HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - Planning Commission - 09/09/2020South Burlington Planning Commission
575 Dorset Street
South Burlington, VT 05403
(802) 846-4106
www.sburl.com
Meeting Wednesday, September 9, 2020
7:00 pm
IMPORTANT:
This will be a fully electronic meeting, consistent with recently-passed legislation. Presenters and members
of the public are invited to participate either by interactive online meeting or by telephone. There will be
no physical site at which to attend the meeting.
Participation Options:
Interactive Online Meeting (audio & video): https://www.gotomeet.me/SBCity/pc-2020-09-09
By Telephone (audio only): Phone # (224) 501-3412, Access Code: 201-969-965
AGENDA:
1. Agenda: Additions, deletions or changes in order of agenda items (7:00 pm)
2. Open to the public for items not related to the agenda (7:02 pm)
3. Announcements and staff report (7:10 pm)
4. *Work Session on Land Development Regulation Overhaul (7:15 pm)
a. Review Planned Unit Development Approaches to Density, and Building Types (7:15 pm)
b. Review Thresholds and applicability for Master Plans, PUDs, Subdivisions (8:25 pm)
5. *Summary and priority of related work products to PUDs and unrelated amendments (8:40 pm)
6. Consider possible application for 2021 Municipal Planning Grant (8:50 pm)
7. Consider Road Name request for Golf Course “Clubhouse” Parcel (8:57 pm)
8. *Review and approve minutes of August 25, 2020 (8:58 pm)
9. Other Business (8:59 pm)
a. *City of Burlington Planning Commission public hearing on proposed amendments to the
Burlington Comprehensive Development Ordinance, September 23, 6:45 pm
10. Adjourn (9:00 pm)
Respectfully submitted,
Paul Conner, AICP,
Director of Planning & Zoning
* item has attachments
South Burlington Planning Commission Meeting Participation Guidelines
1. The Planning Commission Chair presents these guidelines for the public attending Planning Commission meetings
to ensure that everyone has a chance to speak and that meetings proceed smoothly.
2. Initial discussion on an agenda item will generally be conducted by the Commission. As this is our opportunity to
engage with the subject, we would like to hear from all commissioners first. After the Commission has discussed an
item, the Chair will ask for public comment. Please raise your hand to be recognized to speak and the Chair will try
to call on each participant in sequence.
3. Once recognized by the Chair, please identify yourself to the Commission.
4. If the Commission suggests time limits, please respect them. Time limits will be used when they can aid in making
sure everyone is heard and sufficient time is available for Commission to conduct business items.
5. Side conversations between audience members should be kept to an absolute minimum. The hallway outside the
Community Room is available should people wish to chat more fully.
6. Please address the Chair. Please do not address other audience members or staff or presenters and please do not
interrupt others when they are speaking.
7. Make every effort not to repeat the points made by others.
8. The Chair will make reasonable efforts to allow everyone who is interested in participating to speak once before
speakers address the Commission for a second time.
9. The Planning Commission desires to be as open and informal as possible within the construct that the Planning
Commission meeting is an opportunity for commissioners to discuss, debate and decide upon policy matters.
Regular Planning Commission meetings are not “town meetings”. A warned public hearing is a fuller opportunity to
explore an issue, provide input and sway public opinion on the matter.
10. Comments may be submitted before, during or after the meeting to the Planning and Zoning Department. All
written comments will be circulation to the Planning Commission and kept as part of the City Planner's official
records of meetings. Comments must include your first and last name and a contact (e-mail, phone, address) to be
included in the record.
575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburl.com
TO: South Burlington Planning Commission
FROM: Paul Conner, Director of Planning & Zoning
SUBJECT: PC Staff Memo
DATE: September 9, 2020 Planning Commission meeting
1. Agenda: Additions, deletions or changes in order of agenda items (7:00 pm)
2. Open to the public for items not related to the agenda (7:02 pm)
3. Announcements and staff report (7:10 pm)
Staff Report:
S. 237: The Senate this spring passed a bill with significant proposed changes to enabling laws for
local zoning. The House is presently reviewing. Staff is keeping an eye on its status, and the Vermont
Planners Association has weighed in with feedback.
Mapping Tutorials for Zoning. As discussed at your last meeting, Commissioner Ostby will be hosting
two tutorials, Thursday evening 9/3 and Friday mid-day 9/4. Details posted on front porch forum.
4. ***Work Session on Land Development Regulation Overhaul (7:15 pm)
a. Review Planned Unit Development Approaches to Density, and Building Types (7:15 pm)
b. Review Thresholds and applicability for Master Plans, PUDs, Subdivisions (8:25 pm)
See attached memo for 9/9, block layout concepts, most recent building type standards, and prior
Commission memo 8/25.
5. ***Review LDR amendment work plan list; determine approach to review (8:35 pm)
See attached status of LDR amendments
6. Consider possible application for 2021 Municipal Planning Grant (8:50 pm)
Staff is reviewing grant criteria and overall capacity; we will present a recommend on or before the
meeting date.
7. Consider Road Name request for Golf Course “Clubhouse” Parcel (8:50 pm)
The Development Review Board recently issued final plat approval for this phase of the Vermont
National Golf Course. This 11-home neighborhood is located on the east side of Dorset Street,
directly across the street from the VNCC Clubhouse. The approved plans consist of 11 single family
homes on a road that connects Dorset Street to Foulsham Hollow Road. The applicant has requested
that the Commission consider approval of one of the following names, by order of preference:
1. Clubhouse Loop [or Drive, or Lane]
2. Medalist Loop [or Drive]
None of the names conflict with the Vermont E-911 Database. Staff recommends Medalist Drive, as
there has been some confusion historically with the lot being across the street from the actual golf
course clubhouse, and recommends Drive (or Road) over Loop/Lane, as loops are typically circular
and lanes have largely been reserved for rear-access alleys in South Burlington.
8. ***Review and approve minutes of August 25, 2020 (8:58 pm)
9. Other Business (8:59 pm)
a. *City of Burlington Planning Commission public hearing on proposed amendments
to the Burlington Comprehensive Development Ordinance, September 23, 6:45
pm
10. Adjourn (9:00 pm)
* item has attachments
575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburl.com
MEMORANDUM
TO: South Burlington Planning Commission
FROM: Paul Conner, Director of Planning & Zoning
SUBJECT: Proposed Density Approach; Thresholds, Applicability in PUDs
DATE: September 9, 2020 Planning Commission meeting
At your last meeting, staff and Commissioners discussed how subdivisions are proposed to function, how
blocks are formed, and how different approaches to calculating density could apply in PUD settings.
The staff memo from that meeting is enclosed again in this week’s packet, as the information is largely the
same. At this meeting, we’d like to address the following items:
1. Proposed Min/Max Density Calculations by PUD type. [Updated with staff recommendations]
Recommended Minimum and Maximum Residential Density, by PUD type
PUD Type Minimum Density Staff Recommendation Maximum Density Staff Recommendation
Infill/
Redevelopment
Greater of
• 4 units per Buildable Acre or
• Zoning district max density number (eg. XX
u/a) applied to Buildable Area
Building Type-Based, with:
• A subset of the requirements of the PUD
type(s) allowed AND
• Specific context-based design standards to
transition from the current built environment
• Staff is reviewing where this may leave gaps
that would warrant a Land-Based approach
TND Greater of
• 4 units per Buildable Acre or
• Zoning district max density number (eg. XX
u/a) applied to Buildable Area
For PC Discussion: Consider Min of 8 units per
Buildable Acre within ¼ mile of transit routes
Building-Type Based
NCD Greater of
• 4 units per Buildable Acre or
• Zoning district max density number (eg. XX
u/a) applied to Buildable Area
Building-Type Based
Conservation Greater of
• 4 units per Buildable Acre or
• Zoning district max density number (eg. XX
u/a) applied to Buildable Area
For PC Discussion: In selected areas of the City,
no minimum density if at least 85% of gross
area is assigned as Open Space and the
assigned Buildable Area does not exceed 10
acres
Land-Based Option 1:
• Based on Underlying Zoning
• Calculated as maximum density of
underlying zoning district (e.g. XX u/a) for
total land area*, applicable only in the
Buildable Area
For PC Discussion: Determine whether to include
or exclude hazards in density calculations
2
At the last meeting, staff presented a powerpoint that included pros and cons of each approach. These are
repeated below:
Pros and Cons of Each Approach to Density
Land Based Option 1 Land Based Option 2 Building Based
Source Underlying Zoning Minimum Density Building Types
Pros • Similar to current LDRs
• Direct link to underlying
zoning.
• For Conservation PUD,
directly addresses
takings
• Allows for direct incentives
proportional to the scale of
the development
• Incremental step from
current LDRs
• Establishes a pedestrian-oriented
environment with a mix of housing
types;
• Encourages innovation in design;
• Supports affordability of housing;
• Makes full use of infrastructure;
• Makes efficient use of land that is
being developed
Cons Likely to result in missing
neighborhood elements:
• No or little mix of
housing types beyond
single and two-family
homes
• No neighborhood
environment, with
larger unbuilt, unusable
areas between multi-
family buildings
Can result in missing
neighborhood elements:
• No or little mix of housing
types beyond single and
two-family homes
• No neighborhood
environment, with larger
unbuilt, unusable areas
between multi-family
buildings
• Establishes compact building form
that may differ from adjacent built
areas (on smaller lots) – need
include context-sensitive standards
in infill design
• Single and two-family homes have
a narrower lot width than recent
typical design
To assist in the Commission’s decision making, staff offers the following resources:
A. Sample Block Layouts based on the Commission’s options for calculation of maximum density.
See the enclosed package of drawings. This series shows examples of how the different approaches to
density calculation could apply in a typical block. We used the example of a block in the Orchards
Neighborhood that measures 750’ x 250’ (2,000’ total perimeter).
Examples 1A, 1B, 1C, and 2C show a parcel-based approach; examples 4A, 4B, 5A and 5B are building-type
based. Staff used the building types as the template and assumed that there would be a minimum of three
building types required and a maximum of 50% of any single building type allowed.
B. Building Types most recent working draft
The Commission and Affordable Housing Committee have each reviewed and provided feedback on prior
drafts. This draft further refines prior versions through additional detail and refinement of standards.
NOTE: The numerical standards (lot width, lot area, height, setback etc.) are not set in stone; at an upcoming
meeting, Commissioners can review in detail the effects of narrower or wider lots.
Meeting Objectives:
A. Determine approach to calculation of minimum / maximum density for each PUD type.
3
2. Applicability of PUD Types / Thresholds
Proposed Thresholds for PUDs:
Area Applicability Conservation TND NCD Infill/Redevelopment
0-2 acres Not Permitted
2-4 acres Elective Permitted Permitted up to TND/NCD threshold
4+ acres Mandatory (1) Permitted Permitted up to TND/NCD threshold
5+ acres Mandatory (1,2) Permitted Permitted Permitted up to TND threshold
10+ acres Mandatory (2) Permitted Permitted Permitted
(1) The Commission had previously indicated that PUDs should be required for all neighborhoods over 4 acres in
size in order to preclude large-lot, sub-Act 250 neighborhoods from being built. An alternative to requiring a
PUD for these 4-10 acre lots could be to establish a maximum lot size under standard subdivision. This has not
been fully examined but is an option for the Commission.
(2) Staff is working with consultant Sharon Murray to review circumstances of single-buildings on large lots and
how these would related to PUD requirements.
Proposed Applicability of Individual PUD/PRD Types:
PUD Type Allowable Zoning Districts
Infill/ Redevelopment Applicable TND / NCD districts
Conservation PUD All Zoning Districts where thresholds are exceeded; R1, R2, SEQ-NR,
SEQ-NRT, SEQ-VR, SEQ-VC, SEQ-NRP [additional limitations apply]
TND R1-PRD, R1-LV, R2, R4, R7, Lakeshore, Allen Rd, Swift St, C1-LR, R7-NC,
SEQ NR, SEQ-NRT, SEQ-NRT, SEQ-VR, SEQ-VC
NCD R12, All C1- Districts, C2, Allen Road, Swift St, R7-NC
Building TypeDescriptionPUD Type Frontage Type Lot Area (Min‐Max)Lot Width* HeightSetbacks/ Building Location [note: front setbacks may move to street types]GlazingVehicular Access & Parking [PC to determine if these should be guidelines or standards]Supplementary Design NotesAllowed Street CategoriesDetached House A single unit dwelling or group home, consisting of one detached principal dwelling unit per lot. May include one accessory dwelling and/or a home occupation, as allowed under the regulations. TNDCON (per underlying)Residential front yard; Porch, stoop; Main pedestrian entrance to the house shall be accessed directly from and face the street or green. 4,000‐10,000 SF 40'‐80' lot width 1.5‐2.5 stories •BTZ 10‐25 ft (exceptions for arterials and irregular lots approved by DRB); may be reduced to 5 feet for porch•Min side setback: 5 Ō• Min rear setback: 10 ftNo requirements. South facing windows to living space encouraged.•On a corner lot, parking shall be accessed from the side street.•Garages must be set back (will insert SEQ language here) and doors may not consume more than 40% of the total front façade of the structure. Alley access preferred.Maximum lot coverage 70% Local, CollectorCarriage House A small, detached, accessory building located on the same lot as a detached house or owner‐occupied duplex, respecting required setbacks. This type of housing is intended to provide affordable housing and home‐based businesses within the context of a walkable, residential neighborhood.TNDCON (per underlying)NCDAt ground level or above a detached garage. Not permitted in the front yard.Must be on a shared lot with a detached house. Must be on a shared lot with a detached house. For detached ADUs in accessory structures, 15 feet maximum. May increase by 2 feet in height for every 10 feet from property line, not to exceed 2 stories. •Typically located at the rear of a lot. May not be to the front of the main structure• Minimum 10' rear and side setbacks for single story. Two stories shall meet all setbacks for principal buildings.No requirements. South facing windows encouraged.In accordance with detached single family units. ADUs provided parking per LDRs. Shared driveway access (single curbcut) required. Architecture shall be complementary to that of the principal building.Local, CollectorDuplex (stacked or side‐by‐side)A two‐unit dwelling, consisting of a small to medium sized detached residential structure that contains two principal dwelling units, either stacked or side by side, which are entirely separated by a vertical dividing wall or floor. This housing type has the appearance of a single family dwelling and is typically scaled to fit within a primarily single family neighborhood. It is intended to provide additional, housing options within the context of a walkable, residential neighborhood. TNDCON (per underlying)Each dwelling unit has its own primary entry that faces the street and is accessed from a porch or stoop.5,000‐10,000 SF lot area per building; Individual units in side by side duplex may be sited on lots equivalent to half of the minimum and max range listed here.•50'‐80' lot width; •May be located on one lot, or two lots sharing a side property line along the dividing wall, with front, side, and rear yards. 1.5‐2.5 stories •BTZ 10‐25 ft(exceptions for arterials and irregular lots approved by DRB); may be reduced to 5 feet for front porch•Min side setback for outside walls: 5 Ō•Min side setback for inside or shared walls: 0 Ō• Min rear setback: 20 ftNo requirements. •If facing the street, garages are limited to single bay per dwelling unit. Additional bays must be located either behind the duplex or be side‐loaded•Provision of on‐street parking and alley access is preferred•Driveways may not exceed 12' in width per unitMaximum lot coverage for structure 70%Local, CollectorMultiplex, Small A housing type consisting of 3 to 4 principal dwelling units within a detached, residential building that has the appearance of a large single family dwelling (detached house), with front, side and rear yards. This housing type is typically scaled to fit sparingly within a primarily single family neighborhood, or within medium density residential neighborhood. It is intended to provide additional housing options within the context of a walkable, residential neighborhood.TNDCON (per underlying)NCDPorch; stoop. The units may share a common main entrance or have separate residential scale entrances. At least one main entry must face the street. 8,000‐15,000 SF •50'‐100' lot width2‐2.5 stories BTZ 10‐25 ft (exceptions for arterials and irregular lots approved by DRB)•Min side setback for outside walls: 10 Ō•Min side setback for inside or shared walls: 0 Ō• Min rear setback: 20 ftLocation and amount of glazing should be typical of a large single family dwelling, with ample residential scale windows. Large windowless walls are not permitted.Garages are limited to detached accessory structures or rear‐loaded and hidden from view of the principal public street. Front entry shall be principal design feature of front facing facade. Maximum lot coverage TBDLocal, Collector, ArterialCottage ClusterA series of small, detached, one‐unit structures arranged to define a shared courtyard that is typically perpendicular to the street. A cottage cluster is scaled to fit within primarily single‐family or medium‐density neighborhoods, and includes 3 to 9 buildings. The shared central green space takes the place of a private rear yard and serves as a community‐enhancing ltTNDCON (per underlying)Porch; shared couryard with units adjacent to the street having direct entrance from the street2,000‐5,000 SF per unit 80'‐125' lot width at street [reviewing for consistency with T3]1‐2 stories Setbacks: 5 foot minimum front, side, and rear . Outermost perimeter must meet 10 foot side and rear setbacks from adjacent properties.No requirements. Vehicular access is to the rear of the structures, or a common parking lot may be provided. There should be no vehicular access through the shared courtyard. Varies, but are internally consistent. Maximum lot coverage TBDLocal, CollectorRow House/Townhouse A structure that contains 3 to 10 very narrow to medium‐sized dwelling units connected to one another side‐by‐side by a party wall. Each dwelling unit has an individual entry facing the street, and groupings of units often share uniform plans, fenestration and architectural treatments. NCDTNDCON (per underlying)Each unit has an individual entrance that faces the public street and is accessed from a porch, stoop, or lightwell2,000‐4,000 SF per unit 20'‐30' per unit lot width2‐2.5 stories BTZ 10‐25 ft (exceptions for arterials and irregular lots approved by DRB) •Min side setback for outside walls: 10 ft Min side setback for inside or shared walls: 0 ftNo requirements. Per current regs related to parking. Groupings of units should generally share uniform fenestration and architectural treatmentsCollector, ArterialMultiplex, medium A large, detached structure that contains 5 to 8 dwelling units. Has a single building massing and may often have the appearance of a traditional large single‐family home or duplex. NCDTNDCON (per underlying)The structure has several residential style entries, several of which must face the street and are accessed from a porch, or stoop10,000‐18,000 SF 60'‐125' lot width 2‐2.5 stories BTZ 10‐25 ft, 5‐15 feet to the sides.Minimum front glazing of 30% for all sides facing the public street. South facing windows encouraged.Per Article 14See description. The Board may approve a single, shared entry is careful thought is given to make the building appear as though it is a large/estate home. Local, Collector, ArterialDRAFT
Building TypeDescriptionPUD Type Frontage Type Lot Area (Min‐Max)Lot Width* HeightSetbacks/ Building Location [note: front setbacks may move to street types]GlazingVehicular Access & Parking [PC to determine if these should be guidelines or standards]Supplementary Design NotesAllowed Street CategoriesMultiplex, large A large, detached structure that contains 9 to 12 dwelling units. Designed and massed to appear as one or more large single‐family homes. Large multiplexes can be located in a location that transitions from a primarily single‐family neighborhood into a higher‐density or mixed‐use neighborhood.NCDCON (per underlying)The structure has several residential style entries, several of which must face the street and are accessed from a porch or stoop 20,000‐35,000 SF 80'‐150' lot width 2‐3 stories BTZ 15‐35 ft, 5‐15 feet to the sides.Minimum front glazing of 30% for all sides facing the public street. South facing windows encouraged.To the rear of the structure. No garages facing the street. Garages should be individual rather than be a consolidated space. See description. The design of the structure to resemble single family homes distinguishes it from a multistory flex building. Collector, ArterialStacked Flat Building A large detached structure that contains 12‐60 dwelling units. Building must be oriented with its narrowest dimension at the street, fitting in line with the street rhythm. NCD 80'‐150' lot width [note: still be evaluated]3‐5 stories BTZ 15‐35 ft, 5‐15 feet to the sides.Minimum front glazing of 30% for all sides facing the public street. South facing windows encouraged.Underground or to the rear of the structure. Civic Building Medium to large attached or detached building dedicated to a civic use and designed to stand apart from its surroundings due to the specialized nature of its public or quasi‐public use for public assembly. Examples include libraries, places of worship, schools, centers of government, performing arts, community centers, and museums. Private building types also permitted: poolhouse, clubhouse or other spaced dedicated to gathering of neighborhood residentsNCDTNDThe applicant shall plan for and demonstrate a pedestrian access plan.NA NA Public: per underlying zoning; private: 2 stories max.Private civic buildings should be centrally located so that they are accessible to all parts of the surrounding neighborhood. No requirements None required. If provided, per article 14.Collector, ArterialCottage Commercial Intended to provide for a wide mix of uses in a building with the physical characteristics of a small scale residential building. The building is versatile and could easily accommodate either residential or non‐residential uses, distinguishable only through signage. May also serve as a live‐work space. Buildings are expected to reflect the character of the surrounding NCDTNDPorch ; shopfront. Publicly accessible entrance at streetfront.6,000‐15,000 SF 60'‐100' lot width 1.5‐2.5 stories •BTZ 10‐50 ft (exceptions for arterials and irregular lots approved by DRB)•Min side setback: 10 Ō• Min rear setback: 10 ft•Minimum on first floor: 40%•Residential scaled or treated windowsRear of building or on street. Non landscaped parking area may not exceed 2x the footprint of the structure.•Residential doors and residentially scaled windows on public street•Pitched or gabled roof required•Porches, stoops, and covered entryways are tl dLocal, CollectorNeighborhood Storefront Attached or detached building intended to serve people and businesses at the neighborhood or village scale. While the upper stories may provide for office space or residential occupation, the first floor is clearly intended for non‐residential use. TND‐ per 13.28NCD Shopfront, gallery, arcade. •Building entries emphasized with special architectural treatment; A walkway in front of the building, connecting the tenant spaces is required•Commercial entry door6,000‐15,000 SF 60'‐100' lot width May range from 1‐3 stories but must demonstrate an average minimum of 1.5 stories and must have a varied roofline.•Setback no more than 30 feet from road right of way; attached units may have a zero side setback•Restaurant uses are encouraged to provide outdoor dining space•Minimum on first floor: 40%•First floor windows minimum 7.5' in heightPer article 14. Also, non landscaped surface parking area may not exceed 2x the footprint of the structure.•Blank walls not to exceed 30' in length at street levelLocal, Collector, Arterial?MultiStory Flex Building Multi‐purpose building. May be interchangeable between residential and commercial in use and appearance. NCDGallery; arcade; storefront. If intended primarily for residential use, may also (permit?) a large porch. additional entrances may be located to the rear to align with parking areas25,000 SF‐50,000 SF 100'‐250' lot width NCD: per underlying and overlay zoningCampus: 4 stories maxBTZ 10‐50 ft, 15 feet side yard minimumMinimum of 30% of area of façades facing a streetPer article 14. Also, non landscaped surface parking area may not exceed 2x the footprint of the structure.•Required window treatments, facade breaks and roof height variations (details to be added here)Collector, ArterialUrban Storefront Intended as commercial or mixed use for higher density non‐transect areas with higher traffic volumes. Can include freestanding buildings or shared wall buildings. NCDGallery; arcade, storefront. 25,000 SF‐50,000 SF? 150'‐300' lot width•2‐5 stories•Maximum height determined by zoning districtBTZ 10‐30 ft, 15 feet side yard minimumMinimum transparent glazing on street facing first floor: 50%Per article 14. Also, non landscaped surface parking area may not exceed the footprint of the structure.Buildings should have a recognizable base, middle and top and balance vertical and horizontal proportions. Buildings should also employ horizontal building breaks for every 80 feet.Local, Collector, ArterialImportant note‐ just because a type is allowed in a particular PUD type, doesn't meet it is permitted anywhere, on any street type, and without limitation. Language is under development by our consulting team to use these types in context. There may be a required mix of housing types within a PUD. DRAFT
Building TypeDescriptionPUD Type Frontage Type Lot Area (Min‐Max)Lot Width* HeightSetbacks/ Building Location [note: front setbacks may move to street types]GlazingVehicular Access & Parking [PC to determine if these should be guidelines or standards]Supplementary Design NotesAllowed Street Categories*Special NotesStandards for all types•Lot widths are measured at the primary street. •12 feet additional lot width is permitted for SF and Duplex buildings where access is needed to the side or rear of the lot for parking's. 18 feet additional is permitted per all other housing types where access is needed to the side or rear of the lot. No additional width is permitted where garages are proposed to be front loaded. Curbcuts at street shall not exceed 12 feet in width. Home occupations permitted in accordance with LDRSAll buildings must be oriented to the street, or shared green or courtyard where applicable. For pre‐existing lots with less than 200 feet of frontage on a public street and where the depth of the lot is more than 2x the width of the lot's frontage, the design may instead treat the access drive or new private street as the primary frontage. See design for mews (TBC)When used in CC FBC district, standards of Chapter 8 take precedentDRAFT
575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburl.com
MEMORANDUM
TO: South Burlington Planning Commission
FROM: Paul Conner, Director of Planning & Zoning
SUBJECT: Subdivisions, PUDs, Master Plans, Site Plans
DATE: August 25, 2020 Planning Commission meeting
At your last meeting, the focus was on Article 12 and the draft Environmental Protection Standards. At this
meeting we’d like to take a similar tact, but on the “built environment” side of the equation, and then tie
them together.
Over the past year-plus, you’ve seen and provided input on a multitude of different pieces of this puzzle. I’m
sure it’s been a challenge to keep track of, and we appreciate all of your attention. At this meeting we’d like
to give you a snapshot of where we are with each of the pieces, what each does, and most importantly,
gather Commission feedback on a handful of extremely important remaining decision points.
Included in this memo are updates, proposed thresholds for, and key questions on the following:
1. Subdivision Standards
2. Planned Unit Developments
3. Master Plans
4. Site Plans
Staff will begin the meeting with a presentation. The presentation will highlight the goals of the project, what
these updates include and intended to do (and what they do not do), and where pieces of the work – namely
PUDs – complement other updates to the LDRs that the Commission may elect to undertake in the future.
Included in this presentation will be a discussion of two possible ways that the Commission may elect to
assign maximum density in a PUD (which may also vary by PUD type): Land-Based vs. Building-Type Based.
This determination in various PUD settings is the most significant remaining decision for the Commission in
terms of completing the PUD project. Most of the remaining key questions are about thresholds and how to
achieve the stated goals for this project.
The presentation will also reference the current Commission’s work, including expansion of the TDR program
and integration with Inclusionary Zoning. These will be addressed more fully at an upcoming meeting
Meeting objectives:
• Commissioners are clear proposed structure and role of subdivisions, master plan, PUD, site plan
• Commissioners are clear on role of Hazards, Level 1, Level 2 Resources
• Commissioners are clear on how a Conservation subdivision works or pose questions they have
• Commissioners are clear on options for calculating maximum density or pose questions they have
• Commissioners have identified any additional information needed to make decisions on critical
questions at upcoming meetings
2
Below please find a status report on each topic, staff recommendations, and key Commission questions
Key questions / future decisions for Commission consideration are in Red
1. Subdivisions:
Summary:
This is a major upgrade to this Article. Currently nearly all subdivisions, except for minor subdivisions
resulting in two lots, are also Planned Unit Developments (PUDs), and therefore not generally tied to
underlying zoning district standards. This amended Article establishes clear standards for the subdivision
of land (creation and merger of lots, supporting infrastructure) under the City’s current zoning district
and environmental protection regulations. As proposed, all planned unit developments are considered
subdivisions, but not all subdivisions will qualify as types of planned unit development.
Principal Functions
• Establishes the pattern of land subdivision and subsequent development: arrangement of streets,
blocks, building lots, supporting infrastructure, civic and other open spaces, and connectivity with
transportation networks, adjoining parcels.
• Establishes street and block length standards applicable to residential & mixed-use zoning districts
• Newly created building lots must meet zoning district (or PUD) lot standards, and accommodate
development (uses) allowed within the zoning district.
• In a non-PUD subdivision, development density is based only on the Buildable Area, and is not
transferable from undevelopable land within the subdivision.
Proposed Applicability / Thresholds:
• Administrative Review for minor Boundary Line adjustments and lot mergers.
• DRB review required for all subdivisions per state law. The level of review varies by type of
subdivision, as currently defined under the LDRs:
• Minor Subdivision: 2 lots (final review)
• Major Subdivision: 3+ lots (preliminary, final review)
How Environmental Protection Standards are applied
• Resource protection standards under Articles 10 and 12 apply, as applicable to any form of
development, including allowed encroachments.
• Subdivision and building lot lines must avoid or, to the extent allowed under applicable regulations,
minimize the subdivision and physical fragmentation of protected resources. A building lot may
extend into a protected resource area only as necessary to meet minimum lot area and frontage
standards.
• Hazards / Level I Resource Areas must be set aside as undevelopable land (e.g., conserved open
space), and excluded from the calculation of “Buildable Area.” (see note re: Conservation
Subdivisions)
• Level I and II Resource Areas may be incorporated into a building lot so long as the building envelope
on the lot is delineated to exclude these resources.
3
How Density is Applied:
In a non-PUD subdivision, development density is determined based on zoning district standards (lot
sizes, frontage, etc.) as applied to the net buildable area. It is not transferrable from undevelopable
areas to developable areas within the subdivision.
Status:
Draft ready for Commission review (with adjustments to natural resource classification underway based
on Commission feedback). Final language to be modified based on Commission feedback on key items.
Staff to provide complete draft in September 2020.
Related Documents:
Standard Status
Environmental Protection Standards Provided to PC 5/26/20
Street types
PC previously reviewed; complete
Civic Space Types PC previously reviewed; need to assign to zoning
districts for subdivision
Updated planned rights-of-way Draft ready for review
Official Map On PC work plan; to be updated following IZ
Critical Remaining Commission Decisions Points on Subdivisions
• Confirm that in future subdivisions, Hazards and Level 1 Resources must be set aside as
undevelopable land (e.g., conservation lots) and excluded from density calculations
• Application of “walkable” street and block standards in residential and mixed use districts
Non-critical, important decision points on Subdivisions [future meeting this summer/fall]
• Review traffic level of service thresholds
• Review proposed standards for public vs private roads
• Confirm requirements for construction / payment of infrastructure connections
• Review proposed minimum civic space standards [non-PUD subdivisions]
4
2. Planned Unit Developments
Summary:
Planned Unit Development (PUD) provisions, as currently required for all subdivisions of 10 or more
acres under the LDRs and all major subdivisions in the SEQ (and elective for 2 or more acres), provide
flexibility from applicable zoning district requirements by allowing the DRB to modify or waive required
lot sizes, setbacks, and other dimensional standards, ostensibly to meet stated community objectives in
conformance with the comprehensive plan. Current standards also allow for the calculation and
transfer of density across the entire subdivision, as applied within designated development areas. PUDs
currently function primarily as a means to modify or waive zoning standards, without any additional
design or development criteria intended to meet city objectives.
The intent of new PUD provisions, is to more clearly and specifically define planned unit development as
one or more “types” of planned development that allow for some flexibility within defined dimensional
and design parameters specific to each type. As proposed, PUD types function as “floating” zones that
relate to underlying zoning districts with regard to allowed uses (with limited additions) and minimum
densities of development, but otherwise incorporate dimensional and design standards – including land
allocation, and street, building, and civic space type standards – that vary by PUD type.
Principal Functions
• Allow or require integrated, comprehensive forms of planned development, e.g.:
• Traditional Neighborhood Development – walkable residential neighborhoods
• Neighborhood Commercial Development –walkable, mixed use centers
• Conservation PUDs – resource conservation, walkable neighborhoods
• Infill/Redevelopment – context sensitive modifications allowing integration, “best fit”
• Each PUD type is proposed as a “floating zone”– an overlay zone as defined under the current LDRs,
which is generally affiliated with an underlying zoning district in terms of allowed uses (with
additional uses assigned to certain PUD types), but dimensional and design standards for blocks lots,
and building form vary by PUD type.
• Each PUD type has minimum thresholds (triggers) for applicability.
• More than one PUD type may be permitted within a parcel or parcels, so long as minimums for each
are met
How Environmental Protection Standards are applied
• Resource protection standards under Articles 10 and 12 apply, as applicable to any form of
development, including allowed encroachments.
• Subdivision and building lot lines must avoid or, to the extent allowed under applicable regulations,
minimize the subdivision and physical fragmentation of protected resources
• Hazards Resource Areas must be set aside as undevelopable land (e.g., conserved open space), and
excluded from the calculation of “buildable area.”
• Level I Resource Areas are treated as follows:
• In a TND, NCD, or Infill/Redevelopment PUD, they are treated as a Hazard Resource Area
• In a Conservation PUD, they are treated as a Level II Resource Areas [note, this is a work is
progress based on Commissioner feedback at 8/11 meeting]
• Level II Resource Areas are included in the calculation of “buildable area” – e.g., for purposes of
determining the allowed density of development, and minimum land use (and resource land in
Conservation PUD) allocations as applicable; however resource protections standards apply
5
• Level II Resources may include land that is not otherwise regulated in Article 12, such as
Agricultural soils or farms, expanded riparian areas, other
• In a conservation PUD, the applicant has a right to build on 30% of non-Hazard land, which may
include some Level II Resources if these Level II resources exceed 70% of the remaining
property. Level II resources recommended be ranked for purposes of Conservation PUD
allocations.
Proposed Thresholds for PUDs:
Area Applicability Conservation TND NCD Infill/Redevelopment
0-2 acres Not Permitted
2-4 acres Elective Permitted Permitted up to TND/NCD threshold
4+ acres Mandatory (1) Permitted Permitted up to TND/NCD threshold
5+ acres Mandatory (1,2) Permitted Permitted Permitted up to TND threshold
10+ acres Mandatory (2) Permitted Permitted Permitted
(1) The Commission had previously indicated that PUDs should be required for all neighborhoods over 4 acres in
size in order to preclude large-lot, sub-Act 250 neighborhoods from being built. An alternative to requiring a
PUD for these 4-10 acre lots could be to establish a maximum lot size under standard subdivision. This has not
been fully examined but is an option for the Commission.
(2) Staff is working with Sharon Murray to review circumstances of single-buildings on large lots and how these
would related to PUD requirements.
Proposed Applicability of Individual PUD/PRD Types:
PUD Type Allowable Zoning Districts
Infill/ Redevelopment Applicable TND / NCD districts
Conservation PUD All Zoning Districts where thresholds are exceeded; R1, R2, SEQ-NR,
SEQ-NRT, SEQ-VR, SEQ-VC, SEQ-NRP [additional limitations apply]
TND R1-PRD, R1-LV, R2, R4, R7, Lakeshore, Allen Rd, Swift St, C1-LR, R7-NC,
SEQ NR, SEQ-NRT, SEQ-NRT, SEQ-VR, SEQ-VC
NCD R12, All C1- Districts, C2, Allen Road, Swift St, R7-NC
Simplified Developable Land Allocations [simplified, full version to be provided next month]
PUD Type Residential Min Non-Residential
Min
Open Space Min Unallocated
TND 70% 5% 10% (Civic) 15%
NCD 40% 25% 10% (Civic) 25%
Conservation 15% 0% 70% (65% Resource,
2% civic)
15%
6
Minimum and Maximum Residential Density, by PUD type
PUD Type Minimum Density Maximum Density
Infill/Redevelopment Greater of 4 units per Buildable Acre or
underlying zoning district max gross density
Land-Based 1 or 2, or Building-Based
[staff recommends Commission discuss
pros & cons of each]
TND Greater of 4 units per Buildable Acre or
underlying zoning district max gross
density, whichever is greater
Option: Minimum of 8 units per Buildable
Acre within ¼ mile of transit routes
Land-Based 1 or 2, or Building-Based
[staff recommends Building-Based]
NCD Greater of 8 units per Buildable Acre or
underlying zoning district max gross density
whichever is greater
Land-Based 1 or 2, or Building-Based
[staff recommends Building-Based]
Conservation Greater of 4 units per Buildable Acre or
underlying zoning district max gross density
Land-Based 1 or 2, or Building-Based
[staff recommends Commission discuss
pros and cons of each]
Maximum Density Alternatives:
Land Based Option 1 Land Based Option 2 Building Based
Source Underlying Zoning Minimum Density for
applicable PUD
Building Types
Base
calculation
Total land area
underlying zoning
district maximum
1.5 – 2 times the minimum
density for the PUD
Determined based on allowed
building types and associated lot
sizes as applied within Buildable
Areas
Bonuses, TDRs Added (eg, current
affordable housing)
2 – XX times the minimum
density for the PUD
Additional more compact building
types and/or greater allowed
percentage of more compact
building types
Status:
In development; awaiting PC review and determination on how to calculate Maximum Density
Related Documents:
Standard Status
Environmental Protection Standards Provided to PC 5/26/20
Subdivision Standards See above
Master Plan Standards See above
Street types PC previously reviewed; complete
Civic Space Types PC previously reviewed; need to assign to zoning
districts for subdivision
Building Types [except PRD] PC previously reviewed; Commission to review
updated detailed requirements
TDR standards for sending / receiving areas Under development
Site Plan Standards Ready for Commission Review
7
Critical Remaining Commission Decisions Points on Planned Unit Developments
• Determine whether to include infill/redevelopment PUDs for smaller residential parcels
• Determine How Maximum Density is to be calculated in TNDs, NCDs, Conservation,
Infill/Redevelopment
• Finalize list of Hazards, Level 1 Resource Protection Areas, Level 2 Resource Protection Areas
Non-critical, important decision points on master plans [future meeting this summer/fall]
• Finalize thresholds for PUDs and PUD types
• Review and Finalize Building Type standards
• Finalize allocations for each PUD type
• Determine standards for Infill/Redevelopment
• Determine allowed uses to apply to each
• Incorporate TDRs (sending, receiving) into PUD types
• Incorporate Inclusionary Zoning into PUD types
8
3. Master Plan
Summary:
As with subdivisions, this is a major upgrade to Article 15, to include more specific submission
requirements and review criteria. Master plans are intended to provide an overall plan for the orderly,
coordinated development of large tracts of land, and for more complex, phased development projects,
including most forms of planned unit development. The current Master Plan requirement under Article
15 applies to:
• Development of more than 10 dwelling units in the SEQ (also referred to in the SEQ as a
“regulating plan”)
• Development of more than 10 dwelling units in a 5-year period in the R1-Lakeshore District.
Current Master Plan provisions do not include specific review criteria; they simply establish a handful
thresholds for required amendments. They also give the DRB authority to determine the level of review
for future phases of development, but do not require phasing or overall design plans, and do not give the
applicant any vested rights.
The amended Master Plan would require applicants to identify protected resource areas, areas reserved
for future development, and the overall pattern of development (street, block layouts) within designated
development areas, to include the allocation of proposed land uses and civic space. The master plan
would also provide overall buildout estimates (budgets), proposed phasing schedules, and (potentially)
establish common design palates to be carried through the development. Where a design palate is
submitted and approved, it can be carried through future approvals. For the applicant, an approved
Master Plan would vest the project under current Land Development Regulations for a period of up to 10
years, for all future applications submitted under that Master Plan.
Principal Functions
• Applies to larger, more complex development – larger parcels, phased development, planned unit
development, multiple principal uses or buildings on a parcel
• Consists of a development (subdivision, land use, transportation, design) plan prepared to scale,
that establishes the overall framework for orderly, integrated subdivision and development of one
or more parcels of land.
• Used to determine project budgets at buildout (e.g., total developed area, acreage allocations by
use type, total housing units or gross square feet, total trip generation, stormwater volume, water
and sewer capacity allocations, etc.) and anticipated mitigation measures, improvements.
• Serves as the basis for project phasing (phasing plan), specifying the timing and sequence of
development, provision of civic space, public amenities, etc. in relation existing and planned
infrastructure capacity, required improvements, adopted capital improvement plan.
• May also serve as the basis for formal development agreements with the City (e.g., with regard to
provision of infrastructure, public facilities, amenities).
• Subsequent subdivision, development applications must be found to be consistent with the master
plan as approved.
• Vests the project under the current regulations for a period of up to 10 years, to provide assurances
necessary for project financing as necessary for large-scale projects, e.g.,
9
Proposed Thresholds:
As proposed, required for:
• Subdivision, development of any parcel equal to or greater than 4 acres (elective 2-4 acres)
• All Planned Unit Development
• Development occurring over 2 or more phases or 3 or more years
• Multiple principal buildings on a single lot (in association with preliminary site plan review)
How Environmental Protection Standards are applied
• Per Article 12 / Subdivision / PUD type standards
How Density is Applied:
• Per underlying zoning / PUD type standards
• Master Plan may approve multiple PUDs within a single application
Status:
Draft complete for Commission review in September. Minor modifications will be needed based on
Commission guidance on Subdivisions, PUDs
Related Documents:
Standard Status
Subdivision See above
PUDs See below
Site Plans See below
Critical Remaining Commission Decisions Points on Master Plans
• Thresholds for applicability [review in early September]
Non-critical, important decision points on master plans [future meeting this summer/fall]
• Amount of information required [include design palate]
10
4. Site Plans
Summary: Site plans are the specific, site-level design of how a building and its support infrastructure
are arranged on a lot. They apply to all development other than the subdivision of land, and single or
two family home properties in South Burlington. In the past these have been closely linked to PUDs and
in fact many commercial properties have applied as PUDs in order to obtain dimensional waivers, etc.
The proposed amendments would make clear the DRB / Administrative Officer’s purview with site plans
specifically, and establish clear (limited) authority to grant dimensional waivers where appropriate, thus
reserving the PUD tool for its intended purpose.
Principal Functions:
• Site level design for all development except single family homes & two family homes
• Includes building bulk, placement and architectural standards, as applicable
• Standards and arrangement of site features: parking, lighting, stormwater, site-level civic space,
landscaping, refuse removal, snow removal, etc.
• Allows for limited waiver of dimensional standards by the DRB
• Density, housing preservation, and inclusionary zoning standards applied
• Site-level traffic and transportation demand management [subset of a subdivision or PUD]
How Environmental Protection Standards are applied
Per Article 12 [may have been partially addressed via subdivision / PUD if lot was created after adoption
of regulations
Proposed Thresholds: As presently applied: all development other than single and two-family homes
Status: Draft ready for Commission review.
Related Documents:
Standard Status
Environmental Protection Standards Provided to PC 5/26/20
Subdivision Standards See above
Master Plan Standards See above
TDR Standards [may be applied now or later] Under development
Site-Level Civic Space Types [possible later
addition]
PC previously reviewed; need to assign amounts
per site plan – may be later project
Update underlying Zoning Districts if not a PUD
[including possible future modifications]
Not yet started
Critical Remaining Commission Decisions Points on Planned Unit Developments
• Review proposed changes to underlying zoning districts [in September]
Non-critical, important decision points on master plans [future meeting this summer/fall]
• Determine waiver authority for site plan applications
• Consider options for infill via TDR
• Consider site-level civic space requirements
LDR Proposed Amendment List2020‐09‐0212345678910111213AB C DG H LNumber Title Description LDR Section Type Overall status Next stepsLDR‐20‐01 Environmental Resource StandardsUpdate Natural Resource Standards, add Forest Blocks & Forest Block Connectors; establish criteria for limited infrastructure incursion3.04; Article 12 PUD PC reviewed on 8/11; return to draft after discussion of PUD types; adjust to include Conservation PUDCommission confirm standards at high level; provide recommendation to Council for feedback; develop draft for public inputLDR‐17‐13 Urban Design Overlay Lot CoverageRequest to allow greater lot coverage in the C1‐Auto District. Working Group proposes to be for Urban Design OverlayArticle 10 Stand Alone Draft complete. PC review 8/11/2020Commission review and possible actionLDR‐20‐04 Planned Unit DevelopmentsUpdate and re‐write of PUD standards; integration of existing SEQ standards into city‐wide PUD standardsArticle 15C PUDDraft under development. PC guidance on thresholds and density approach 8/25Determine Density; applicability, thresholdsLDR‐20‐02 Subdivision Standards Update and re‐write of Subdivision Standards & procedures Article 15B PUD Staff draft complete (subject to modification with conclusion on PUDs)Present to PCLDR‐20‐03 Master Plan Standards Update and re‐write of Master Plan Standards Article 15A PUD Staff draft 90% Present alongside PUDs or Site PlansLDR‐20‐05 Building Types Establish building types for applicability in PUDs (and possible elsewhere later)Appendix E PUD Commission has reviewed; staff draft 90%. Need to calibrate with PUDsPC to review and calibrate for PUDsLDR‐20‐06 Open Space Types in PUDsApply certain open space types to PUDs (& Subdivisions). Relates to LDR‐19‐06Appendix E PUD Commission has reviewed. Draft 90%.Reconcile with PUDs & Subdivisions; present to PCComprehensive Plan amendment for Natural ResourcesPossible amendment of Comprehensive Plan natural resource and future land use map to reflect updated objectives for conservation.Comp Plan PUD PC decide whether update is neededLDR‐20‐07 Street standards Replace Street standards from City Center FBC, Southeast Quadrant, and General with citywide standardsArticle 9, Article 11, Article 15PUD Draft complete. Needs to be put into graphic formPresent to PCLDR‐20‐08 Required setback on Arterials & CollectorsSeparates required setbacks from the subject of Planned Rights‐of‐Way (previously required together). Eliminates larger setbacks (50') from most streets and relies on underlying zoning. Clears conflict with SEQ standards3.06, Article 9 Subdivision / Site Plan StdsStaff draft complete Present to PCLDR‐20‐09 Planned Rights‐of‐Way Provides greater clarification for how a planned ROW is to be measured, and notes that "existing" ROW is a typical and not necessarily the actual existing along all roadways3.06 Subdivision / Site Plan StdsStaff draft complete Present to PCLDR‐20‐10 Building envelopes for SEQ‐NRPEstablish building envelopes for any allowed development in the SEQ‐NRP districtArticle 9 Related to Environmental Protection StdsStaff draft ready Present to PC
LDR Proposed Amendment List2020‐09‐021AB C DG H LNumber Title Description LDR Section Type Overall status Next steps141516171819202122LDR‐20‐11 Site Plan Standards; waiversUpdates general site plan standards to ensure that cross‐references to related standards are included. Revises waiver standards to allow site plan review to stand "on its own" [currently many properties use PUD as a tool to seek waivers from standards], and to set clear waiver guidelines to the DRB; establishes standards for when adjacent streetscape improvements are needed.14.04; 14.07 Site Plan Stds Staff first draft 80% Present to PC in SeptemberLDR‐20‐12 Expand Use of TDRs Expand applicability of TDRs citywide New Article 11 TDR [relates to PUDs for receiving]Staff and Commissioner Mittag have prepared detailed outlines.PC discuss approach and provide directionLDR‐20‐13 C1 Zoning Districts Eliminates C1‐R12 zoning district and C1‐Air zoning district. C1‐R12 west of I‐89 becomes C1‐R15, C1‐R12 near Kennedy Drive and C1‐Air become Transition Commercial. Purpose statement for C1‐R15 revised. C1‐Auto purpose statement revised; possible realignment and clarifications re display vehiclesArticle 5 Individual Ready for presentation Present to PCLDR‐20‐14Transition Mixed Use and Neighborhood Mixed Use DistrictsEstablishes two new zoning districts to replace Allen Road, Swift Street, R7‐NC and C1‐LR districts, and apply per zoning mapArticle 5 PUD Ready for presentation Present to PCLDR‐20‐15 R2 Zoning District Removed PUD density increase in R2 district and instead applies via PUD standards 4.02 PUD Ready for presentation Present to PCLDR‐20‐16 R1 Zoning Districts Eliminates subdistricts of R1 (R1‐PRD, R1‐Lakeview, R1‐Lakeshore), removes PUD density increases, and instead applies, where allowed, through PUDs. R1‐PRD and R1‐Lakeshore become R1 and PUDs are addressed via PUD standards. R1‐Lakeview is consolidated into Lakeshore neighborhood.4.01 PUD Ready for presentation Present to PCLDR‐20‐17 Floodplain standards Raise requirement minimum levels for any roadways to 2 feet above flood elevation10.01 NAT RESOURCE Staff draft complete Present to PCLDR‐20‐24 Address construction noise in LDRsSet standards and requirements associated with construction noiseArticle 16 Stand Alone Council discussion in September 2020; TBD if any requests to CommissionLDR‐19‐06 Open Space Chart & FBC typesModify table of open space types (Appendix F) and applicability in the City Center Form Based Code DistrictArticle 8, Appendix EFBC; relates to PUDs for applicabilityPC held hearing 8/13/19; staff has reviewed questionsPresent to PC
LDR Proposed Amendment List2020‐09‐021AB C DG H LNumber Title Description LDR Section Type Overall status Next steps2324252627282930313233LDR‐20‐18 Technical corrections 3.01 District descriptions; 3.04: silvicultural practices; 3.06: setbacks for pre‐existing lots; 3.06: accessory structure setbacks; 3.06 corner visibility; 3.07 Height; 3.09 Umbrella uses; 3.10 parking for ADUs; 5.08 relocate commercial district standards; zoning district descriptions‐ remove redundant references to implementing Plan and streamline wording for uses; 6.05 removes / relocates standards for commercial / industrial districts; Throughout ‐ removes redundant references to implementing Comprehensive Plan; Article 6 & Section 13.11 relocate and clarify when drive‐throughs are permitted / prohibited [no policy change proposed]; 13.17 Relocate SEQ fence standards; 13.11 relocate numbering system requirements; throughout: generally renumber sections; Appendix E remove requirement for paper submissionThroughout TECHNICAL 90%; awaiting determinations on other sectionsPresent to PCResidential Design Re‐locates residential design standards from SEQ to apply citywide; modifies garage scale to principal facade 3.16 Conservation PUDs?Staff draft complete Present to PC for considerationLDR‐20‐19 City Center Official Map ‐ Executive DriveRelocate the planned roadway from Patchen Road west from current placement over executive drive to Jaycee BoundaryOfficial Map INDIVIDUAL Discussed in City Council and Rec/Parks & Bike/Ped Executive SessionsPresent to PCLDR‐18‐02 Change IA to ResidentialRezone Edlund parcel from IA‐S to R4 or other PUD Commission has indicated that this would be part of a larger review of properties during Interim ZoningRecommend address as part of PUDsLDR‐20‐20 Replace Traffic Overlay DistrictReplaces the traffic overall district with a tiered city‐wide set of standards that promote multi‐modal transportationArticle 15 TRANSPORTATIONStaff / consultant draft 80%Present approach to PC; PC to decide when to includeLDR‐20‐21 Airport Approach cones & FAA reviewRevised language following communication with the FAA 6.02, 6.03, 10.***TIDY Staff draft complete Staff Identified; Present to PCLDR‐20‐23 FBC official map recreation pathsConsider addition of recreation / pedestrian paths in City Center FBC area official MapOfficial Map FBC FBC Subcommittee reviewed in 2019; recommendedReconstitute FBC subcommitteeAccessory Structures Increases allowance for # of accessory structures on a lot and references total SF of accessory structures as part of total lot building coverage instead of 50% of ground floor area of principal building; removes special reference to garage connection3.10 SITE PLAN Staff draft complete Staff Identified; Present to PCRetaining walls Allow the DRB to consider approval of a retaining wall within 5' of a property line.13.25 SITE PLAN Staff draft complete Staff Identified; Present to PCEarth Products ‐ StormwaterExempt the removal of earth products from an approved stormwater facility. Removed requirement to obtain a formal exemption from the ZA[not a practice elsewhere in the LDRs]13.17 SITE PLAN Staff draft complete Staff Identified; Present to PCBus Shelters Remove local review if in ROW. 13.09 SITE PLAN Staff draft complete Staff Identified; Present to PC
LDR Proposed Amendment List2020‐09‐021AB C DG H LNumber Title Description LDR Section Type Overall status Next steps34353637383940414243444546RV Parking Allows RVs to be placed in the same locations as an accessory structure on a property, plus the driveway3.09 SITE PLAN Staff draft complete Resident Request; present to PCPre‐existing small lots Reduces minimum size of a pre‐existing small lot that may be built upon from 1/8 acre to 3,000 s.f. and width from 40' to 30'3.05 SITE PLAN Staff draft complete Staff Identified; Present to PCFBC Building breaks, Roofline Stds; garage access; T3 upper windows conflictsClarify how far a building break along a vertical plane must extend; review roofline standards; address garage accessesFBC T3, T4, T5 BESFBC Initial review by FBC subcommittee on mostDetermine Review BodyFBC t5 Curb Cuts / blocksConsider relocating curb cut allowance in T5 to be at rear of first buildingArticle 8 FBC FBC subcommittee reviewed in 2019Determine Review BodyFBC Building street frontageConsider modifying street types and/or allowing buildings with no street frontage if frontage on street is metT4 BES FBC FBC Subcommittee reviewed in 2019Determine Review BodyFBC T5 Uses & Doors Modify doorway frequency and public usage standards in T5; consider modifying allowance uses to service & retail only for first 25' and then all uses behind. Allow lobbyT5 BES FBC FBC Subcommittee reviewed in 2019Determine Review BodyFBC T5 0' size lot line Consider requiring a 0' setback on at least one side of a T5 lot T5 BES FBC Not yet reviewed Determine Review BodyLDR‐19‐07 Solar canopies in Parking areasWould parking areas with solar canopies to have modified landscaping requirements13.06 SITE PLAN PC pulled and asked for work on landscaping around perimeters. Updated draft completePresent to PCFBC official Map ‐ Williston Road Network StudyReview and consider official map amendment based on Williston Road Phase II report. Also adjust frontage building requirements based on TiersOfficial Map; Article 8FBC PC to discuss Determine Review BodyLimited Neighborhood Commercial Use UpdateExpand allowance to be integrated into a mixed‐use or non‐residential building on the property in addition to as a stand‐alone structure13.27 Individual Staff draft under development Present to PC. Not pressingLDR‐18‐05 Allow parking in front where setbackAllow parking to be in front of buildings where building set back XXX feet from roadSITE PLAN Commission Indicated in Nov 2018 that this request would be considered following Interim ZoningPC to review post IZLDR‐18‐04 Remove Scenic Overlay segmentRemove the scenic overlay district from a parcel in the SEQ‐NR district on Hinesburg RoadNAT RESOURCE Commission Indicated in Nov 2018 that this request would be considered following Interim ZoningPC to review post IZLDR‐18‐03 Review rural areas Review regulations for rural lands in South Burlington PUD To be reviewed as part of Interim ZoningUnder review as part of IZ
SOUTH BURLINGTON PLANNING COMMISSION
MEETING MINUTES
25 AUGUST 2020
1
The South Burlington Planning Commission held a regular meeting on Tuesday, 25 August 2020, at 7:00
p.m., via remote electronic participation.
MEMBERS PRESENT: J. Louisos, Chair; B. Gagnon, M. Ostby, M. Mittag, D. Macdonald, P. Engels
ALSO PRESENT: P. Conner, Director of Planning and Zoning; S. Dooley, L. Ravin, F. Von Turkovich, A.
Chalnick, A. & C. Long, J. Nick, L. Kingsbury, D. Long, K. Ryder
1. Agenda: Additions, deletions or changes in order of agenda items:
No changes were made to the agenda.
2. Open to the public for items not related to the Agenda:
No issues were raised.
3. Planning Commissioner announcements and staff report:
Mr. Conner said things are very busy in the office due in part to lots of refinancing and to noise issues
connected with the building of a street in the SEQ, and noted that the Council is looking into noise
issues; this issue may get to the Planning Commission in the next few months.
4. Work Session on Land Development Regulation Overhaul:
a. Presentation and discussion of Subdivision, Master Plan, and PUD Standards
b. Review and discussion of key questions
c. Staff update on Habitat Block map and analysis; Commissioner questions
Mr. Conner noted the repackaging of materials to make things clearer. Things will all be pulled together
in the next few meetings.
Mr. Conner then presented a power point focusing on subdivisions, master plans, PUDs, environment
protection standards, site plan standards and related amendments.
PUDs are not intended to solve every problem. They address large neighborhoods and some infill
neighborhoods and can complement zoning standards. Other tools include subdivision regulations,
zoning district standards and Form Based Codes.
Mr. Conner showed overhead photos of city neighborhoods such as Mayfair Park, the Orchards and
Prouty Parkway which do meet all the standards. He also showed the Village at Dorset Park which has
some small blocks and one very large block (which would have had a mid-block connection were it to be
approved today). He also showed the Dorset Street/Barrett Street neighborhood and noted the San
Remo block where a street is planned to break up the long block. Mr. Conner also noted some
commercial examples such as Larkin Terrace and the corner of Shelburne Rd. and Farrell Street as well
2
as Taft Corners in Williston which also meet block standards. The concept is that a standard block size
can fit all types of development. Mr. Conner noted that once roads are set, there are there forever; the
question is what can take place decades from now.
Regarding density, Mr. Conner showed how different arrangements can work in the same block area.
The idea here is that the numeric density is secondary to the scale of the building on the site. He
showed some examples from Oregon and said the question is how to get different housing types into a
block. To demonstrate this, Mr. Conner showed a side-by-side duplex, stacked duplex, townhouses, a
South Village triplex, a 4-plex that will look like a single-family home, and the Kirby Cottages (Mr. Conner
noted that the Kirby Cottages have all been purchased by a South Burlington Company for housing for
employees).
Mr. Mittag asked how you deal with traffic with 60+units on a block. Mr. Conner said South Burlington
is not planning anything on that scale, probably about half of that. There can also be incentives so
people are not always in cars, and there can be some non-residential components so every trip is not a
vehicle trip.
Mr. Von Turkovich asked whether building types are exclusive or just a way to get a discussion started.
Mr. Conner said they are just a sampling. There is a full list available. Mr. Von Turkovich said he liked
the block sizing.
Ms. Louisos asked if housing types would be considered at the subdivision level. Mr. Conner said there
is nothing to preclude that, but it is a leap to do so.
Ms. Ostby asked if there are examples of where this has happened. Mr. Conner said Minneapolis did it
recently and cities in the Pacific Northwest have been doing it for some time.
Mr. Conner then outlined the 4 types of PUDs being considered:
a. Traditional Neighborhood
b. Neighborhood Commercial
c. Conservation
d. Infill/Redevelopment
He added that the Commission may look at a “Campus” PUD later, but that in order to complete the
principal part of this project in the nearer term, that this piece had been put as a lower priority.
Each of the PUDs is proposed as a “floating zone” on an overlay zone as defined under the current LDRs,
generally affiliated with an underlying district. Each PUD type will have a minimum trigger for
applicability, and more than one PUD type may be permitted within a parcel as long as the minimums
are met.
The Resource Protection Standards in Articles 10 and 12 would apply to PUDs. In all PUDs except the
Conservation PUD, hazards and Level 1 resource areas would be set aside as undevelopable and would
3
be excluded from the buildable area calculation. In Level 2, resource areas, would be included in the
buildable area to determine density. Resource protection standards would still apply.
In the Conservation PUD, 70% of natural resources must be set aside (how that is calculated would be
up to the Planning Commission). It would be the Commission’s option to base requirements on a full
parcel and to exclude Level 1 and both Level 1 and Hazards. Level 2 resources may include land not
otherwise regulated in Article 12, such as agricultural soils or farms. An applicant could build on 30% of
non-hazard land which may include some Level 2 resources, if these resources exceed 70% of the
remaining property. Mr. Conner noted that all of these numbers and calculations are up to the
Commission
Mr. Conner then showed a chart of Residential Development Density Options. He showed 4 different
ways to calculate maximum density. The remaining question for the Commission to consider is whether
to go with a “land-based” density option or a “building type-based” option. The land-based option
would, for example, could be 4 units per acre minus hazards, etc. The building-based option would
construct density based on building types and their allocated land area. A maximum number of
different types of homes would be established. In the latter case, a bonus would become more of an
allowed housing type or possibly a different housing type.
Mr. Conner showed a chart describing various building types (e.g., detached house carriage house,
duplex, multiplex, etc.). He also showed a chart of Building Form Based Density (buildings per acre on
residential land after Level1 and Hazards are removed).
Mr. Macdonald said it looks as though the building-based option allows more density. Mr. Conner said
that effectively it does, but there would be fewer dwelling units per acre. The DRB would have guidance
to consider such things as transit routes, adjacent neighborhoods, etc.).
Mr. Conner said both approaches could work for infill types of development and in a Conservation PUD
(you can get the same amount of density you would get before deducting the 70%). While both forms
would work, the message would be simpler with a “land-based” approach, especially for a Conservation
subdivision.
Ms. Ostby asked whether the 1.2 units per acre in the Southeast Quadrant (SEQ) would still work. Mr.
Conner gave examples of how a Conservation PUD, or a TND, would work, and how the application of
TDRs could make a difference. In the SEQ, staff’s working draft states that without TDRs, there would be
a minimum density set in whatever area you wanted to build. You would get density on the buildable
part of the property. The remainder of the land would be for conservation or reserved for future use if
you chose not to bring in TDRs.
Mr. Mittag asked what would happen if a person had a large parcel and wanted to set aside 90% and
build homes on 4 or 5 large lots. Mr. Conner said the person could go with a straight subdivision. The
Commission wouldn’t have to put in a minimum density. He also noted that there are areas where the
city may want a minimum amount development. He added that the Conservation PUD could also be
designed without a minimum density in some areas.
4
Mr. Engels said he heard that there are only 700 acres left for development in the city. Mr. Conner said
that is probably close in terms of land not incumbered. It does not include land that could be used for
redevelopment and infill. Mr. Engels suggested focusing on those 700 acres. He said what he is hearing
sound close to Form Based Code, and he felt that was worthwhile to explore. It is a simple system while
the other is more complex, especially when you’re looking at only 700 acres. Mr. Conner noted that
PUDs and Form Based Code are not all that dramatically different from each other.
Mr. Gagnon noted that even with Form Based Code, certain building types and street types are defined,
and that is what a PUD is doing….like a Form Based Code without the T-zones. Mr. Conner felt that was
accurate. He felt there was nothing to preclude the city from over time moving away from PUDs once
there are specific neighborhoods designed and laid out through the Coty’s detailed work in those areas.
Mr. Mittag felt commercial and industrial zones might be appropriate places for Form Based Code.
Mr. Conner said he didn’t expect anything to be settled at this meeting. At the next meeting, all this will
be put together with the conservation pieces.
Mr. Chalnick asked about having a large parcel with a lot of resources to conserve, but a person wants to
sell off a few parcels along the road. Mr. Conner said that is a policy decision. The first PUD draft did
have a minimum density, but that is not set in stone. Mr. Chalnick asked whether a landowner could
choose a Conservation PUD. Mr. Conner said in most of the country, that would be established. The
proposal for the Planning Commission is that in all residential and lower density areas it would be an
option for an owner.
Noah Hyman, another member of the public, said he wants to building houses for his 4 kids and create a
“family compound.” He asked if what is proposed would inhibit his ability to do that and whether he
would have to create a minimum density. He also felt that what he heard tonight devalues TDRs.
Mr. Conner said it is an objective of the TDR Committee to retain the TDR value. TDRs could go outside
PUD areas (e.g., Shelburne Road, Williston Rd) where residential density could be increased.
Ms. Dooley said she would like to hear the community’s perspective on this, particularly with relevance
to affordability and what kind of community people want.
Mr. Conner said that relates to the “missing middle,” and that is why the proposal is looking at different
ways to consider density and create a variety of housing. He stressed that this is not a “silver bullet.”
Ms. Dooley said it is important to make that link explicit. She felt it is important to have a goal of
inclusion so that people of one income level aren’t living in one part of the community and those of
another level in another part of the community. Ms. Ostby said she felt inclusionary zoning needs to be
city-wide.
5
Mr. Macdonald asked whether the 700 developable acres are identifiable. He felt if the Commission
could see them, they could consider what should go there. Mr. Conner said “absolutely.” The
conversation could be tied to the map of available parcels.
Ms. Ostby said she would offer a remote listening session to community members and hep develop a
map so people can form questions for the Commission.
Ms. Louisos noted an offer from a community group to speak with the Commission regarding housing.
They made a presentation to the City Council. Mr. Gagnon felt that would be good as some residents
follow the Commission and not the Council, and the report does supplement what the Commission has
been talking about.
Ms. Louisos said she would work with Mr. Conner about the timing for that presentation.
5. Minutes of 27 November 2018, 17 December 2019, 2 February, 11 February and 11 August
2020:
Mr. Gagnon moved to approve all of the above Minutes as written. Mr. Mittag seconded. Motion
passed unanimously.
6. Other Business:
Ms. Ostby said she would like to know how people affected by the 2 different development types feel
about them. Mr. Conner said the biggest difference is that with “parcel-based”, unless you go with a
really high number, you don’t get a mixture of housing types and there are gaps which preclude
walkable neighborhoods.
Members agreed to hold the next meeting on Wednesday following Labor Day as the City Council will be
meeting on the Tuesday.
As there was no further business to come before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned by
common consent at 9:05 p.m.
___________________________________
Clerk
The City of Burlington will not tolerate unlawful harassment or discrimination on the basis of political or religious affiliation, race, color, national origin, place of
birth, ancestry, age, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, marital status, veteran status, disability, HIV positive status, crime victim status or genetic
information. The City is also committed to providing proper access to services, facilities, and employment opportunities. For accessibility information or
alternative formats, please contact the City Planning department or 711 if you are hearing or speech impaired.
City of Burlington, VT
149 Church Street, 3rd Floor
Burlington, VT 05401
Phone: (802) 865-7144
www.burlingtonvt.gov/plan
TO: South Burlington Planning Director
Colchester Planning Director
Winooski Planning & Zoning Manager
Chittenden County Regional Planning Director
VT Department of Housing and Community Development
FROM: Meagan Tuttle, AICP, Comprehensive Planner, City of Burlington
DATE: August 27, 2020
RE: Burlington Comprehensive Development Ordinance Amendments
Enclosed, please find proposed amendments to the City of Burlington Comprehensive
Development Ordinance:
ZA-21-01: Daycare & Preschool in RCO
ZA-21-01: Temporary Tents
The Planning Commission will hold a public hearing on the proposed amendments on
Wednesday, September 23, 2020 at 6:45 pm via a virtual meeting on the platform Zoom.
Please ensure this communication is forwarded to the chairs of your respective Planning
Commissions. Submit any communications for the Planning Commission’s consideration at
the hearing to me by close of business on September 22, 2020.
Thank you.
CC: Andy Montroll, Burlington Planning Commission Chair
David White, FAICP, Director, City Planning
Scott Gustin, AICP, Principal Planner, Department of Permitting & Inspections
Kimberly Sturtevant, Assistant City Attorney
The City of Burlington will not tolerate unlawful harassment or discrimination on the basis of political or religious affiliation, race, color, national origin, place of
birth, ancestry, age, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, marital status, veteran status, disability, HIV positive status, crime victim status or genetic
information. The City is also committed to providing proper access to services, facilities, and employment opportunities. For accessibility information or
alternative formats, please contact the City Planning department or 711 if you are hearing or speech impaired.
Burlington Planning Commission
149 Church Street
Burlington, VT 05401
www.burlingtonvt.gov/pz
Phone: (802) 865-7144
Andy Montroll, Chair
Bruce Baker, Vice Chair
Yves Bradley
Alex Friend
Emily Lee
Harris Roen
Jennifer Wallace-Brodeur
PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE
Burlington Comprehensive Development Ordinance
ZA-21-01 Daycares & Preschools in RCO
ZA-21-02 Temporary Tents
Pursuant to 24 V.S.A. §4441 and §4444, notice is hereby given of a public hearing by the Burlington
Planning Commission to hear comments on the following proposed amendments to the City of
Burlington’s Comprehensive Development Ordinance (CDO). Per Act 92, Secs. 5 and 6, the public
hearing will take place during the Planning Commission meeting on Wednesday, September 23,
2020 beginning at 6:45pm. You may access the hearing/meeting as follows:
To join from a Computer, please click this URL to join, and enter the password if prompted:
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/87568033583
To join by phone, dial this number and enter the Webinar ID when prompted:
Number: +1 312 626 6799 Webinar ID: 875 6803 3583
Pursuant to the requirements of 24 V.S.A. §4444(b):
Statement of purpose:
The purpose of the proposed amendments are as follows:
ZA-21-01: To eliminate the distinction between small and large Day Care Centers and small
and large Preschools, and to eliminate the GFA limit on these facilities in RCO districts.
ZA-21-02: To allow for placement of structural tents for non-residential purposes without
review or zoning permit required for up to 180 days with Fire Marshal permit.
Geographic areas affected:
These amendments apply to the following areas of the city:
ZA-21-01: Eliminating the distinction between small and large facilities applies to all zoning
districts, but changes what is presently allowed in RCO and E-AE zoning districts. Change to
footnote 8 impacts only RCO zoned areas.
ZA-21-02: Applies to all parts of the city.
List of section headings affected:
The proposed amendments modify the following sections of the Burlington Comprehensive
Development Ordinance:
ZA-21-01: Modifies Sec. 5.4.1, Table 8.1.8-1, some definitions in Article 13, and Appendix-A Use
Table
ZA-21-02: Modifies Sec. 5.1.2 (f) Temporary Structures
The full text of the Burlington Comprehensive Development Ordinance is available online at
www.burlingtonvt.gov/DPI/CDO. The proposed amendment can be reviewed in hard copy posted
on the first floor of City Hall, 149 Church Street, Burlington or on the department’s website at
https://www.burlingtonvt.gov/DPI/CDO/Proposed-Amendments-Before-the-Planning-Commission
The City of Burlington will not tolerate unlawful harassment or discrimination on the basis of political or religious affiliation, race, color, national origin, place of
birth, ancestry, age, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, marital status, veteran status, di sability, HIV positive status, crime victim status or genetic
information. The City is also committed to providing proper access to services, facilities, and employment opportunities. For accessibility information or
alternative formats, please contact the City Planning department or 711 if you are hearing or speech impaired.
City of Burlington, VT
149 Church Street, 3rd Floor
Burlington, VT 05401
Phone: (802) 865-7144
www.burlingtonvt.gov/plan
TO: Burlington Planning Commission
FROM: Meagan Tuttle, Comprehensive Planner, City Planning
DATE: August 27, 2020
RE: Proposed CDO Amendment: ZA-21-01 Day Care & Preschool in RCO Districts
Overview & Background
This amendment originates from a request made by the Winooski Valley Parks District (WVPD) on
behalf of its tenants, the Ethan Allen Museum and the Forest Preschool. The preschool has operated
at the Homestead Barn and WVPD property since 2015. Due to the critical need for childcare in the
City and state, the preschool has maintained a waiting list for enrollment. As a result of COVID-19, the
preschool is experiencing a significant increase in the demand for space in the program, as well new
standards to re-open under modified guidelines for staff and classroom space. While the WVPD has
space to expand to meet both the increased need for space at the current enrollment, as well as the
preschool’s needs under expanded enrollment, the zoning ordinance presently limits this expansion
in two ways—by limiting the gross floor area (GFA) of the facility and the enrollment to 20 children.
Presently, the CDO separately defines Small Day Care Center and Large Day Care Center and Small
Preschool and Large Preschool. The distinction between large and small facilities in both of these
cases is based on the number of children served in a facility—small is limited to 20 children, while
large is more than 20 children. A zoning amendment that predates the current 2008 CDO made the
distinction between Small and Large Daycares. An amendment to enable a small childcare to
operate in conjuction with the facilities at the WVPD property was approved in 2015. These
thresholds then informed a series of more recent amendments which established the same
distinction between Large and Small Preschools, and a series of other changes related to these uses.
The distinction between large and small facilities is relevant only within the RCO and E-AE zoning
districts. Within these districts, Small Day Cares and Small Preschools are allowed as a Conditional
Use, but only in conjunction with Small Museums and are lmited to 50% of the GFA of the museum.
However, neither Large Day Care nor Large Preschool are permitted in these districts. Within all other
zoning districts, large and small facilities of both types are treated exactly the same in terms of where
they are allowed, any applicable footnotes, and their minimum parking requirements (as proposed by
ZA-20-04, which is scheduled for public hearing before the Council).
In order to enable the preschool to respond to its underlying and COVID-19 driven needs for
expanded enrollment, the WVPD has requested an amendment to the ordinance to address these
limitations. It is staff’s recommendation that the CDO be amended to eliminate the distinction
between large and small day care and preschool facilities, as there is no material difference between
them except for within the RCO and Enterprise-Ag districts, and to remove the 50% GFA limit on their
size relative to museums within the RCO districts.
Proposed Amendment
Amendment Type
Text Amendment Map Amendment Text & Map Amendment
Purpose Statement
This amendment proposes to eliminate the distinction between small and large Day Care Centers
and small and large Preschools, and to eliminate the gross floor area limitation on these facilities
within the RCO zoning districts.
Proposed Amendments
To achieve the goals identified above, the proposed amendment affects the following sections of
the Burlington Comprehensive Development Ordinance:
1. Update Sec. 5.4.1 to reflect updated uses
Remove references to small and large day care centers and preschools, and replace
with “Day Care Center” and “Preschool.”
2. Update Table 8.1.8-1 regarding minimum parking for updated uses
Remove references to small and large day care centers and preschools, and replace
with “Day Care Center” and “Preschool.” Utilize minimum parking standards as
proposed by ZA-20-04, which are consistent across all uses.
3. Modify definitions in Article 13 to change uses
Revise Small Day Care Center and Large Day Care Center to Day Care Center
Revise Small Preschool and Large Preschool to Preschool
4. Update Appendix A- Use Table to reflect updated uses, amend Footnote 8 (attached to
this memo)
Update the uses within Appendix A to be consistent with the above changes
Utilize existing Small Day Care Center provision for new Day Care Center use, and
existing Small Preschool provisions for new Preschool use regarding where facilities
are permitted or conditional use.
Amend Footnote 8 to remove the 50% GFA limit for Daycares and Preschools within
the RCO Districts relative to Small Museums
**BEGIN PROPOSED AMENDMENTS**
Changes shown (underline to be added, strike out to be deleted) are proposed changes to the
Burlington Comprehensive Development Ordinance.
Sec. 5.4.1 Small and Large Day Care Centers and Small and Large Preschools
In addition to the provisions of Art 3, Part 5 for conditional uses, and applicable site and design
review standards in Art 6, the following additional regulations shall be applicable to an
application involving a small day care center or, large day care center, small preschool, or large
preschool where such uses are treated as conditional uses pursuant to Appendix A – Use Table:
(a) No playground equipment shall be located within the front yard;
(b) [Reserved]
(c) The site plan review shall insure adequate and safe drop-off and pickup space is provided and
that traffic problems are not created;
(d) Any additions, signage, or site improvements shall be residential in character;
(e) The facility shall be licensed by the State of Vermont;
(f) No more than one residential unit may be converted for the creation of a single small day care
center, large day care center, small preschool, or large preschool. Such a conversion shall be
exempt from the requirements of Article 9, Part 2- Housing Replacement; and,
(g) The neighborhood is not overburdened with other small day care centers, large day care
centers, small preschools, or large preschools.
Sec. 8.1.8 Minimum Parking Requirements
Parking for all uses and structures shall be provided in accordinace with Table 8.1.8-1.
(a) – (c) As written.
Table 8.1.8-1 Minimum Off-Street Parking Requirements
Neighborhood
Districts
Shared Use
Districts
Downtown
Districts
NON-RESIDENTIAL USES Per 1,000 square feet of
gross floor area (gfa) except as noted
**All prior uses As Written**
Daycare - Large (Over 20 children) (per two
(2) employees)
1 plus 1 drop-
off per 5
children
1 plus 1
drop-off per
5 children
2 drop-off0
Daycare - Small (20 children or less) (per
two (2) employees) 1 1 1
School – Preschool Large
(over 20 children) (per two (2) employees
1 plus 1 drop-
off per 5
children
1 plus 1
drop-off per
5 children
1 plus 1 per 5
children0
School – Preschool Small
(up to 20 children) (per two (2) employees 1 1 1
**All following uses As Written**
Sec. 13.1.2 Definitions
All other definitions as written.
Day Care Center: (See Article 5 for specific provisions.)
(a) Family Day Care Home: For the purposes of this ordinance, family day care home shall
have the same meaning as that set forth in 24 V.S.A. sec. 4412 (5).
(b) Small Day Care Center: A state licensed daycare facility. serving no more than twenty (20)
full-time children in total.
(c) Large Day Care Center: A state-licensed facility providing day care services for more
than twenty (20) full-time children.
School: The academic space and accessory uses for the teaching of children or adults.
(a) Primary: elementary school, inclusive of grades K-8.
(b) Secondary: a high school and/or vocational center for attendance after
elementary/primary school, granting a high school diploma for levels of education
inclusive of grades 9-12.
(c) Post-Secondary: after high school, including colleges, community colleges, universities,
or continuing education.
(d) Trade or Professional: a school that offers instruction in skilled trades.
(e) Small Preschool: a school providing educational services for children from 3 years of age
until their admission to first grade and that may include kindergarten., serving no more than
twenty (20) full-time children in total.
(f) Large Preschool: a school providing educational services to children from 3 years of age
until their admission to first grade and that may include kindergarten, for more than twenty
(20) full-time children in total.
**END PROPOSED AMENDMENTS**
Relationship to planBTV
This following discussion of conformance with the goals and policies of planBTV is prepared in
accordance with the provisions of 24 V.S.A. §4441(c).
Impact on Safe & Affordable Housing
The proposed amendment has no impact on the provision of safe and affordable housing.
Compatibility with Proposed Future Land Use & Density
The proposed amendment removes arbitrary standards limiting the size of a day care or
preschool facility in an area of the city where these uses are otherwise permitted as a
conditional use. This change is consistent with planBTV policy 14.4 which identifies the need
to “expand the number and quality of spaces available for, and funding sources to support,
child care close to where residents life and work in order to ensure that all Burlington
families have access to these services regardless of income or background.”
Planned Community Facilities
The proposed amendment has no impact on planned community facilities.
Process Overview
The following chart summarizes the current stage in the zoning amendment process, and
identifies any recommended actions:
Planning Commission Process
Draft Amendment
prepared by:
Staff, resident
request
Planning
Commission
Discussion
8/26/2020
Approved for
Public Hearing
8/26/2020
Public Hearing
9/23/2020
Approve &
forward to
Council
Continue
discussion
City Council Process
First Read &
Referral to
Ordinance Cmte
Ordinance
Committee
discussion
Ordinance
Cmte
recommends
to Council
Second Read &
Public Hearing
Approval &
Adoption
Rejected
Excerpt of Appendix A-Use Table for Proposed ZA-21-01
Proposed ZA-21-01 Day Care & Preschool in RCO Districts
Urban
Reserve
Recreation, Conservation & Open
Space Institutional Residential Downtown
Mixed Usei Neighborhood Mixed Use Enterprise
USES UR RCO - A RCO - RG RCO - C I RL/W RM/W RH DW-PT16 NMU NAC NAC-
RC NAC-CR E-AE E-LM
RESIDENTIAL USES UR RCO - A1 RCO - RG RCO - C I RL/W RM/W RH DW-PT16 NMU NAC NAC-
RC NAC-CR E-AE E-LM
** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** **
RESIDENTIAL SPECIAL
USES UR RCO – A RCO - RG RCO - C I RL/W RM/W RH DW-PT16 NMU NAC NAC-
RC NAC-CR E-AE E-LM
** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** **
NON-RESIDENTIAL USES UR21 RCO - A RCO - RG RCO - C I RL/W RM RH DW-PT16 NMU NAC NAC-
RC NAC-CR E-AE E-LM
** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** **
Daycare - Large
(Over 20 children)
(see Sec. 5.4.1)
N N N N CU CU13 CU13 CU13 N Y Y Y Y N CU17,27
Daycare - Small
(up to 20 children)Day Care
Center
(See Sec.5.4.1)
N CU8 CU8 CU8 CU CU13 CU13 CU13 N Y Y Y Y CU CU17,27
Daycare – Family Home N N N N Y Y Y Y N Y Y Y Y N N
** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** **
School – Preschool Large
(over 20 children)
(see Sec. 5.4.1)
N N N N CU CU13 CU13 CU13 N Y Y Y Y N CU17,27
School – Preschool Small
(up to 20 children)
(see Sec. 5.4.1)
N CU8 CU8 CU8 CU CU13 CU13 CU13 N Y Y Y Y CU CU17,27
** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** **
Footnotes (1) – (7) As Written.
8. 8. Small daycare Day Care centers and small preschools in the RCO zones shall only be allowed as part ofwhen a small museum is the principal uses. and shall
constitute less than 50% of the gross floor area of the museum.
Footnotes (9) – (32) As Written.
_____________________________________
i For permitted and conditional uses within the Downtown and Waterfront Form Districts, refer to Article 14.
Legend:
Y Permitted Use in this district
CU Conditional Use in this district
N Use not permitted in this district
Abbreviation Zoning District
RCO – A RCO - Agriculture
RCO – RG RCO – Recreation/Greenspace
RCO – C RCO - Conservation
I Institutional
RL/W Residential Low Density, Waterfront Residential Low Density
RM/W Residential Medium Density, Waterfront Residential Medium Density
RH Residential High Density
DW-PT Downtown Waterfront-Public Trust
NMU Neighborhood Mixed Use
NAC Neighborhood Activity Center
NAC-RC NAC – Riverside Corridor
NAC-CR NAC – Cambrian Rise
E-AE Enterprise – Agricultural Processing and Energy
E-LM Enterprise – Light Manufacturing
The City of Burlington will not tolerate unlawful harassment or discrimination on the basis of political or religious affiliation, race, color, national origin, place of
birth, ancestry, age, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, marital status, veteran status, di sability, HIV positive status, crime victim status or genetic
information. The City is also committed to providing proper access to services, facilities, and employment opportunities. For accessibility information or
alternative formats, please contact the City Planning department or 711 if you are hearing or speech impaired.
City of Burlington, VT
149 Church Street, 3rd Floor
Burlington, VT 05401
Phone: (802) 865-7144
www.burlingtonvt.gov/plan
TO: Burlington Planning Commission
FROM: Meagan Tuttle, Comprehensive Planner, City Planning
DATE: August 27, 2020
RE: Proposed CDO Amendment: ZA-21-02 Temporary Tents
Overview & Background
During the COVID-19 State of Emergency, since mid-March of this year, the City has established
programs such as the “Making Space” initiative to expand areas of public rights of way available for
restaurant and retail recovery to occur safely, and to adhere to social distancing requirements. This
effort has included the installation of temporary tents, awnings, tables and chairs, parklets, and other
infrastructure to create designated spaces for commercial activity. Many other programs and
establishments have moved their activities outdoors into what is considered a safer environment to
reduce the risk of COVID-19 transmission. As these activities have taken place within public rights of
way, the Burlington CDO has not applied, and a streamlined process for review and approval by the
Department of Public Works has been established.
As we move into the fall and winter months, and particularly as we prepare for the anticipated return
of in-person classes both in the Burlington School District and the higher education institutions, we
expect that temporary outdoor venues will play an even more significant role in the safe and
successful operations of commercial and civic establishments. Through the City’s COVID-19 Analytics
Team, we understand that the Burlington School District, and other childcare and youth
programming providers are planning to utilize outdoor spaces as a complement to their indoor
facilities and programming. Over the summer, the Permitting & Inspections Department has received
zoning permit applications from Burlington City Arts, churches and other establishments in the city
seeking to erect tents on private property where the CDO does apply.
As such, this amendment seeks to amend the zoning ordinance to provide additional flexibility in the
Temporary Structure Provisions to exempt Tents as defined in Chapter 3 of NFPA 101 from requiring
a zoning permit for up to 180 days, contingent upon the Fire Marshal issuance of a temporary tent
permit.
Proposed Amendment
Amendment Type
Text Amendment Map Amendment Text & Map Amendment
Purpose Statement
The proposed amendment provides for the placement of structural tents for non-residential
purposes without review or required zoning permit for up to 180 days, provided that the tent is
approved by the Burlington Fire Marshal.
Proposed Amendments
To achieve the goals identified above, the proposed amendment affects the following sections of
the Burlington Comprehensive Development Ordinance:
1. Amend Sec. 5.1.2 (f) Temporary Structures
Add an exemption for Tents from review and required permit for up to 180 days
within any 12-month period.
**BEGIN PROPOSED AMENDMENTS**
Changes shown (underline to be added, strike out to be deleted) are proposed changes to the
Burlington Comprehensive Development Ordinance.
Sec. 5.1.2 Structures
Except as otherwise provided by law or by this ordinance, no structure in any district shall be
created, removed or altered except in conformance with the provisions of this Article and the
requirements of the district in which such land or structure is located.
(a) - (e) As Written.
(f) Temporary Structures:
The administrative officer may approve a temporary structure that is incidental and accessory
to a principal use subject to the following:
No Review or Permit
Required
Site Plan Review: Zoning
Permit & COA
Review as per
Underlying Zoning
A structure placed up to
10 consecutive days or 30
days within any 12-month
period at the same
location.
A structure placed from 11-
31 consecutive days or 31-
60 days within any 12
month period at the same
location.
A structure placed over 31
consecutive days or more
within any 12 month
period at the same
location, is no longer
considered a temporary
structure.
Tents used for
recreational non-
commercial camping
purposes.
Tents as defined in
Chapter 3 of NFPA 101 for
non-residential purposes,
as approved by the
Burlington Fire Marshal,
placed up to 180 days
within any 12-month
period at the same
location.
**END PROPOSED AMENDMENTS**
Relationship to planBTV
This following discussion of conformance with the goals and policies of planBTV is prepared in
accordance with the provisions of 24 V.S.A. §4441(c).
Impact on Safe & Affordable Housing
The proposed amendment has no impact on the provision of safe and affordable housing.
Compatibility with Proposed Future Land Use & Density
The proposed amendment has no impact on proposed future land use and densities in
planBTV.
Planned Community Facilities
The proposed amendment has no impact on planned community facilities.
Process Overview
The following chart summarizes the current stage in the zoning amendment process, and
identifies any recommended actions:
Planning Commission Process
Draft Amendment
prepared by:
Staff, resident
request
Planning
Commission
Discussion
8/26/2020
Approved for
Public Hearing
8/26/2020
Public Hearing
9/23/2020
Approve &
forward to
Council
Continue
discussion
City Council Process
First Read &
Referral to
Ordinance Cmte
Ordinance
Committee
discussion
Ordinance
Cmte
recommends
to Council
Second Read &
Public Hearing
Approval &
Adoption
Rejected
11.10.5 Air-Supported and Air-Inflated Structures.
11.10.5.1 General.In addition to the general provisions of
11.10.1, the requirements of 11.10.5 shall apply to air-
supported and air-inflated structures.
11.10.5.2 Pressurization (Inflation) System.The pressuriza-
tion system shall consist of one or more operating blower
units. The system shall include automatic control of auxiliary
blower units to maintain the required operating pressure.
Such equipment shall meet the following requirements:
(1) Blowers shall be powered by continuous-rated motors at
the maximum power required.
(2) Blowers shall have personnel protection, such as inlet
screens and belt guards.
(3) Blower systems shall be weather protected.
(4) Blower systems shall be equipped with backdraft check
dampers.
(5) Not less than two blower units shall be provided, each of
which has capacity to maintain full inflation pressure with
normal leakage.
(6) Blowers shall be designed to be incapable of overpressur-
ization.
(7) The auxiliary blower unit(s) shall operate automatically if
there is any loss of internal pressure or if an operating
blower unit becomes inoperative.
(8) The design inflation pressure and the capacity of each
blower system shall be certified by a professional engineer.
11.10.5.3 Standby Power System.
11.10.5.3.1 Afully automatic standby power system shall be pro-
vided. The system shall be either an auxiliary engine generator
set capable of running the blower system or a supplementary
blowerunitthatissizedfor1timesthenormaloperatingcapacity
and is powered by an internal combustion engine.
11.10.5.3.2 The standby power system shall be fully automatic
to ensure continuous inflation in the event of any failure of
the primary power. The system shall be capable of operating
continuously for a minimum of 4 hours.
11.10.5.3.3 The sizing and capacity of the standby power sys-
tem shall be certified by a professional engineer.
11.10.6 Maintenance and Operation.
11.10.6.1 Instructions in both operation and maintenance
shall be transmitted to the owner by the manufacturer of the
tensioned-membrane, air-supported, or air-inflated structure.
11.10.6.2 Annual inspection and required maintenance of
each structure shall be performed to ensure safety conditions.
At least biennially, the inspection shall be performed by a pro-
fessional engineer, registered architect, or individual certified
by the manufacturer.
11.10.7 Services.
11.10.7.1 Fired Heaters.
11.10.7.1.1 Only labeled heating devices shall be used.
11.10.7.1.2 Fuel-fired heaters and their installation shall be
approved by the authority having jurisdiction.
11.10.7.1.3 Containers for liquefied petroleum gases shall be
installed not less than 60 in. (1525 mm) from any temporary
membrane structure and shall be in accordance with the pro-
visions of NFPA 58,Liquefied Petroleum Gas Code.
11.10.7.1.4 Tanks shall be secured in the upright position
and protected from vehicular traffic.
11.10.7.2 Electric Heaters.
11.10.7.2.1 Only labeled heaters shall be permitted.
11.10.7.2.2 Heatersusedinsideatemporarymembranestruc-
ture shall be approved.
11.10.7.2.3 Heaters shall be connected to electricity by elec-
tric cable that is suitable for outside use and is of sufficient size
to handle the electrical load.
11.11 Tents.
11.11.1 General.
11.11.1.1 The provisions of Section 11.1 shall apply.
11.11.1.2 Tents shall be permitted only on a temporary basis.
11.11.1.3 Tents shall be erected to cover not more than
75 percent of the premises, unless otherwise approved by the
authority having jurisdiction.
11.11.2 Flame Propagation Performance.
11.11.2.1 All tent fabric shall meet the flame propagation per-
formance criteria contained in Test Method 2 of NFPA701,Stan-
dard Methods of Fire Tests for Flame Propagation of Textiles and Films.
11.11.2.2 One of the following shall serve as evidence that the
tent fabric materials have the required flame propagation per-
formance:
(1) The authority having jurisdiction shall require a certifi-
cate or other evidence of acceptance by an organization
acceptable to the authority having jurisdiction.
(2) The authority having jurisdiction shall require a report of
tests made by other inspection authorities or organiza-
tions acceptable to the authority having jurisdiction.
11.11.2.3 Where required by the authority having jurisdic-
tion, confirmatory field tests shall be conducted using test
specimens from the original material, which shall have been
affixed at the time of manufacture to the exterior of the tent.
11.11.3 Location and Spacing.
11.11.3.1 There shall be a minimum of 10 ft (3050 mm)
between stake lines.
11.11.3.2 Adjacent tents shall be spaced to provide an area to
be used as a means of emergency egress. Where 10 ft
(3050 mm) between stake lines does not meet the require-
ments for means of egress, the distance necessary for means of
egress shall govern.
11.11.3.3 Tents not occupied by the public and not used for
the storage of combustible material shall be permitted to be
erected less than 10 ft (3050 mm) from other structures where
the authority having jurisdiction deems such close spacing to
be safe from hazard to the public.
11.11.3.4 Tents, each not exceeding 1200 ft
2 (112 m
2) in fin-
ished ground level area and located in fairgrounds or similar
open spaces, shall not be required to be separated from each
other, provided that safety precautions meet the approval of
the authority having jurisdiction.
11.11.3.5 The placement of tents relative to other structures
shallbeatthediscretionoftheauthorityhavingjurisdiction,with
consideration given to occupancy, use, opening, exposure, and
other similar factors.
101–118 LIFE SAFETY CODE
2015 Edition
Copyright 2017 National Fire Protection Association (NFPA®). Licensed, by agreement, for individual use and download on 12/04/2017 to BARRY SIMAYS for designated user Burlington Fire Department. No other reproduction
or transmission in any form permitted without written permission of NFPA®. For inquiries or to report unauthorized use, contact licensing@nfpa.org. This NFCSS All Access subscription expires on August 4, 2018.
EB95026C-F52B-4C1A-B00C-3EB3597D61DD
3.3.262 Specification.
3.3.262.1*Design Specification.A building characteristic
and other conditions that are under the control of the de-
sign team. (SAF-FUN)
3.3.262.2 Input Data Specification.Information required
by the verification method. (SAF-FUN)
3.3.263 Staff (Residential Board and Care).Persons who pro-
vide personal care services, supervision, or assistance. (SAF-BCF)
3.3.264 Stage.A space within a building used for entertain-
ment and utilizing drops or scenery or other stage effects.
(SAF-AXM)
3.3.264.1 Legitimate Stage.A stage with a height greater
than 50 ft (15 m) measured from the lowest point on the
stage floor to the highest point of the roof or floor deck
above. (SAF-AXM)
3.3.264.2 RegularStage.Astagewithaheightof50ft(15m)
or less measured from the lowest point on the stage floor to
the highest point of the roof or floor deck above. (SAF-AXM)
3.3.265*Stair.
3.3.265.1 Aisle Stair.A stair within a seating area of an
assembly occupancy that directly serves rows of seats to the
side of the stair, including transition stairs that connect to
an aisle or a landing. (SAF-AXM)
3.3.265.2 Outside Stair.A stair with not less than one side
open to the outer air. (SAF-MEA)
3.3.266 Stakeholder.An individual, or representative of
same, having an interest in the successful completion of a
project. (SAF-FUN)
3.3.267 Storage Occupancy.See 3.3.190.15.
3.3.268*Stories in Height.The story count starting with the
level of exit discharge and ending with the highest occupiable
story containing the occupancy considered. (SAF-FUN)
3.3.269*Story.Theportionofabuildinglocatedbetweenthe
upper surface of a floor and the upper surface of the floor or
roof next above. (SAF-FUN)
3.3.269.1 Occupiable Story.A story occupied by people on
a regular basis. (SAF-FUN)
3.3.270 Street.A public thoroughfare that has been dedi-
cated for vehicular use by the public and can be used for ac-
cess by fire department vehicles. (SAF-MEA)
3.3.271* Street Floor.Astory or floor level accessible from the
street or from outside the building at the finished ground
level, with the floor level at the main entrance located not
more than three risers above or below the finished ground
level, and arranged and utilized to qualify as the main floor.
(SAF-MER)
3.3.272*Structure.That which is built or constructed. (SAF-
FUN)
3.3.272.1 Air-Inflated Structure.A structure whose shape is
maintained by air pressure in cells or tubes forming all or
part of the enclosure of the usable area and in which the
occupants are not within the pressurized area used to sup-
port the structure. (SAF-IND)
3.3.272.2*Air-SupportedStructure.Astructurewhereshape
is maintained by air pressure and in which occupants are
within the elevated pressure area. (SAF-IND)
3.3.272.3 Limited Access Structure.A structure or portion
of a structure lacking emergency openings. (SAF-IND)
3.3.272.4 Membrane Structure.A building or portion of a
building incorporating an air-inflated, air-supported,
tensioned-membrane structure; a membrane roof; or a
membrane-covered rigid frame to protect habitable or us-
able space. (SAF-IND)
3.3.272.5 Multilevel Play Structure.A structure that con-
sists of tubes, slides, crawling areas, and jumping areas that
is located within a building and is used for climbing and
entertainment, generally by children. (SAF-AXM)
3.3.272.6*Open Structure.Astructure that supports equip-
ment and operations not enclosed within building walls.
(SAF-IND)
3.3.272.7*Parking Structure.A building, structure, or por-
tion thereof used for the parking, storage, or both, of mo-
tor vehicles. [88A,2015] (SAF-IND)
3.3.272.7.1 Assisted Mechanical Type Parking Structure.A
parkingstructurethatusesliftsorothermechanicaldevicesto
transport vehicles to the floors of a parking structure, where
the vehicles are then parked by a person. [88A,2015] (SAF-
IND)
3.3.272.7.2 Automated Type Parking Structure.A parking
structure that uses computer controlled machines to store
and retrieve vehicles, without drivers, in multi-level storage
racks with no floors.[88A,2015] (SAF-IND)
3.3.272.7.3 Enclosed Parking Structure.Any parking struc-
ture that is not an open parking structure. [88A,2015]
(SAF-IND)
3.3.272.7.4 Open Parking Structure.A parking structure
that meets the requirements of 42.8.1.3 (SAF-IND).
3.3.272.7.5 Ramp Type Parking Structure.A parking struc-
ture that utilizes sloped floors for vertical vehicle circula-
tion. [88A,2015] (SAF-IND)
3.3.272.8 Permanent Structure.Abuilding or structure that
is intended to remain in place for a period of more than
180 days in any consecutive 12-month period. (SAF-FUN)
3.3.272.9 Temporary Structure.Abuilding or structure not
meeting the definition of permanent structure. (See also
3.3.272.8, Permanent Structure.)(SAF-FUN)
3.3.272.10 Tensioned-Membrane Structure.A membrane
structure incorporating a membrane and a structural support
system such as arches, columns and cables, or beams wherein
the stresses developed in the tensioned membrane interact
withthoseinthestructuralsupportsothattheentireassembly
acts together to resist the applied loads. (SAF-IND)
3.3.272.11*Underground Structure.A structure or portions
of a structure in which the floor level is below the level of
exit discharge. (SAF-IND)
3.3.272.12 Water-Surrounded Structure.A structure fully
surrounded by water. (SAF-IND)
3.3.273 Suite.
3.3.273.1 Guest Suite.An accommodation with two or
more contiguous rooms comprising a compartment, with
or without doors between such rooms, that provides living,
sleeping, sanitary, and storage facilities. (SAF-RES)
101–36 LIFE SAFETY CODE
2015 Edition
Copyright 2017 National Fire Protection Association (NFPA®). Licensed, by agreement, for individual use and download on 12/04/2017 to BARRY SIMAYS for designated user Burlington Fire Department. No other reproduction
or transmission in any form permitted without written permission of NFPA®. For inquiries or to report unauthorized use, contact licensing@nfpa.org. This NFCSS All Access subscription expires on August 4, 2018.
EB95026C-F52B-4C1A-B00C-3EB3597D61DD
3.3.273.2 Non-Patient-Care Suite (Heath Care Occupancies).A
suite within a health care occupancy that is not intended
for sleeping or treating patients. (SAF-HEA)
3.3.273.3 Patient Care Non-Sleeping Suite (Health Care Occu-
pancies).A suite for treating patients with or without pa-
tient beds not intended for overnight sleeping. (SAF-HEA)
3.3.273.4 Patient Care Sleeping Suite (Health Care Occupan-
cies).A suite containing one or more patient beds in-
tended for overnight sleeping. (SAF-HEA)
3.3.273.5 Patient Care Suite (Health Care Occupancies).A
series of rooms or spaces or a subdivided room separated
from the remainder of the building by walls and doors.
(SAF-HEA)
3.3.274 System.
3.3.274.1 Elevator Evacuation System.A system, including a
verticalseriesofelevatorlobbiesandassociatedelevatorlobby
doors, an elevator shaft(s), and a machine room(s), that pro-
vides protection from fire effects for elevator passengers,
people waiting to use elevators, and elevator equipment so
that elevators can be used safely for egress. (SAF-MEA)
3.3.274.2 Site-Fabricated Stretch System.A system, fabri-
cated on-site, and intended for acoustical, tackable, or aes-
thetic purposes, that is comprised of three elements: (1) a
frame (constructed of plastic, wood, metal, or other mate-
rial) used to hold fabric in place, (2) a core material (infill,
with the correct properties for the application), and (3) an
outside layer, comprised of a textile, fabric, or vinyl, that is
stretched taut and held in place by tension or mechanical
fasteners via the frame. (SAF-INT)
3.3.275 Technically Infeasible.A change to a building that
has little likelihood of being accomplished because the exist-
ing structural conditions require the removal or alteration of a
load-bearing member that is an essential part of the structural
frame, or because other existing physical or site constraints
prohibit modification or addition of elements, spaces, or fea-
tures that are in full and strict compliance with applicable
requirements. (SAF-FUN)
3.3.276 Temporary Platform.See 3.3.211.1.
3.3.277 Temporary Structure.See 3.3.272.9.
3.3.278 Tensioned-Membrane Structure.See 3.3.272.10.
3.3.279*Tent.Atemporarystructure,thecoveringofwhichis
made of pliable material that achieves its support by mechani-
cal means such as beams, columns, poles, or arches, or by rope
or cables, or both. (SAF-IND)
3.3.279.1 Private Party Tent.Atent erected in the yard of a
private residence for entertainment, recreation, dining, a
reception, or similar function. (SAF-AXM)
3.3.280 Thermal Barrier.See 3.3.31.3.
3.3.281 Tower.An enclosed independent structure or por-
tion of a building with elevated levels for support of equip-
ment or occupied for observation, control, operation, signal-
ing, or similar limited use. (SAF-IND)
3.3.281.1 Air Traffic Control Tower.An enclosed structure or
buildingatairportswithelevatedlevelsforsupportofequipment
and occupied for observation, control, operation, and signaling
of aircraft in flight and on the ground. (SAF-IND)
3.3.282 Two-Family Dwelling Unit.See 3.3.66.3.
3.3.283 Uncertainty Analysis.See 3.3.17.2.
3.3.284 Underground Structure.See 3.3.272.11.
3.3.285 Verification Method.A procedure or process used to
demonstrate or confirm that the proposed design meets the
specified criteria. (SAF-FUN)
3.3.286* Vertical Opening.An opening through a floor or
roof. (SAF-FIR)
3.3.287 Vomitory.An entrance to a means of egress from an
assembly seating area that pierces the seating rows. (SAF-AXM)
3.3.288 Wall.
3.3.288.1 Fire Barrier Wall.A wall, other than a fire wall,
that has a fire resistance rating. (SAF-FIR)
3.3.288.2 Proscenium Wall.The wall that separates the
stage from the auditorium or house. (SAF-AXM)
3.3.289* Wall or Ceiling Covering.A textile-, paper-, or
polymeric-based product designed to be attached to a wall or
ceiling surface for decorative or acoustical purposes. (SAF-INT)
3.3.290 Water-Surrounded Structure.See 3.3.272.12.
3.3.291 Weathered-Membrane Material.See 3.3.171.5.
3.3.292 Yard.An open, unoccupied space other than a court,
unobstructed from the finished ground level to the sky on the
lot on which a building is situated. (SAF-MEA)
Chapter 4 General
4.1* Goals.
4.1.1* Fire.Agoal of this Code is to provide an environment for
the occupants that is reasonably safe from fire by the following
means:
(1)*Protection of occupants not intimate with the initial fire
development
(2) Improvement of the survivability of occupants intimate
with the initial fire development
4.1.2* Comparable Emergencies.An additional goal is to pro-
vide life safety during emergencies that can be mitigated using
methods comparable to those used in case of fire.
4.1.3* Crowd Movement.An additional goal is to provide for
reasonably safe emergency crowd movement and, where re-
quired, reasonably safe nonemergency crowd movement.
4.2 Objectives.
4.2.1 Occupant Protection.A structure shall be designed,
constructed, and maintained to protect occupants who are
not intimate with the initial fire development for the time
needed to evacuate, relocate, or defend in place.
4.2.2 Structural Integrity.Structural integrity shall be main-
tained for the time needed to evacuate, relocate, or defend in
place occupants who are not intimate with the initial fire de-
velopment.
4.2.3 Systems Effectiveness.Systems utilized to achieve the
goals of Section 4.1 shall be effective in mitigating the hazard
or condition for which they are being used, shall be reliable,
shall be maintained to the level at which they were designed to
operate, and shall remain operational.
101–37GENERAL
2015 Edition
Copyright 2017 National Fire Protection Association (NFPA®). Licensed, by agreement, for individual use and download on 12/04/2017 to BARRY SIMAYS for designated user Burlington Fire Department. No other reproduction
or transmission in any form permitted without written permission of NFPA®. For inquiries or to report unauthorized use, contact licensing@nfpa.org. This NFCSS All Access subscription expires on August 4, 2018.
EB95026C-F52B-4C1A-B00C-3EB3597D61DD