratio, in renewing with H&B/Travelers, the city will see a reduction in premiums of approximately $111,000 this year. The bid also includes a two-year rate agreement that limits a rate increase in year 2 to not more than 4%, provided the city remains at or below a loss ratio of 50%. This bid process paired with the City’s strong loss history has yielded approximately $300,000 in 2-year premium savings from what was originally projected heading into the FY24 budget planning process. Overall, heading into 2023, the City is well positioned well below its high premiums in 2016 despite a 25% increase since then in property value increases and other exposures. Recommendation/Possible Action No formal action required. Consent item recommendation: Receive results of 2022 general liability, property, and workers’ compensation insurance request for proposals, and 2023 renewal with Hickok & Boardman. 180 Market Street South Burlington, VT 05401 | tel 802.846.4106 | fax 802.846.4101 | www.southburlingtonvt.gov MEMORANDUM TO: Jessie Baker, City Manager South Burlington City Council FROM: Paul Conner, Director of Planning & Zoning Kelsey Peterson, City Planner SUBJECT: FY 2023 Municipal Planning Grant application submittal DATE: November 21, 2022 City Council meeting Background The State Agency of Commerce and Community Development has made available funding for towns and cities to undertake planning activities again this year. The maximum grant award for a single municipality is $24,000 and require a minimum 10% local match. The proposed match source is the Planning & Zoning consulting account. The State awards these grants based on a series of competitive criteria. Those include: application quality, work plan & budget, linkage to comprehensive plan, citizen participation, statewide priorities, and bonus points for projects related to neighborhood development areas, of which we have one. Project Proposal The proposed project is to develop an equity framework for planning projects. It has become clear that the planning processes in the City could be designed to do a more consistent, more efficient, and more effective job of reaching the City’s equity goals and be a piece of implementing the City Council’s Declaration of Inclusion adopted in July 2022. Pursuit of equity in our planning processes will be an ongoing process, including the Comprehensive Plan update, but we believe that having a framework prepared by a professional in this field will be a tool for the Planning & Zoning Department and the Planning Committee to pursue greater equity in our work. The grant serve to engage an outside consultant to provide the with greater guidance in how we conduct planning decision-making. The deliverables would include scale-able best practices for an equitable approach to planning projects for the future, and would be able to serve as a model for other communities and areas of programming for the City. The proposed project is directly responsive to one of the grant’s top policy priorities for 2023, and was approved unanimously by the Planning Commission at their November 8th meeting. Proposed Action: Approval of the submittal of a Municipal Planning Grant application, for up to $22,000 in grant funds plus at least a 10% local match, for the work described above. The match may be higher to meet the project objectives and may, for the purposes of the grant, be placed in context of the Council’s connected work described above. WWHEREAS, the Municipality of ____________________________ is applying for funding as provided for in the FY23 Budget Act and may receive an award of funds under said provisions; and WHEREAS, the Department of Housing and Community Development may offer a Grant Agreement to this Municipality for said funding; and WHEREAS, the municipality is maintaining its efforts to provide local funds for municipal and regional planning purposes or that the municipality has voted at an annual or special meeting to provide local funds for municipal and regional planning purposes, Now, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED 1. That the Legislative Body of this Municipality enters into and agrees to the requirements and obligations of this grant program including a commitment to match funds. 2. That the Municipal Planning Commission recommends applying for said Grant; _____________________________ ______________________________ (Name of Planning Commission Chair) (Signature) 3a. That (Name)_________________________Title____________________________ who is either the Chief Executive Officer (CEO), as defined by 10 VSA §683(8), or is a Select Board Member, the Town Manager, the City Manager, or the Town Administrator, is hereby designated to serve as the Municipal/Authorizing Official (M/AO) for the Grant Electronic Application and Reporting System (GEARS), and to execute the Grant Agreement and other such Documents as may be necessary to secure these funds. 3b. (Alternate Authorizing Official for redundancy) That (Name)_________________________Title____________________________ who is either the Chief Executive Officer (CEO), as defined by 10 VSA §683(8), or a Select Board Member, is the Town Manager, the City Manager, or the Town Administrator, is hereby designated to serve as the Municipal/ Authorizing Official (M/AO) for the Grant Electronic Application and Reporting System (GEARS), and to execute the Grant Agreement and other such Documents as may be necessary to secure these funds. 3c. That (Name) ________________________Title____________________________ is hereby designated as the Grant Administrator, the person with the overall Administrative responsibility for the Municipal Planning Grant program activities related to the application, and any subsequent Grant Agreement provisions. Passed this ___________ day of ____________, ______. FY223 Municipal Resolution for MMunicipal Planning GGrant South Burlington Jessica Louisos Jessie Baker City Manager Paul Conner Director of Planning & Zoning 2023 Municipal Planning Grant – Municipal Resolution July 2022 Vermont Department of Housing and Community Development Page 2 … (For rural towns oor consortia only) The regional planning commission will serve as agent for the municipality or consortium. (Check the box if the municipality authorizes its regional planning commission to prepare the application, support grant administration and be exempt from competitive selection if serving as project consultant.) LEGISLATIVE BODY (name) (signature) INSTRUCTIONS FOR RESOLUTION FORM A. The Legislative Body of the Municipality must adopt this resolution or one that will have the same effect. This Form may be filled in or the adopted Resolution may be issued on municipal letterhead, filling in the name of the municipality, the Legislative Body (e.g. Selectboard), and the name and title of the Municipal/ Authorizing Official(s) (M/AOs); and the Grant Administrator. B. Following formal adoption, a majority of the legislative body must sign the Resolution. The Chair of the Planning Commission must also sign upon endorsement by vote of the Planning Commission. C. This form must be either uploaded to the online application or grant, or mailed to: Municipal Planning Grant Program Department of Housing and Community Development One National Life Drive, Sixth Floor Montpelier, VT 05620-0501 D. If mailed, an electronic copy of the submitted Resolution document will be uploaded by DHCD staff and available online. E. Please note that the designated Municipal/Authorizing Official(s) and Grant Administrator must also register for an account in the online grants management system, if they have not done so already, before the application can be considered complete. CONSORTIUM APPLICATIONS: For a consortium, each municipality must complete a separate Resolution form. All municipalities in a consortium must designate the same Municipal/Authorizing Official(s) and grant Administrator. Helen Riehle Meaghan Emery Tim Barritt Tom Chittenden Matt Cota 180 Market Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sbvt.gov MEMORANDUM TO: Jessie Baker, City Manager South Burlington City Council FROM: Paul Conner, Director of Planning & Zoning SUBJECT: Appointment of Marty Gillies as an Acting Zoning Administrative Officer and Acting Code Officer DATE: November 21, 2022 City Council meeting I am writing to request that our newest employee, Marty Gillies, be authorized as an Acting Zoning Administrative Officer and Acting Code Officer. Marty joined us in September as Development Review Planner and is excelling in his work. I am excited to present this next step in his work with the City. At a broader scale, we are taking a team approach to permitting and enforcement, meaning that all Planning & Zoning Department staff are authorized. This approach has served us well, providing strong customer service. Internally, this allows us to balance workload and assign work according to skills and availability. The appointment would be effective until the Council’s next round of annual appointments in March. 180 Market Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sbvt.gov MEMORANDUM TO: South Burlington City Council Jessie Baker, City Manager FROM: Paul Conner, AICP, Director of Planning & Zoning SUBJECT: LDR-22-05 & 22-06; Proposed amendments to Land Development Regulations: Expansion of Transfer of Development Rights program applicability and legal/technical corrections DATE: November 21, 2022 City Council Meeting This evening’s meeting includes a second public hearing and possible action on the above-referenced amendments to the Land Development Regulations (LDRs). This round of amendments includes two components: an expansion to the City’s Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) program, and a series of minor and technical changes. The amendments, categorized in this way, are summarized and assessed with respect to the City’s Comprehensive Plan in the formal Planning Commission Report on the Proposed Amendments, prepared in accordance with State law. A brief description of each amendment, taken from the Commission Report is included below. Following the City Council’s October 17th public hearing, the Council voted to make a small change to clarify how the timing of a conservation action would affect future development on the same parcel, following public input. The proposed change was submitted to the City Clerk and Planning Commission pursuant to 24 VSA 4442(b). In accordance with the Statute, the Planning Commission reviewed the change at its October 25th meeting and voted to re-approve their Report without changes. No further public input has been submitted to Staff since the Council’s first hearing. Recommended Action: Staff recommends that the Council open, hold, and close the public hearing. Subsequently, Council may discuss and consider adoption of the amendments. Proposed motion 1: “I move to open a public hearing on amendments to the Land Development Regulations number LDR-22-05 and LDR-22-06.” Proposed motion 2: “I move to close the public hearing on amendments to the Land Development Regulations number LDR-22-05 and LDR-22-06.” Possible motion 3: “I move to adopt amendments to the Land Development Regulations number LDR-22-05 and LDR-22-06 as presented in this meeting’s packet." 2 Brief description of the Proposed Amendments: A. LDR-22-05: Update the regulation of Transferable Development Rights (TDRs), 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 Brief explanation of the proposed amendment: This amendment updates the existing Transferable Development Rights program. It expands the areas where TDRs can be received to areas outside the SEQ districts to the City’s medium and higher-density residential and mixed use zoning districts along transit-served areas, establishes how TDRs can be used and maximum use of TDRs in all areas where they can be received, and outlines the process for severing TDRs from a property and receiving them on a property. Specifically, the draft regulations create two new tier for use of TDRs. • Within the City’s higher-density mixed use zoning districts – C1-R12, C1-R15, C1-Auto, C2 – TDRs may used to increase residential density without numerical limitation. The “cap” on maximum density is removed and instead the limitations on a site rely on the physical and dimensional limitations of the site and/or zone, such as building height, setbacks, lot coverage, and civic space requirements. Maximum density is effectively eliminated through the purchase of TDRs, as is the case in the City Center Form Based Code. • With the City’s transitional mixed use districts – Allen Road, Swift Street, C1-Limited Retail, R7, and R7- Neighborhood Commercial, all within the transit overlay district only – TDRs may be used to increase density a maximum of 50% above the base number for the zoning district. In both cases above, the expanded TDR program is integrated with the existing inclusionary zoning options for properties. After meeting their minimum required inclusionary units for a given site, an applicant may use either existing bonus inclusionary option (up to the cap of 50% increase total, in all districts) or TDRs to achieve the additional density. Below is a map of the updated TDR applicability. No changes in applicability are proposed in the southeast quadrant. 3 B. LDR-22-06: Minor and Technical Amendments to Bicycle Parking, Performance Bonds, Submission Requirements, and Section numbering (Sections 13.03, 13.05, 14.11, 15.A.20, 17.04, 17.15, Appendix E) Brief explanation of the proposed amendment: Table in 13.03 of the LDRs related to bicycle parking: In Section 13.03 of the LDRs, the table governing the number of bicycle parking spaces lists “uses” that are not identical to the uses listed in the Table of Uses in Appendix C. The amendment is to clearly indicate which uses require 1 bicycle space per 20,000 SF and which require 1 bicycle space per 5,000 SF. Move Section 15.A.20 (Performance Bonds) to Article 17: This amendment moves performance bonds from Subdivision to Administration to be clear it can apply in circumstances beyond subdivisions, as is the case in several instances. 4 Re-letter Section 13.05 to correct double “A” subsections: In Section 13.05, there are two subsections labeled “A”. In a prior version of the LDRs, when stormwater management standards were contained in Article 12, the “Applicability” section was contained in “B. Scope and Applicability” and the language under that section included internal references that persist in the new 13.05. Delete 17.04C Subdivision Approvals header: Section 17.04 contains a subsection A labeled “Subdivision Approvals. [reserved]” that is no longer needed and is a vestige of former state enabling statutes. It is currently a duplicate “A” that should be labeled “C” as in the previous version of the LDRs. Modify Appendix E to specify submission requirements for Final Plat for Minor Subdivisions, and for solar- ready roofs. 180 Market Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sbvt.gov PROPOSED AMENDMENTS to the SOUTH BURLINGTON LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS Public Hearing Monday, November 21, 2022 at 7:00 pm PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the City Council will hold a public hearing on Monday, November 21, 2022 at 7:00 PM to consider amendments to the Land Development Regulations. The amendments affect all parts of the City unless otherwise specified below. The hearing will be held in person and remotely via GoToMeeting. Participation options: • In Person: City Hall Auditorium, 180 Market Street • Interactive Online: https://meet.goto.com/SouthBurlingtonVT/city-council-11-21-2022 • Phone (408) 650-3123; Access Code: 298-710-037 The purpose of the hearing is to consider the following: A. LDR-22-05: Update the regulation of Transferable Development Rights (TDRs), 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 (Section 2.02, 4.04, 4.05, 4.06, 9.05, 14.04, 15.A.11, Articles 15C, 18, 19, Appendix C) B. LDR-22-06: Minor and Technical Amendments to Bicycle Parking, Performance Bonds, Submission Requirements, and Section numbering (Sections 13.03, 13.05, 14.11, 15.A.20, 17.04, 17.15, Appendix E) Copies of the proposed amendments are available for inspection at the Department of Planning & Zoning, City Hall, 3rd Floor, 180 Market Street, and on the city website at www.sbvt.gov. Helen Riehle, City Council Chair November 3, 2022 LDR-22-05 TRANFERABLE DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS 2 DEFINITIONS 2.01 Rules of Construction, Intent and Usage 2.02 Specific Definitions 2.03 Definitions for Flood Hazard Purposes . . . Density increase. For the purposes of the Transfer of Development Rights, tThe allowable increase in the amount density of residential development onf a receiving parcel for TDRs, expressed as a higher maximum average number of dwelling units per acre of a receiving parcel than would be allowable on theat receiving parcel if it were part of a PUD that did not use TDRs; allowing a higher average number of dwelling units for each acre of a receiving parcel also increases building bulk and lot coverage. . . . TDR. Transfer of Development Rights or Transferrable Development Rights. . . . Transferrable Development Rights. The development potential of a parcel of land assigned by these regulations which may be severed from a parcel, (the sending parcel), and which may be transferred to and used on another parcel, (the receiving parcel). To the extent that the development potential of a sending parcel is used on a receiving parcel, rights or interests in the parcel created by a legal instrument in perpetuity, conserving the sending parcel and limiting the possible uses of the sending parcel to agriculture, forestry, natural area and/or outdoor non-motorized recreation shall be granted to the City, a State agency or a Qualified Organization, Aas defined in 1024 V.S.A. section 6301a4423, as amended from time to time. LDR-22-05 TRANFERABLE DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS 4 RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS . . . 4.04 Residential 7 District 4.05 Residential 12 District 4.06 Residential 7 with Neighborhood Commercial District . . . 4.04 Residential 7 District - R7 . . . C. Area, Density, and Dimensional Requirements. In the Residential 7 District all requirements of this Section 4.04 and Table C-2, Dimensional Standards, shall apply, except as provided for via applicable PUD type under Article 15.C or as modified by use of Inclusionary Zoning under Article 18 or Transferable Development Rights under Article 19. . . . 4.05 Residential 12 - R12 . . . C. Area, Density, and Dimensional Requirements. In the Residential 12 District all requirements of this Section 4.05 and Table C-2, Dimensional Standards, shall apply, except as provided for via applicable PUD type under Article 15.C or as modified by use of Inclusionary Zoning under Article 18 or Transferable Development Rights under Article 19. 4.06 Residential 7 With Neighborhood Commercial District - R7-NC . . . C. Lot, Area, and Dimensional Requirements. The lot, area, and dimensional requirements shall be those set forth in Table C-2, Dimensional Standards, for C1 Districts, except as provided for via applicable PUD type under Article 15.C or as modified by use of Inclusionary Zoning under Article 18 or Transferable Development Rights under Article 19. Provisions of Article 3 and Table C-2, Dimensional Standards, may be modified by the Development Review Board in accordance with the conditions and objectives of this Section 4.06. 5 COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS 5.01 Commercial 1 (C1) . . . 5.04 Commercial 1 with Limited Retail (C1-LR) 5.05 Commercial 2 (C2) 5.06 Swift Street District (SW) 5.07 Allen Road District (AR) . . . 5.01 Commercial 1 - C1 . . . C. Area, Density, and Dimensional Requirements. In the Commercial 1 District, area, density, and dimensional requirements shall be those shown in Table C-2, Dimensional Standards, except as provided for via applicable PUD type under Article 15.C or as modified by use of Inclusionary Zoning under Article 18 or Transferrable Development Rights under Article 19. . . . 5.04 Commercial 1 with Limited Retail (C1-LR) . . . C. Area, Density, and Dimensional Requirements. In the Commercial 1 with Limited Retail C1-LR District, area, density, and dimensional requirements shall be those shown in Table C-2, Dimensional Standards, except as provided for via applicable PUD type under Article 15C or as modified by use of Inclusionary Zoning under Article 18 or Transferrable Development Rights under Article 19. 5.05 Commercial 2 District C2 . . . C. Area, Density, and Dimensional Requirements. In the Commercial 2 C2 District, area, density, and dimensional requirements shall be those shown in Table C-2, Dimensional Standards, except as provided for via applicable PUD type under Article 15.C or as modified by use of Inclusionary Zoning under Article 18 or Transferrable Development Rights under Article 19. 5.06 SWIFT STREET DISTRICT SW . . . D. Area, Density, and Dimensional Requirements. In the SW District, area, density, and dimensional requirements shall be those shown in Table C-2, Dimensional Standards or as modified by use of Inclusionary Zoning under Article 18 or Transferrable Development Rights under Article 19. 5.07 ALLEN ROAD DISTRICT AR . . . C. Area, Density, and Dimensional Requirements. In the AR District, area, density, and dimensional requirements shall be those shown in Table C-2, Dimensional Standards, except as provided for via applicable PUD type under Article 15C or as modified by use of Inclusionary Zoning under Article 18 or Transferrable Development Rights under Article 19. LDR-22-05 TRANSFERABLE DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS 9 SOUTHEAST QUADRANT – SEQ . . . 9.05 [reserved] Transfer of Development Rights; Sending & Receiving Areas . . . 9.05 [reserved] Transfer of Development Rights; Sending & Receiving Areas A. Authorization and Purpose: All land within the SEQ District is provided with an Assigned Density, which limits the total number of dwelling units originating in the SEQ District to approximately 3,800 dwelling units less any areas identified as Hazards under these Regulations. The Transfer of Development Rights is hereby authorized in order to encourage the conservation of open space, natural resources, scenic views and agricultural uses, to promote well-planned residential development in clusters within the SEQ District, and to encourage the concentration of development towards priority areas within the City. B. Sending and Receiving Areas. TDRs are transferred and severed from lands within designated sending areas and transferred to and used on lands within designated receiving areas. (1) Sending Areas. Lands within the following areas are designated as Sending Areas: (a) Lands within the SEQ-NRP and SEQ-NRT sub-districts. (2) Receiving Areas. Lands within the following areas are designated as Receiving Areas: (a) Lands within the SEQ-NR, SEQ-NRT, SEQ-NRN, SEQ-VR and SEQ-VC sub-districts; (b) Parcels with land underlying the Urban Design Overlay District. (c) As authorized via Planned Unit Development in accordance with Article 15.C C. Assigned Density: For the purposes of the Transfer of Development Rights, all land in the SEQ District is provided an Assigned Density of one point two (1.2) dwelling units and/or lots per gross acre, less any areas identified as Hazards under these Regulations. (1) SEQ-VC: Lots in the SEQ-VC sub-district that were in existence as of the effective date of this Article and that are two acres or less in size shall be allowed an assigned residential density of four (4) dwelling units to the acre. D. Allowable Density for Development that does not Include a Transfer of Development Rights: If an application does not use Transferrable Development Rights, the number of dwelling units that may be developed on the parcel shall not exceed a density and a maximum number of units per structure as follows: (1) In the SEQ-NRP sub-district, the provisions of Section 9.12 shall apply. (2) In the SEQ-NRT, SEQ-NR, SEQ-NRN and SEQ-VR sub-districts: One point two (1.2) dwelling units to the acre and four (4) dwelling units per structure. (3) In the SEQ-VC Subdistrict: (a) For lots that were in existence as of the effective date of this Article and that are two acres or less in size: four (4) dwelling units per acre South Burlington Land Development Regulations (b) For all other lots: One point two (1.2) dwelling units to the acre and four (4) dwelling units per structure. E. Allowable Density for Development that Includes a Transfer of Development Rights (1) Except as provided for in a Planned Unit Development in accordance with Article 15.C, if a zoning permit or subdivision application in the Southeast Quadrant Zoning District uses Transferrable Development Rights, the number of dwelling units that may be located on a contiguous development parcel subject to a single application or subdivision shall be increased to a maximum gross density as follows: (a) In the SEQ-NRT, SEQ-NRN, and SEQ-NR sub-districts: One-point-eight (1.8) dwelling units to the acre and four (4) dwelling units per structure. (b) In the SEQ-VR and SEQ-VC sub-districts: Eight (8) dwelling units to the acre and six (6) dwelling units per structure. Where a structure has been approved as part of a Master Plan prior to January 9, 2012 with a greater number of dwelling units than those permitted in these Regulations, such approved number of units in a structure shall remain in effect. (2) A Planned Unit Development submitted and approved under Article 15.C of these Regulations are subject to the density requirements therein and are eligible to use Transferable Development Rights as enumerated therein. (3) If a site plan or PUD outside the Southeast Quadrant Zoning District uses Transferrable Development Rights, the maximum development density that may be located on a development parcel subject to a site plan or PUD approval shall be increased as follows: (a) In the Urban Design Overlay District, lot coverage indicated in Section 10.05 of these Regulations. F. Development Rights Necessary to Obtain Density Increase (1) To obtain the increased residential density allowable in a receiving area, transferrable development rights must be acquired from 0.83 acres of land in a sending area for each additional dwelling unit (excluding accessory dwelling units) approved for development on the receiving parcel beyond the maximum average density that would be allowable on the receiving parcel if the application did not use transferrable development rights. (2) To obtain the increased density allowable for a lot coverage increase in a receiving area outside of the SEQ District, transferrable development rights must be acquired as set forth on Table 9-0. Table 9-0: Density Rights Required to Obtain Lot Coverage Increase Additional Lot Coverage Approved for Receiving Parcel beyond the Maximum Lot Coverage Allowed on the Receiving Parcel is Site Plan or PUD did not use TDRs TDRs required from land in sending areas Up to 10,000 SF 0.83 acres 10,001 SF – 20,000 SF 1.67 acres 20,001 SF – 30,000 SF 2.50 acres Each additional increment of 10,000 SF 0.83 acres South Burlington Land Development Regulations G. Allowances for Affordable Housing. (1) In the SEQ-VR and SEQ-VC sub-districts, the Development Review Board may allow residential structures containing one or more affordable dwelling units to have two additional dwelling units, up to a maximum of eight (8) dwelling units per structure. This provision shall not be interpreted to allow an increase in the total allowable number of units for the project as a whole. (2)(1) Inclusionary dwelling units and Residential Offset Units approved pursuant to this Section and Section 18.01, shall not constitute units for the purposes of calculation of Transferable Development Rights. LDR-22-05: Transferable Development Rights South Burlington Land Development Regulations 14 SITE PLAN and CONDITIONAL USE REVIEW 14.01 General Purpose 14.02 Definition of Site Plan 14.03 Uses and Actions Subject to Site Plan Review 14.04 Authority for Review of Site Plans 14.05 Application Review Procedure 14.06 General Review Standards 14.07 Specific Review Standards 14.08 [reserved] 14.09 [reserved] 14.10 Conditional Use Review: General Provisions and Standards 14.11 Site Plan and Conditional Use Review: Specific Uses and Standards 14.04 Authority for Review of Site Plans A. Authority, Development Review Board (DRB). The DRB has the authority under these Regulations and 24 V.S.A. § 4414 and § 4416 to: . . . (3) Modify a dimensional requirement under this Article or the Table of Dimensional Standards (Appendix C). . . . (b) Limitations. In granting a modification, In no case shall the DRB permit: (i) the location of a new structure less than five (5) feet from any property boundary; (ii) land development creating a total site coverage exceeding the allowable limit for the applicable zoning district in the case of new development; (iii) increasing the coverage on sites where the pre-existing condition exceeds the applicable limit; (iv) an increase in residential density above the allowed maximum in the applicable zoning district, outside of review as Planned Unit Development (Article 15C), Inclusionary Zoning (Section 18.01) or via a Transfer of Development Rights (Article 19); or, (v) the location of parking not in compliance with Section 14.06 (A)(2). LDR-22-05: Transferable Development Rights South Burlington Land Development Regulations 15.A SUBDIVISION REVIEW . . . 15.A.11 General Standards . . . 15.A.11 General Standards A. Development Suitability. The applicant must demonstrate that the land to be subdivided is physically suited for its intended use and the proposed density or intensity of development, and that the proposed subdivision will not result in undue adverse impacts to public health and safety, environmental resources as identified and regulated under Article 12, neighboring properties and uses, or public facilities and infrastructure located on or within the vicinity of the land to be subdivided. (3) Buildable Area Calculations. The allowed number of building lots or dwelling units within the subdivision shall be calculated based on the Buildable Area of the parcel or tract to be subdivided except as otherwise specified for a Transect Zone Subdivision under Article 8, a Planned Unit Development under Article 15.C; and as provided for the transfer of development rights under Article 19, or affordable housing offsets, bonuses, or incentives under Article 18. (a) Any proposed alteration of the existing grade to create developable building lots, including land excavation or fill, must meet the standards of Section 14.11 (Alteration of Existing Grade), Article 16 (Construction and Erosion Control) and other applicable resource protection, flood hazard area and stormwater management standards under these Regulations. LDR-22-05: Transferable Development Rights South Burlington Land Development Regulations 15.C PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT . . . 15.C.04 Standards Applicable to All PUD Types 15.C.05 Conservation Development 15.C.06 Traditional Neighborhood Development 15.C.07 General PUD . . . 15.C.04 PUD Standards Applicable to All PUD Types . . . C. Compliance with Regulations. The provisions and standards specific to a PUD supersede underlying zoning district, subdivision, and site plan standards. In no case, however, shall the provisions or standards specific to a PUD supersede the Environmental Protection Standards of Article 12. Notwithstanding this supersession of the underlying zoning district, subdivision, and site plan standards, any application that includes a density increase that exceeds the Assigned Density of a parcel shall require a TDR under Article 19. D. Development Density. . . . (7) Maximum Development Density. The maximum development density allowed within any PUD except a Conservation PUD shall be determined based on the total buildable area, proposed land use allocations by use category, the allowed mix of building types, and associated building lot standards as specified by PUD type. (a) The DRB may allow for an increase in the overall density of residential development within a designated Residential or Mixed Use area, for example through adjustments or modifications to the required housing mix, allowed housing types, or associated building lot or height standards, as necessary to accommodate the following: (i) The purchase and transfer of development rights from land within designated sending areas under Article 19 the SEQ-NRP or SEQ-NRT Subdistrict (Section 9.05 Transfer of Development Rights). (ii) The incorporation of offset housing units under inclusionary zoning (Section 18.01 Inclusionary Zoning). (iii) The incorporation of additional housing units awarded as an incentive for affordable housing development under Section 18.01 Inclusionary Zoning). LDR-22-05: Transferable Development Rights 15.C.05 CONSERVATION DEVELOPMENT 15.C.05 Conservation Development . . . E._____Conservation PUD Sub-Zones. A Conservation PUD must include the following Sub-Zones, as designated on the PUD Master Plan, and as more specifically identified and delineated on preliminary and final subdivision plans and plats: (1) Conservation Area. A Conservation PUD must include one or more designated “Conservation Areas” which at minimum comprise 70% of the total tract or parcel area; and which, to the maximum extent physically feasible, are contiguous or linked to resource or other open space areas located on adjacent parcels or in the immediate vicinity of the proposed PUD. Any tract or parcel area, or portion thereof, which is subject to a conservation easement that prohibits or otherwise limits future subdivision and/or other development held by the City or a qualified nonprofit organization may be included in and incorporated into a designated Conservation Area so long as said tract or parcel, or portion thereof, and the proposed Conservation Area otherwise meet the requirements of this Section 15.C.05.E. (a) The designated Conservation Area(s) must include and incorporate: (i) Hazards, as defined and regulated under Article 12 (Table 12-01) which, as unbuildable land, are not eligible for or subject to the transfer of development density. (ii) Level I Resources, as defined and regulated under Article 12 (Table 12-01) which, within a Conservation PUD, are eligible for and subject to the transfer of development rights. In meeting the minimum 70% allocation requirement, Level I Resources are to be given priority for inclusion within a designated Conservation Area. . . . (b) In the SEQ District, a Conservation Area may also include and incorporate a portion of the tract or parcel located within the SEQ-NRP Sub-District, as eligible for the transfer of development rights either within the Conservation PUD, or to another designated receiving area under Article 19Section 9.05 (Transfer of Development Rights). . . . F._____Residential Density and Unit (Yield) Calculations. Notwithstanding PUD residential density provisions under Section 15.C.04, for a Conservation PUD: . . . (3) Supplemental Housing Units. Additional, supplemental housing units are allowed by right or may be included within the designated Development Area as necessary to achieve the Minimum LDR-22-05: Transferable Development Rights 15.C.05 CONSERVATION DEVELOPMENT Density of residential development required under (4) below; or to achieve the Maximum Residential Density allowed by zoning district under (5). Supplemental Housing Units include: (a) Offset housing units granted by right for any required Inclusionary Dwelling units pursuant to Section 18.01; (b) Bonus housing units awarded for the provision of additional affordable housing pursuant to Section 18.01; and (c) Housing units associated with the receipt transfer and purchase of transferrable development rights pursuant to Article 19(Section 9.05). . . . LDR-22-05: Transferable Development Rights 15.C.07 General PUD . . . H. Development Density. (1) Development Density regulations and definitions included in Section 15.C.04(D) shall apply to General PUDs. (2) Development density within a General PUD is determined by maximum development density in the underlying zoning district, except as follows. (a) Density can be re-allocated within the PUD area within single zoning districts; (b) Additional density may be achieved through either or both Inclusionary Zoning and application of Transferrable Development Rights where specifically authorized by and as regulated by Section 18.01 or Article 19Section 9.05. LDR-22-05: Transferable Development Rights ARTICLE 18 HOUSING STANDARDS South Burlington Land Development Regulations 18. HOUSING STANDARDS 18.01 Inclusionary Zoning 18.02 [Reserved] 18.03 Housing Preservation 18.01 Inclusionary Zoning . . . J. Maximum Density Achievable with Inclusionary Zoning and Transferable Development Rights (1) Maximum density in Table 19-1 can be achieved through receipt of TDRs, use of Inclusionary Zoning offsets or bonuses, or a combination of TDRs and Inclusionary Zoning. (2) Total density through use of TDRs and Inclusionary Zoning cannot exceed the limits in Table 19-1. ARTICLE 19 TRANSFERABLE DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS NOTE: ALL TEXT WITHIN ARTICLE 19 IS PROPOSED NEW TEXT South Burlington Land Development Regulations LDR-22-05 – TRANSFERABLE DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS 19. TRANSFERABLE DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS 19.01 Authority & Purpose 19.02 Severance of Transferable Development Rights 19.03 Receipt of Transferable Development Rights 19.04 Determination of Transferable Development Rights 19.01 Authority & Purpose A. Authority. The City of South Burlington has the authority under 24 V.S.A. § 4423 to establish bylaws governing the Transfer of Development Rights (“TDRs”). TDRs are hereby authorized in order to encourage the conservation of open space, natural resources, scenic views and agricultural lands, and to direct development to priority areas within the City as indicated in Table 19-1. B. Purpose. The purpose of this section is to regulate the use of TDRs to encourage preservation of open space. Specifically, it is the intention of this section to regulate the transfer of development rights from areas where land conservation is a priority to priority areas for development within the City. 19.02 Severance of Transferable Development Rights A. Sending Areas and Sending Properties. 1. Sending Areas. Lands within the following areas are designated as Sending Areas: a. Lands within the following districts: SEQ-NRP and SEQ-NRT B. Assigned Density and Severing Rights: For the purposes of Transferable Development Rights, lands are provided an Assigned Density. 1. The Assigned Density is determined by zoning district: a. In the SEQ District, except as provided in 19.02B(1)(b), all land is provided an Assigned Density of one point two (1.2) dwelling units and/or lots per gross acre, less any areas defined as Hazards under these Regulations. b. In the SEQ-VC Subdistrict, lots that were in existence as of the effective date of this Article and that are two acres or less in size shall be allowed an assigned residential density of four (4) dwelling units per gross acre. 2. TDRs must be severed as whole numbers. Less than one TDR cannot be severed, therefore a minimum of development rights from 0.83 acres can be severed from a sending property. 3. Severance of development rights from each 0.83 acres will equal one TDR for receipt on a receiving property. 4. Any property within a sending area that has not fully utilized its development rights is eligible to be a sending property. C. Process for Severing Development Rights ARTICLE 19 TRANSFERABLE DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS NOTE: ALL TEXT WITHIN ARTICLE 19 IS PROPOSED NEW TEXT South Burlington Land Development Regulations 1. Severance of development rights occurs when the owner of the sending property executes a deed of severance of development rights. 2. Deeds of severance of TDR must include the written determination by the Administrative Officer indicating the number of development rights being severed and the number of development rights remaining on the property. 3. The deed of severance of TDR must be recorded in the City of South Burlington Land Records. 4. The deed of severance of TDR shall be in a form that is approved by the City Attorney and must recite that it is a conveyance under 24 V.S.A. § 4423 and recites the number of acres affected, as required by 24 V.S.A. § 4423(b)(3). 5. Severance of development rights must include a perpetual conservation easement granted to the City of South Burlington under 10 V.S.A. Chapter 155. a. The conservation easement must be recorded in the City of South Burlington Land Records. b. The conservation easement shall limit the possible uses of the affected area of the sending parcel to agriculture, forestry, natural area and/or outdoor non-motorized recreation. 19.03 Receipt of Transferable Development Rights A. Receiving Areas and Receiving Properties. 1. Receiving Areas. Lands within the following areas are designated as Receiving Areas: a. All districts listed in Table 19-1. B. Receiving Development Rights 1. All properties within a receiving area are eligible to receive TDRs, up to the maximum density increases in Table 19-1. 2. TDRs must be received as whole numbers. 3. Density increases on a receiving property may include an increase in lot coverage, building coverage, or allowed residential density (by number of residential units allowed), allowed by zoning district in Table 19-2. 4. TDRs can be used for any combination of density increases as allowed by the zoning district in Table 19-2 on a single property. C. Process for Receiving Development Rights 1. Receipt of transferable development rights occurs when the owner of a receiving property executes a deed of receipt, which shall include or reference a deed from the owner of TDR conveying said TDR to the owner of the receiving property, attaching the development right(s) to the receiving property. 2. The DRB shall have discretion to determine when an applicant must receive development rights on a property to enable approval or construction of additional units. 3. A deed of receipt must be recorded in the City of South Burlington Land Records, including the number of TDRs applied to the property. 4. The deed of transfer shall be in a form that is approved by the City Attorney and must recite that it is a conveyance under 24 V.S.A. § 4423. ARTICLE 19 TRANSFERABLE DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS NOTE: ALL TEXT WITHIN ARTICLE 19 IS PROPOSED NEW TEXT South Burlington Land Development Regulations 5. Nothing in this Article precludes combination of a deed of severance of TDR and a deed of receipt. 6. Any transfer of development rights to a receiving property pursuant to this Article only authorizes a density increase. It does not alter any other regulations applicable to the receiving property. D. Maximum Density Achievable through Transferable Development Rights and Inclusionary Zoning 1. Maximum density in Table 19-1 can be achieved through receipt of TDRs, use of Inclusionary Zoning offsets or bonuses, or a combination of TDRs and Inclusionary Zoning. 2. Total density through use of TDRs and Inclusionary Zoning cannot exceed the limits in Table 19-1. Table 19-1 Maximum Density Increases with TDRs Zoning District(s) Max. Allowable Density through TDRs and/or Inclusionary Zoning Max. Allowable Building and Lot Coverage C1-R15, C1-Auto, C1-R12, C2 No maximum 10 percentage points above existing maximum C1-LR, AR, SW 50% more than base density 10 percentage points above existing maximum R12, R7-NC, R7 within the Transit Overlay District only 50% more than base density 10 percentage points above existing maximum SEQ-NRT, SEQ-NRN, and SEQ- NR For development that is not a Planned Unit Development, 1.8 dwelling units per gross acre, and 4 dwelling units per structure For development that is a Planned Unit Development, as authorized within Article 15.C - SEQ-VR and SEQ-VC For development that is not a Planned Unit Development, 8 dwelling units per gross acre, and 6 dwelling units per structure For development that is a Planned Unit Development, as authorized within Article 15.C - Table 19-2 Density Increases per TDR Received ARTICLE 19 TRANSFERABLE DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS NOTE: ALL TEXT WITHIN ARTICLE 19 IS PROPOSED NEW TEXT South Burlington Land Development Regulations Zoning District(s) Increase in Residential Density per TDR Increase in Lot and Building Coverage per TDR C1-R15, C1-Auto, C1-R12, C2 1 dwelling unit 10,000 SF C1-LR, AR 1 dwelling unit 10,000 SF R12 with Transit Overlay District 1 dwelling unit 10,000 SF SW 1 dwelling unit 5,000 SF R7-NC, R7 within Transit Overlay District 1 dwelling unit 5,000 SF SEQ-NR, SEQ-NRT, SEQ-NRN, SEQ-VR, SEQ-VC 1 dwelling unit - 19.04 Determination of Transferable Development Rights A. Recording System. The City shall establish and maintain a system for recording and monitoring the severance, ownership and receipt of transferable development rights. B. Administrative Authority. The Administrative Officer has authority to determine the development rights available. C. Application Requirements. An application for a determination of the development rights available to be severed from a sending property must include: 1. Completed application form(s). 2. A tax map, plat, or site plan showing the boundaries of each lot, tract or parcel from which development rights are sought to be severed. 3. Hazards delineation or affirmation pursuant to Article 12. 4. Determination of the existing zoning of the property. 5. A copy of the deed for the sending property. 6. A calculation of the number of development rights available to be severed from the property and the number of those development rights proposed to be severed. 7. All applicable fees. D. Calculation of Development Rights. Development rights shall be calculated to the nearest whole number. Where the application of this formula results in a fractional dwelling unit, that fractional dwelling unit shall be rounded to the nearest whole number (fractions that are greater than n.00 but less than n.50 are rounded down; fractions that are greater than or equal to n.50 but less than n+1.00 are rounded up). LDR-22-05: Transferable Development Rights APPENDIX C USES and DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS TABLE C-2 DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS APPLICABLE IN ALL DISTRICTS (WITHOUT PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT) Buildings only Buildings, parking and all other impervious surfaces Front(s)Side yard(s) Rear Accessory Principal (flat) Principal (pitched) Stories Facing Street Stories Below Roofline Roofline Stories [see section 3.07(B)] Total Stories IA-N ALL 10 acres 20%40%75 50 50 15 35 40 IA-S ALL 10 acres 10%20%75 50 50 15 35 40 PR ALL none 15%25%40 15 30 15 35 40 MU ALL none 30%70%40 15 30 15 35 40 Single-family 9,500 SF (1.2) 20%40%20 10 30 15 25 28 2 3 1 4 Two-family 12,000 SF (1.2)20%40%20 10 30 15 25 28 2 3 1 4 Multi-family 6,000 SF/unit (4)20%40%20 10 30 15 25 28 2 3 1 4 All other uses 40,000 SF (1.2)15%30%20 20 30 15 25 28 2 3 1 4 Single-family 9,500 SF (1.2) 20%40%20 10 30 15 25 28 2 3 1 4 Two-family 12,000 SF (1.2)20%40%20 10 30 15 25 28 2 3 1 4 Multi-family 6,000 SF/unit (4)20%40%20 10 30 15 25 28 2 3 1 4 All other uses 40,000 SF (1.2)15%30%20 20 30 15 35 40 3 3 1 4 Single-family 9,500 SF (1.2) 20%40%20 40%30 15 25 28 2 3 1 4 Two-family 12,000 SF (1.2)20%40%20 10 30 15 25 28 2 3 1 4 Multi-family 6,000 SF/unit (4)20%40%20 10 30 15 25 28 2 3 1 4 All other uses 40,000 SF (1.2)15%30%20 20 30 15 30 35 3 3 1 4 Single-family 7,500 SF (4)20%40%10 5 10 15 25 25 2 3 1 4 Two-family 12,000 SF (4)20%40%10 5 10 15 25 25 2 3 1 4 Multi-family 6,000 SF/unit (4)20%40%10 5 10 15 25 25 2 3 1 4 Non-residential uses 12,000 SF 20%40%10 10 10 15 25 25 2 3 1 4 Single-family 12,000 SF (4)20%40%20 10 30 15 25 25 2 3 1 4 Two-family 12,000 SF/unit (4)20%40%20 10 30 15 25 25 2 3 1 4 R1-Lakeview All 14,000 SF (3)20%40%20 10 30 15 25 25 2 3 1 4 R1 All 40,000 SF (1)15%25%50 25 30 15 25 28 2 3 1 4 Single-family 22,000 SF (2)20%40%30 10 30 15 25 28 2 3 1 4 Two-family 22,000 SF (2)20%40%30 10 30 15 25 28 2 3 1 4 Multi-family 11,000 SF/unit (2)20%40%30 10 30 15 25 28 2 3 1 4 R2 Maximum Building HeightStandard setbacks (feet): SEQ-NRP, NRT, NRN* and NR QCP District Land Use SEQ-VR LN SEQ-VC Minimum lot size (max. residential density in dwelling units per acre)** Maximum site coverage: South Burlington Land Development Regulations LDR-22-05: Transferable Development Rights APPENDIX C USES and DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS Buildings only Buildings, parking and all other impervious surfaces Front(s)Side yard(s) Rear Accessory Principal (flat) Principal (pitched) Stories Facing Street Stories Below Roofline Roofline Stories [see section 3.07(B)] Total Stories Maximum Building HeightStandard setbacks (feet):District Land Use Minimum lot size (max. residential density in dwelling units per acre)** Maximum site coverage: R4 Single-family 9,500 SF (4)20%40%30 10 30 15 25 28 2 3 1 4 Two-family 12,000 SF (4)20%40%30 10 30 15 25 28 2 3 1 4 Multi-family 6,000 SF/unit (4)20%40%30 10 30 15 25 28 2 3 1 4 Non-residential uses 40,000 SF 30%60%30 10 30 15 25 28 2 3 1 4 R7 Single-family 6,000 SF (7)30%40%30 10 30 15 25 28 2 3 1 4 Two-family 10,000 SF (7)30%40%30 10 30 15 25 28 2 3 1 4 Multi-family 6,000 SF/unit (4)30%40%30 10 30 15 25 28 2 3 1 4 Non-residential uses 40,000 SF 40%60%30 10 30 15 25 28 2 3 1 4 R12 Single-family 6,000 SF (12)30%40%30 10 30 15 25 28 2 3 1 4 Two-family 8,000 SF (12)30%40%30 10 30 15 25 28 2 3 1 4 Multi-family 3,500 SF/unit (12)40%60%30 10 30 15 35 40 Non-residential uses 40,000 SF 40%60%30 10 30 15 35 40 R7-NC All residential uses All non- residential uses 12,000 SF 40%70%30 10 30 15 35 40 Multi-family 3,500 SF/unit (C1-R12); 2,900 SF/unit (C1-R15) 40%70%30 10 30 15 5 All other uses 40,000 SF 40%70%30 10 30 15 5 C1-Auto Multi-family 3,500 SF/unit (15)40%70%30 15 30 15 5 All other uses 40,000 SF 40%70%30 15 30 15 5 C1-AIR All 40,000 SF 40%70%30 15 30 15 35 40 Single-family 6,000 SF (12)30%40%30 10 30 15 25 28 2 3 1 4 Two-family 8,000 SF (12)30%40%30 10 30 15 25 28 2 3 1 4 Multi-family 3,500 SF/unit (12)40%70%30 10 30 15 35 40 Non-residential uses 20,000 SF 40%70%30 10 30 15 35 40 Single-family 6,000 SF (12)30%40%30 10 30 15 25 28 2 3 1 4 Two-family 8,000 SF (12)30%40%30 10 30 15 25 28 2 3 1 4 AR C1 Same as R7 standards C1-LR South Burlington Land Development Regulations LDR-22-05: Transferable Development Rights APPENDIX C USES and DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS Buildings only Buildings, parking and all other impervious surfaces Front(s)Side yard(s) Rear Accessory Principal (flat) Principal (pitched) Stories Facing Street Stories Below Roofline Roofline Stories [see section 3.07(B)] Total Stories Maximum Building HeightStandard setbacks (feet):District Land Use Minimum lot size (max. residential density in dwelling units per acre)** Maximum site coverage: Multi-family 3,500 SF/unit (12)40%70%30 10 30 15 35 40 Non-residential uses 20,000 SF 40%70%30 10 30 15 35 40 Single-family 6,000 SF (7)30%40%30 10 30 15 25 28 2 3 1 4 Two-family 10,000 SF (7)30%40%30 10 30 15 25 28 2 3 1 4 Multi-family 6,000 SF/unit (7)30%40%30 10 30 15 35 40 Non-residential uses 20,000 SF 40%70%30 10 30 15 35 40 Multi-family 6,000 SF/unit (7)40%70%30 10 30 15 35 40 All other uses 40,000 SF 40%70%30 10 30 15 35 40 IC All 40,000 SF 40%70%30 10 30 15 35 40 AIR All 3 acres 30%50%50 35 50 15 35 40 AIR-I All 3 acres 30%50%50 35 50 15 35 40 IO All 3 acres 30%50%50 35 50 15 35 40 City Center FBC District C2 ** Where minimum lot size is established as SF per unit, the per-unit lot size shall automatically be adjusted to accommodate inclusionary offset and bonus units granted via Article 18 and use of TDRs under Article 19 * See Article 9 for additional dimensional standards in the SEQ-NRN subdistrict. Where a conflicts exists, the more restrictive shall apply. Please see Article 8, City Center FBC District AR SW South Burlington Land Development Regulations LDR-22-06A: Bicycle Parking ARTICLE 13 SUPPLEMENTAL REGULATIONS South Burlington Land Development Regulations 13 SUPPLEMENTAL REGULATIONS . . . 13.03 Bicycle Parking & Storage . . . 13.03 Bicycle Parking and Storage A. Purpose. These standards for short term parking and long term storage of bicycles are intended to recognize and promote cycling as a viable means of transportation and recreation for residents, consumers, visitors, and employees. . . . Table 13-3. Bicycle Parking Requirements Type of Activity Short Term Bike Parking Long Term Bike Storage Residential buildings with more than 3 units 1 for every 10 units; minimum 41 1 for every unit Warehousing & distribution, Distribution and related storage, lumber and contractor’s yard, self- storage, and light manufacturingindustry 1 per 20k SF; minimum 2 2 per tenant Retail, restaurant, office, and all other non-residential uses except Educational facility 1 per 5k SF; minimum 4 50% of required short term bike parking spaces. Educational facility 1 space for each 20 students of planned capacity. For new buildings only, one space for each 20 employees. 1 May request waiver from minimum per building for buildings with less than 6 units if Development Review Board finds the need is adequately met for visitors. Table 13-4. Long Term parking – shower and changing room facility requirements Number of protected long term bicycle parking spaces Changing facility Unisex Showers Clothes Lockers 1-3 none none 1 4 - 9 12 12 3 For every 10 12 12 40% of LTB parking 2 if unisex, units available to any gender; otherwise provide one per gender 14-1 LDR-22-06B: Performance Bonds South Burlington Land Development Regulations 14 SITE PLAN and CONDITIONAL USE REVIEW . . . 14.11 Site Plan and Conditional Use Review: Specific Uses and Standards 14.11 Site Plan and Conditional Use Review: Specific Uses and Standards . . . F. Alteration of Existing Grade (1) . . . (2 ) Standards and Conditions for Approval. (a) The Development Review Board shall review a request under this Section for compliance with the standards contained in this Section 14.11(F) and Section 3.07, Height of Structures of these regulations. An application under this section shall include the submittal of a site plan, planned unit development or subdivision plat application showing the area to be filled or removed, and the existing grade and proposed grade created by removal or addition of material. (b) The Development Review Board, in granting approval may impose any conditions it deems necessary, including, but not limited to, the following: (i) Duration or phasing of the permit for any length of time. (ii) Submission of an acceptable plan for the rehabilitation of the site at the conclusion of the operations, including grading, seeding and planting, fencing, drainage, and other appropriate measures. ii) Provision of a suitable bond or other security in accordance with Section 15.A.20 17.15 adequate to assure compliance with the provisions of these Regulations. (iv) Determination of what shall constitute pre-construction grade under Section 3.07, Height of Structures. LDR-22-06B: Performance Bonds ARTICLE 15.A SUBDIVISION REVIEW South Burlington Land Development Regulations 15.A SUBDIVISION REVIEW . . . 15.A.20 Performance Bonds, Escrow Accounts, Letters of Credit . . . 15.A.20 Performance Bonds, Escrow Accounts, Letters of Credit A. Public Facilities and Improvements. (1) Public facilities and improvements under this Article shall include, without limitation, streets, sidewalks, recreation paths, curbing, water and sewer mains and pipes, stormwater infrastructure, pipes and catch basins, fire hydrants, parks, recreational facilities and other improvements which are public or are intended to become public. (2) Before the issuance of a zoning permit, the applicant, subdivider or developer must furnish the City with a suitable performance bond, escrow account, or letter of credit in an amount sufficient to cover the full costs of all proposed public facilities and improvements and ancillary site improvements and their maintenance for two years after completion. (3) Term. Such bonds, escrow accounts, or letters of credit shall run until the City Engineer has deemed the work to be complete in accordance with City approvals and regulations and for two (2) years thereafter, but in no case for a longer term than three (3) years. However, with the consent of the applicant, subdivider or developer, the term of that bond, escrow account or letter of credit may be extended for an additional period not to exceed three (3) years. If any public facilities and improvements have not been installed or maintained as provided within the term of the bond, escrow account or letter of credit then the amount secured by the bond, escrow account or letter of credit shall be forfeited to the City. (4) Partial Release. Upon a determination by the City Engineer that a phase of the construction of public facilities and improvements is complete as provided in Article 15.A.18(E), the Administrative Officer may recommend that the City Treasurer approve a partial release of the amount of the bond, escrow account or letter of credit equivalent to the phase or portion of the completed construction, up to a maximum of 90% of the original amount. Any amounts that the City Treasurer releases shall not exceed the proportion of the total project that has been built, up to a maximum of 90% of the original amount. The remaining 10% of the original amount of the bond, escrow account or letter of credit only shall be released upon the determination of the City Engineer that the public facilities and improvements have been maintained for two years after the City Engineer determined the public facilities and improvements to be complete. Upon a determination by the City Engineer that the public facilities and improvements have been maintained as provided within the term of the bond, escrow account or letter of credit, the Administrative Officer may recommend that the City Treasurer approve the release of the remaining 10% of the original amount. LDR-22-06B: Performance Bonds ARTICLE 15.A SUBDIVISION REVIEW South Burlington Land Development Regulations B. All other bonds, escrow accounts, or letters of credit required by these Regulations, including but not limited to Landscaping and Site Restorations or rehabilitation, Earth Products and required demolition and removal of buildings. (1) Before issuance of a zoning permit, the applicant, subdivider or developer shall furnish the City with a suitable performance bond, escrow account, or letter of credit in an amount sufficient to guarantee all landscaping and plantings as required under Article 14, and any site restorations or rehabilitations as required under Article 3 or Article 13, for a period as described in this section. (a) For development with a total landscaping budget requirement of $2,000 or less, no performance bond, escrow account, or letter of credit shall be required. (b) For development with a total landscaping budget requirement of over $10,000, the required amount for performance bond, escrow account, or letter of credit shall be $10,000, plus fifty percent (50%) of the landscaping budget amount over $10,000. Example: a development with a total required landscaping budget of $20,000 shall have a performance bond, escrow account, or letter of credit of not less than $15,000. (2) Term for Bonds, Escrow Accounts, or Letters of Credit for demolition and removal of buildings required by Article 3.09. Bonds, escrow accounts or letters of credit for the demolition and removal of a principal building upon the construction and occupancy of a new principal building, as required by Article 3.09 of these Regulations, shall run for a period of two (2) years. The Administrative Officer may recommend that the City Treasurer approve the release of the bond, escrow account or letter of credit upon a demonstration of compliance with Article 3.09(E)(3). If an applicant, subdivider or developer does not demonstrate compliance with Article 3.09(E)(3) as provided within the term of the bond, escrow account or letter of credit, then the amount secured by the bond, escrow account or letter of credit shall be forfeited to the City. (3) Term for Other Bonds, Escrow Accounts, or Letters of Credit required under Articles 3, 13, 14, and 15. All other bonds, escrow accounts, or letters of credit shall run for a period of three (3) years. However, with the consent of the applicant, subdivider or developer, the term of that bond, escrow account or letter of credit may be extended for an additional period not to exceed three years. If any required work has not been constructed, installed, or maintained as provided within the term of the bond, escrow account or letter of credit then the amount secured by the bond, escrow account or letter of credit shall be forfeited to the City. C. Bond Amounts. The amount of such bond, escrow account or letter of credit shall be established by the Development Review Board and shall be equal to 100% of the estimated project costs for public facilities and improvements, plus a 15% contingency; or 100% of the estimated project costs for all other types of bonds required by these Regulations. The applicant, subdivider or developer shall be responsible for providing accurate cost estimates. Where amounts are not specified by these Regulations, the City Engineer shall review all cost estimates and provide a recommendation to the Board. The Board may invoke technical review to confirm the accuracy of estimates. LDR-22-06B: Performance Bonds ARTICLE 15.A SUBDIVISION REVIEW South Burlington Land Development Regulations D. Form of Bonds, Other Sureties. The form of any such bond, escrow account, or letter of credit shall be approved by the City Attorney and City Council and shall include procedures for the City to make use of such funds in accordance with 24 VSA § 4464. E. "As-built" construction drawings and plans shall be submitted in paper and digital form to, and approved by, the City Engineer, prior to the release of any bonds, or portions thereof, for the installation of all required improvements. LDR-22-06B Performance Bonds ARTICLE 17 ADMINISTRATION and ENFORCEMENT [ALL TEXT MOVED FROM 15.A.20 INTO NEW SECTION 17.15] 17 ADMINISTRATION and ENFORCEMENT . . . 17.15 Performance Bonds, Escrow Accounts, Letters of Credit . . . 17.15 Performance Bonds, Escrow Accounts, Letters of Credit A. Public Facilities and Improvements. (1) Public facilities and improvements under this Article shall include, without limitation, streets, sidewalks, recreation paths, curbing, water and sewer mains and pipes, stormwater infrastructure, pipes and catch basins, fire hydrants, parks, recreational facilities and other improvements which are public or are intended to become public. (2) Before the issuance of a zoning permit, the applicant, subdivider or developer must furnish the City with a suitable performance bond, escrow account, or letter of credit in an amount sufficient to cover the full costs of all proposed public facilities and improvements and ancillary site improvements and their maintenance for two years after completion. (3) Term. Such bonds, escrow accounts, or letters of credit shall run until the City Engineer has deemed the work to be complete in accordance with City approvals and regulations and for two (2) years thereafter, but in no case for a longer term than three (3) years. However, with the consent of the applicant, subdivider or developer, the term of that bond, escrow account or letter of credit may be extended for an additional period not to exceed three (3) years. If any public facilities and improvements have not been installed or maintained as provided within the term of the bond, escrow account or letter of credit then the amount secured by the bond, escrow account or letter of credit shall be forfeited to the City. (4) Partial Release. Upon a determination by the City Engineer that a phase of the construction of public facilities and improvements is complete as provided in Article 15.A.18(E), the Administrative Officer may recommend that the City Treasurer approve a partial release of the amount of the bond, escrow account or letter of credit equivalent to the phase or portion of the completed construction, up to a maximum of 90% of the original amount. Any amounts that the City Treasurer releases shall not exceed the proportion of the total project that has been built, up to a maximum of 90% of the original amount. The remaining 10% of the original amount of the bond, escrow account or letter of credit only shall be released upon the determination of the City Engineer that the public facilities and improvements have been maintained for two years after the City Engineer determined the public facilities and improvements to be complete. Upon a determination by the City Engineer that the public facilities and improvements have been maintained as provided within the term of the bond, escrow account or letter of credit, the Administrative Officer may recommend that the City Treasurer approve the release of the remaining 10% of the original amount. B. All other bonds, escrow accounts, or letters of credit required by these Regulations, including but not limited to Landscaping and Site Restorations or rehabilitation, Earth Products and required demolition and removal of buildings. LDR-22-06B Performance Bonds ARTICLE 17 ADMINISTRATION and ENFORCEMENT (1) Before issuance of a zoning permit, the applicant, subdivider or developer shall furnish the City with a suitable performance bond, escrow account, or letter of credit in an amount sufficient to guarantee all landscaping and plantings as required under Article 14, and any site restorations or rehabilitations as required under Article 3 or Article 13, for a period as described in this section. (a) For development with a total landscaping budget requirement of $2,000 or less, no performance bond, escrow account, or letter of credit shall be required. (b) For development with a total landscaping budget requirement of over $10,000, the required amount for performance bond, escrow account, or letter of credit shall be $10,000, plus fifty percent (50%) of the landscaping budget amount over $10,000. Example: a development with a total required landscaping budget of $20,000 shall have a performance bond, escrow account, or letter of credit of not less than $15,000. (2) Term for Bonds, Escrow Accounts, or Letters of Credit for demolition and removal of buildings required by Article 3.09. Bonds, escrow accounts or letters of credit for the demolition and removal of a principal building upon the construction and occupancy of a new principal building, as required by Article 3.09 of these Regulations, shall run for a period of two (2) years. The Administrative Officer may recommend that the City Treasurer approve the release of the bond, escrow account or letter of credit upon a demonstration of compliance with Article 3.09(E)(3). If an applicant, subdivider or developer does not demonstrate compliance with Article 3.09(E)(3) as provided within the term of the bond, escrow account or letter of credit, then the amount secured by the bond, escrow account or letter of credit shall be forfeited to the City. (3) Term for Other Bonds, Escrow Accounts, or Letters of Credit required under Articles 3, 13, 14, and 15. All other bonds, escrow accounts, or letters of credit shall run for a period of three (3) years. However, with the consent of the applicant, subdivider or developer, the term of that bond, escrow account or letter of credit may be extended for an additional period not to exceed three years. If any required work has not been constructed, installed, or maintained as provided within the term of the bond, escrow account or letter of credit then the amount secured by the bond, escrow account or letter of credit shall be forfeited to the City. C. Bond Amounts. The amount of such bond, escrow account or letter of credit shall be established by the Development Review Board and shall be equal to 100% of the estimated project costs for public facilities and improvements, plus a 15% contingency; or 100% of the estimated project costs for all other types of bonds required by these Regulations. The applicant, subdivider or developer shall be responsible for providing accurate cost estimates. Where amounts are not specified by these Regulations, the City Engineer shall review all cost estimates and provide a recommendation to the Board. The Board may invoke technical review to confirm the accuracy of estimates. D. Form of Bonds, Other Sureties. The form of any such bond, escrow account, or letter of credit shall be approved by the City Attorney and City Council and shall include procedures for the City to make use of such funds in accordance with 24 VSA § 4464. E. "As-built" construction drawings and plans shall be submitted in paper and digital form to, and approved by, the City Engineer, prior to the release of any bonds, or portions thereof, for the installation of all required improvements. LDR-22-06C: Technical Correction to stormwater numbering ARTICLE 13 SUPPLEMENTAL REGULATIONS South Burlington Land Development Regulations 13 SUPPLEMENTAL REGULATIONS . . . 13.05 Stormwater Management . . . . . . 13.05 Stormwater Management A. Purpose. The purpose of this section is: (1) To promote stormwater management practices that maintain pre-development hydrology through site design, site development, building design and landscape design techniques that infiltrate, filter, store, evaporate and detain stormwater close to its source; (2) To protect water resources, particularly streams, lakes, wetlands, floodplains and other natural aquatic systems on the development site and elsewhere from degradation that could be caused by construction activities and post-construction conditions; (3) To protect other properties from damage that could be caused by stormwater and sediment from improperly managed construction activities and post-construction conditions on the development site; (4) To reduce the impacts on surface waters from impervious surfaces such as streets, parking lots, rooftops and other paved surfaces; and (5) To promote public safety from flooding and streambank erosion, reduce public expenditures in removing sediment from stormwater drainage systems and natural resource areas, and to prevent damage to municipal infrastructure from inadequate stormwater controls. B. Applicability. (1) These regulations will apply to all development within the City of South Burlington where one-half acre or more of impervious surface area exists or is proposed to exist on an applicant’s lot or parcel. (2) If the combination of new impervious surface area created and the redevelopment or substantial reconstruction of existing impervious surfaces is less than 5,000 s.f. then the application is exempt from requirements in this Section 13.05. (3) Applications meeting the criteria set forth in section 13.05(B)(1), and not exempt under section 13.05(B)(2), shall meet the application requirements in Section 13.05(C) and the site design requirements in section 13.05(DE) as follows: (a) If the area of the lot or parcel being redeveloped or substantially reconstructed is less than 50% of the lot’s existing impervious surface area, then only those portions of the lot or parcel that are being redeveloped or substantially reconstructed must comply with all parts of Section 13.05(ED). All new impervious surface area must meet the site design requirements of section 13.05(DE). (b) If the area of the lot or parcel that is being redeveloped or substantially reconstructed exceeds 50% of the lot or parcel’s existing impervious surface area then all of the lot or parcel’s impervious surfaces must comply with all parts of Section 13.05(DE). All new impervious surface area must meet the site design requirements of Section 13.05(ED). LDR-22-06C: Technical Correction to stormwater numbering ARTICLE 13 SUPPLEMENTAL REGULATIONS South Burlington Land Development Regulations C. Application Requirements. Applicants required to comply with Section 13.05 shall provide the following information in their application: (1) Sub-watershed boundaries and drainage area delineations for all stormwater treatment practices. (2) Location, type, material, size, elevation data, and specifications for all existing and proposed stormwater collection systems, culverts, and stormwater treatment practices. (3) Soil types and/or hydrologic soil group, including the location and results of any soil borings, infiltration testing, or soil compaction testing. Infiltration testing shall be completed using methods identified in the VSMM (see section 4.3.3.2 in the 2017 VSMM, or as updated). (4) A brief written description of the proposed stormwater treatment and management techniques. Where Tier 1 practices are not proposed (see Section 13.05(C)(1)(a)), the applicant shall provide a full justification and demonstrate why the use of these practices is not possible before proposing to use Tier 2 or Tier 3 practices. (5) A detailed maintenance plan for all proposed stormwater treatment practices. (6) Modeling results that show the existing and post-development hydrographs for the WQv storm event, the one-year, twenty-four hour rain event, and the twenty-five year, twenty-four hour storm event (rainfall amounts to be determined using NOAA, Atlas 14 data and a type II rainfall distribution). Any TR-55 based model shall be suitable for this purpose. The intent of the twenty-five year storm event analysis is to ensure the proposed project does not overload an existing downstream drainage structure(s) and result in damage to private or public infrastructure or property. The analysis is also intended to ensure that stormwater infrastructure installed as a part of a development can accommodate future upstream development. (7) The applicant’s engineer must provide such information as the stormwater superintendent or designee deems necessary to determine the adequacy of all drainage infrastructure. D. Process. (1) Applications for proposed development that solely include development related to stormwater management (Section 13.05) may be reviewed via Administrative Site Plan Review (Section 14.04(B)). (2) Applications involving an Environmental Restoration Project may be reviewed via Administrative Site Plan Review (Section 14.04(B)). E. Design Requirements - On-Site Treatment. Applicants shall meet the following standards for on-site treatment of stormwater: (1) The Water Quality Volume (WQv) as defined in the Vermont Stormwater Management Manual (VSMM) for the lot or parcel’s impervious surfaces shall not leave the lot via overland runoff and shall be treated using Tier 1 practices as detailed in the VSMM. (a) If it is not possible to treat the volume of stormwater runoff using a Tier 1 practice as specified in Section 13.05(ED)(1) due to one or more of the following constraints: (i) Seasonally high or shallow groundwater, (ii) Shallow bedrock, (iii) Soil infiltration rates of less than 0.2 inches per hour, (iv) Soils contaminated with hazardous materials, as that phrase is defined by 10 V.S.A. §6602(16), as amended, LDR-22-06C: Technical Correction to stormwater numbering ARTICLE 13 SUPPLEMENTAL REGULATIONS South Burlington Land Development Regulations (v) The presence of a “stormwater hotspot” as defined in the VSMM, or (vi) Other site conditions prohibitive of on-site infiltration runoff subject to the review and approval of the Development Review Board, then the WQv shall be treated on the lot using Tier 2 practices as described in the most recently adopted version of the VSMM. A site with an existing Tier 3 practice is allowed to evaluate retrofitting/expanding this practice to meet the requirements of Section 13.05(ED)(2). Existing Tier 3 practices shall only be used to satisfy the requirements of Section 13.05(ED)(1) in accordance with the Water Quality Practice Selection Flowchart in the VSMM. (2) The post-construction peak runoff rate for the one-year, twenty-four hour (rainfall amounts to be determined using NOAA, Atlas 14 data and a type II rainfall distribution) rain event shall not exceed the existing peak runoff rate for the same storm event from the site under conditions existing prior to submittal of an application. (3) Applicants who demonstrate that the required control and/or treatment of stormwater runoff per section 13.05(ED)(1) and 13.05(ED)(2) cannot be achieved for areas subject to these regulations per Section 13.28(B) may utilize Site Balancing as defined in these Regulations. (4) New drainage structures shall comply with the following standards: (a) All drainage structures must be designed to safely pass the twenty-five year, twenty-four hour (4.0 inch) rain event (rainfall amounts to be determined using NOAA, Atlas 14 data and a type II rainfall distribution); (b) Concrete risers, not brick and mortar, must be used to achieve the necessary drainage structure elevation. (c) Driveway culverts must have a minimum diameter of 18” and 12” of cover above them. F. Design Requirements – Impacts to Municipal System. Stormwater runoff from sites meeting the requirements of Section 13.05(ED), or sites that are exempt from Section 13.05(ED), may discharge to the municipal stormwater system, or a stormwater system within a proposed future municipal right-of-way, provided that the stormwater system has adequate capacity to convey the twenty-five year storm event from the contributing drainage area. All applicants shall meet the following standards if it is determined that their project may have impacts to municipal stormwater system: (1) New drainage structures connected to the municipal stormwater system, or a stormwater system within a proposed future municipal right-of-way, shall comply with the following standards: (a) New drainage structures should be located within the street right-of-way (b) All drainage structures must be designed to safely pass the twenty-five year, twenty-four hour (4.0 inch) rain event (rainfall amounts to be determined using NOAA, Atlas 14 data and a type II rainfall distribution); (c) Drainage pipes must have a minimum diameter of 15” and be connected to drainage structures using booted connections. (d) Concrete risers, not brick and mortar, must be used to achieve the necessary drainage structure elevation. (e) House footing drains shall only be connected to drainage facilities located in the street right-of- way when a suitable location to daylight the footing drain cannot be found. (f) Footing drains must not be connected to road underdrain. LDR-22-06C: Technical Correction to stormwater numbering ARTICLE 13 SUPPLEMENTAL REGULATIONS South Burlington Land Development Regulations (g) Any footing drains connected to drainage facilities in the street right-of-way shall be provided with a backflow preventer. (h) Driveway culverts must have a minimum diameter of 18” and 12” of cover above them. (2) Drainage Structures To Accommodate Upstream Development. Culverts, pipes, or other drainage facilities shall be of sufficient size to accommodate potential runoff from the entire upstream drainage area, whether or not all or part of the upstream area is on the applicant’s lot or the parcel subject to the application. In determining the anticipated amount of upstream runoff for which drainage facilities must be sized, the applicant shall design the stormwater drainage system assuming the total potential development of upstream drainage areas. All drainage structures shall be designed to, at a minimum, safely pass the twenty-five year, twenty-four hour rain event (rainfall data to be determined using NOAA, Atlas 14 and a type II rainfall distribution). (3) Responsibility for Downstream Drainage Structures. In instances where the Stormwater Superintendent anticipates that additional runoff incident from a proposed development may overload an existing downstream drainage structure(s) and result in damage to private or public infrastructure or property, the DRB shall impose conditions requiring the applicant to incorporate measures to prevent these conditions, notwithstanding whether such improvements are located on or off the applicant’s property. G. Intermittent Stream Alteration and Relocation Standard. Alteration of Intermittent Streams. When a development incorporates Tier 1 or Tier 2 stormwater treatment practices (as defined in the VSMM) to manage the stormwater that an intermittent stream is conveying in pre-development conditions, the intermittent stream may be altered or relocated as part of stormwater treatment, provided the stormwater management system meets all standards in this Section. An alteration or relocation of an intermittent stream is exempt from the Vermont Stream Alteration Rule. LDR-22-06D: Technical Correction to admin & enforcement numbering ARTICLE 17 ADMINISTRATION and ENFORCEMENT 17 ADMINISTRATION and ENFORCEMENT . . . 17.04 Expiration of Permits and Approvals . . . 17.04 Expiration of Permits and Approvals A. Zoning Permits. A zoning permit shall expire one (1) year from its date of issue unless viewed as a whole, the work, time, and expenditures invested in the project demonstrate a continued good faith intent to presently commence upon the permitted project. B. Expiration of Approvals. All site plan, conditional use, variances, design review, and miscellaneous application approvals shall expire six (6) months from the date of their approval by the Development Review Board or Administrative Officer, unless: (1) A zoning permit is issued for the project; (2) The Development Review Board or Administrative Officer has granted a longer period for a multi-phase development or for other projects that may reasonably require a longer period before commencement of the permitted project; or, (3) The Development Review Board or Administrative Officer has approved a request for extension of the approval. The Board or Administrative Officer may approve one (1) extension to an applicant of an approval if reapplication takes place before the approval has expired and if the Board determines that conditions are essentially unchanged from the time of the original approval. In granting such an extension, the Board or Administrative Officer may specify a period of time of up to one (1) year for the extension. A. Subdivision Approvals. [reserved] LDR-22-06E: Submission requirements APPENDIX E SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS APPENDIX E SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS Site Plan Sketch Plan Master Plan Major Prelim Major Final PUD Minor Final Subdiv Sketch Subdiv Final DRB Non- subdiv. Admin / Site Plan Submittal requirement √ √ √ √ √√√ √ √ √ Completed application form; one (1) digital copy of plans; and a list of the owners or record of abutting property owners √ √ √ √ √√√ √ √ √ Name and address of the owner of record, applicant, and owners of record of abutting properties; and name and address of engineer(s), architect(s), landscape architect(s) preparing plans, plan preparation date, and date and description of all revisions shown on all plan sheets √ √ √ √ √√√ √ √ √ Date, true north arrow and scale (numerical and graphic). The preferred scale shall be not more than one hundred (100) feet to the inch, or not more than sixty (60) feet to the inch where lots have less than one hundred (100) feet of frontage. √ √ √ √ √√√ √ √ √ Narrative accompanying the application to include the following: (a) description of the project; (b) demonstration of compliance with applicable review standards; (c) list of submission elements; and (d) list of any changes made to plans from previous submittals under the same application √ √ √ √√√ √ List of waivers the applicant desires from the requirements of these regulations and accompanying narrative describing the request(s), detailing the City's authority to grant the request(s) and describing why the waiver(s) should be granted √Project phasing plan √ √√√ √ Estimated project construction schedule, construction phasing, and date of completion, and estimated cost of all site improvements. (note: for FBC subdivisions, only public infrastructure information required) √ √ √ √ √√√ √ √ √ Any other information or data that the Administrative Officer or Development Review Board shall require for a full assessment of the project pursuant to the Land Development Regulations √ √ √ √ √√√ √ √ √ Location map, showing relation of subject property to adjacent properties and surrounding area. √ √ √ √ √√√ √ √ √ Boundaries and area of existing subject property(ies), proposed property lines, continues properties, boundaries of all zoning districts, transects, and overlay districts, and all designations on the City's Official Map, and lots within the proposed subdivision numbered. √√√√√√√√√√Location of existing restrictions on land, such as easements and covenants. √√√√√√Location of planned restrictions on land, such as easements and covenants. √√√Permanent reference monuments √√√ Copies of proposed deeds, deed restrictions, covenants, agreements or other documents showing the manner in which open space, including park and recreational areas, and school site areas are to be dedicated, reserved and maintained and a certificate from the City Attorney that these documents are satisfactory.√√√ √ In the case of a subdivision or development served by a privately owned and/or maintained street: A completed contract between the landowner and the City regarding the number of lots or dwelling units to be served by the proposed right-of- way or private street and the responsibility for the roadway maintenance and a copy of all proposed deeds, agreements, or other documents which convey or relate to the use of a privately owned street or right-of- way, and a certificate of the City Attorney that these documents are satisfactory.√√√ √ A complete survey of the subdivision, prepared by a licensed land surveyor, showing the location, bearing and length of every street line, lot line and boundary line, and existing and proposed restrictions on the land, including but not limited to access ways and utility easements. Where applicable, this information shall be tied to reference points previously established by the City. √ √ √√√ Lot area in square feet and acres, and lot coverage calculations including building, overall, and front yard coverage and the location and layout of any off-street parking or loading areas, traffic circulation areas, pedestrian walkways, and fire lanes. √ √√√ Point-by-point lighting plan and cut sheets for all proposed outdoor lighting within the site √ √ √√√ √ √ Preliminary grading, drainage, landscaping and buffering plan in accordance with Article 13, Supplemental Regulations. √ √√√ √ The extent and amount of cut and fill for all disturbed areas, including before-and- after profiles and cross sections of typical development areas, parking lots and roads, and including an erosion and sedimentation control plan, and proposed locations of sediment sink/setting pond and interceptor swales. All Districts Except City Center FBC City Center FBC District PROJECT DESCRIPTION SITE INFORMATION South Burlington Land Development Regulations LDR-22-06E: Submission requirements APPENDIX E SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS Site Plan Sketch Plan Master Plan Major Prelim Major Final PUD Minor Final Subdiv Sketch Subdiv Final DRB Non- subdiv. Admin / Site Plan Submittal requirement All Districts Except City Center FBC City Center FBC District √ √ √√√ The location of any outdoor storage for equipment and materials if any, and the location, type and design of all solid waste-related facilities, including dumpsters and recycling bins. √ √ √√√ √ Estimate of all earthwork, including the quantity of any material to be imported to or removed from the site or a statement that no material is to be removed or imported. √ √ √√√ Location of existing structures on the site, and showing all site conditions to remain. √ √ √ √ √√√ √ √ √ Existing water courses & buffers, wetlands & buffers, base flood elevations if located in an area of special flood hazard, wooded areas, ledge outcrops, and other natural features. √√√√√√√√Existing and proposed open space √√√ √ √ By proper designation on such plat, all public space for which offers of cession are made by the applicant and those spaces title to which is reserved by him. √ √√√ √ √ The location of all open space to be dedicated to the City as well as all open space to be retained by the applicant or to be held in common private ownership. √√√√√√√√√√Existing and proposed contours at a maximum vertical interval of two (2) feet. √ √√√ Detailed specifications and locations of planting, landscaping, screening, and/or buffering materials. √A general concept of the landscaping, both in written and graphic form. √ √ √ √ √ A list of existing vegetation, with the location, type, and size of existing trees of six inches or greater in caliper. √ √√ √ A written plan to preserve and protect significant existing vegetation during and after construction. Such plan will be of sufficient detail that the City of South Burlington will be able to inspect the site during construction to ensure that existing vegetation is protected as per the plan. √ √√√ Detailed landscaping plan, specification of materials, costs, and phasing plan, including vegetation to remain, types of new plant materials, identified by common name and botanical name, sizes of all new plant materials by height and/or diameter at time of planting and at maturity, quantities of each of the planting materials, and treatment of the ground surface (paving, seeding, or groundcover) for all plantings, screening, buffering, and stormwater infiltration. √√√√Detailed erosion control plan demonstrating compliance with these regulations √√√√√√Existing and proposed structures √ √√ Preliminary plans, elevations, floor plans, and sections of proposed structures showing the proposed location, use, design and height of all structures, roads, parking areas, access points, sidewalks and other walkways, loading docks, outdoor storage areas, sewage disposal areas, landscaping, screening, site grading, and recreation areas if required. Plans shall also show any proposed division of buildings into units of separate occupancy and location of drives and access thereto. √ √√√ Detailed elevations to demonstrate compliance with Building Envelope Standards and material requirements √ √Plan for achieving required mix of housing types and archictural feastures as required by Section 13.17 (Residential Design for New Single and Two-Family Homes) √√Solar ready roof analysis report √√Elevations of buildings proposed as part of Planned Unit Developments √ √ √ √√√ √ Letter of intent from the Agency of Transportation confirming that the Agency has reviewed the proposed plan and is prepared to issue an access permit under 19 V.S.A. § 1111, and setting out any conditions that the Agency proposes to attach to the section 1111 permit. √ √ √ √ √ √ √ Location, type, and width of existing and proposed streets and block layout (including roadways, sidewalk, recreation path) √ √ √ √ Plans and profiles showing location of existing and proposed street pavements, proposed elevations along center lines of all streets, curbs, gutters, sidewalks, manholes, catch basins, and culverts √ √ √√ Plans showing the location, size and invert elevations of existing and planned sanitary sewers, storm water drains, and fire hydrants and location and size of water, gas, electricity and any other utilities or structures. √√√√√√√Location of existing septic systems and wells. √√√√√Existing and proposed water and wastewater usage √√√√√Location and design of all utility distribution facilities BUILDINGS STREETS AND UTILITIES LANDSCAPE FEATURES - REVIEW South Burlington Land Development Regulations LDR-22-06E: Submission requirements APPENDIX E SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS Site Plan Sketch Plan Master Plan Major Prelim Major Final PUD Minor Final Subdiv Sketch Subdiv Final DRB Non- subdiv. Admin / Site Plan Submittal requirement All Districts Except City Center FBC City Center FBC District √ √√√ The location and details of all the improvements and utilities, including the location of all utility poles, utility cabinets, sewage disposal systems, water supply systems, and all details and locations of the stormwater management system. √√√Preliminary designs of any bridges or culverts which may be required. √√√√Construction drawings of all required improvements. √ √ √ √ The length of all straight lines, the deflection angles, radii, length of curves and central angles of all curves tangent distance and tangent bearings for each street. √ √ √√√ √ √ All means of vehicular access and egress to and from the site onto public streets, and all provisions for pedestrian access and circulation. √ √ √ √ √ √ Analysis of traffic impacts, if required by the traffic overlay district and/or the DRB. √ √ √√√ Proposed stormwater management system, including (as applicable) location, supporting design data and copies of computations used as a basis for the design capacities and performance of stormwater management facilities. √ √√√ Detailed plans, designs and finished grades of retaining walls, steps, ramps, paving, site improvements, fences, bridges, culverts, and drainage structures. √Master Plan: See Article 15.B √ √ √ √ Initial Site Conditions Map Base flood elevations if located in an area of special flood hazard, wooded areas, ledge outcrops, and other natural features. River Corridors. Existing mapped data for permanent River Corridors; estimates for top of bank/stream where not mapped by VT DEC; estimated locations of intermittent streams. Wetland areas and buffers. Exsting mapped data from Vermont Significant Wetland Inventory, Vermont Significant Wetland Inventory Advisory Layer, Hydric Soils, and other known sources. Applicant-estimated areas for potential Class III areas. [note: Field Verification of all potential wetland areas is strongly encouraged at the earliest stages of revoew] Habitat Block Overlay District: Boundary of Habitat Block Overlay District, of all proposed mofications and exchanges, and supporting materials required by Section 12.04 Habitat Connector Overlay District: Boundary of Habitat Connector Overlay District, of all proposed relocations, and supporting materials required by Section 12.04 and 12.05. Steep Slopes: Existing mapped data of steep and very steep slopes √√√√√Complete Site Conditions Map River Corridors. Field verification/ delineation of top of bank / top of slope for permanent and intermittent surface waters by a qualified professional, where not mapped by VT DEC. All materials required by Section 12.07 Flood Hazard Areas. All materials required by Section 12.08. Wetland areas and buffers. Field delineation and report of functions and values of all wetland areas prepared by a qualified wetlands consultant. All materials required by Section 12.06 Habitat Block Overlay District: Boundary of Habitat Block Overlay District, of all proposed mofications and exchanges, and supporting materials required by Section 12.04 Habitat Connector Overlay District: Boundary of Habitat Connector Overlay District, of all proposed relocations, and supporting materials required by Section 12.04 and 12.05. Steep Slopes: Mapped data of unaffected steep or very steep slopes; Field delineation of steep and very steep slopes with a vertical drop exceeding three (3) feet proposed to be impacted * note: the Land Development Regulations may contian additional submission requirements for specific requests and applications Required maps must be prepared to scale by a qualified professional (e.g. engineer, architect, landscape architect, or urban designer) using the most current data and NATURAL RESOURCES South Burlington Land Development Regulations 180 Market Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sbvt.gov MEMORANDUM TO: Donna Kinville, City Clerk South Burlington Planning Commission FROM: South Burlington City Council, c/o Paul Conner, Director of Planning & Zoning SUBJECT: Changes to draft Land Development Regulations #LDR-22-05 and LDR-2206; public hearing November 21, 2022 DATE: October 17, 2022 The City Council on October 17, 2022, the City Council held a public hearing on amendments to the Land Development Regulations #LDR-22-05 and LDR-22-06. Following that hearing, the Council approved a modification to the text based on public input. Pursuant to 24 VSA 4442(b), a copy of the changed proposal, shown below in redline, is hereby provided to the City Clerk and to the Planning Commission. In accordance with the Statute, the planning commission is requested to review and amend the Report prepared pursuant to subsection 4441(c) of this title to reflect the changes made by the legislative body and to submit that amended Report to the City Council at or prior to the public hearing. The City Council will hold its second public hearing on LDR-22-05 and LDR-22-06 on Monday, November 21, 2022, at 7 pm. -------------------------------- 15.C.05 Conservation Development . . . E._____Conservation PUD Sub-Zones. A Conservation PUD must include the following Sub-Zones, as designated on the PUD Master Plan, and as more specifically identified and delineated on preliminary and final subdivision plans and plats: (1) Conservation Area. A Conservation PUD must include one or more designated “Conservation Areas” which at minimum comprise 70% of the total tract or parcel area; and which, to the maximum extent physically feasible, are contiguous or linked to resource or other open space areas located on adjacent parcels or in the immediate vicinity of the proposed PUD. Any tract or parcel area, or portion thereof, which is subject to a conservation easement that prohibits or otherwise limits future subdivision and/or other development held by the City or a qualified nonprofit organization may be included in and incorporated into a designated Conservation Area so long as said tract or parcel, or portion thereof, and the proposed Conservation Area otherwise meet the requirements of this Section 15.C.05.E. (a) The designated Conservation Area(s) must include and incorporate: (i) Hazards, as defined and regulated under Article 12 (Table 12-01) which, as unbuildable land, are not eligible for or subject to the transfer of development density. (ii) Level I Resources, as defined and regulated under Article 12 (Table 12-01) which, within a Conservation PUD, are eligible for and subject to the transfer of development rights. In meeting the minimum 70% allocation requirement, Level I Resources are to be given priority for inclusion within a designated Conservation Area 180 Market Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sbvt.gov South Burlington Planning Commission Proposed Land Development Regulations Amendment & Adoption Report Report Approved June 14, 2022 Report reapproved following City Council modifications October 25, 2022 In accordance with 24 V.S.A. §4441, the South Burlington Planning Commission has prepared the following report regarding the proposed amendments and adoption of the City’s Land Development Regulations. Outline of the Proposed Overall Amendments The South Burlington Planning Commission held a public hearing on Monday, August 8 at 7:00 pm, in person and via electronic platform, to consider the following amendments to the South Burlington Land Development Regulations: A. LDR-22-05: Update the regulation of Transferable Development Rights (TDRs), 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 Amendments to Bicycle Parking, Performance Bonds, Submission Requirements, and Section numbering Brief Description and Findings Concerning the Proposed Amendments The proposed amendments have been considered by the Planning Commission for their consistency with the text, goals, and objectives of the City of South Burlington’s Comprehensive Plan, adopted February 1, 2016. For each of the amendments, the Commission has addressed the following as enumerated under 24 VSA 4441(c): “…The report shall provide a brief explanation of the proposed bylaw, amendment, or repeal and shall include a statement of purpose as required for notice under section 4444 of this title, and shall include findings regarding how the proposal: (1) Conforms with or furthers the goals and policies contained in the municipal plan, including the effect of the proposal on the availability of safe and affordable housing. (2) Is compatible with the proposed future land uses and densities of the municipal plan. (3) Carries out, as applicable, any specific proposals for any planned community facilities.” 2 A. LDR-22-05: Update the regulation of Transferable Development Rights (TDRs), including, but not limited to, expanding the receiving areas for TDRs and updating process for sending and receiving TDRs Brief explanation of the proposed amendment: This amendment updates the existing Transferable Development Rights program. It expands the areas where TDRs can be received to areas outside the SEQ districts to the City’s medium and higher-density residential and mixed use zoning districts along transit-served areas, establishes how TDRs can be used and maximum use of TDRs in all areas where they can be received, and outlines the process for severing TDRs from a property and receiving them on a property. Findings Concerning the Proposed Amendments (1) Conforms with or furthers the goals and policies contained in the municipal plan, including the effect of the proposal on the availability of safe and affordable housing. The proposed TDR program updates are intended to support the land use pattern envisioned by the 2016 Comprehensive Plan. This includes increasing residential density along corridors with transit lines and municipal services, and conserving land in appropriate areas of the City. Specifically, the updated program expands the receiving areas for TDRs to zoning districts that already have higher residential densities and/or existing transit, like the districts along much of Shelburne Road and medium-density residential areas in the Transit Overlay District. The designation of sending areas in the SEQ allow for greater conservation of those areas with compensation to the current landowners. These updates are intended to foster greater housing variation and affordability in the City in areas where additional development is supported by infrastructure, and directing it away from areas where it is not. The 2016 Comprehensive Plan includes several goals and policies, described in the Plan as objectives and strategies: Comprehensive Plan Objectives: • Objective 2: Offer a full spectrum of housing choices that includes options affordable to households of varying income levels and seizes by striving to meet the housing targets set forth in this Plan. • Objective 3: Foster the creation and retention of a housing stock that is balanced in size and target income level, is representative of the needs of households of central Chittenden County, and maintains an efficient use of land for use by future generations. • Objective 4: Support the retention of existing and construction of new affordable and moderate-income housing, emphasizing both smaller single-family homes and apartments, to meet demand within the regional housing market. 3 • Objective 5: Build and reinforce diverse, walkable neighborhoods that offer a good quality of life by designing and locating new and renovated housing in a context-sensitive manner that will facilitate development of a high-density, City Center, mixed-used transit corridors, and compact residential neighborhoods. • Objective 16: Build and reinforce diverse, accessible neighborhoods that offer a good quality of life by designing and locating new and renovated development in a context-sensitive manner. • Objective 31: Conserve, restore and enhance biological diversity within the City, through careful site planning and development that is designed to avoid adverse impacts to critical wildlife resources, and that incorporates significant natural areas, communities and wildlife habitats as conserved open space. • Objective 36: Conserve productive farmland and primary agricultural soils within the City. • Objective 39: The majority of all new development will occur within the Shelburne Road, Williston Road, and Kennedy Drive Corridors, and other areas within the Transit service area. • Objective 40: Prioritize development that occurs within the community into the higher intensity areas identified within this Plan. Comprehensive Plan Strategies: • Strategy 4: Implement a variety of tools and programs to foster innovative approaches to preserving and increasing the City’s supply of affordable and moderate income housing. Potential tools should be explored and could include form-based codes that would allow a variety of residential and mixed use building types, transferable development rights, neighborhood preservation overlay districts, household definition regulations, inclusionary zoning, bonuses and incentives, waivers and expedited review processes, and/or a housing retention ordinance. • Strategy 5: Increase the supply of safe and affordable rental housing by allowing higher- density, mixed- use and mixed-income development within City Center and transit corridors, allowing multi- unit housing within transitional zones between residential neighborhoods and commercial/ industrial land uses. • Strategy 7: Accommodate compatible infill and additions to homes in existing neighborhoods. • Strategy 8: Explore innovative land development regulations that allow for a range of residential building and neighborhood types, including but not limited to cottage housing, clustered housing and infill residential development. • Strategy 10. Develop strategies that can lead to the availability or development of more housing that is affordable to middle income, working residents and families in the City. Work through the CCRPC with surrounding communities to increase the inventory of housing that is more affordable to families. Consider development of a program that enables “empty nesters” occupying “family” sized housing to comfortably downsize into a multi-family unit that may be available nearby keeping them in their neighborhood but freeing the former home up for new generations of young families. 4 • Strategy 12. Promote the construction of new homes - particularly affordable and moderate- income units - that are highly energy-efficient, and upgrades to existing homes to make them more energy-efficient, which will reduce residents’ overall cost of living and contribute to housing affordability. • Strategy 13. Target for construction, by 2025, of 1,080 new affordable housing units - 840 housing units affordable to households earning up to 80% of the AMI and 240 housing units affordable to households earning between 80% and 120% of the AMI. Comprehensive Plan Ongoing Activities • Continue to refine the City’s Land Development Regulations to promote the Plan’s goals and objectives. • Continue to facilitate the use of transfer of development rights within the SEQ zoning district to achieve the smart growth objectives for the SEQ. • Continue to allow neighborhood areas with a buildable density of between four and eight units per acre, using development rights transferred from areas in the SEQ designated for conservation or protection. (2) Is compatible with the proposed future land uses and densities of the municipal plan. The TDR program updates allow for greater density of residential uses in areas indicated medium to higher intensity use in the Comprehensive Plan, while implementing greater conservation in the areas indicated for very low or low intensity use. For example, many receiving areas are centered on Shelburne Road, parts of Willison Road, Hinesburg Road, and similar, along with associated transitional areas, where “medium to higher intensity – mixed use” and “medium intensity – residential to mixed-use” future land uses are indicated. Sending areas are planned as “very low intensity – principally open space” and “lower intensity – principally residential”. These are all indicated on Map 11: Future Land Use in the 2016 Comprehensive Plan. (3) Carries out, as applicable, any specific proposals for any planned community facilities. This proposed amendment does not relate directly to any planned community facilities. However, it intends to incentivize development in areas where municipal infrastructure exists and community facilities also exist. B. LDR-22-06: Minor and Technical Amendments to Bicycle Parking, Performance Bonds, Submission Requirements, and Section numbering Brief explanation of the proposed amendment: Table in 13.03 of the LDRs related to bicycle parking: In Section 13.03 of the LDRs, the table governing the number of bicycle parking spaces lists “uses” that are not identical to the uses listed in the Table of Uses in Appendix C. The amendment is to clearly indicate which uses require 1 bicycle space per 20,000 SF and which require 1 bicycle space per 5,000 SF. 5 Move Section 15.A.20 (Performance Bonds) to Article 17: This amendment moves performance bonds from Subdivision to Administration to be clear it can apply in circumstances beyond subdivisions, as is the case in several instances. Re-letter Section 13.05 to correct double “A” subsections: In Section 13.05, there are two subsections labeled “A”. In a prior version of the LDRs, when stormwater management standards were contained in Article 12, the “Applicability” section was contained in “B. Scope and Applicability” and the language under that section included internal references that persist in the new 13.05. Delete 17.04C Subdivision Approvals header: Section 17.04 contains a subsection A labeled “Subdivision Approvals. [reserved]” that is no longer needed and is a vestige of former state enabling statutes. It is currently a duplicate “A” that should be labeled “C” as in the previous version of the LDRs. Modify Appendix E to specify submission requirements for Final Plat for Minor Subdivisions, and for solar-ready roofs. Findings Concerning the Proposed Amendments (1) Conforms with or furthers the goals and policies contained in the municipal plan, including the effect of the proposal on the availability of safe and affordable housing. The proposed changes are technical in nature and service only to clarify the LDR. (2) Is compatible with the proposed future land uses and densities of the municipal plan. The proposed changes are technical in nature and service only to clarify the LDR. (3) Carries out, as applicable, any specific proposals for any planned community facilities.” The proposed changes are technical in nature and service only to clarify the LDR. 180 Market Street, South Burlington, Vermont 05403 | 802-846-4106 | www.southburlingtonvt.gov MEMORANDUM TO: Jessie Baker, City Manager; South Burlington City Council FROM: Paul Conner, Director of Planning and Zoning Colin McNeil, City Attorney SUBJECT: Potential School Impact Fee Ordinance DATE: November 21, 2022 City Council meeting Enclosed, per the Council’s request at its October 17th meeting, please find two documents regarding a potential School Impact Fee. They are: • School Impact Fee Analysis Report • Draft Amendment to the City’s Impact Fee Ordinance to enact a School Impact Fee Background: The School Board earlier this year engaged RSG Inc to prepare an Impact Fee Analysis Report to identify and enumerate possible use of Impact Fees to address capital needs related to growth within the School Burlington School District. The School Board and City Council held a joint meeting in the spring to discuss the subject. In October the Interim Schools Superintendent met with the Council on behalf of the Board to share findings, to introduce the initial plans for addressing capacity, and to seek Council direction on a potential School Impact Fee. Council asked City staff to prepare a draft Ordinance for Council’s consideration based on this work. Analysis Report and Draft Ordinance: The Analysis Report, prepared by RSG Inc. for the School District, examines school capacity needs, levels of service, and anticipated capital projects. The Report provides a proposed financial structure for the construction and installation of semi-permanent Zero-Energy Modules (ZEMs) at two schools, Orchard and Marcotte. The Analysis Report serves as the basis for the enclosed Draft Ordinance Amendment. Draft Ordinance: The enclosed amendments to the Impact Fee Ordinance would (re) establish a school impact fee. Notable features as drafted: • Would apply to construction of new dwelling units or adding bedrooms to existing dwelling units • Would apply to new or existing homes seeking a zoning permit following the effective date • Effective date would be phased: 50% of total fee for zoning permits submitted on or after July 1, 2023 and 100% of total fee for zoning permits submitted on or after January 1, 2024 • Fees would be based on bedrooms, in four categories: (0-1 bedroom; 2 bedroom, 3 bedroom, 4+ bedroom). • Credits for past and future property tax payments applied at time of calculation • For Council consideration, the draft ordinance includes a 4% school impact fee administration fee. This is an allowable but not required element of an impact fee Ordinance 2 Public Hearing and possible enactment: This meeting serves as the first reading of the draft Ordinance. Should the Council wish to proceed, the next step would be to warn and hold a public hearing on the draft Ordinance (with any changes made by Council), after which time the Council may vote on adoption of the amendment. The School District / Superintendent is requesting the hearing be held at the Council’s soonest eligible regular meeting, December 21, 2022. Jessie Baker and I recommend the Council discuss the timing of this hearing in consideration of the Holidays and adjacent budget meetings for Council in selecting its hearing date. Possible motion: “I move to hold a public hearing on the proposed amendments to the Impact Fee Ordinance, for the purposes of enacting a school impact fee, for ****** [date].” Page 1 CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON IMPACT FEE ORDINANCE Adopted: January 9, 1995 Amended: April 17, 1995 December 2, 1996 February 2, 1998 September 7, 1999 July 16, 2001 December 3, 2007 October 19, 2009 July 1, 2013 (Effective October 15, 2013) May 19, 2014 DRAFT AMENDMENTS NOVEMBER 2022 Page 2 SOUTH BURLINGTON IMPACT FEE ORDINANCE … Section 3. Establishment of Fees. … F. School Impact Fee: Any land development as described in subparagraph (1) which is issued a permit under the City of South Burlington Zoning Regulations after the date this Impact Fee Ordinance provision becomes effective shall pay an impact fee determined in accordance with the formula set forth in subparagraph (2). (1) This impact fee shall apply to any land development that results in an increase in dwelling units on a per bedroom basis or an increase in bedrooms in an existing dwelling unit. (2) Formula for determination of impact fees: (a) For new dwelling units, the fee listed in Table SD-1, less appropriate credits for payment of past and future property taxes as shown in Tables SD-2 and SD-3. (b) For existing dwelling units that increase the number of bedrooms: the new dwelling unit impact fee listed in Table SD-1 for the total number of bedrooms in the unit after the increase is complete minus the new dwelling unit impact fee listed in Table SD-1 for the number of bedrooms that existed in the unit prior to the increase. TABLE SC-1: SCHOOL IMPACT FEE PER DWELLING UNIT BY NUMBER OF BEDROOMS NUMBER OF BEDROOMS IN DWELLING UNIT AMOUNT OF SCHOOL IMPACT FEE Zero or One Bedroom $2,748 Two Bedrooms $4,636 Three Bedrooms $8,929 Four or more Bedrooms $12,535 (c) The City shall be entitled to assess and retain an additional administrative fee not more than four percent (4%) of the funds collected as compensation for the expense of collecting these fees and administering this ordinance, inclusive of costs associated with updating the impact fee study. The annual financial accounting shall identify the portion of fees retained for administrative purposes. (3) The impact fee formula set forth in subparagraph (2) above is based on a study and report entitled “South Burlington School District Impact Fee Study” prepared by RSG, dated November 9, 2022, which report is incorporated into this ordinance by reference. (4) Impact fees collected pursuant to this ordinance provision shall be used to pay costs associated with the following school improvement projects which are described in the above referenced report: Page 3 (a) PK-8 Zero Energy Modular (ZEM) Classroom Flexible Space: Capital Costs for eight (8) zero- energy modular (ZEM) structures for use within the PK-8 grade facilities as listed in Table 12 of the Report referenced in this Subsection. Section 4. Payment of Fees A. Impact fees levied under this ordinance shall be paid to the City Treasurer prior to the issuance of any permits under the Zoning Regulations of the City of South Burlington for the construction of any development subject to the payment of impact fees. The Zoning Administrator shall not issue any zoning permit for the construction of such developments without first receiving proof of payment of the required impact fees from the City Treasurer. B. Applicability of School Impact Fees levied under this ordinance shall be phased in as follows: a. For complete zoning permit applications submitted on or after July 1, 2023, 50% of the fees listed in Section 3F of this ordinance; b. For complete zoning permit applications submitted on or after January 1, 2024, the full fees listed in Section 3F of this ordinance. Section 5. Accounting and Register of Payment. A. Impact fees collected pursuant to this Ordinance shall be placed by the City Treasurer in separate interest bearing accounts for each type of impact fee established. B. The City Treasurer shall maintain a register for each account indicting the date of payment of each fee, the amount paid, and the name of the payer. C. The City Treasurer shall prepare an annual accounting of all fees paid into and withdrawn from each account, showing the source and amounts collected, and the amounts expended and the projects for which such expenditures were made. D. Collected School Impact Fees shall be distributed to the South Burlington School District on an annual basis in accordance with the “School Impact Fee Agreement” between the City of South Burlington and the South Burlington School District. The South Burlington School District shall prepare and provide to the City of South Burlington an annual accounting of all fees paid into and withdrawn from the School District’s Impact Fee account, showing the source and amounts collected, and the amounts expended and the project(s) for which such expenditures were made. Section 6. Refunds. A. If the actual expense to the City of a project to be funded at least in part by impact fees is less than the fees collected or to be collected, the City shall refund to the then owner of the property for which the fee was paid, that portion of any impact fee, with accrued interest, which is in excess of the appropriate amount due to the City. The City shall provide this refund within one year of the date it completes or terminates construction of the project. If the actual expense to the School District of a project to be funded at least in part by school impact fees is less than the fees collected or to be Page 4 collected, the School District shall return the overage with accrued interest to the City who shall refund the fees in accordance with this subsection. B. [reserved] If the City reduces the amount of an impact fee after some fees have been collected, the City shall refund to the then owner of the property for which a fee was paid, that portion of any impact fee, with accrued interest, which is in excess of the appropriate amount due to the City. The City shall provide this refund within one year of the date it reduces the impact fee. C. If the City or School District does not expend an impact fee within six years of the date it is paid to the City, the then owner of the property for which the fee was paid may apply for and receive a refund of the fee, provided the request for refund is filed within one year of the expiration of the six year time period. Any School Impact Fee subject to a refund in accordance with this section shall be returned by the School District to the City for distribution of the refund. D. A person who pays an impact fee established under this ordinance and subsequently abandons the project without commencing construction of the land development on which the impact fee was based, may request and receive from the City a refund of the impact fee in full. All such fees distributed to the School District shall be returned to the City with accrued interest so the City can refund the fees in accordance with this subsection. Any accrued interest shall be retained by the City to offset administrative costs. A person who receives a refund under this provision shall not commence construction of the land development for which the refund was made without repaying the required impact fees. Section 7. Expenditure Restrictions. A. All impact fees collected pursuant to this ordinance, and accrued interest, shall be expended only for the specifically identified projects which were the basis for the fees. Such fees and accrued interest shall be expended within six years of the date they are received by the City Treasurer. B. The City or School District Treasurer shall pay, from the appropriate account, expenses associated with the designated projects as they become due and upon receipt of appropriate documentation regarding such expense. Page 5 TABLES … SCHOOL IMPACT FEES: RESIDENTIAL TAX CREDIT APPLIED TO IMPACT FEE TABLE SC-2: 2023-2031 PAST TAX RATE FOR ZEM BOND PER $1,000 OF VALUATION DWELLING CONSTRUCTION YEAR [A] ANNUAL EXPENSE [B] TAX RATE NEEDED (PER $1,000 ASSESSMENT) [C] CUMULATIVE TAX RATE (PER $1,000 ASSESSMENT) [D] 2023 $250,000 0.120431 $0.00 2024 $250,000 0.118652 $0.12 2025 $250,000 0.116898 $0.25 2026 $250,000 0.115171 $0.38 2027 $250,000 0.113469 $0.51 2028 $250,000 0.111792 $0.64 2029 $250,000 0.110140 $0.77 2030 $250,000 0.108512 $0.91 2031 $250,000 0.106908 $1.05 TABLE SC-3: 2023-2031 FUTURE TAX RATE PER BEDROOM DWELLING CONSTRUCTION YEAR [A] ANNUAL EXPENSE [B] TAX ASSESED PER BEDROOM [C] CUMULATIVE TAX PAID PER BEDROOM (NET PRESENT VALUE) [D] 2023 $250,000 $31.31 $230.55 2024 $250,000 $30.85 $206.15 2025 $250,000 $30.39 $181.49 2026 $250,000 $29.94 $156.54 2027 $250,000 $29.50 $131.29 2028 $250,000 $29.07 $105.73 2029 $250,000 $28.64 $79.83 2030 $250,000 $28.21 $53.59 2031 $250,000 $27.80 $26.99 SOUTH BURLINGTON SCHOOL DISTRICT IMPACT FEE STUDY November 9, 2022 South Burlington School District Cover Image Credit: City of South Burlington © 2022 RSG South Burlington School District SOUTH BURLINGTON SCHOOL DISTRICT IMPACT FEE STUDY i CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................ 1 1.1 LEGAL BACKGROUND ...........................................................................2 2.0 COMMUNITY CONTEXT .................................................................... 4 2.1 POPULATION ..........................................................................................4 2.2 HOUSEHOLDS ........................................................................................5 PERSONS PER HOUSEHOLD ..............................................................6 BEDROOMS PER HOUSEHOLD ...........................................................8 2.3 LAND USE FORECASTS ...................................................................... 10 COUNTYWIDE CONTEXT ................................................................... 11 FORECAST GROWTH IN HOUSING AND STUDENTS ...................... 12 3.0 SCHOOL DISTRICT FEE DEVELOPMENT .................................... 15 3.1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................... 15 3.2 SERVICE STANDARD ........................................................................... 16 3.3 STUDENTS PER HOUSEHOLD ............................................................ 18 4.0 BASE IMPACT FEE ......................................................................... 23 4.1 OPTION 1: DISTRICTWIDE IMPROVEMENT ....................................... 23 CAPITAL COSTS .................................................................................. 23 BASE FEE CALCULATION .................................................................. 24 4.2 OPTION 2: PK-8 ZERO-ENERGY MODULAR (ZEM) CLASSROOM FLEXIBLE SPACE ........................................................ 26 CAPITAL COSTS .................................................................................. 27 BASE FEE CALCULATION .................................................................. 27 4.3 IMPLEMENTATION AND EQUITY CONSIDERATIONS ....................... 29 5.0 CREDITS .......................................................................................... 30 5.1 CREDITS ............................................................................................... 30 INFRASTRUCTURE CREDITS ............................................................ 30 REVENUE CREDITS ............................................................................ 30 6.0 FINAL IMPACT FEE ......................................................................... 34 ii LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE 1: IMPACT FEE PROCESS ................................................................................. 1 FIGURE 2: SOUTH BURLINGTON POPULATION AND HOUSING .................................. 4 FIGURE 3: SOUTH BURLINGTON HOUSING PERMITS (HISTORICAL 1980 TO 2021) .................................................................................................................... 6 FIGURE 4: AVERAGE HOUSEHOLD SIZE (1940–2016) .................................................. 7 FIGURE 5: EXISTING BEDROOM MIX OF SOUTH BURLINGTON HOUSING UNITS ........................................................................................................................ 9 FIGURE 6: VERMONT PERSONS PER HOUSEHOLD BY BEDROOM .......................... 10 FIGURE 7: CHITTENDEN COUNTY POPULATION PROJECTIONS .............................. 11 FIGURE 8: NEAR TERM HOUSING UNITS BY BEDROOM MIX .................................... 13 FIGURE 9: TOTAL ENROLLMENT FORECAST ............................................................. 14 FIGURE 10: VHFA PERCENT OF HOUSING TYPES WITH SCHOOL-AGE CHILDREN ............................................................................................................... 19 FIGURE 11: SCHOOL-AGE CHILDREN MULTIPLIERS (ECONSULT SOLUTIONS) ........................................................................................................... 20 LIST OF TABLES TABLE 1: AVERAGE PERSONS PER HOUSING UNIT .................................................... 8 TABLE 2: SOUTH BURLINGTON BEDROOMS, BY HOUSEHOLD UNIT (2020 5-YEAR ACS) ............................................................................................................ 8 TABLE 3: SOUTH BURLINGTON 2020 HOUSEHOLD MIX BY BEDROOM ..................... 9 TABLE 4: REGIONAL LAND USE HOUSING FORECASTS FOR SOUTH BURLINGTON ......................................................................................................... 12 TABLE 5: SQUARE FEET STANDARDS PER SOUTH BURLINGTON SCHOOL .................................................................................................................. 17 TABLE 6: EXISTING SERVICE STANDARDS IN SOUTH BURLINGTON ...................... 17 TABLE 7: ACS PUMS DATA ON STUDENTS PER HOUSE BY BEDROOM .................. 18 TABLE 8: NUMBER OF STUDENTS PER HOUSING UNIT IN SOUTH BURLINGTON (2022) .............................................................................................. 20 TABLE 9: STUDENT GROWTH BY HOUSEHOLD TYPE ............................................... 21 TABLE 10: CAPITAL COSTS FOR PREFERRED ALL NEW CONSTRUCTION OPTION ................................................................................................................... 24 TABLE 11: NET BASE IMPACT FEE COST PER HOUSING UNIT (2022 DOLLARS) ............................................................................................................... 25 TABLE 12: CAPITAL COSTS FOR THE ZEMS .............................................................. 27 TABLE 13: PK-8 STUDENTS PER HOUSEHOLD .......................................................... 28 TABLE 14: NET BASE IMPACT FEE COST PER HOUSING UNIT (2022 DOLLARS) ............................................................................................................... 29 TABLE 15: 2023-2031 PAST TAX RATE FOR ZEM BOND PER $1,000 OF VALUATION ............................................................................................................ 32 TABLE 16: 2023 – 2031 FUTURE TAX CREDIT PER BEDROOM .................................. 33 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ACS American Community Survey CCI [ENR] Construction Cost Index CCRPC Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission GFA Gross floor area MSBA Massachusetts School Building Authority MTP Metropolitan Transportation Plan PUMS Public Use Microdata Sample VHFA Vermont Housing Finance Agency ZEM Zero-Energy Module 1.0 INTRODUCTION This impact fee study report evaluates how residential land use development in the city of South Burlington places additional demands on the school district and on existing services and infrastructure. Impact fees are a type of land use regulation that local governments use to generate revenue to construct additional capacity to accommodate this demand. The School District retained RSG to develop this needs study to identify a fair and equitable impact fee structure for its capital expansion investments. This study presents the legal nexus between population growth and impacts on the education facilities managed by the South Burlington School District. The base fee derived in this study represents the legal maximum based on the expected capital costs to meet the growth in demand. The base fee and subsequent credits and final fee should be adjusted once the capital costs are agreed and the full mix of funding sources have been identified. Vermont statute authorizes municipalities to levy impact fees on new development. The purpose of these fees is to allocate the cost of new capital facilities to the development that will benefit from those facilities.1 This can include fees to offset the costs of facilities built in the past with excess capacity for anticipated future development, facilities planned to be built to accommodate future development, and marginal expansion of capacity in response to population growth and changes in community expectations. The statute states that the costs of such infrastructure should only include the portion associated with new capacity to accommodate the future land development’s demand. The process is visualized in Figure 1 below. FIGURE 1: IMPACT FEE PROCESS 1 24 V.S.A. § 5200 Source: RSG The methodology used in the School District Impact Fee Study follows a “consumption” or standards based approach by expanding marginal capacity based on incremental changes in demand (i.e., student population). The consumption based approach identifies the standards by which the services are currently provided, compares those to expected standards of service, and uses a change in base demand to forecast how much additional capacity may be necessary in the future. The plan based approach uses an established plan or vision to identify the necessary capital investments to meet the needs of the future population. 1.1 LEGAL BACKGROUND The American Planning Association, which is a national organization dedicated to supporting local communities and planning processes, has developed standards for impact fees. These standards are as follows:2 • The imposition of a fee must be rationally linked (the "rational nexus") to an impact created by a particular development and the demonstrated need for related capital improvements pursuant to a capital improvement plan and program. • Some benefit must accrue to the development as a result of the payment of a fee. • The amount of the fee must be a proportionate fair share of the costs of the improvements made necessary by the development and must not exceed the cost of the improvements. • A fee cannot be imposed to address existing deficiencies except where they are exacerbated by new development. • Funds received under such a program must be segregated from the general fund and used solely for the purposes for which the fee is established. • The fees collected must be encumbered or expended within a reasonable timeframe to ensure that needed improvements are implemented. Six years in Vermont. • The fee assessed cannot exceed the cost of the improvements, and credits must be given for outside funding sources (such as federal and state grants, developer initiated improvements for impacts related to new development, etc.) and local tax payments which fund capital improvements, for example. • The fee cannot be used to cover normal (day to day) operation and maintenance or personnel costs, but must be used for capital improvements, or under some linkage programs, affordable housing, job training, child care, transit operations, etc. This 2 American Planning Association. “APA Policy Guide on Impact Fees.” Available at: https://www.planning.org/policy/guides/adopted/impactfees.htm. expectation has to define costs attributed to mitigating the impacts associated with additional land use development. Typical management activities: • The fee established for specific capital improvements should be reviewed at least every two years to determine whether an adjustment is required, and similarly the capital improvement plan and budget should be reviewed at least every 5 to 8 years. • Provisions must be included in the ordinance to permit refunds for projects that are not constructed, since no benefit will have manifested. • Impact fee payments are typically required to be made as a condition of approval of the development, either at the time the building or occupancy permit is issued. Vermont’s impact fee statute does not preclude using funds for administrative duties associated with the management of the impact fee program. Nationally, it is common practice to collect and expend impact fees to cover time and expenses associated with the creation, management, and administration of the impact fee program. These funds often cover the salary portion of the impact fee administrator, staff time in the preparation and review of impact fee studies, consultant or staff time preparing impact fee needs reports, and ordinance support. Any administrative fee would be specified in the applicable city impact fee ordinance. 2.0 COMMUNITY CONTEXT South Burlington has played an important role in the growth and development of the greater Burlington region in northwestern Vermont. The city is located at the junction of three critical roadways (I-89, I-189, US2, US 7), traversed by the western railway line, is the home of the Burlington International Airport, and surrounds Vermont’s largest municipality, the City of Burlington. South Burlington covers approximately 16.5 square miles and is a regional employment, trade, housing, and transportation center. South Burlington is one of the fastest growing municipalities in Chittenden County and is poised to add more residents and businesses over the coming decades. The city has taken a proactive approach to planning and has been working with the school district, residents, businesses, and other stakeholders as the city refines, updates, and revisits these plans to remain valuable and insightful guides to the regulatory land use development process. 2.1 POPULATION The city of South Burlington is the third most populous municipality after Burlington and Essex (counting Essex Junction and Town) in Chittenden County, with an estimated population of 20,292 as of the 2020 Decennial Census. The city has experienced a sustained growth trajectory since 1940 as supported by population and housing data visualized in Figure 2. FIGURE 2: SOUTH BURLINGTON POPULATION AND HOUSING source: US Census Bureau and 2016 Comprehensive Plan 2.2 HOUSEHOLDS To minimize adverse effects on housing affordability and build a strong nexus between the need for services and growth in the town, it is important to understand the actual number of people occupying the land uses being developed. Households is an accessible and commonly used term for forecasting growth and one of the few units of growth that is specifically used in the permitting process. Between 2000 and 2020 the city of South Bulington resident population grew by 36.4% while occupied housing stock increased by 46.2%. This aligns with long-term trends of decreasing household size. The land use based approach is informed by the use of the Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission’s (CCRPC), which is the regions Federally recognized Metropolitan Planning Organization, long-range population, employment, and housing unit projections for use in regional planning efforts. The most recent comprehensive review of future growth trends occurred during the 2017 update to the Metropolitan Transportation Plan. The CCRPC projections suggest an additional 719 housing units in South Burlington between 2020 and 2030, an 8% change. The city of South Burlington planning department has maintained that the regional forecasts are too low given the rate of residential construction anticipated over the next twenty years. City planning staff have indicated that annual changes of around 140 housing units is more realistic and consistent with past land use permits and growth patterns as shown in Figure 3. FIGURE 3: SOUTH BURLINGTON HOUSING PERMITS (HISTORICAL 1980 TO 2021) Bedrooms however is also a frequently used metric, guiding the size requirements for waste water and raw water as well as other land development permits. Both the number of households and the number of bedrooms in those households are known entities at the time a building permit is obtained prior to construction. The number of occupants, however, are not – which is the true source of demand for city services such as educational facilities. While we cannot assess the impact fee on the actual number of occupants, we have sufficient data to associate a correlation between the size of the household and number of bedrooms to the number of occupants. Persons per Household The American Community Survey estimates that as of 2020, there were 9,087 housing units.3 This is an increase of over 2,586 housing units since the 2000 Census and over 1,453 more than the 2010 census. Most of the housing units are owner occupied (59%) with an average of 3 The ACS is an estimate based on a sampling of data. The City maintains a detailed record of housing permits and overall housing units. However, it is valuable to compare housing and population using a consistent dataset (i.e., ACS). 2.32 persons per household. The remaining 41% of households are renter occupied with 2.00 persons per household4.The citywide average is 2.19 persons per household. There have been attempts nationally to reduce the effect that impact fees may have on housing costs, and especially, “affordable housing.” Changing the assessment on the size of the home or on the number of bedrooms provides a stronger relationship to the number of occupants and the likely impact on the school district. Nationally, over the past half century the average size (number of persons) of the household has dropped from 3.67 persons per household in 1940 to 2.53 in 2016 as shown in Figure 4. FIGURE 4: AVERAGE HOUSEHOLD SIZE (1940–2016) Source: US Census Bureau5 The number of occupants per household influences the number of housing units necessary to house the population and may also influence the degree to which any household may impact 4 2020 American Community Survey 5-year estimates (Table B25010) 5 US Census Bureau. “Historical Households Tables.” December 2020. Available at: https://www.census.gov/data/tables/time-series/demo/families/households.html. the needs for goods and services. Specifically, as it pertains to the school district, if there are fewer occupants, there may be a reduction in likely number of students that may be living in the household. Traditionally, impact fee studies often separated the fees based on ownership status or other proxies for ownership. Rightly or wrongly, the ownership may been an easier way to capture anticipated or degree of impact on the system. However, as shown in Table 1 there has been a trend toward convergence between owner occupied housing sizes and renter occupied housing sizes. Since 2000 the city has seen a decline in average persons per owner occupied unit, and from 2010 to today an increase in the overall household size of rented units. TABLE 1: AVERAGE PERSONS PER HOUSING UNIT AVG. PERSONS PER OWNER OCCUPIED UNIT AVG. PERSONS PER RENTER OCCUPIED UNIT 2000 Census 2.44 2.02 2010 Census 2.50 1.75 2015 ACS 2.38 1.84 2020 ACS 2.32 2.00 Source: US Census Data (Table B25010) To move away from ownership status, it is important to acknowledge that the simple metric of household is too gross of a measure. There is wide variation in the number of occupants and the behaviors of those occupants that should be better accounted for. Additionally, the Comprehensive Plan reinforces the notion that policies such as impact fees, should be designed to be avoid unintentional adverse impacts on affordable housing policies. Bedrooms per Household The 2020 breakdown of households and the number bedrooms is shown in Table 2. Note that the total number of housing units estimated by the ACS is slightly different than what the City Planning office considers to be an accurate count of housing units. The ACS aides in the understanding of the relative makeup of each of the units in the city. TABLE 2: SOUTH BURLINGTON BEDROOMS, BY HOUSEHOLD UNIT (2020 5-YEAR ACS) HOUSEHOLD BEDROOM COUNT COUNT PERCENT No Bedroom (i.e., studio or efficiency unit) 202 2% 1 Bedroom 1,137 13% 2 Bedrooms 3,360 37% 3 Bedrooms 2,807 31% 4 Bedrooms 1,340 15% 5 or More Bedrooms 241 3% Total Housing Units 9,087 100% The weighted average number of bedrooms per unit is 2.5. Aggregated into three levels (0 to 1 bedroom, 2 bedroom, 3 bedroom, and 4+ bedroom) units can be helpful and easier for practical applications. The percentage as a share of the overall housing mix is shown in Figure 5. FIGURE 5: EXISTING BEDROOM MIX OF SOUTH BURLINGTON HOUSING UNITS Source: American Community Survey (2020 5-year. Table B250401) The planning department at the city of South Burlington maintains a robust record of the housing permits and based on the local data there are 9,500 housing units as of 2020. Using the ACS percentage of households by the number of bedrooms the 2020 share of households by bedrooms is shown in Table 3. TABLE 3: SOUTH BURLINGTON 2020 HOUSEHOLD MIX BY BEDROOM TOTAL 0-1 BR 2 BR 3 BR 4+ BR Units 9,500 1,400 3,513 2,935 1,653 Percent 15% 37% 31% 17% Source: City of South Burlington records using ACS percentages Lastly, the U.S. Census Public Use Microdata Sample (PUMS) regularly surveys around 1% of the U.S. population each year across the full set of variables surveyed in the ACS. The 2019 five-year PUMS data was downloaded using the statistical software R and exported for the state of Vermont geography, providing occupancy data on 32,056 households. The data accessed compares persons per household and the number of bedrooms in that household. The relationship is visualized in Figure 6 below. FIGURE 6: VERMONT PERSONS PER HOUSEHOLD BY BEDROOM Source: Census PUMS data analyzed by RSG A strong linear relationship exists between the number of bedrooms a household has and the number of persons in that household. This is a helpful check to confirm that bedroom count can be a reliable measure of the number of occupants, and therefore, the impact on the city of South Burlington facilities, including schools. 2.3 LAND USE FORECASTS The Comprehensive Plan supports the city’s vision for robust and significant growth in both population and employment. The city is expected to remain one of the faster growing communities in Vermont and in Chittenden County. The 2020 Census data indicates the state population grew 2.8%, or 0.28% annually between 2010 and 2020, while South Burlington grew 13.34%, or 1.25% annually6, from 17,904 to 20,292 residents between 2010 and 2020. Countywide Context The 2018 ECOS Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP) produced by the CCRPC developed countywide and municipal forecasts out to 2050. The 2018 projections have countywide population projected to increase from 165,000 in 20207 to 183,000 in 2050. The population is anticipated to slow in annual growth rates through the 2020s and then increase again starting in the 2030s as the ‘millennials’ fully enter an age typical of household formation. Figure 7 shows the chart for the projected countywide population growth through year 2050. The chart indicates that annual growth rates between 2010 and 2020 are around 0.56% and forecast between 2020 and 2030 at 0.4%. South Burlington data indicates that the city is adding residents faster than the Chittenden County average. FIGURE 7: CHITTENDEN COUNTY POPULATION PROJECTIONS Source: CCRPC 2018 ECOS MTP (developed by Economic Policy Resources, Inc. and RSG) 6 Using a natural log growth equation with US Census 2010 and 2020 population estimates 7 The 2019 ACS data indicates Chittenden County has a population of 163,774 165,803 172,596 174,764 183,129 155,000 160,000 165,000 170,000 175,000 180,000 185,000 190,000 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 2022 2024 2026 2028 2030 2032 2034 2036 2038 2040 2042 2044 2046 2048 2050 Forecast Growth in Housing and Students The city of South Burlington is forecast to see an increase in employment and population over the coming decades. By 2030 regional growth forecasts8 suggest South Burlington could see an increase in over 2,000 residents and 3,400 jobs from 2015. These forecasts were developed as part of a regional effort in 2017 by the CCRPC to account for New England wide trends in a Vermont context and then work with local agencies and governments to refine forecasts for each community within Chittenden County. The forecasts were completed going out to the future year 2050, the current planning horizon for the regional long-range planning efforts. The growth anticipated for South Burlington in the regional planning effort (shown in Table 4) shows a significantly slower rate of growth than the historical average of 140 units per year shown in Figure 3. If the 140 units per year remains a long run average, the city could reasonably expect nearly 11,000 housing units by the year 2030. This comparison between the different forecasts is only helpful to provide a perspective on the amount of growth and development expected in the city. TABLE 4: REGIONAL LAND USE HOUSING FORECASTS FOR SOUTH BURLINGTON HOUSEHOLDS HOUSEHOLDS ANNUALIZED GROWTH RATE 2020 9,500 2025 9,793 0.62% 2030 10,219 0.87% 2035 10,644 0.83% 2040 11,069 0.80% 2045 11,495 0.77% 2050 11,920 0.74% Source: CCRP 2018 MTP Forecasts (pivoted using actual 2020 housing units) However, the overall number of housing units is only part of the story. The City Planning Department identified a near term growth projection using an identified list of known or likely land use development projects to occur within the next decade, by 2030. The size, scale, and bedroom composition of these units are expected to be markedly different than what has been the recent historical housing type within South Burlington. Figure 8 shows the existing mix of housing units by bedroom count along with the type of housing unit anticipated over the next few years in the city. The figure shows a clear shift in the composition of the housing units. This will likely affect the anticipated number of students residing in these units. 8 CCRPC MTP Forecasts for year 2030. FIGURE 8: NEAR TERM HOUSING UNITS BY BEDROOM MIX Source: City of South Burlington Planning Department (May 2022) The number of students residing and enrolled in South Burlington schools has traditionally been based on forecasts from McKibben Demographics to inform key inputs such as school by school enrollment by year. The analysis uses a range of demographic factors such as migration (in and out), births and deaths, and historical data that is used to inform the future rate of change in the student populations by grade. At an aggregate level, the October 20, 2021 McKibben report indicates 2,349 resident students in 2020 and forecasts 2,604 in 2030 (and 2,635 by 2032). This is a 10.8% change over the next 10 years, with an annual average increase of nearly 26 students per year. In addition to simply resident students, there are nearly 200 tuition students from nearby communities who attend school in South Burlington. These numbers are expected to remain stable. It is both a service to the wider community in northwestern Vermont but also a benefit for the additional revenue that can offset local education costs. Figure 9 shows the McKibben total school district enrollment forecast out ten years to year 2032. FIGURE 9: TOTAL ENROLLMENT FORECAST Source: McKibben Demographics (October 20, 2021) A detailed methodology and assumptions of McKibben’s work is included in the appendix of the May 2019 Phase 2 Master Planning & Visioning report, titled Demographic Study Report 2019 from McKibben Demographics. The analysis is detailed with the many assumptions that are critical to understanding the future forecasts that were made. Foremost among them is the assumed number of new housing units constructed. The 2019 report states an assumed 500 new units by 2028. This is well short of the amount the City Planning Department has indicated based on historical averages (~140 units per year) as well as near term growth expectations. It will be important for city and school district staff to monitor the changes in enrollment as it relates to housing growth and development. The following chapters rely on the attributes of the housing being constructed in the city as well as the demands on the school facility to accommodate the future growth in student enrollment. 3.0 SCHOOL DISTRICT FEE DEVELOPMENT 3.1 INTRODUCTION The school district has been proactive in developing plans for additional school capacity. Over the past decade a handful of options have been identified such as consolidation at the K-5 level, rebuilding schools, or building anew. This impact fee study report supports the Master Planning Process that continues today to identify pathways forward to maximize student performance by improving the educational capital facilities. Impact fees can support the expansion of the schools within the district as long as there is a sound nexus between the growth in the community, a unit of growth – being households, the demand for additional school space as a result of that growth, and a capital plan to build the additional capacity. This chapter sets out the necessary components of an impact fee including developing the service standard, developing a cost per unit of growth, and including mechanisms for credits and avoiding issues of double payment. The district has a long-term vision of high-quality facilities that are flexible, adaptable and resilient to the inevitable changes in instructional format. The Master Planning Process has included numerous studies and evaluations of the facilities as well as public engagement activities to educate the community on the conditions and capacity challenges at the schools.9 The Master Planning documents along with others including demographic projections were reviewed and informed this impact fee study report, including the following: • Phase 1 - Master Planning and Visioning Process: Site & Building Assessments, Dore and Whittier. April 24, 2018. • South Burlington School District, Redistricting Study Option Statistics, Cropper GIS. May 2, 2019. • Phase 2 – Master Planning and Visioning Process: Educational Component, Dore and Whittier. May 31, 2019. • School District Enrollment Projections. Cropper GIS/McKibben Demographics. September 23, 2019. • Population and enrollment Forecasts: 2021 Series, McKibben Demographics. October 20, 2021. 9 Master Planning and Visioning site. https://www.sbschools.net/Page/736 • Elementary School Building Assessment: Programming Update, Dore and Whittier. November 30, 2021. • Elementary School Building Assessment: Options Analysis, Dore and Whittier. April 26, 2022. 3.2 SERVICE STANDARD Schools are dynamic and flexible spaces within a rigid structural shell. They must respond to evolving educational practices and year to year variations in enrollment. These challenges are among the hundreds of others that have been considered in the Master Planning and Visioning process that the school district organized over the past few years. The process convened working groups and committees to determine the preferred configuration and size of the future schools within South Burlington to meet the expected student population. Vermont has historically used a blanket, one size fits all, 160 square feet of gross square feet per student as the service standard that applies for all schools across all ages in Vermont. The standard has not changed for several decades and is considered inadequate to reflect the changing demands on the educational facilities. Alternatively, Massachusetts provides a current set of design standards that have been identified by the district’s architects as superior to Vermont’s standard and more accurately reflect the desired conditions. The Massachusetts School Building Authority (MSBA) Regulations apply to all public schools and communities that receive state funding assistance in Massachusetts.10 The architects for the South Burlington school district have pointed out that the Massachusetts standards should not be followed indiscriminately and require context and consideration of the local South Burlington situation. However, they do provide a helpful and powerful source of information for the purposes of establishing impact fees by providing a straightforward rubric as to the amount of space a pupil requires. The MSBA square footage standards per student vary by the age of the students (i.e., different standards for elementary vs. high school) and the total enrollment of the school. Table 5 shows the MSBA standard square feet per student standards for the five schools within South Burlington as well as the weighted average for the elementary schools and the overall weighted average. 10 Massachusetts School Grant Building Program. https://www.mass.gov/regulations/963-CMR-200-school-building-grant-program TABLE 5: SQUARE FEET STANDARDS PER SOUTH BURLINGTON SCHOOL SCHOOL SERVICE STANDARD SQUARE FEET PER STUDENT (USING THE MSBA STANDARDS) Average (weighted by size of student population) 180 PK-5 Elementary 173 Rick Marcotte School 165 Chamberlin School 178 Orchard School 162 6-8 Tuttle Middle School 173 9-12 High School 200 Source: RSG analysis of the MSBA Standards The service standards for any future condition are compared to the existing condition to understand whether any deficiency exists today. Existing deficiencies are not eligible for funding through impact fees and must be funded with other sources. The existing enrollment and size of each school and resulting square feet per student is shown in Table 6. The MSBA standards and resulting size of each school and the resulting deficiency is included. TABLE 6: EXISTING SERVICE STANDARDS IN SOUTH BURLINGTON SCHOOL CURRENT TOTAL ENROLLMENT (2022) EXISTING SQUARE FEET OF SCHOOL EXISTING SQUARE FEET PER STUDENT MSBA REQUIREMENTS (SQUARE FEET) MSBA SQ FT PER STUDENT EXISTING CURRENT SPACE DEFICIENCY PER STUDENT Total 2,536 446,534 176 498,892 180 4 PK-5 1,125 167,440 149 194,540 173 24 RMCS 415 55,526 134 68,299 165 31 CS 269 54,792 204 54,792 178 0 OS 441 57,122 130 71,449 162 32 6-8 492 120,552 245 120,552 173 0 9-12 919 158,542 173 183,800 200 27 Source: RSG The analysis indicates that existing deficiencies are particularly acute at the high school and two of the elementary schools. Interim plans include adding temporary classrooms as well as shifting some of the districts to shift students from one school to another. However, as indicated by the overall deficiency of 4 square feet per student, the entire district is space deficient per the MSBA standards. This is the deficiency at the time of this impact fee study and it is expected to increase if capital investments are not made. 3.3 STUDENTS PER HOUSEHOLD Section 2.3 summarized the expectation that South Burlington and the school district is expected to add over 1,000 housing units (up to 1,400 if long-term trends continue) over the next ten years. A portion of those households and the residents living in them are likely to, or at some point in the future, house school-age children, adding to the overall demand for educational facilities in the school district. This chapter sets out the methodology for estimating the number of students that any housing unit in the city may generate, and subsequently, demand for additional capital infrastructure. The McKibben Demographics report indicated a total of 2,349 resident students were enrolled in 2020. The City Planning Department has indicated that there were 9,500 housing units in 2020. This produces an average of 0.247 students per housing unit across the entire city. The ACS also estimates that only 23.3% of households in the city have one or more resident under the age of 18. Roughly, these two numbers indicate that 1 in 4 households has a student in the district. These numbers are citywide averages that could be further divided into the types of housing units being occupied. Recognizing that the city is changing and the demand for smaller housing units is also growing as household size has reduced over the last few decades (see Figure 4). The U.S. Census PUMS regularly surveys around 1% of the U.S. population each year across the full set of variables surveyed in the ACS. The 2020 five-year PUMS data was downloaded using the statistical software R and exported for state of Vermont, providing data on students per household for 13,452 households in the study area.11 The PUMS data shows trend of higher numbers of students residing per unit as the number of bedrooms increases. For instance, single family homes with 4 bedrooms include an average of 0.73 students compared to 3 bedroom units having 0.52 students, and 2 bedroom units having 0.27 students. The data is statewide, and obviously a limited dataset, but provides a local sample to inform this process. TABLE 7: ACS PUMS DATA ON STUDENTS PER HOUSE BY BEDROOM BEDROOMS PER UNIT STUDENTS PER HOUSEHOLD 0 – 1 0.16 2 0.27 3 0.52 11 Total households in the PUMS data is 15,584. However, 2,132 had a bedroom count of (-1) which were removed from the data 4 0.73 Source: RSG analysis of statewide Vermont households PUMS data (2020 5-year) The 2020 PUMS analysis is juxtaposed against an alternative picture of historical data using the 2000 Census data analyzed by the Vermont Housing Finance Agency (VHFA) shown in Figure 10. The VHFA analysis suggests the current overall average within South Burlington (0.247) is reasonable, albeit lower than historical Vermont averages. FIGURE 10: VHFA PERCENT OF HOUSING TYPES WITH SCHOOL-AGE CHILDREN Source: VHFA: Housing and Vermont’s School Enrollment. January 2007. A more recent analysis of 2015 data (2011-2015 ACS data) prepared by Econsult Solutions titled “Who Moves into Vermont Housing” completed in November 2017 shows an extensive breakdown of school-age children by housing unit by bedroom count. The report states that these are derived from national sample and then further filtered to represent Vermont and not sensitive to specific community conditions. The data analyzes households moving into Vermont within four years of the ACS sample (in this case, the earliest move in date is 2008). The Econsult Solutions analysis aligns well with the 2020 PUMS data, with the one change that suggests that more recently there are higher numbers of students in 0 and 1 bedroom units relative to the 2011-2015 analysis. FIGURE 11: SCHOOL-AGE CHILDREN MULTIPLIERS (ECONSULT SOLUTIONS) Source: Econsult Solutions. November 2017. The data sources (citywide average students per housing unit, the PUMS data for Vermont, and the two reports) are used to estimate the current South Burlington specific rates of students per housing unit by number of bedrooms shown in Table 8. TABLE 8: NUMBER OF STUDENTS PER HOUSING UNIT IN SOUTH BURLINGTON (2022) 0-1 BEDROOM UNITS 2 BEDROOM UNITS 3 BEDROOM UNITS 4+ BEDROOM UNITS WEIGHTED AVERAGE STUDENTS PER UNIT Total district students per housing unit 0.096 0.162 0.312 0.438 0.248 PK-5 Grades (~46% of students) 0.044 0.075 0.144 0.202 0.114 Grades 6,7,8 (~23% of students) 0.022 0.037 0.072 0.101 0.057 Grades 9-12 (~31% of students) 0.030 0.050 0.096 0.135 0.076 Source: RSG The number of students by grade cohort are based on the proportional share of each grade. For example, K-5 grades, are 6 years out of 13 (~46%) in which the district operates. Over the long run, every home in South Burlington has a probability to generate a student in proportion with these shares. The number of students generated per housing unit is used to relate the necessary amount of school facility space needed in the district to accommodate for additional housing units being constructed. The ratios for South Burlington appear to be lower than the recent PUMS data for statewide Vermont and lower than the averages analyzed by VHFA and Econsult. The actual number of students added to the district over the coming years will be a function of the number of housing units and the composition of those units. For example, the next few years could look something similar what is shown below in Table 9 based on the expected number of housing units by bedroom type and the number of students per household type. TABLE 9: STUDENT GROWTH BY HOUSEHOLD TYPE YEAR TOTAL HH PER YEAR ANNUAL HOUSING SHARE BY NUMBER OF BEDROOMS NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS BY BEDROOM (STUDENTS BY HOUSEHOLD TYPE) ANNUAL ADDITIONAL STUDENTS TOTAL NEW STUDENTS 0-1 BR 2 BR 3 BR 4+ BR 0-1 BR (.096) 2 BR (.162) 3 BR (.312) 4+ BR (.438) 2022 169 52% 21% 21% 7% 88.0 35.0 35.0 11.0 21 38 2023 336 51% 29% 14% 7% 170.0 96.0 47.0 23.0 39 77 2024 284 58% 24% 12% 7% 164.0 67.0 34.0 19.0 32 109 2025 142 46% 37% 10% 7% 65.5 52.4 14.1 10.1 16 125 2026 140 52% 26% 15% 7% 72.8 36.4 21.0 9.8 16 141 2027 140 52% 26% 15% 7% 72.8 36.4 21.0 9.8 16 158 2028 140 52% 26% 15% 7% 72.8 36.4 21.0 9.8 16 174 2029 140 52% 26% 15% 7% 72.8 36.4 21.0 9.8 16 191 2030 140 52% 26% 15% 7% 72.8 36.4 21.0 9.8 16 207 This possible configuration generally aligns with the forecasts that were prepared by McKibben Demographics (see Figure 9), however, derived from different data and methodology. Future planning between the school district and the city should seek to monitor the housing units, the type of unit, and ideally the numbers of students based on the housing type. This data can be important to monitor and can identify and possibly predict of enrollment pressures before they occur. Further, comments from the City Council suggested an interest in moving beyond bedrooms and creating a square footage based fee. If there is any survey of student enrollment, connecting that enrollment data to housing type, bedrooms, and square footage would be ideal. 4.0 BASE IMPACT FEE 4.1 OPTION 1: DISTRICTWIDE IMPROVEMENT The base impact fee has been designed to encompass the entire school district, with improvements to each of the three elementary schools, the middle school, and the high school. The base fee is designed for the option to reconstruct, improve, and expand each of the school facilities in the district. Alternatively, a renovation and expansion option was subsequently considered and dismissed by the school board. The basic formula for the impact fee assessment is: Square Foot per student x Cost per square foot x Students per housing unit = Base capital cost per housing unit (-) subtract cost per feet for existing deficiencies = Base impact fee per housing (-) subtract for property taxes that may be paid on future debt for school (see Chapter 5.0 for Credits) = Final impact fee per housing unit This impact fee approach uses the consumption or ratio method as the fee is assessed on the marginal basis of expansion. Each unit of growth (student per household) is associated with a specific amount of additional capacity (square feet of space per student). The school district can collect annual impact fees as the means to pay for the new capacity while using more traditional funding sources such as bonds and grants, to pay for the overall project. Any impact fee revenue from annual housing permits will offset the annual bond payments. Capital Costs The capital costs in 2022 dollars for replacing and expanding each of the five schools are shown in Table 10. The capital costs are estimated after a rigorous and comprehensive process to analyze the various options for shifting students within schools, replacing and consolidating schools, as well as the preferred configuration of rebuilding and expanding each of the schools in the district. The values in this table reflect recommendations from an ad-hoc enrollment committee facilitated and organized by the school district. The preferred option for all new construction treats the overall district as one entity rather than fees for specific schools or grade levels. Developing a school impact fee at the district level that uses a districtwide average cost per foot also provides greater flexibility as to the use and spending of the impact fees to pursue any and all opportunities for capital expansion throughout the district. The overall weighted average cost of the new construction option is $587.21 in 2022 dollars. TABLE 10: CAPITAL COSTS FOR PREFERRED ALL NEW CONSTRUCTION OPTION SCHOOL EXISTING SQUARE FOOTAGE FINAL CONSTRUCTED SQUARE FOOTAGE ALL NEW PROJECT COST (MILLION) COST PER SQ FOOT (DOLLARS) NEW CAPACITY COST (MILLION) - 2022 DOLLARS % OF COST OF NEW CAPACITY Total 446,534 571,681 $ 335.70 $ 587.21 $ 67.61 20% PK-5 167,440 206,681 $ 134.34 $ 650.00 $ 7.89 6% RMCS 55,526 75,384 $ 49.00 $ 650.06 $ 4.61 9% CS 54,792 55,153 $ 35.85 $ 649.94 $ 0.23 1% OS 57,122 76,144 $ 49.49 $ 649.97 $ 3.05 6% 6-8 120,552 130,000 $ 71.98 $ 553.68 $ 5.23 7% 9-12 158,542 235,000 $ 130.11 $ 553.65 $ 28.35 22% Source: Dore and Whittier (May 2022 estimates) Table 10 shows the existing and proposed square footage anticipated to be constructed for each of the facilities. Overall, an estimated 20% of the total new square footage is expected to be additional space over and above the space in existing facilities. The total cost of $335.70 million includes $5.88 million to address existing deficiencies, $262.21 million to replace the existing capacity, and $67.61 million to increase the capacity of the system. Important to note – at the time of this study preparation – the total cost excludes any financing costs such as interest. Base Fee Calculation The base impact fee is a result of the additional square feet of space needed to accommodate additional students as a result of new students occupying an increasing number of housing units in South Burlington. a) Space per student: The overall average space per student required in the district is 180 square feet. This standard is based on the MSBA given the typical enrollment of the school and the grade levels of students in the school. b) Cost per square foot: The overall average cost per square foot of educational space in the district is $587.21 in 2022 dollars. c) Number of students per housing unit: The number of students that may occupy any housing unit in the city does vary by the size of the unit, typically aligned with the number of bedrooms. The overall average of 0.248 students per household or per Table 8 by bedroom count. 0-1 BEDROOM UNIT 2 BEDROOM UNITS 3 BEDROOM UNITS 4+ BEDROOM UNITS WEIGHTED AVERAGE STUDENTS PER UNIT Students per housing unit 0.096 0.162 0.312 0.438 0.248 d) Existing deficiency: The district currently has an average deficiency of 4 square feet of education space per student. This is calculated using the existing square footage (446,534 square feet) divided by the current enrollment (2,536 students) = 176 square feet per student. The MSBA weighted average for the district is 180 square feet per student. The current cost per square foot estimates ($587.21) includes costs to rebuild existing capacity, address the deficiency, and expand the facility. Therefore, the cost of addressing the existing deficiency is removed from the cost per square foot that is embedded in the overall project cost estimates. The net base impact fee cost per housing unit is shown for housing units by bedroom or by the citywide average in Table 11. The fee can be established on either a bedroom bases or on a straight average which would assess each housing unit the same fee regardless of bedroom count. TABLE 11: NET BASE IMPACT FEE COST PER HOUSING UNIT (2022 DOLLARS) 0-1 BEDROOM UNIT 2 BEDROOM UNITS 3 BEDROOM UNITS 4+ BEDROOM UNITS Students per unit 0.096 0.162 0.312 0.438 Sq feet of School Required per housing unit (180 square feet per student x no of students) 17.3 29.2 56.2 78.9 Cost per square foot: $587.21 Base impact fee cost per housing unit $10,148.46 $17,125.52 $32,982.48 $46,302.33 Deficiency (4 sq ft per student x no. students x cost per square foot) ($2,348.84) ($2,348.84) ($2,348.84) ($2,348.84) Net base impact fee cost per unit (Base impact fee - Deficiency) $7,799.62 $14,776.68 $30,633.64 $43,953.49 4.2 OPTION 2: PK-8 ZERO-ENERGY MODULAR (ZEM) CLASSROOM FLEXIBLE SPACE This second capital enhancement option will consist of using semipermanent modular structures to accommodate an additional 140 students using an average of 17.5 students per module. The capacity of the units reflects an average number of students given the variety of uses and needs of different classes and activities that could occur within the modules. The number is viewed as a conservatively low value, with higher numbers providing only greater overall capacity to accommodate more students. The district will purchase eight zero-energy modular (ZEM) structures for use within the PK-8 grade facilities – serving as flexible space where acute student capacity constraints are particularly challenging. The eight modules are expected to have a lifespan of ten or more years and can be moved within the district to meet the changing capacity needs of specific community schools. The base impact fee for the ZEM option has been designed to account for added capacity for the PK through 8 grade education facilities. The basic formula for the impact fee assessment is: Cost per new student capacity x Students per housing unit = Base capital cost per housing unit (-) subtract cost per feet for existing deficiencies = Base impact fee per housing (-) subtract for property taxes that may be paid on future debt for school (see future Chapter 5.0 for Credits) = Final impact fee per housing unit This impact fee approach uses the consumption or ratio method as the fee is assessed on the marginal basis of expansion. Each unit of growth (student per household) is associated with a specific amount of additional capacity. The school district can collect annual impact fees as the means to pay for the new capacity while using more traditional funding sources such as bonds and grants, to pay for the overall project. Any impact fee revenue from annual housing permits will offset the annual bond payments and reduce the net burden on the existing tax base. 91.5% of the ZEMs capacity is a net addition to the school facilities and therefore eligible to be paid for through the collection of impact fees. Capital Costs The capital costs for the eight ZEMs are summarized in the table below. The District has retained architects and engineers to design the integration of the ZEMs into the existing school facilities. The costs are inclusive of the full cost to purchase, setup, and prepare the ZEMs for use as shown in Table 12. TABLE 12: CAPITAL COSTS FOR THE ZEMS Construction Cost $ 5,332,722 Soft Costs (20%) $ 955,978.20 Implementation Costs (excluding custodial staff) $ 100,050.00 Project Costs (excluding financing) $ 6,388,750.20 Unit cost per ZEM installed (8 units) $798,593.78 Source: DEW Construction 8 November 2022 Important to note, the total cost excludes any financing costs such as interest. The financing costs can be integrated into the impact fee as a necessary cost line item to implement the new capacity and then use impact fees to return revenue to the district as growth occurs. Base Fee Calculation The base impact fee accounts for the costs of providing additional square feet of space needed to accommodate additional students as a result of land use development generating additional students in the South Burlington School District. The base fee is derived using the following steps: a) Space per student: The ZEMs are self-contained units with a different standard of space than the overall school, which includes common areas, hallways, gyms, cafeterias, etc. The ZEMs are essentially additional core classroom space. It has been identified by the district that each ZEM can accommodate 17.5 students, using an average daily estimate across the various classes and anticipated uses.12 b) Cost per Student: The average installed cost per ZEM is $798,593.78.13 Using the average of 17.5 students per ZEM, the average cost per additional student capacity is $ $45,633.93. This is the base cost of installing additional school capacity (using the ZEMs 12 Number of students is estimated based on their expected use across the different class types and activities. 13 Cost excludes staff costs such as custodial time and excludes financing. as the benchmark basis) for each additional student being added to the district each year. c) Number of students per housing unit: The number of students that may occupy any housing unit in the city is shown to correlated with the number of bedrooms in the unit. The overall weighted average of 0.128 PK-8 grade students per household reflects the near term expected changes citywide based on expected bedroom counts within new construction over the next 5 years that anticipates the majority being 1 and 2 bedroom units (see Figure 8 for the changing housing types). The number of students by housing type is summarized in Table 13. TABLE 13: PK-8 STUDENTS PER HOUSEHOLD 0-1 BEDROOM UNITS 2 BEDROOM UNITS 3 BEDROOM UNITS 4+ BEDROOM UNITS PK-8 students per housing unit 0.066 0.112 0.216 0.303 d) Existing deficiency: The district currently provides 287,992 square feet for the PK-8 programs. Per the MSBA standards the PK – 8 program requires 315,092 square feet. This represents a deficiency of approximately 9.5%. This represents approximately 17 additional square feet per student to attain the MSBA standards. Because the ZEMs are a more focused unit of expansion (classrooms vs common area space), it is not appropriate to use that strict definition of deficiency. Rather, discounting the base impact fee by 9.5% to acknowledge that the addition of the ZEMs is not only serving new growth in students, but also existing capacity challenges. The net base impact fee cost per housing unit is shown for housing units by bedroom or by the citywide average in Table 14. TABLE 14: NET BASE IMPACT FEE COST PER HOUSING UNIT (2022 DOLLARS) 0-1 BR [A] 2 BR [B] 3 BR [C] 4+ BR [D] PK – 8 grade students per unit 0.066 0.112 0.216 0.303 ZEM Cost per additional student capacity $ 45,633.93 Base impact fee cost per housing unit $ 3,033 $ 5,118 $ 9,857 $13,838 Deficiency (current 9.5% space deficiency in PK-8 grade facilities) $ (285) $ (482) $ (928) $ (1,302) Net base impact fee cost per unit (Base impact fee - Deficiency) $ 2,748 $4,636 $8,929 $12,535 4.3 IMPLEMENTATION AND EQUITY CONSIDERATIONS The fee would also be assessed on housing expansions that add bedrooms. If a two-bedroom unit were to be expanded to add another bedroom, it is logical to assess a fee that reflects the greater likelihood that the house will have a student residing in it. The difference between the existing number of bedrooms and the future number of bedrooms could be a reasonable method to calculate the assessed fee. Any building permit which constructs an additional bedroom would be expected to pay the difference in fee between the original number of bedrooms and the new number of bedrooms. The impact fee based on the number of bedrooms reflects the data that smaller housing units are more likely to house fewer students compared to larger homes or those with more bedrooms. The fee is structured to recognize the smaller degree of impact on the school system that houses with fewer bedrooms have, by assessing a lower fee per household. The impact is that the houses with 3 or more bedrooms are faced with a substantially higher burden per household. While this may be equitable from the standpoint of impact to the school system, it may create a financial burden by increasing the overall cost of housing for larger families. The cost of new homes will likely increase as a result of internalizing the wider community costs (schools, transportation, water, recreation, library, police, fire, etc.) of new housing through impact fees. 5.0 CREDITS 5.1 CREDITS Credits are adjustments to the base impact fee that a land use would be assessed. Credits are applicable for the school district impact fee developed in Chapter 4.0. The credits in this impact fee study report have not calculated because the final fee value and the final mix of funding for the capital expenditure items have not been finalized. This chapter will be expanded once the final capital fees and mix of funding is agreed. A final fee would adjust the base fee based on the credits. Two credits are used to offset impact fees: infrastructure credit and revenue credits. The credits are applied after the base impact fee is calculated, as per equation: Infrastructure Credits A land use development applicant that constructs or directly funds any of the capital items funded through impact fees. In the case of the school district, it is unlikely that a private entity may construct additional education capacity and be eligible for an infrastructure impact fee credit. Revenue Credits Revenue credits discount the base impact fee to reduce the chance that a land use development in South Burlington would fund the same capital improvement through two different funds. This frequently occurs when the developer pays property taxes (prior to the development of the land and after the development) and a portion of which goes to fund the capital project that the impact fee contributed toward. In this situation, it is necessary to offset the impact fee by a credit value to eliminate the double payment toward the same capacity. Property tax is paid by a parcel owner on undeveloped land prior to a land use development and future taxes once the land is developed. The taxes on the undeveloped land that contribute to paying the school district bond debt is referred to as the “past tax payments.” The property tax payments on the developed land that will contribute to district debt is referred to as “future tax payments.” The streams of past and future tax payments are translated into net present values using an assumed 3% discount rate. Impact Fee = (Cost per Unit of Growth x New Units of Growth) – (Applicable Credits) The ZEMs are to be funded through impact fees and property taxes which are collected to pay off the construction bond. The revenue credit is necessary to offset the possibility of a parcel owner paying both the property taxes that will be used for the bond debt and the impact fee. Approximately $850,000 per year is required to satisfy the amortization schedule of the $6.8 million dollar bond to cover the ZEMs. The first full year of payment will conclude June 2024 and the last full year of payment will conclude June 2031. It is estimated that approximately $600,000 per year can be collected through impact fees, leaving an estimated $250,000 of property tax revenue to fund the ZEM bond debt. The impact fee revenue is estimated using a forecast of housing unit growth, the type of housing units by bedroom, and the net impact fee (see Table 14). Property Valuation Approach The strongest nexus between the amount of property tax paid and the development is the value of the property, prior to development and after development. The city of South Burlington’s 2021 residential Grand List taxable valuation is $20,149,679 (total assessed value of $2,014,967,880). The assumption is that the grand list will continue to grow by 1.5% per year, a tax rate is estimated per $1,000 of assessed value of the property to generate the annual expenses required. As the grand list grows, the tax rate will decrease (the absolute dollars needed per year is fixed and the tax base to raise those dollars grows). The combined tax rate of past years and future years are brought to net present valuations depending on the year the parcel is developed. Past Tax Revenue Credit Tax is calculated on the value of the land prior to the development or redevelopment. The share of taxes paid that were used to fund the school district ZEMs would be discounted off of the impact fee paid. The past tax credit is only applied to the entity who has the impact fee liability. For example: • If a parcel is developed in 2025, the credit shall apply for the taxes paid in 2023, 2024, and 2025. • If a parcel is developed in 2025, but was sold in 2024 to the current owner, the credit shall only apply for the taxes paid in 2024 and 2025. Table 15 shows the annual tax rate per $1,000 valuation of the grand list to achieve the annual revenue to pay for the ZEM debt for properties that will pay property tax between 2023 and 2031. The past taxes are credited against any impact fee liability. TABLE 15: 2023-2031 PAST TAX RATE FOR ZEM BOND PER $1,000 OF VALUATION DWELLING CONSTRUCTION YEAR [A] ANNUAL EXPENSE [B] TAX RATE NEEDED (PER $1,000 ASSESSMENT) [C] CUMULATIVE TAX RATE (PER $1,000 ASSESSMENT) [D] 2023 $250,000 0.120431 $0.00 2024 $250,000 0.118652 $0.12 2025 $250,000 0.116898 $0.25 2026 $250,000 0.115171 $0.38 2027 $250,000 0.113469 $0.51 2028 $250,000 0.111792 $0.64 2029 $250,000 0.110140 $0.77 2030 $250,000 0.108512 $0.91 2031 $250,000 0.106908 $1.05 Table 15 column [D] shows past taxes for the year of development for properties that paid tax from 2023 onwards that is the sum of previous tax rates (using a 3% discount rate) that are applied for each $1,000 of valuation. For example, an undeveloped property that is undergoing development in 2027 that is assessed at $500,000 would have a past tax credit of $253.92 [($500,000/$1,000)*0.51]. It is noted that the average assessed value of undeveloped land per acre of $58,433 in South Burlington.14 The credit should be calculated from the most current assessment of the property, either raw land if it is undeveloped, or if it is a redevelopment, the total value of the property (land and structures) pre-redevelopment should be used. Future Tax Revenue Credit A portion of property taxes paid on the value of the developed parcel will fund the ZEM debt service is calculated for the year of development in Table 16. The post-development future credit is calculated based on the total development value of the parcel including the structure and land value. The tax paid per bedroom is a conservative value based on the average U.S. Census data includes sales prices for new residential construction by region.15 The data includes sales price by improved square foot that include finished basements and livable space that are heated or cooled. This would exclude garages, porches, or other external spaces. The data indicates a range in housing values with an approximate average of $650,000 in current 2022 dollars in the northeast US. 14 2021 Grand List weighted average by acres empty (undeveloped) land value per acre for land uses codes R2. 15 US Census. Characteristics of New Housing. https://www.census.gov/construction/chars/ The future taxes assessed on the developed house can be estimated using the average new home sales price and the average number of bedrooms per unit. TABLE 16: 2023 – 2031 FUTURE TAX CREDIT PER BEDROOM DWELLING CONSTRUCTION YEAR [A] ANNUAL EXPENSE [B] TAX ASSESSED PER BEDROOM [C] CUMULATIVE TAX PAID PER BEDROOM (NET PRESENT VALUE) [D] 2023 $250,000 $31.31 $230.55 2024 $250,000 $30.85 $206.15 2025 $250,000 $30.39 $181.49 2026 $250,000 $29.94 $156.54 2027 $250,000 $29.50 $131.29 2028 $250,000 $29.07 $105.73 2029 $250,000 $28.64 $79.83 2030 $250,000 $28.21 $53.59 2031 $250,000 $27.80 $26.99 Table 16 column [D] shows future taxes for the year of development that the property may pay that is the net present value of future tax payments (using a 3% discount rate) that are applied for when the fee is paid. For example, a new 3-bedroom unit in 2026 would have a future tax credit of $469.62 ($156.54 per bedroom * 3 bedroom). This is the 2026 value of all future taxes paid that might contribute to the ZEMs debt service and would reduce the impact fee. Total Revenue Credits The total revenue credit is the sum of the past tax (pre-development) and the future tax (post- development) that is estimated to be used to pay the debt service for the ZEMs. The past tax uses the property value to estimate the amount of taxes assessed on that property while the future tax uses the number of bedrooms in the residential unit. 6.0 FINAL IMPACT FEE The final impact fee uses the base impact fee derived in Chapter 4.0 and the credits calculated in Chapter 5.0 to determine a final impact fee that would be assessed on residential developments in South Burlington. The final impact fee uses the following formula: The final impact fee is calculated using the following steps: 1. Determine the final number of bedrooms in the residential unit that requires the zoning permit 2. Look up the net base impact fee in Table 14 based on the number of bedrooms. 3. Determine the current assessed value of the property. 4. Based on the year of the zoning permit, look up the past tax paid per $1,000 of assessed value using Column [D] in Table 15. Divide the assessed value of the property by 1,000 and multiply by this value. This is the revenue credit for past taxes. 5. Given the year of the zoning permit, look for the future tax payments after the development or redevelopment takes place using Column [D] in Table 16. Multiply this value by the final number of bedrooms in the unit. The final impact fee is the result of: Impact Fee = (Net Base Fee Calculation) - (Credits) Impact Fee = (Cost per Unit of Growth x New Units of Growth) – (Revenue Credits) Impact Fee = (Net Base Fee Calculation) - (Credits) Impact Fee = (Cost per Unit of Growth x New Units of Growth) – (Revenue Credits) Impact Fee = Step 2 - (Step 4 – Step 5) Example Fee Derivations The following are hypothetical scenarios which are intended to illustrate how the fees are calculated. 3 bedroom unit - new development on private lot 3 Bedroom House on private lot $ 8,929.39 Net Base Fee for 3 bedroom unit (see Table 14) 2025 Zoning Permit Year $80,000 pre-development value 80 credit tax value (per $1,000 of assessed value) $20.00 ZEM Past Tax Credit (see Table 15) $544.46 Post Development Tax Credit (see Table 16) $564.46 Total Credit $ 8,364.93 Final Impact Fee 2 bedroom unit - new development in a larger, 30 unit multifamily structure 2 Bedroom unit $ 4,636.42 Net Base Fee for 2 bedroom unit (see Table 14) 2027 Zoning Permit Year $16,667 pre-development value ($500k of assessed value divided by number of units on parcel) $16.67 credit tax value (per $1,000 of assessed value) $8.46 ZEM Past Tax Credit (see Table 15) $262.58 Post Development Tax Credit (see Table 16) $271.04 Total Credit $ 4,365.37 Final Impact Fee Enforcement and Removal Policies and Procedures Relating to Unauthorized Campsites on City Properties Section 1 – Background: The City of South Burlington is committed to supporting and maintaining a safe public environment for all residents and visitors of South Burlington. Like other communities throughout Vermont and the United States, the City of South Burlington is experiencing an increase in the levels of individuals experiencing homelessness, including a growing number of unauthorized campsites on public property. Such campsites pose safety and health concerns for people living in them and around them, as they create challenges related to human waste, garbage, exposure to communicable diseases, exposure to violence and other human health concerns. At the same time, the City is mindful that any enforcement activity must be rooted in respect for the people we serve, and that the delivery of social services is an essential part of this policy’s effectiveness. Section 2 – Purpose: The City of South Burlington seeks to provide a standardized procedure governing the enforcement of State and local laws prohibiting camping on public property. It also seeks to establish a clear and standardized procedure for the cleanup of public property being used unlawfully for the purpose of shelter and/or temporary residence and for the disposition of property discovered within those camps. In establishing this policy, the City also recognizes that enforcement activity is most effective when social services and resources are offered in conjunction with that activity, and reflect fundamental principles for addressing encampments, as identified by the U.S. Interagency Council on Homelessness (USICH). These principles include establishing a multi-sector response, conducting comprehensive and coordinated outreach, and addressing basic needs and providing storage. Section 3 – Policy Statement: When area shelters are at capacity, City staff shall take a general non-involvement approach to any found unauthorized campsites, viewing those campsites through the lens of not criminalizing people creating shelter due to lack of housing. When, however, area shelter space is available or when campsites or other activity constitute “obstructions” (as defined herein), present immediate hazards, or are found in “emphasis areas” that meet specific criteria as outlined in this Policy, unauthorized campsites and obstructions will be removed. Where applicable, personal property removed from unauthorized campsites will be temporarily stored in a manner that is in harmony with other local, state and federal laws; Whenever practical, City staff will collaborate with community partners to ensure that enforcement is accompanied by direct service delivery and engagement. Section 4 – Goals: The goals of this policy are to: • Provide consistent processes and procedures for removing campsites from City of South Burlington Property; • Where applicable, temporarily store personal property in a manner that is in harmony with other local, state and federal laws; • Whenever practical, collaborate with community partners to ensure that enforcement activity is accompanied by direct service delivery and engagement. Section 5 – Definitions: 5.1 "City" means the City of South Burlington, including its officers, employees, agents, or any contractors and sub-contractors. 5.2 "Emphasis Area" means an area or location where homeless campsites have become a repeated or consistent problem. When designating an Emphasis Area, the City shall make a determination based on the totality of the circumstances of a particular location. The City shall follow the guidelines outlined in Section 15. 5.3 "Campsite" means one or more tent, lean-to, structure, tarpaulin, pallet, or makeshift structure used for purposes of habitation located in an identifiable area within the City of South Burlington. Habitation is evidenced by the presence of bedding materials, campfires, cooking materials, storage of clothing and other personal belongings or items, gathered together in a manner where it appears to a reasonable person that the site is being used for habitation purposes. Campsites do not include sites a reasonable person would conclude are no longer in use, because any remaining materials are garbage, debris, or waste. 5.4 "Immediate hazard" means a campsite where people camping outdoors are at risk of serious injury or death beyond that caused by increased exposure to the elements, or their presence creates a risk of serious injury or death to others, or the campsite presence is causing imminent compromise to the structural integrity of the surrounding location. Immediate hazard campsites include but are not limited to areas exposed to moving vehicles, areas that can only be accessed by crossing driving lanes outside of a legal crosswalk, or other critical areas, where the lack of sanitation facilities results in human solid or liquid waste being discharged therein. 5.5 "Obstruction" means people, tents, personal property, garbage, debris or other objects related to a campsite that: are on a public sidewalk; interfere with the pedestrian or purposes of public rights-of-way; or interfere with areas that are necessary for or essential to the intended use of a public property or facility. 5.6 "Personal Property" means an item that: is reasonably recognizable as belonging to a person; has apparent utility in its present condition and circumstances; and is not hazardous. 5.7 Examples of personal property include but are not limited to identification documents, personal papers and/or legal documents, tents or tarps, collapsible chairs, bicycles, strollers, radios and other electronic equipment, eyeglasses, prescription medications, photographs, jewelry, and medical devices such as crutches or wheelchairs. 5.8 Personal property does not include building materials such as wood products, shopping carts, metal, pallets, or rigid plastic, nor does it include other large and/or bulky items such as furniture (sofas, dressers, etc.). The relevant staff member will determine whether an item is personal property, and in cases when the status of an item cannot reasonably be determined in the staff member's good faith and best judgment based on the totality of the circumstances, the staff member will treat the item as personal property under this rule. Section 6 – Removing Obstructions and Immediate Hazard Campsites: 6.1 Those circumstances arising to obstructions and immediate hazard campsites may be cause for immediate removal according to applicable laws and rules. The provisions of Sections 7, 8, 9, and 10 of this policy do not apply to removing obstructions and immediate hazard campsites. While the provisions of this Section 6 apply to obstructions and immediate hazard campsites, for purposes of simplicity, the provisions outlined herein in Section 6 shall refer to these collectively as “obstructions.” 6.2 If an obstruction is observed and is to be immediately removed by City personnel observing the obstruction, a notice is not required to be affixed to the obstruction before its removal. 6.3 If the obstruction is determined to be under control of an individual present where the obstruction is observed, oral notice to immediately remove the obstruction shall, if reasonably possible, be given to the individual. 6.4 Physical obstructions that are personal property shall be removed and stored by the City as provided for in Section 13 and may be recovered as provided for in Section 14. 6.5 Garbage, debris, litter and waste may be immediately removed and disposed of. 6.6 Upon removing an obstructing campsite, the City shall post a notice as provided for in Section 12. Section 7 – Campsite Removal Prioritization: 7.1 The removal of campsites may be prioritized after an inspection of campsite locations by City personnel. The inspection shall be documented in a format acceptable by the City. The prioritization may be revised at any time as a result of new campsites being identified, additional campsites being inspected, or as new information about a campsite's condition becomes available. 7.2 The following criteria, which have no relative priority, shall be considered when prioritizing campsites for removal: (1) objective hazards such as moving vehicles and steep slopes; (2) criminal activity; (3) quantities of garbage, debris, or waste; (4) other active health hazards to occupants or the surrounding neighborhood; (5) difficulty in extending emergency services to the site; (6) imminent work scheduled at the site for which the campsite will pose an obstruction; (7) damage to the natural environment or environmentally critical areas, and (8) the proximity of individuals experiencing homelessness to uses of special concern including schools, playgrounds, or facilities for the elderly. 7.2.1 In the event that area emergency shelters are at capacity, City personnel will not notice campsites for removal. City personnel will consult with social service providers as to the availability of housing during the exercise of Section 7 of this policy. 7.2.2 Section 8 – Campsite Removal and Notice Requirements 8.1 For campsites other than “Immediate Hazard Campsites” or Obstructions, notices shall be prominently posted at the campsite no fewer than 24 hours before a campsite removal. 8.2 The notice shall contain the following: (1) the date and time the notice was posted; (2) a warning that garbage, debris, waste, litter and abandoned property will be disposed of immediately; (4) the location where any personal property remaining may be stored by the City if removed; (5) information on how personal property may be claimed by its owner; (6) a warning that failure to claim within one (1) week may result in the destruction of said property, and (7) contact information for emergency shelter resources. 8.3 Removal notices shall be posted at the campsite in a manner reasonably calculated to be seen, preferably in multiple locations. 8.4 Notices shall also be posted on, or as close as reasonably practicable, to each tent or structure which is subject to removal. Notices so posted on or near each tent or structure shall contain the same information as outlined in Section 8.2. 8.5 If individuals are present at the campsite, oral notice shall, if reasonably possible, be given to the individuals that the campsite is subject to removal as provided for in the posted notice. 8.6 Nothing in this section shall prohibit the City from posting notice that the removal of a large campsite will occur over a period of several days, until completion, so long as removal operations commence within the time frame identified in the notice. 8.7 City personnel overseeing a campsite removal should document the notices posted at a campsite site. Photographic documentation is recommended. Section 9 – Identifying or Providing Alternative Shelter Options Before Removal of a Non-Obstructing or Immediate Hazard campsite: 9.1 Prior to removing a campsite, City personnel shall offer alternative shelter locations for individuals in the campsite. The alternatives must be available to the campsite occupant starting on the date a campsite removal notice is posted and continue to be available until the campsite removal is completed. Section 10 – Outreach for Campsite Removals: 10.1 The City of South Burlington will coordinate with community partners to ensure that City personnel are accompanied by outreach staff during the removal of inhabited campsites whenever practical. Section 11 – Campsite Cleanup: 11.1 All designated City personnel, vendors, and other personnel necessary for a campsite removal and cleanup shall be present at the start of a campsite removal. 11.2 Whenever practical, City personnel should be accompanied by outreach staff at the removal of any inhabited campsite. 11.3 If there are any individuals remaining on site, a final warning and reasonable opportunity to leave shall be given prior to further enforcement. 11.4 The City shall take reasonable steps to segregate personal property from material that is not personal property, provided the segregation does not pose a danger to the individual segregating the personal property from the other material. 11.5 Tents and/or structures that were not previously posted with a notice but are in the immediate area of tents or structures that were posted with a notice may be removed if the tents or structures were placed in the immediate area after notices were posted. 11.6 Personal property shall be stored as provided for in Section 13 and may be recovered as provided for in Section 14. 11.7 The City may remove and dispose of garbage, debris, waste, hazardous items, and other like material. Items of personal property which may present a health and safety hazard either immediately or during storage due to contamination by blood, liquid waste, solid waste, dirt, filth or other potentially infectious agent shall be removed and disposed of. 11.8 If, during the removal process, an individual on site is protesting removal of a personal property item, as that term is defined herein, the City shall provide a reasonable opportunity for the individual to remove it. However, the individual shall be advised that campsite removal work at the site shall continue and that if the individual fails to remove the personal property item before cleanup is complete, such item may be retrieved from storage. The individual shall be provided with the contact information for the storage facility identified in Section 13. 11.9 If the individual has an item that does not meet the definition of personal property, as defined herein, the person shall be provided a reasonable opportunity to remove the item. However, the individual shall be advised that campsite removal work at the site shall continue and that if the individual fails to remove the item before cleanup is complete, such item may be deemed abandoned and disposed of. 11.10 City personnel should thoroughly document their actions during the removal process to adequately corroborate that personal property which is being disposed of is either hazardous or has no apparent remaining utility. 11.11 When called to the scene, South Burlington Police Department members will identify, seize, and securely store any weapons found at the campsite site. 11.12 Property attributable to a crime (e.g. weapons, items that have been reported to be stolen, etc.) will be handled in accordance with the Police Department’s established evidentiary policy and practice. Section 12 – Post-campsite Removal Notice: 12.1 A notice shall be prominently posted at the site where a campsite has been removed and the site cleaned up. 12.2 The notice shall state: (1) the date the cleanup was performed; (2) whether personal property was stored by the City; (3) where the personal property is stored; (4) how any stored personal property may be claimed by its owner; (5) that property not claimed will be destroyed after one (1) week, and (6) contact information for outreach personnel who can assist individuals with shelter alternatives and other services. This notice shall not be removed by the City for a minimum of one (1) week. Section 13 – Storage of Personal Property Removed from Campsite: 13.1 The City shall store all personal property encountered when removing obstructions and immediate hazards, or when removing campsites, provided the City has no obligation to store personal property that is hazardous (for example, a needle-strewn tent) or is reasonably expected to become a hazard during storage (for example; wet bedding materials, wet clothing or other textiles contaminated with biohazard materials). 13.2 The campsite site shall be posted with a notice if personal property is removed from the site. 13.3 The notice shall contain the same information as referenced in Section 12.2 and shall not be removed from the site by the City for a minimum of one (1) week. 13.4 The City shall maintain a log of personal property removed from a campsite. Each item logged shall be kept until the personal property is recovered by its owner, or the property is discarded as permitted under these rules. The log shall indicate: 13.4.1 Camp location and date of camp cleanup. 13.4.2 Description of each item of property, including the type of item, color, brand name (if known), and marks thereon identifying the owner. 13.4.3 To whom the property was released and the date of release, or, in the event the property is not recovered, the date of destruction or disposal. 13.4.4 Containers, backpacks, boxes, etc. that contain personal property can be sealed at the site, and inventoried as a single item. City personnel will conduct a visual inspection of the bag to determine if valuables, hazardous materials or perishable items are enclosed. Valuables will be inventoried separately. Hazardous materials or perishable items will be disposed of. 13.5 Personal property that is not recovered after one (1) week, excluding the date the property was stored, may be destroyed or disposed of by the City. Section 14 – Recovering Stored Property: 14.1 Individuals claiming personal property that has been removed from a campsite may contact the Police Department or designated community partner who will inform the individual how the property may be recovered. 14.2 Personal property may be recovered by the individual at the location where the property is stored. 14.3 The individual shall describe the personal property sought with particularity. No formal legal identification, such as displaying a valid driver's license, will be required as a predicate before an individual can recover the property. The log of personal property, as referenced in section 13.4, shall indicate the name as provided by the individual who received the recovered property. If there are no circumstances indicating a competing claim of ownership, the property shall be released to the individual seeking its recovery. Storage of personal property shall be at no cost to the individual. Section 15 – Campsite Removal from an Emphasis Area: 15.1 The City may identify a specific area as an Emphasis Area. 15.2 An area may not be identified as an Emphasis Area, and enforcement of an Emphasis Area shall not commence until: a campsite or obstruction removal has occurred; the area is otherwise free of campsites; and the area has been posted with signage as an Emphasis Area. 15.3 If an area has been designated as an Emphasis Area, the area shall be inspected and monitored by the City on a regular basis. The area shall be signed, and may be fenced. The signage shall identify: (1) the location of the Emphasis Area; (2) that camping is prohibited in the Emphasis Area; (3) that any material found in the Emphasis Area may be removed without further notice; (4) where any personal property removed is stored; and (5) how any stored personal property may be claimed by its owner. 15.4 Individuals camping in an Emphasis Area and their campsite-associated personal property may be removed as an obstruction. Signed this XX day of XXX, XXXX. ______________________________________ Helen Riehle, Chair ______________________________________ Meaghan Emery, Vice-Chair ______________________________________ Tim Barritt, Clerk ______________________________________ Thomas Chittenden, Councilor ______________________________________ Matt Cota, Councilor 1 | P a g e S e p t e m b e r 2 0 2 2 FY2022 ANNUAL REPORT South Burlington The Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission (CCRPC) is a political subdivision of the State created by the municipalities of Chittenden County in 1966 for the development of policies, plans and programs that address regional issues and opportunities in Chittenden County. Its vision is to be a pre- eminent, integrated regional organization that plans for healthy, vibrant communities, economic development, and efficient transportation of people and goods while improving the region’s livability. The CCRPC serves as the region’s federally designated metropolitan planning organization (MPO) and is responsible for comprehensive and collaborative transportation planning involving municipalities, state and federal agencies and other key stakeholders in Chittenden County. The CCRPC works to ensure implementation of the regional transportation plan and provides technical and planning assistance to its member municipalities, and the Vermont Agency of Transportation (VTrans). The CCRPC is governed by a 29-member board consisting of one representative from each of the County’s 19 municipalities; transportation representatives from VTrans, Green Mountain Transit (GMT), Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), Federal Transit Administration (FTA), Burlington International Airport (BIA), and a rail industry representative; and, at-large members representing the interests of agriculture, environmental conservation, business, and housing/socio-economic. The legislative body of each Chittenden County municipality selects its own representative and alternate. The full CCRPC selects the at-large representatives. The CCRPC appreciates the continued opportunity to work with its municipal members to plan appropriately for the region’s future to protect and improve the special quality of life that is shared throughout Chittenden County. In FY22, the CCRPC invested approximately $5.9 million in regional land use, transportation, emergency management, energy, natural resources, public engagement, training, and technical assistance. The program leverages more than $4.5 million in Federal and State investment with $250,400 in municipal dues and another $175,000 in local match for specific projects—a more than 10:1 return on local investment. South Burlington representatives to the CCRPC Board and other committees in FY22 were:  CCRPC Representative: Chris Shaw | CCRPC Alternate: Meaghan Emery  Transportation Advisory Committee (TAC): Justin Rabidoux (Tom DiPietro FY23)  Planning Advisory Committee (PAC): Paul Conner  Clean Water Advisory Committee (CWAC): Dave Wheeler  Regional Emergency Management Committee (REMC): Fire Chief Steven Locke, Fire Marshall Terry Francis Specific activities the CCRPC is engaged in with South Burlington, as well as CCRPC’s regional activities, are discussed in the following sections. 110 West Canal Street, Suite 202 Winooski, Vermont 05404-2109 802-846-4490 www.ccrpcvt.org 2 | P a g e S e p t e m b e r 2 0 2 2 In FY2022, the CCRPC provided assistance to South Burlington on the following projects and initiatives:  Zoning and Town Plan Assistance: CCRPC staff started an initial review of the South Burlington Comprehensive City Plan. CCRPC staff have also continued with assistance to South Burlington on zoning-related support including revisions to the Official Map, Zoning Map and Natural Resources map, and wetlands and steep slope regulation amendments.  Queen City Park Road Bike/Ped Scoping: The goal of this scoping study was to develop bicycle and pedestrian connections between the Hannaford Plaza on US Route 7 in South Burlington, along Queen City Park Road and Austin Drive to the Island Line Shared Use Path in Burlington. The study developed and evaluated numerous alternatives, conducted outreach to residents and other stakeholders, and identified a preferred alternative that was approved by the City Council. The final report was completed in June 2022: https://studiesandreports.ccrpcvt.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/QCP-Austin-Final_24- June-2022.pdf. Total consultant budget: $85,000  South Burlington Bike/Ped Mapping Phase II: The City & CCRPC recently completed a mapping inventory of the city’s bicycle path segments including type, side of the street, and location of existing and anticipated connections. Phase II of this project added data fields and catalogued existing conditions in preparation for future infrastructure improvement projects. Specifically, data collected included bridge condition, path width and condition, and street/path integration. Total consultant budget: $10,000.  Kimball Ave Path Feasibility Study for Crossing of Potash Brook: This feasibility study evaluated options to connect the Kimball Avenue shared use path over the Potash Brook stream crossing. In 2006, the City of South Burlington endorsed a preferred alternative for a shared use path along Kimball Avenue to connect shared use path systems in Williston and South Burlington. While some sections of the path have been constructed, this study provided more detailed alternative design options and updated cost estimates for a shared use path crossing over Potash Brook. The final report was completed in May 2022: https://studiesandreports.ccrpcvt.org/wp- content/uploads/2022/07/Final_PotashBrk_PathCrossingFeasibility.pdf Total consultant budget: $20,800.  Mary Street Pedestrian Feasibility Study: This study investigated the feasibility of providing pedestrian facilities on Mary Street between Market Street and Williston Road. With significant new residential development in the immediate area, the need to enhance pedestrian access along Mary Street is a priority. Final report is available here: https://studiesandreports.ccrpcvt.org/wp- content/uploads/2022/08/20220608_MaryStPedestrianFeasibilityStudy.pdf Total consultant budget: $10,000.  Climate Action Plan: CCRPC Staff worked with the City’s appointed Task Force to develop a multisector Climate Action Plan that provides a blueprint for the City, its residents, businesses, and partners to take action to meet the City’s climate goals. The Climate Action Plan was South Burlington Activities 3 | P a g e S e p t e m b e r 2 0 2 2 approved by the City Council on October 3, 2022. A more detailed transportation sector implementation plan (with consultant assistance) is scheduled to kick off in FY23. Cost to be determined.  Traffic Overlay District Replacement (Phase 2): Following completion of the project to replace the City’s Traffic Overlay District with citywide transportation standards, this Phase 2 work will quantify planned Tier 1 Zone improvements. After initial planning discussions in FY22, this project was shifted to FY23. Total consultant budget: $28,000  Water Quality Planning Assistance: The CCRPC continued to provide assistance with Municipal Roads General Permit (MRGP) compliance. Staff reviewed and sent REI updates to the DEC data portal before the April 1st, 2022, deadline.  Emergency Management – LEMP: CCRPC staff offered assistance in the preparation of the annual Local Emergency Management Plan (LEMP), to ensure that South Burlington identified a chain of command for efficient response in the event of an emergency.  Chittenden County Brownfields Program: CCRPC obtained a $400,000 EPA Brownfield Assessment Grant in FY16; and a $300,000 EPA Brownfields Assessment Grant in FY18 and a $99,000 Vermont ACCD Assessment Grant in FY22. Since the fall of 2016, using these grants the program has provided $586,488 to assess perceived or real contamination issues in various municipalities, including South Burlington at 600 Spear Street (south of UVM Farm Barn). For more information, visit: https://www.ccrpcvt.org/our-work/economic- development/brownfields/.  Traffic Counts: Traffic counts conducted in support of South Burlington’s transportation projects and studies can be found here: (http://vtrans.ms2soft.com/).  Geographic Information Systems: CCRPC staff developed a map on behalf of the Champlain Valley Conservation Partnership to conceptually show the focus areas for future conservation in South Burlington and completed a GIS inventory of on-street parking spaces in the South Burlington City Center.  Elders and Persons with Disabilities (E&D) Transportation Program: The E&D Transportation Program supports community members through affordable transportation to medical appointments, access to grocery stores, and social visits with friends and family. In our region, Green Mountain Transit (GMT) contracts with the Special Services Transportation Agency (SSTA) to provide the service. The program uses a combination of lift-equipped vans, sedans and minivans, along with volunteer drivers to give rides to E&D users. While still adapting from the impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic, the E&D program continued to deliver vital transportation to older adults and persons with disabilities in South Burlington.  Technical Assistance: CCRPC staff provided a variety of technical assistance to the City, including: o Provided support to the South Burlington Affordable Housing Committee. o Reviewed the Act 250 materials for the South Village Communities in South Burlington (4C1160R-11) and drafted a letter. o Conducted STOP sign warrant analyses and drafted recommendations for the intersections of Pine Tree Terrace/Myers Ct/Gilbert St and Midland Ave/Bower St/Catkin Drive. 4 | P a g e S e p t e m b e r 2 0 2 2 The TIP (http://www.ccrpcvt.org/our-work/our-plans/transportation-improvement-program/) is a prioritized, multi-year list of transportation projects in Chittenden County. To receive federal funds, each transportation project, program or operation must be authorized through the TIP. South Burlington projects included in the TIP are listed below. These projects are also identified in the FY22 Vermont Agency of Transportation Capital Program for design or construction.  I-89 Exit 14 Area Signal Upgrades: $1.3 million project to upgrade signals at Exit 14. Implementation scheduled to begin in 2023.  I-189 Concrete Pavement Repair and Paving: $2.55 million for pavement repair and paving completed in 2021.  US7 Signal Upgrades, Webster Road to Swift Street: $4.7 million for upgrades to 16 traffic signals. Construction completed in 2021.  Bartlett Brook Stormwater Treatment System Expansion: 2018 Municipal Highway and Stormwater Mitigation Program award of $123,988 federal and $251,732 state funds. Construction scheduled for 2022.  Woodcrest/Deane Street Stormwater Infiltration and Detention System: $242,000 Transportation Alternatives award in 2018. Construction completed in 2021.  Expansion of Kennedy Drive Stormwater Pond 7: $300,000 Transportation Alternatives award in 2018. Construction scheduled for 2023.  Kennedy Drive Gravel Wetland Retrofit, Pond 2: $83,693 federal and $169,923 state Municipal Highway and Stormwater Mitigation Program award in 2019. Construction scheduled for 2023.  Linwood Drive Closed Drainage System and Stormwater Treatment: $115,358 federal and $188,216 state Municipal Highway and Stormwater Mitigation award in 2019. Construction scheduled for 2023.  Williston Road Bicycle and Pedestrian Improvements: $2.4 million project for bike and pedestrian improvements on Williston Road between Dorset Street and Midas Drive/White Street. Partially funded with a 2017 VTrans Bicycle and Pedestrian Program award ($800,000). Construction scheduled for 2024.  Kimball/Marshall Avenue Bicycle & Pedestrian Facilities over Muddy Brook: $300,000 Transportation Alternatives award in 2020 to construct a shared use path adjacent to a culvert replacement project. Construction completed in 2022.  US7 Paving, Charlotte (north of Higbee Road) to South Burlington (Swift Street): $9.7 million paving project to begin in 2022.  Airport Drive Infiltration Project: 2021 Municipal Highway Stormwater Mitigation Program award for $365,200. Construction scheduled for 2024.  Dorset Street Path – Old Cross Road to Sadie Lane: 2019 VTrans Bicycle and Pedestrian Program award for $661,600. Construction scheduled to being in 2024.  East-West Alternative Transportation Crossing: $9,768,834 RAISE grant to construct a bicycle and pedestrian bridge over I-89 near Exit 14. Construction scheduled to begin in 2023. South Burlington Projects in the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) 5 | P a g e S e p t e m b e r 2 0 2 2  Spear Street Bike/Ped Improvements: 2021 Transportation Alternatives award for $300,000. To be construction in 2026.  VT116/Cheesefactory Road Intersection Improvements: New Traffic and Safety Program project. Construction schedule to be determined. Project Name Brief Description Total Budget South Burlington Planning Technical Assistance – General Planning Provide support for planning & land use projects, with an anticipated focus on development and implementation of the City’s priority planning and mapping projects in its FY 23 work plan. CCRPC staff will provide assistance as a fee for service project for $3,000 from the City. South Burlington Climate Action Plan Technical Assistance Provide support for planning & land use projects, with an anticipated focus on development and implementation of the Climate Action Plan and its component parts. CCRPC staff will provide assistance as a fee for service project for $25,080 from the City. Multi-site Crosswalk Assessment: Four Intersections for Connectivity Analysis of possible installation of pedestrian crosswalks at Songbird Road and Dorset Street; Nicklaus Circle and Dorset Street; Pheasant Way and Spear Street; Patchen Road at Jaycee Park. $20,000 budget which includes a $4,000 local match. Bike/Pedestrian Bridge over I-89 Study Study of the landing areas, transportation connections, surrounding land uses, and integration into broader transportation network for the recently- funded bike and pedestrian bridge connecting the Quarry Hill area to the University Mall/Dorset Street area of South Burlington. $90,000 budget which includes a $18,000 local match.  ECOS Plan Implementation: The CCRPC continues to implement the strategies of the 2018 Chittenden County ECOS Plan (http://www.ecosproject.com/2018-ecos-plan). The ECOS Plan (Environment; Community; Opportunity; Sustainability) is the regional plan for Chittenden County and combines three plans into one: The Regional Plan, the Metropolitan Transportation Plan, and the Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy. The 2021 ECOS Annual Report summarizes progress toward the goals set in the ECOS Plan: (http://www.ecosproject.com/2021-annual-report). In addition, the ECOS Scorecard monitors the accomplishments and indicators depicting progress towards all 17 of the ECOS goals (https://embed.clearimpact.com/Scorecard/Embed/8502). Regional Activities FY2023 CCRPC Work Program 6 | P a g e S e p t e m b e r 2 0 2 2  Chittenden County Municipal Legislative Briefing: On December 7th, the CCRPC hosted a legislative briefing to serve as a forum for municipal representatives and legislators to connect on important topics for the upcoming legislative session. The focal areas for the 2021 briefing included: Smart Growth Investment; Economic Recovery; Governance & Funding (http://www.ccrpcvt.org/about-us/commission/policies-positions/).  Public Engagement & Racial Equity: Achieving a healthy, inclusive, and prosperous future for Chittenden County is the vision of our Regional ECOS Plan. However, the ECOS partners know we cannot achieve that future without addressing the systemic racism in our community. While addressing inequity has been one of the eight key strategies in the ECOS Plan since 2013, there is much work to be done. The 2014 Public Participation Plan (PPP: http://www.ccrpcvt.org/our- work/our-plans/public-participation-plan/) guides our program and policy outreach and will be updated in FY23 with a renewed focus on analyzing inequities in all sectors of our work to ensure that we actively eliminate barriers and foster an inclusive and meaningful public engagement for all planning and policy work we do – this meaningful engagement is the foundation that leads to actions that meet the needs of our diverse community. In FY22 the CCRPC continued to address issues related to racial and economic disparities through the following actions: o Continued working with equity consultant The Creative Discourse Group (TCDG) to address racial equity within CCRPC. Their work included an Organizational Equity Assessment of CCRPC with recommendations. o Established a CCRPC Racial Equity Leadership Team (ELT) which has evolved into a newly forming Equity Advisory Committee (EAC) to guide the CCRPC’s equity work. o Facilitating, providing, and/or taking advantage of educational opportunities for our staff, municipalities, and other local and regional partners that address inequities and advance anti-racism efforts. o Strengthening existing relationships and partnerships and forging new ones with Vermont organizations working to advance anti-racism efforts. o In partnership with TCDG, hosted a Planning for Equity Summit as way to engage outside individuals and external partners in examining our organization's policies, practices, culture, and services through the lens of anti-racism and white privilege to ensure they reflect our commitment to racial justice.  Building Homes Together: The CCRPC, Champlain Housing Trust and Evernorth concluded the first Building Homes Together campaign, which has been a five-year outreach, education, and advocacy effort focused on the production of much-needed housing in Chittenden County. The campaign set a goal of 3,500 new homes from 2016 to 2020, with 700 of them permanently affordable to low-income households. Over the five years, 3,659 net new homes were built, but only 536 of them are permanently affordable, achieving 77% of the affordable housing goal. Following the conclusion of the first campaign, the Building Homes Together 2.0 campaign was launched last fall with the goal of building 5,000 homes by 2025 for people of all incomes, including at least 1,250 affordable homes. To review the latest housing data, infographics and press releases, more information can be found at http://www.ecosproject.com/building- homes-together/.  Emergency Management: The CCRPC helped the State transition from regional Local 7 | P a g e S e p t e m b e r 2 0 2 2 Emergency Planning Committees to a statewide LEPC starting in July 2021. Concurrent with that change a Regional Emergency Management Committee (REMC) was formed consisting of two representatives from each municipality and others involved in emergency management in Chittenden County. The purpose of the REMC is to coordinate and support regional all-hazard emergency planning and preparedness activities to improve the region’s ability to prepare for, respond to, and recover from all disasters. CCRPC staff participate in a wide array of emergency management-related workshops and exercises to support our role in the SEOC when called upon. The CCRPC also served as the local liaison between municipalities and the state to collect damage assessment information after significant storm events, helped with emergency preparedness for hazardous materials incidents, collected information from each municipality on annual implementation of hazard mitigation activities, and worked with municipalities to complete Local Emergency Management Plans. Finally, CCRPC assisted IEM, a national consulting firm, with drafts of the 2022 Chittenden County Multi-Jurisdictional All-Hazards Mitigation Plan (https://www.ccrpcvt.org/our-work/emergency-management/hazard- mitigation-plan/) and its municipal annexes.  Regional Energy Planning: The CCRPC continues initiatives to support the Region’s Enhanced Energy Plan (http://www.ccrpcvt.org/our-work/our-plans/regional-energy-plan/). The CCRPC hired an energy project manager in September and participated in implementation activities funded by ACCD, which included a Button-Up Vermont event, statewide RPC roundtables, a resource to towns for addressing climate change in land use policy (https://www.ccrpcvt.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/Climate-Change-and-Land- Use_Standard-Resolution_20220427.pdf), energy committee roundtables, technical assistance to energy committees and municipal staff, promotion of CVOEO low-income weatherization program, and electric vehicle, energy storage, heat pump, and weatherization education webinars.  Chittenden County Park and Ride Plan Update: This plan assesses existing park and ride facilities in Chittenden County, identify opportunities for improvements to the existing facilities, and evaluate the potential for new facilities that will benefit commuters and residents throughout the CCRPC region and adjacent communities. This plan also evaluates recent travel trends and establishes a methodology and process to determine whether there is demand for new facilities and where new facilities may be warranted. The plan will be finalized later this fall.  Chittenden County I-89 2050 Study: The CCRPC in collaboration with VTrans, municipalities, and other interested parties completed the I-89 2050 Study. The study evaluated existing multimodal conditions along the I-89 Corridor and its interchanges; assessed numerous new and improved interchange alternatives; conducted extensive outreach to the public including underserved populations, municipal officials, and other stakeholder groups; developed and analyzed bundles of multimodal corridor improvements, and created an implementation plan that will guide the corridor toward the project’s vision over the next 30 years. For more information, please visit the project website: https://envision89.com/.  Transportation Demand Management (TDM): In partnership with VTrans, CCRPC staff managed the transition of the Way to Go! School Challenge into Park Your Carbon (https://www.connectingcommuters.org/parkyourcarbon). The COVID-19 pandemic impacted the effectiveness of Way to Go! which was a school-focused K-12 program to encourage 8 | P a g e S e p t e m b e r 2 0 2 2 sustainable transportation and demonstrate the environmental and financial benefits of non- single occupant vehicle travel. Park Your Carbon was created to pandemic-proof this TDM program and create a fun, engaging brand with easy participation by all Vermonters. Since the transportation sector is the largest contributor to statewide greenhouse gas emissions, educating and encouraging a shift in transportation behavior away from driving alone can help Vermont meet its climate and energy goals. The CCRPC participated in CATMA’s Employer Transportation Coordinator (ETC) Network program and events to learn from other ETC Network members about employee TDM benefits and programs. The CCRPC also continued to collaborate with regional TDM partners to evaluate strategies and policies to encourage sustainable modes of transportation such as walking, biking, ridesharing, vanpooling, transit, bikesharing and carsharing. TDM partners include: the Chittenden Area Transportation Management Association (CATMA), CarShare VT, the University of Vermont, Green Mountain Transit (GMT), Local Motion, Greenride Bikeshare, Go! Vermont/VTrans, and United Way.  Public Transportation Planning: The CCRPC remains engaged with GMT in a wide variety of public transit planning projects and initiatives to support the continued development of a transportation system that is efficient, equitable and environmentally sustainable. In FY22, the CCRPC staff participated in Association for Commuter Transportation (ACT) meetings (https://www.actweb.org/), continued to participate in Tri-Town Transportation Committee meetings to review community-based solutions to enhance mobility in Jericho, Underhill and Cambridge, served as a stakeholder for the Vermont Clean Cities Coalition’s Future of Rural Transit Project (https://vtccc.w3.uvm.edu/projects/future-of-rural-transit/) and managed the Transit Finance Study that developed transit financing options for the Legislature to consider (https://studiesandreports.ccrpcvt.org/wp- content/uploads/2021/12/Transit_Funding_Report_Dec2021.pdf).  Elders and Persons with Disabilities (E&D) Transportation Program: The Chittenden County E&D Transportation Program supports community members through affordable transportation to medical appointments, access to fresh food at the grocery store, and social visits with friends and family. In FY22, the E&D Committee held four quarterly meetings to discuss program funding, volunteer driver utilization and opportunities to enhance transportation equity within our region. In coordination with VTrans, the CCRPC hosted the 3rd Annual E&D Transportation Summit in Burlington. More information about the event can be found here: (https://vtrans.vermont.gov/public-transit/E-and-D). The CCRPC also managed the E&D, ADA & Medicaid Call Center Feasibility Study: (https://studiesandreports.ccrpcvt.org/wp- content/uploads/2022/08/GMT-SSTA-Call-Center-Draft-Final-Report.pdf).  Active Transportation Planning: The CCRPC began updating the 2017 Regional Active Transportation Plan (ATP, https://www.ccrpcvt.org/our-work/our-plans/regional-bikeped- plan/), which serves as the active transportation element of the long-range Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP). The ATP includes recommended priority corridors, programs and policies to support active transportation throughout the region. CCRPC staff collaborated with TDM partners and local municipalities to expand the Greenride Bikeshare system and convert the fleet to electric assist bicycles (www.greenridebikeshare.com). The CCRPC also promoted TDM strategies and provided bike/ped-related technical assistance to municipalities and businesses, assisted municipalities with bike/ped grant and UPWP applications, managed bike/ped-related UPWP projects, and conducted bike/ped counts on paths, designated bike 9 | P a g e S e p t e m b e r 2 0 2 2 lanes, and other roadways. The CCRPC also continued to host the 2021 webinar series from the Association of Pedestrian and Bicycling Professionals for municipalities and regional partners.  Clean Water: The CCRPC’s water quality initiatives help to safeguard our clean drinking water, support our recreation and tourism industry, and make our municipalities more resilient to flood events. The CCRPC continues to host the Clean Water Advisory Committee and the MS-4 Sub-Committee (https://www.ccrpcvt.org/about-us/committees/clean-water-advisory- committee/) and provide guidance for the Vermont Clean Water Fund. CCRPC staff also joined the Lake Champlain Sea Grant Program Advisory Committee, and managed Design Implementation Block Grant projects on behalf of select towns to design stormwater treatment practices. The CCRPC also supported education programs such as the Rethink Runoff (http://www.rethinkrunoff.org) on behalf of nine of our municipalities, assisted with watershed resiliency mapping, participated in water quality-focused policy discussions. As the newly designated Clean Water Service Provider (CWSP) for the Northern Lake Champlain Direct Drainages, Basin (5). CCRPC worked to seat the Basin 5 Water Quality Council which will assist the CCRPC as it oversees the development and implementation of non-regulatory water quality improvement projects that reduce phosphorus loading into these streams and Lake Champlain.  Municipal Roads General Permit (MRGP) Compliance and Water Quality Planning Assistance: CCRPC staff continues to work with all Chittenden County municipalities on meeting their MRGP obligations. This includes evaluating segments through Road Erosion Inventories (REIs), tracking and documenting upgraded segments and outlets, and reporting to DEC. Staff also assists municipalities with the State’s Grants in Aid (GIA) program, which allocates funding to participating towns for stormwater improvements related to the MRGP. In FY2022, 13 Chittenden County municipalities signed up to participate in the GIA program. An estimated 38 non-compliant segments will be upgraded using the allocated $253,000.  Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy: With federal funding from the US Economic Development Administration, CCRPC continued work on a Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS) for our region in concert with the Addison, Rutland and Central VT regions -- collectively called the West Central Vermont CEDS. This document will help identify priority economic development strategies and projects and will be used by a variety of federal and state funding programs when making grant decisions. The project will be completed in late 2022.  VTculverts: CCRPC staff worked with a consultant to upgrade the VTculverts website (https://www.vtculverts.org/). The new website allows easy in-the-field bridge and culvert inventories to be conducted. VTculverts is a great tool to visually see town-maintained bridges and culverts on a map or chart. Between the new website and training, municipal use of the website has increased.  Regional Technical Assistance: This includes, but is not limited to, municipal technical assistance for various transportation issues, GIS mapping, and bylaw revisions, Act 250/Section 248 application reviews, grant administration and grant application assistance for plans, projects and initiatives at the local level that help advance the ECOS Strategies, Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP), and Transportation Improvement Program (TIP).  Lake Champlain Byway: Chittenden County includes eight of the Byway’s 22 communities: Milton, Colchester, Winooski, Essex Junction, Burlington, South Burlington, Shelburne, and 10 | P a g e S e p t e m b e r 2 0 2 2 Charlotte. CCRPC staff maintained the Byway website (https://lakechamplainbyway.com/) including a helpful Interactive Map (http://map.ccrpcvt.org/lcbyway/). Additionally, CCRPC continues to host the Byway's audio stories App & Phone line (https://lakechamplainbyway.com/explore-our-regions/mobile-story-app/). For further information about the CCRPC, please visit http://www.ccrpcvt.org/ or contact CCRPC Executive Director, Charlie Baker: cbaker@ccrpcvt.org. South Burlington Fire Department 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 (802) 846-4110 Fax (802) 846-4125 To: Jessie Baker, City Manager From: Steven A. Locke, Fire Chief Date: November 8, 2022 RE: Ambulance Billing Write Off Policy The Fire Department in collaboration with the Finance Department and our ambulance billing vendor is requesting your authorization to adopt a write off policy for delinquent accounts for people we transport via ambulance. As you are aware, the Department charges for these services and has an excellent collection rate for those patients with private insurance or those covered by Medicare or Medicaid. However, the reality of ambulance transports is that some balances become delinquent and are simply not collectable. This often occurs with patients who do not have health insurance and/or do not have the ability to pay. Keeping these balances in our billing system inflates aging report, mixing pending balances and delinquent balances together. Aging reports then becomes an inaccurate method to determine true collectibles. Over time it can become very unreliable as the balance grows and grows. Under the proposed policy, delinquencies and write offs are fully reported each month, so the process is transparent, and trends can be tracked. Additionally, any write off can be reversed if needed, so there is little risk in adopting this policy. We believe this policy is best suited to guide our ambulance billing process. Thank you for your consideration of this request. South Burlington Fire Department 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 (802) 846-4110 Fax (802) 846-4125 Policy on Delinquent Ambulance Billing Accounts Adopted by the South Burlington City Council on November 21, 2022 Purpose: To oversee delinquent balances and to authorize write off from Medical Billing Services (MBS) system to: 1. ensure that bad debt is properly monitored. 2. ensure that MBS reporting accurately distinguishes between collectible (pending) and uncollectible (delinquent) balances. 3. Oversee the quality of MBS’ work. Policy: MBS shall report delinquencies to the City of South Burlington monthly. Delinquencies will be categorized as outlined below: 1. Delinquent – Bad Address. The address supplied by crews is invalid for mailing purposes. When available, MBS has checked for a better address via the Vermont Health Information Exchange (VITL), and no better address can be found. 2. Delinquent – Pt. Cost Sharing. Insurance was billed and paid according to policy. The patient then failed to pay three consecutive invoices for the remaining balance. 3. Delinquent – Ins. Repriced. Insurance was billed and paid according to policy. The patient then failed to pay three consecutive invoices for the remaining balance. In these cases, the insurer “repriced” the bill according to policy terms. This category is essentially the same as the previous one listed, simply categorized separately to help identify insurers that “reprice” bills that may leave surprise balances for patients. 4. Delinquent – Making Payments. The patient had requested and was granted a monthly payment plan covering his or her balance. The patient then failed to pay three consecutive invoices. 5. Delinquent – Uninsured. No insurance was received from either the patient or the crew and was not available in VITL. The uninsured patient then failed to pay three consecutive invoices. 6. Delinquent – IPP. In this case a bill was submitted to an insurance payer and that payer chose to send the payment to the patient. That patient then failed to pay three consecutive invoices. MBS will report an account as delinquent when all the following conditions are met: 1. Insurance, if available, has been submitted, pursued, and payments received. 2. If the patient is uninsured or after insurance has paid, the patient has been billed at least three times at 30-day intervals for any remaining balances. 3. The patient has not made any payments within 30 days of the final bill. Upon receipt the City Treasurer or their designee shall review the delinquency report and authorize MBS to write off some or all the balances. Subsequent write offs as authorized are reported the following month. Write offs can be reversed at any time if desired by the City. MBS has authority to write off any balance of $20 or less on its own, and MBS is authorized to write off balances where the patient is deceased. Signed this 21st day of November, 2022 ______________________________________ Helen Riehle, Chair ______________________________________ Meaghan Emery, Vice-Chair ______________________________________ Tim Barritt, Clerk ______________________________________ Thomas Chittenden, Councilor ______________________________________ Matt Cota, Councilor South Burlington Fire Department 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 (802) 846-4110 Fax (802) 846-4125 To: Jessie Baker, City Manager From: Steven A. Locke, Fire Chief Date: November 8, 2022 RE: Ambulance Fee Increase The Department seeks approval to increase the billing rates charged for ambulance services. It is projected that these modest changes will increase annual revenue collections by approximately $60,000. It should be noted that these increases will not affect those patients covered by either Medicare or Medicaid. Patients who have either of these insurance providers have limitations on payments and the excess balance must be written off by the City. Ultimately, these proposed rate increases affect approximately 16 percent of those we transport with commercial insurance. The increases provided in the schedule below would be effective upon passage by the City Council and a description of each charge is outlined in Appendix A. The Department arrived at the proposed increase by taking the average fee charged by other municipal ambulance services in Chittenden County (see page 3 for rate summary). The objective is to raise rates to maximize revenue without being seen as unreasonable for our area. We believe the proposal below meets that objective. The Department is recommending the following changes to the fee schedule. Charge Description Current Charge Proposed Increase New Charge BLS – Emergency $625.00 $200.00 $825.00 ALS 1 – Emergency $800.00 $250.00 $1050.00 ALS 2 – Emergency $1,200.00 $200.00 $1,400.00 Mileage $14.00 $7.50 $21.50 Thank you for your consideration of this request. Appendix A Description of Transport Types Basic Life Support (BLS) – Includes the provision of medically necessary supplies and services and BLS ambulance transportation as defined by the State where you provide the transport. An emergency response is one that, at the time you are called, you respond immediately. A BLS emergency is an immediate emergency response in which you begin as quickly as possible to take the steps necessary to respond to the call. Advanced Life Support, Level 1 (ALS1) – Includes the provision of medically necessary supplies and services and the provision of an ALS assessment or at least one ALS intervention. An ALS assessment is performed by an ALS crew as part of an emergency response that is necessary because the beneficiary’s reported condition at the time of dispatch indicates only an ALS crew is qualified to perform the assessment. An ALS assessment does not necessarily result in a determination that the beneficiary requires an ALS level of transport. In the case of an appropriately dispatched ALS emergency service, if the ALS crew completes an ALS assessment, the services provided by the ambulance transportation service provider or supplier shall be covered at the ALS emergency level. This is regardless of whether the beneficiary required ALS intervention services during the transport, provided the ambulance transportation itself was medically reasonable and necessary and all other coverage requirements are met. An ALS intervention is a procedure that must be performed by an emergency medical technician- intermediate (EMT-Intermediate) or an EMT-Paramedic in accordance with State and local laws. An ALS1 emergency is an immediate emergency response in which you begin as quickly as possible to take the steps necessary to respond to the call. Advanced Life Support, Level 2 (ALS2) – Includes the provision of medically necessary supplies and services, involving: At least three separate administrations of one or more medications by intravenous push/bolus or by continuous infusion (excluding crystalloid fluids) or at least one of these ALS2 procedures: • Manual defibrillation/cardioversion • Endotracheal intubation • Central venous line • Cardiac pacing • Chest decompression • Surgical airway or • Intraosseous line BLS Rate ALS 1 Rate ALS 2 Rate Mileage Rate AMBULANCE BILLING RATE SURVEY Burlington $ 900.00 $ 1,150.00 $ 1,550.00 $ 20.00 UVM Rescue $ 650.00 $ 775.00 $ 1,000.00 $ 16.50 South Burlington $ 625.00 $ 800.00 $ 1,200.00 $ 13.00 Charlotte $ 825.00 $ 975.00 $ 1,400.00 $ 18.00 Colchester $ 1,233.00 $ 1,730.00 $ 1,979.00 $ 34.00 Essex Rescue $ 700.00 $ 800.00 $ 1,200.00 $ 25.00 Richmond $ 710.00 $ 835.00 $ 1,170.00 $ 20.00 St. Michael's $ 750.00 $ 1,000.00 $ 1,300.00 $ 20.00 Shelburne $ 700.00 $ 800.00 $ 1,000.00 $ 15.00 Milton $ 939.81 $ 1,354.38 $ 1,717.77 $ 27.15 Williston $ 850.00 $ 1,050.00 $ 1,400.00 $ 22.00 Average $ 807.53 $ 1,024.49 $ 1,356.07 $ 20.97 Municipal Average $ 831.42 $ 1,054.93 $ 1,401.86 $ 21.57 CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE AMBULANCE BILLING RATES WHEREAS, it is appropriate for the City of South Burlington to charge fees for services rendered rather than having all costs paid via property tax: and, WHEREAS, currently the South Burlington Fire Department charges a series of Ambulance fees depending on the type of service provided; and, WHEREAS, the current Ambulance fees for the following services are, $625 for Basic Life Support, $800 for Advanced Life Support 1, $1,200 for Advanced Life Support 2, and $14 per loaded mile; and, WHEREAS, it has been more than three years since the Ambulance fees have been adjusted. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the South Burlington City Council establishes the following Ambulance fees; $825 for Basic Life Support, $1,050 for Advanced Life Support 1, $1,400 for Advanced Life Support 2, and $21.50 per loaded mile; and, FURTHER, BE IT RESOLVED, that these fees are in line with rates charged by other area municipalities, and, FURTHER, BE IT RESOLVED, the terms of this Resolution shall be effective upon passage by the City Council. APPROVED this _______ day of November, 2022. SOUTH BURLINGTON CITY COUNCIL ___________________________ _____________________________ Helen Riehle, Chair Tom Chittenden ___________________________ _____________________________ Meaghan Emery, Vice-Chair Matt Cota ___________________________ Tim Barritt, Clerk 180 Market Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sbvt.gov MEMORANDUM TO: Jessie Baker, City Manager South Burlington City Council FROM: Paul Conner, Director of Planning & Zoning SUBJECT: Climate Action Plan Task Force Recommendation to consider Charter Change enabling regulation of thermal energy systems in existing buildings DATE: November 21, 2022 City Council meeting The Climate Action Plan Task Force, in their final meeting prior to conclusion of their work, passed a motion recommending that the City Council advance a Charter Change enabling regulation of heating systems in existing buildings to the voters at Town Meeting Day 2023. The proposed Charter Change mirrors one approved by the voters of the City of Burlington, and approved by the Legislature and signed by the Governor this past session. Ethan Goldman and Andrew Chalnick, chair and vice-chair the Task Force, will present the recommendation using the enclosed powerpoint. Staff has reviewed statutory requirements regarding Charter changes. Should the Council wish to advance a Charter change to the voters at the 2023 Town Meeting Day election, it would need to vote on proposed language amending the Charter, and schedule its required public hearings, no later than the Council’s November 30, 2022 special meeting. Climate Action South Burlington Climate Action Task Force (CATF) presentation to South Burlington City Council Recommendation to Consider Charter Change to Permit Regulation of Thermal Energy Systems in Existing Construction Climate Change in Vermont Climate Change in Vermont* SB’s Climate Action Plan •The final Climate Action Plan focuses on actions to address the 2 major contributors to GHGs: Buildings and Transportation •Tonight we focus on Buildings, which account for 34% of South Burlington’s annual GHGs •To meet SB’s climate change commitments, the plan requires all of the following in respect of the Buildings sector by 2030: •360 housing units to be electrified each year to reduce emissions by 9% •600 homes to be weatherized each year to reduce emissions by 5% •8% of all commercial space (by square foot) to be electrified each year to reduce emissions by 17% •All new development >12.5 units/acre to reduce emissions by 4% •All new construction -commercial and residential -to be carbon free to reduce emissions by 4% •The CATF requests the Council to consider the following change to South Burlington’s charter: “To regulate thermal energy systems in residential and commercial buildings, including assessing carbon impact or alternative compliance payments, for the purpose of reducing greenhouse gas emissions throughout the City. No assessment of carbon impact or alternative compliance payment shall be imposed unless previously authorized by a majority of the legal voters of the City voting on the question at an annual or special City meeting duly warned for that purpose.” •This is the same change recently made to the City of Burlington’s charter. •The Charter Change is a small first step. It does not commit South Burlington to do anything, but allows a conversation about policy to begin. Charter Change Request •The Council may elect to place a proposed charter change before the voters at a regular or special election. •Scheduled elections in South Burlington include Town Meeting Day (first Tuesday in March) each year, and State/Federal primaries (August) and State/Federal elections (November) of each even-numbered year. •If the vote passes, the charter change is submitted to the Legislature. •A locally-approved approved charter amendment may be considered by the Legislature and may be adopted as written, modified, or not adopted. •If the legislature approves the change, the council would consider regulations under its new authority. •In the case of this particular charter change. any assessment of carbon impact or alternative compliance payment would need to be approved by the voters. Charter Change Process Climate Action ...making South Burlington cleaner, more affordable, healthier, and better prepared for the future. Appendix Burlington’s Charter Change •The City of Burlington’s charter has been amended to provide Burlington the power: “To regulate thermal energy systems in residential and commercial buildings, including assessing carbon impact or alternative compliance payments, for the purpose of reducing greenhouse gas emissions throughout the City. No assessment of carbon impact or alternative compliance payment shall be imposed unless previously authorized by a majority of the legal voters of the City voting on the question at an annual or special City meeting duly warned for that purpose.” •The proposed change was approved by voters in November 2021 •The charter change was approved by the Vermont legislature and signed by the Governor in April 2022. •We understand Burlington is now in the process of developing regulations utilizing its new authority. Burlington’s Charter Change Mayor Miro Weinberger of Burlington said this after the charter change became effective: “The way to achieve the end of our fossil fuel use and address the climate emergency, while improving our quality of life, is to electrify everything, particularly our buildings and vehicles …The passage into law of Burlington’s Thermal Energy Charter Change gives us an essential new tool for advancing our work to make Burlington a Net Zero Energy city. I look forward to working with the City Council as we continue on the path toward our bold goal. I am proud of Burlington’s leadership on this effort, and I thank the Burlington and Chittenden County legislative delegations for their work to pass the Charter Change, and thank Governor Scott for signing the bill.” Burlington FAQs on Charter Change Q: Why is the City pursuing this Charter Change? A: Building energy use is the largest single source of carbon emissions in Burlington. With this Charter Change, the City is asking the State for the authority to assess a carbon impact or alternative compliance fee as an option in regulating thermal energy systems. Then, if the State grants the City this authority by approving this Charter Change, the City would develop a policy proposal and bring it back to Burlington voters to approve through a second vote on a future ballot question. The goal is that the City could use a price-based system like a carbon impact or alternative compliance fee to as an option for regulating buildings –starting with new construction –to ensure that they are designed to use renewable energy for heating, which avoid costly future retrofits and reduce fossil fuel use in Burlington. Q: Why focus on buildings? A: Buildings burn fossil fuels, predominately for heating, hot water, and thermal energy use. Thermal energy represents more than one-quarter of Vermont’s greenhouse gas emissions, second only to the transportation sector. Buildings can use renewable fuels such as Burlington’s 100 percent renewable electricity (generated by biomass, hydro, wind, and solar), instead of fossil fuels, to provide heating and hot water to Burlingtonians by using highly efficient technologies such as cold-climate heat pumps. Additionally, other renewable fuels, such as renewable gas, biodiesel, and biomass also can reduce fossil fuel use. Q: Would the Charter Change impose new taxes on homeowners, renters, or businesses? A: No. The Charter Change language does not seek to impose any new taxes or fees. Instead, it asks the State for the authority to assess a carbon impact or alternative compliance fee in the future, as a way for buildings to meet thermal energy system requirements. Any policy change that included the assessment of such a fee would take effect only if approved by Burlingtonians through a future vote. The City’s immediate focus would be on bringing forward such a proposed policy that related to new buildings, not existing buildings. Burlington FAQs on Charter Change Q: Does the Charter Change allow for a carbon tax in Burlington? A: No. The proposed Charter Change does not allow for a carbon tax. Rather Burlington would be asking the State for authority to develop a plan –which City voters would approve through a second vote in the future –to allow building owners to pay an alternative compliance or carbon assessment fee as one way to meet thermal energy system requirements for buildings. The plan would offer alternatives to a fee to meet City policy goals, including upgrading energy efficiency and installing renewable heating and thermal systems in buildings to reduce or eliminate fossil fuel use. Again, the City’s focus currently is on policies related to new, not existing, buildings. Q: Would the Charter Change require Burlingtonians to switch their current heating systems? A: No. The Charter Change does not require such a switch. Rather, it would give the City the authority to develop a proposal to regulate thermal energy systems. Burlington voters would then consider this specific policy proposal in a second, future vote. This policy would be designed to regulate emissions from fossil fuel heating and hot water systems. The City’s first area of focus is to ensure that new buildings are designed to use renewable energy for heating so that these new buildings are compatible with our long-term Net Zero Energy and climate goals, avoiding costly future retrofits and reducing fossil fuel use in Burlington. Q: Where does Burlington's electricity come from? Is it really sustainable? A: In 2014, Burlington became the first city in the country to generate 100 percent of our electricity from renewable energy. In 2018 this electricity was generated 34% from biomass, 16% from large hydro, 13.5% from small hydro, 27% from wind, and 1.5% from solar. See the following links for more information on where our electricity comes from,sustainability at the McNeil Generating Station, and BED's local and renewable forestry practices. In 2019, Burlington was named the top city in the Northeastern U.S.and fourth in the country for solar per capita by Environment America, and performed similarly in the 2020 rankings. Burlington FAQs on Charter Change Q: When the City regulates heating systems, will those regulations require the installation of electric heat? Didn’t Burlingtonians switch from electric heat to natural gas a few decades ago? A: The City is not requiring a switch to any particular heating system or encouraging the transition of heating systems to the old, costly, resistance electric heat found in buildings decades ago. Rather, new policy proposals could support switching to modern, efficient renewable heating sources. These sources include high-efficiency, cold climate heat pumps, which hundreds of Burlingtonians already are installing to heat homes and buildings, and which work even at temperatures well below zero degrees. Cold climate heat pumps are far more efficient and less costly to operate than the old resistance electric heat, and, as a bonus, they also provide efficient and reliable air conditioning during our increasingly warm summers. Other renewable options may include efficient electric heating from ground-source heat pumps (already in use at places like Champlain College, the Sustainability Academy, C.P. Smith and J.J. Flynn elementary schools, and the new Hula office complex), modern wood pellet heating, and conventional heating systems utilizing renewable fuels such as renewable gas, biodiesel, or biomass. Q: Will increased electric use increase our electric rates? A: Analysis filed with the Public Utility Commission by Burlington Electric Department as part of its Integrated Resource Plan demonstrates that, while grid upgrades eventually may be needed to reach the Net Zero Energy goals as we electrify our heating and transportation needs, the Net Zero Energy effort, when compared with business as usual, could have a significant, positive economic benefit (in the form of reduced rate pressure) for all Burlington ratepayers. Further, Energy Action Network analysis shows that, for every dollar spent on fossil fuels in Vermont, only a quarter of that money stays in the Vermont economy, while we ship $1.5 billion out-of-state to purchase fossil fuels. In contrast, 62 cents of every dollar spent on electricity stays in the Vermont economy. Therefore, using Burlington’s 100 percent renewable electricity to meet more of our heating and transportation needs offers a unique opportunity to buy local with our energy dollars. October 3, 2022 MEMO TO:City of South Burlington, President Helen Riehle & City Manager Jessie Baker FROM:Meghan O’Rourke, Channel Director,morourke@cctv.org RE:Town Meeting TV FY22 Update and FY23/City’’s FY24 Budget Request Town Meeting TV submits this report in advance of our visit with the City of South Burlington. The purpose of the presentation is to brief the City Council on Town Meeting TV operations, to hear from the community on how Town Meeting TV might better serve your needs, and to request an annual municipal contribution in the amount of $22,050 for general Town Meeting TV operations. Introduction:Town Meeting Television was launched by its member communities in September 1990. Town Meeting TV is operated by CCTV Center for Media & Democracy on behalf of the Chittenden County Government Access Channel Trust. The City of South Burlington is currently represented by your council president, Helen Riehle. We appreciate Helen sharing her time and expertise with us on behalf of the city of South Burlington. Between 10/1/21 and 9/30/22, Town Meeting TV produced and supported 1313 programs for our member communities; 397 were categorized as municipal coverage. During the period of 10/1/2021 - 9/30/2022 Town Meeting TV live streamed, recorded, produced, and archived 56 City Council and Development Review Board meetings for the City of South Burlington. In addition, coverage and service includes other general TV programs recorded in and about South Burlington, election programs, legislative updates, and municipal updates. Town Meeting TV studios and internships remain open to all community members. The contract stipulates production of 5 meetings/month and at least one South Burlington specific general program.South Burlington officials and residents are Town Meeting TV Update & Budget Request for 7/1/23 - page 1 invited to inform us of more community based programming for potential coverage. We are requesting an FY24 City of South Burlington municipal contribution of $22,050 to help meet continued revenue shortfalls from declining cable contributions. This is outlined in the 5 year projection chart below. At this point, we expect municipal contributions to increase along with the rates of inflation or at 5%. In addition, we are offering municipalities the opportunity to add meeting coverage and/or meeting archiving by CCTV productions at the municipal rate. The current municipal rate for meeting production, including pre-production, field production, live streaming & titling, post-production, and archiving is estimated to be 7 hours per meeting at the municipal rate of $95/hour or $665 per meeting. Costs for titling, aring, and archiving recorded meetings conducted without Town Meeting TV operators can also be calculated on a case by case basis. Municipal Funding Request:The City of South Burlington contribution is part of the municipal supplement to the Town Meeting TV annual budget. We have projected that Town Meeting TV’s municipal members will contribute $108,000, or %19.5, to the operating revenue, toward streaming, airing, marketing, distributing and archiving. Municipalities may opt to add additional meeting coverage at the current municipal production rate of $95/hour. See below for the chart of projected municipal support requests. PROJECTIONS FY19 (7/19) FY20 (7/20) FY21 (7/21) FY22 (7/22) FY23 (8/23) FY24 (8/24) FY25 (8/25) 50%0%5%5%5%5%5 years Burlington $12,000 $24,000 $24,000 $25,200 $26,460 $27,783 $29,172 $156,615 South Burlington $10,000 $20,000 $20,000 $21,000 $22,050 $23,152 $24,310 $130,512 Winooski $6,000 $7,000 $8,000 $9,000 $10,000 $11,000 $12,000 $57,000 Essex $6,000 $12,000 $12,000 $12,600 $13,230 $13,891 $14,586 $78,307 Essex Jct $6,000 $12,000 $12,000 $12,600 $13,230 $13,891 $14,586 $78,307 Williston $6,000 $12,000 $12,000 $12,600 $13,230 $13,891 $14,586 $78,307 Increase $46,000 $87,000 $88,000 $93,000 $98,200 $103,610 $109,240 $579,050 Town Meeting TV Update & Budget Request for 7/1/23 - page 2 Town Meeting TV FY22 Report Town Meeting TV supports public officials who seek to engage their constituents in the work of local government. We connect community members to local government so they are able to take action on community and public issues. Revenue Sources:Town Meeting TV is funded, in large part, by the cable subscribers of Comcast and Burlington Telecom. In addition to their requirement to set aside channels and “cable capacity”, regional cable subscribers are assessed 5% of their bills for PEG operating and 1.5% for capital costs. This revenue, locally, is shared by Town Meeting Television and The Media Factory. In Town Meeting TV’s FY23 Budget, approved by the municipal Trustees, cable revenue accounts for 80%of the FY23 budget revenue,estimated to be $555K, detailed in the budget narrative, below. Services:With your partnership, Town Meeting TV produces,live streams, records, titles, distributes and archives gavel-to-gavel coverage of municipal meetings, regional events, and educational programs designed to help open the doors of local government, civic life, and promote public awareness and participation. Town Meeting TV is part of a network of community access media centers that provide an essential community service that has expanded to meet the needs of remote participation in public meetings, public health communications, more extensive election coverage, and community producer requests for services. During this year our services included: Live streaming of gavel-to-gavel coverage of municipal and regional meetings in Burlington, South Burlington, Winooski, Essex, Essex Junction, Williston and Colchester. These meetings are streamed live, aired on TV, and archived. Town Meeting TV content is available on Comcast channel 1087, BT channel 217 and 17, BT channel 317, online at ch17.tv (with clickable agendas) and at youtube.com/TownMeetingTV (with transcripts.) Town Meeting TV continues to work with communities to make that experience productive while retaining high video and audio quality for TV distribution and archiving. Town Meeting TV Update & Budget Request for 7/1/23 - page 3 Hybrid Meeting support -During the pandemic Town Meeting TV worked with municipalities to install and support high quality hybrid meeting systems. In many cases these systems were purchased by the municipalities and the expected technical life was 3 years from installation. In the next year we will be reevaluating the functional life and best practices on a case by case basis with each municipality. Redundant and reliable archiving of community based video content, including meetings and public events is a unique service of Town Meeting TV. This content is available on YouTube and also searchable at www.cctv.org a/k/a ch17.tv. During this past year the Town Meeting TV archivist worked with the Northeast Document Conservation Center (NEDCC) to shore up the redundancy and efficacy of our archival systems. We are working not only to digitize all of our current physical media, but to ensure easy, permanent, secure, and public access to all community media content past, present and future. This work with the NEDCC will also position CCTV and Town Meeting TV to secure archival grant funding. In-depth election programming - Town Meeting TV produces televised local forums featuring all candidates, municipal budgets and ballot presentations during Town Meeting, Primary and General elections. Town Meeting TV also partners with state level organizations such as AARP, League of Women Voters and media outlets such as VTDigger.org to bring election information to a wider audience. In most cases Town Meeting TV is the only forum for all registered candidates to appear in front of voters in a fair, congenial, and high quality format. Community based programs - Democracy begins in dialogue.Community access TV is the site of many interesting and provocative conversations. From shows on addiction recovery and prevention, education reform, national politics, local issues, the Town Meeting TV studio (both in person and online) provides citizens a space to express and workshop ideas with their community. In FY22 our studios have reopened to many new and old community producers. On average we are hosting 2-3 studio programs a week. Marketing and Outreach - Opening the doors to democracy also means connecting community members in a nonpartisan manner, to a variety of ideas and content. Our marketing efforts include supporting internships and experimentation with various tools and platforms for expanding our reach. We excerpt and share meeting highlights such as Mayor or City Council updates, connect local journalists Town Meeting TV Update & Budget Request for 7/1/23 - page 4 to source material, and help the public make sense of the content that is recorded and archived by the Town Meeting TV field crew. Media Education for school groups (e.g., CCV, UVM,Champlain, local high schools) is a crucial part of the Town Meeting TV civic work. Helping students understand what is behind the creation of media and engaging them with local civic leaders through internships and volunteering are foundation to the work of community media. Not only are we developing the next generation of field producers and editors, but we are also introducing young people to how local government functions and why it is important. This year Town Meeting TV is in year two of the Neighbrohood Media Internship project supported by grant funding from the VT Community Foundation. Maintaining a Public Web Presence.Town Meeting TV’s website is home to more than 50,000 pieces of archival content. We envision this as a gateway to community content both present and historic. We are continuing on the process of upgrading the Town Meeting TV website to a new platform and that municipalities will be able to more easily embed municipal content on their own home pages. Legal and Advocacy Matters:Town Meeting TV has worked closely with its colleagues in the Vermont Access Network (VAN) to advocate for the replacement of declining cable revenue. The Legislature recognized our work as an “essential service” during the COVID emergency period and awarded CRF funds to subsidize COVID related communications and funded a comprehensive study (The PEG Study) to assess what authority the state has to restructure how PEG is funded. This work leads us to a short term statewide legislative request for FY23 of $900K. The legislators will look to the municipalities to support this proposal, and we are happy to discuss this in more detail with you. CCTV Center for Media and Democracy continues to administer the services of Town Meeting TV on behalf of the Trustees. This unique relationship allows Town Meeting TV to be housed alongside other community based projects such as the CCTV Archives, The VT Language Justice Project and CCTV Productions. These relationships allow us to share expertise, community connections, and carry the work we do together, farther. Town Meeting TV cable channels reach 25-30,000 cable subscribers within Chittenden County. The archive of all content is available at Ch17.tv. Applicable content is distributed statewide as well as nationwide. The Town Meeting TV Town Meeting TV Update & Budget Request for 7/1/23 - page 5 website averages about 1000 hits per month, and the Town Meeting TV youtube channel maintains about 3,250 subscribers. People watch meetings and events, share them, and most importantly report that they can find them when needed. Thank you for your support. We are happy to respond to any questions, comments, and are always open to ways that we can serve you better. The Town Meeting TV Budget Narrative for FY22 follows. Town Meeting TV/ Town Meeting TelevisionBUDGET NARRATIVE FY23 October 1, 2022 – September 30, 2023 1. OVERVIEW Town Meeting Television operates channels on Comcast 1087 and Burlington Telecom 17 & 217 and on Burlington Telecom, Channel 317. Programming is available on ch17.tv and on YouTube Channel 17/Town Meeting Television. The primary mission is to cover public meetings and events for Burlington, South Burlington, Essex, Essex Junction, Winooski, Williston, and Colchester. We offer free training and equipment upon request. We will also air public issues programs submitted by the public. This work is funded primarily through franchise fees paid by local cable subscribers, as a percentage of their cable TV bills and in recent years, by local government contributions and fundraising efforts. The State of Vermont requires public access channels and franchise fees from cable operators in exchange for those company’s use of the public rights of way. Cable operators choose to pass these fees on to their cable subscribers. The state’s authority to require channels and fees is based on Cable Communications Policy Act of 1984. Since 1984, the State of Vermont (through the Vermont Public Utility Commission) has required Vermont cable operators to provide public, educational, and government (PEG) access channels by levying a PEG fee of 5% of cable subscriber revenue to be used for operating these channels through access management organizations (also known as community media centers; and, .5% to be set aside for capital purchases for channel playback hardware, studios, cameras and the materials needed to record, produce and distribute community content. Town Meeting TV Update & Budget Request for 7/1/23 - page 6 As a result of Vermont Government’s firm commitment to PEG access, Vermonters benefit from a thriving network of 24 access management organizations that put $8.7 million of cable subscriber dollars to work, producing more than 18,000 hours of original local programs each year--many of which are government meetings which are streamed live--and employing 78 full time and 101 part time staff. Town Meeting TV operates as a project of CCTV Center For Media and Democracy.CCTV is responsible for making sure Town Meeting TV obligations are met to the Municipal Town Meeting TV Board of Trustee. 2. REVENUE SUMMARY FY23 revenue is projected to be $690,697.91.Expenses are projected to be$741,120.88.A budget shortfall of (50,422.97)is expected and will be covered byCCTV grant raising and philanthropic fundraising. ●The estimated revenue received from Comcast is projected to be $382,459for operating and $138,238 for capital. ●Burlington Telecom’s total contribution has come in at $30.5K for operatingand capital in FY22. ●Municipal revenue is projected at 108,000. ●Interest/ Capital Gains is estimated conservatively to be $2,500+/-. 3. EXPENSE SUMMARY The total FY23 expenses are projected to be $741,120. Operating Expense is estimated to be $597,050. Operating expenses include theCCTVcontractfor Town Meeting TV operations at $564,900 alongside other Trustee’s expenses. This is an increase of 10K over last year. We expect CapitalExpensesto be $144,070.Those expenses are detailed below. A.OPERATING EXPENSES Town Meeting TV operating expenses are estimated to be $597,050.Theseinclude: CCTV Base Contract of $564,900.The CCTV base-line services include site costoverhead and staff labor for Administration,Field Production,ProductionCoordination, Post Production, Scheduling, Internships, Marketing, andArchiving.approximately 18K yearly hours and 8.7 FTE. CCTV Base Contract Expenses: Town Meeting TV Update & Budget Request for 7/1/23 - page 7 a.Wages and Benefits total $383,379 This includes: ●Payroll,Health/Dental/Vision Insurance, Unemployment,WorkersCompensation and Payroll taxes for 8.7 FTE employees. b.Non-Wage Costs: $51,152 include the following ●Site Costs: Rent, Utilities, Offsite Storage:$30,188 ●Communications (Cell, Local, Long Distance, Postage,Internet):$2217 (purchased a new phone system with BT). ●Office Expenses (Copying, Printing, Supplies): $1043 ●Computer Expenses $1876.55 ●Professional Development:Includes training dues and expenses, conference, Alliance for Community Media events which are expected to bevirtual for the next year.Total: $6245 ●CCTV Management & Overhead: Total $100,266 -includes businessmanagement, advocacy, fundraising support, archival and technical support for Town Meeting TV as one of the projects. This number has been reducedfrom the previous year due to onboarding of new projects (VLJP) b. Trustees Expenses ●Legal:$3500 - We do not anticipate legal issues,but carry this as a matter ofgood business practice. ●Investment Fees:$1250 .8% on our Vermont Community Foundation Fund ●Accounting Services:$4,000 ●Audit:$8300 ●Advertising:$5000 -To support outreach around municipal content. ●Comcast Advertising $4000 -Pass through funds from Comcast ●Directors Insurance:$600 -Reduced by half due to a new carrier. ●Membership Dues:$5,200 -Trade Organizations that work on behalf ofcommunity media: VAN and Alliance for Community Media B. CAPITAL EXPENSES Town Meeting TV’s annual Capital budget is based on priority areas recommendedby Staff and approved by the Trustees. The FY23 Capital recommendations, estimated to be $144,070 include hardware, supplies and contractors. Town Meeting TV continues to contract with third party technical services(Clearbearing) to monitor and support our technical operations, including at the Tech Core, shared with the Media Factory in the South End. This is the largest itemin our capital budget and it ensures ongoing seamless support for our workinginfrastructure and archival assets. Town Meeting TV Update & Budget Request for 7/1/23 - page 8 This year’s capital budget is larger than the past two previous years, in part due to pandemic related delayed and deferred maintenance on field and studioequipment. Equipment Total: $32,087 Estimated equipment costs largely reflect the annual replacement of cameras, computers and equipment due to extended use. Thisincludes: ●Production:Purchase of additional field production and remote meeting gear, and equipment for live titling in the field. ●Post Production:Editing Workstation, VHS decks, archival encoder ●Office:Replacement staff computers ●IT/ Network/ Tech Core Equipment:For Tech core improvements and videostorage options. Capital Support Total: $111,983 Capital Support constitutes the bulk of the capitalbudget, as most technical solutions are software and consultant supported. TheFY23 budget includes: ●Web Development:Continued work on moving to new web platform ●Repair and Maintenance:Includes Clearbearing Tech Support. ●Service Contracts:Tech Core Rental, Clearbearing Assistance on projects, Phone, Internet. ●Dues and Subscriptions:for interactive program guide (Gracenote), AdobeCreative Cloud, podcast subscription, Slack, Dropbox to improve remoteworkflow systems Town Meeting TV Update & Budget Request for 7/1/23 - page 9 Legislative Update In FY21, the Vermont Legislature identified public, educational and government (PEG) access as an “essential service” for Vermont through its continuing coverage of public health messages, ongoing access to public meetings, connecting communities and preserving local identity. In recognition, the Legislature provided financial support for pandemic operations and funded a PEG Study to help plan for the future of community media. Community Media is an Essential Service The PEG Study, released in January 2021, confirms the inevitable decline of cable revenue in Vermont (PEG’s primary funding source) and increasing costs necessary to meet increasing demand for public meeting coverage and community communications. The PEG Study recommended that the Legislature use its authority to restructure Vermont’s telecommunications taxes and take a new look at how public benefits, like PEG, will be funded. During recent meetings with key legislators, VAN was encouraged to develop short-term funding requests while continuing to work toward the longer-term policy goal. VAN’s three year funding request provides short term relief to meet community communications needs in all corners of the state, and lays the groundwork for broader policy change in Vermont’s telecommunications tax structure. The request: VA N ’ s L e g i s l at ive R e q u e s t FY23 - $900,000 FY24 - $1 Million FY25 - $1.5 Million Vermont Access Network vermontaccess.net info@vermontaccess.net For more information: Lauren-Glenn Davitian, CCTV, 802.777.7542 davitian@cctv.org