HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - Planning Commission - 05/25/2021South Burlington Planning Commission
575 Dorset Street
South Burlington, VT 05403
(802) 846-4106
www.sburl.com
Meeting Tuesday, May 25, 2021
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 (audio & video): https://www.gotomeet.me/SBCity/pc-2021-05-25
Telephone (audio only) (872) 240-3412; Access Code: 677-311-661
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. *Introduction of request for zoning amendment east of Airport Parkway in the vicinity of Kirby Road
Extension, Gene Richards and Nic Longo, BIA; possible establishment of a Task Force to review and
provide recommendations to the Commission (7:15 pm)
5. Continued Commission review of proposed amendments to the Land Development Regulations #LDR-20-
01, Environmental Protection Standards following public hearing; possible action to approve draft
amendments and submit to the City Council
6. *Minutes: May 11, 2021 (8:55 pm)
7. Other Business (8:57 pm)
8. Adjourn (9:00 pm)
Respectfully submitted,
Paul Conner, AICP,
Director of Planning & Zoning
* item has attachments
South Burlington Planning Commission Virtual Meeting Public Participation Guidelines
1. The Planning Commission Chair presents these guidelines for the public attending Planning Commission meetings
to ensure that everyone has a chance to speak and that meetings proceed smoothly.
2. In general, keep your video off and microphone on mute. Commission members, staff, and visitors currently
presenting / commenting will have their video on.
3. Initial discussion on an agenda item will generally be conducted by the Commission. As this is our opportunity to
engage with the subject, we would like to hear from all commissioners first. After the Commission has discussed an
item, the Chair will ask for public comment.
4. Please raise your hand identify yourself to be recognized to speak and the Chair will try to call on each participant
in sequence. To identify yourself, turn on your video and raise your hand, if participating by phone you may unmute
yourself and verbally state your interest in commenting, or type a message in the chat.
5. Once recognized by the Chair, please identify yourself to the Commission.
6. If the Commission suggests time limits, please respect them. Time limits will be used when they can aid in making
sure everyone is heard and sufficient time is available for Commission to to complete the agenda.
7. Please address the Chair. Please do not address other participants or staff or presenters and please do not
interrupt others when they are speaking.
8. Make every effort not to repeat the points made by others. You may indicate that you support a similar viewpoint.
Indications of support are most efficiently added to the chat.
9. The Chair will make reasonable efforts to allow all participants who are interested in speaking to speak once to
allow other participants to address the Commission before addressing the Commission for a second time.
10. The Planning Commission desires to be as open and informal as possible within the construct that the Planning
Commission meeting is an opportunity for commissioners to discuss, debate and decide upon policy matters.
Regular Planning Commission meetings are not “town meetings”. A warned public hearing is a fuller opportunity to
explore an issue, provide input and influence public opinion on the matter.
11. Comments may be submitted before, during or after the meeting to the Planning and Zoning Department. All
written comments will be circulated to the Planning Commission and kept as part of the City Planner's official
records of meetings. Comments must include your first and last name and a contact (e-mail, phone, address) to be
included in the record. Email submissions are most efficient and should be addressed to the Director of Planning
and Zoning at pconner@sburl.com and Chair at jlouisos@sburl.com.
12. The Chat message feature is new to the virtual meeting platform. The chat should only be used for items
specifically related to the agenda item under discussion. The chat should not be used to private message
Commissioners or staff on policy items, as this pulls people away from the main conversation underway. Messages
on technical issues are welcome at any time. The Vice-Chair will monitor the chat and bring to the attention of
Commissioners comments or questions relevant to the discussion. Chat messages will be part of the official
meeting minutes.
13. In general discussions will follow the order presented in the agenda or as modified by the Commission.
14. The Chair, with assistance from staff, will give verbal cues as to where in the packet the discussion is currently
focused to help guide participants.
15. The Commission will try to keep items within the suggested timing published on the agenda, although published
timing is a guideline only. The Commission will make an effort to identify partway through a meeting if agenda
items scheduled later in the meeting are likely not be covered and communicate with meeting participants any
expected change in the extent of the agenda. There are times when meeting agendas include items at the end
that will be covered “if time allows”.
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: Planning Commission Meeting Memo
DATE: May 25, 2021 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)
4. *Introduction of request for zoning amendment east of Airport Parkway in the vicinity of Kirby Road
Extension, Gene Richards and Nic Longo, BIA; possible establishment of a Task Force to review and
provide recommendations to the Commission (7:15 pm)
See enclosed staff memo and introduction of request from Gene Richards
5. Continued Commission review of proposed amendments to the Land Development Regulations #LDR-20-
01, Environmental Protection Standards following public hearing; possible action to approve draft
amendments and submit to the City Council (7:40 pm)
Per the Commission discussion on Thursday May 20th following the public hearing, the Commission will
begin to discuss the identified topics by Commissioners, beginning with wetlands and the tools available to
consider the natural resources being evaluated, including Conservation PUDs, the Natural Resource
Protection District, and resource-specific standards. The full list of topics to be reviewed includes:
Topics identified for follow-up by Commissioners:
• Wetlands definition/ buffer / stormwater treatment in buffer
• Grasslands
• Agricultural lands / soils
• UVM lands policy and technical items
• Habitat blocks - buffers, edge adjustments, follow-up on Arrowwood’s response to question on
adjustments
• Timing of PUD/ Env. Protection Standards adoption
• Takings / make sure draft is legally defensible
• Section 9.06(B)3 / Map 7/8 reference
The project webpage has been updated to include the recommendations from the City Attorney as well as
the CCRPC; both agreed upon by the Commission, and will be further updated by incorporating the
comments provided at the public hearing into the summary of all feedback.
https://www.southburlingtonvt.gov/departments/planning_and_zoning/draft_environmental_protection_st
andards.php
6. *Minutes: May 11, 2021 (8:55 pm)
7. Other Business (8:57 pm)
8. Adjourn (9:00 pm)
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: Airport area re-zoning request
DATE: May 25, 2021 Planning Commission meeting
Enclosed with your packet please find an initial letter from Gene Richards, Director of Aviation of the
Burlington International Airport, for the Planning Commission to consider a possible re-zoning of land east of
Airport Parkway in the vicinity of Kirby Road Extension. The land in this area is owned by the Airport (with
the exception of Kirby Road Extension, owned by the City).
Background & Request
The purpose of the request would be to allow for one or more Airport facilities to be installed on a portion
of the site, in conjunction with a buffer area to the street and neighborhood.
The Airport is in the process of undertaking several significant capital projects, including taxiway and runway
re-alignments, expansion of passenger security areas, and expansion of aviation-related businesses toward
the south end of the Airport.
Gene Richards and Nic Longo from the Airport will provide a more full overview of the Airport’s vision and
the request at the meeting.
The area under consideration was designated as “reserved for aviation-related development and/or noise
buffer” in the Airport’s 2016 Re-Use Plan, a required planning document for any land acquired by an Airport
as part of a noise compatibility program. The Planning Commission provided feedback on the Draft Re-Use
Plan in January 2017, expressing broad support for the planning effort and for establishing a transition from
airport-related functions to the Chamberlin neighborhood with a buffer and improved and relocated street
network (principally south of the area requested for current consideration).
Staff Recommendation
Understanding the Commission’s present workload related to Interim Zoning and also recognizing the
timeliness of projects at the Airport, staff recommends that the Commission establish a short-term Task
Force to review the subject fully and to prepare specific recommendations, including, if applicable, proposed
specific amendments to the Land Development Regulations.
Further, in consideration of the same demands on staffing, we have arranged for a consultant with
significant planning project experience in South Burlington and throughout Vermont to work directly with
the Task Force, and then the Planning Commission, to steward this project as an extension of planning staff
for the duration of this project.
2
Recommended Charge, Membership, and Timeline for the Task Force
Task Force Charge:
To review and evaluate, with consultant staffing support, the request for a possible re-zoning of land east of
Airport Parkway in the vicinity of Kirby Road Extension, from “Residential 4” to a district that would support
aviation-related activities.
In considering the request, the Task Force is invited and charged with developing a recommended course of
action consistent with Neighborhood and Airport plans and the recently-approved multi-community joint
resolution, foster economic opportunity, and foster a thoughtful transition from aviation activities to the
adjacent neighborhood.
Task Force Public input:
Meetings of the Task Force are to be considered public meeting and subject to the Open Meeting Law. The
Task Force is further charged with gathering community input on the proposed action, including engaging
with stakeholders & residents and soliciting public input via public input meetings and/or solicitation of
community feedback through other means.
Deliverables:
In making it recommendations, and in the event it concludes an amendment is warranted, the Task Force is
further charged with developing specific amendments to the Land Development Regulations, accompanying
report, and other city policy documents in order to enact the change for consideration and possible approval
by the Planning Commission and City Council. If the Task Force is ultimately disinclined to propose changes,
it is tasked with preparing an analysis report and presentation to the Planning Commission.
Task Force Composition
• Two (2) Planning Commission members
• One (1) City Councilor [to be selected by the City Council]
• One (1) Economic Development Committee member [to be selected by the Committee]
• One (1) resident of the Chamberlin Neighborhood not serving on any of the above bodies selected
by the Planning Commission no later than June 8.
Timeline
The Task Force should complete its work and provide its final deliverables to the Planning Commission no
later than September 8, 2021.
SOUTH BURLINGTON PLANNING COMMISSION
MEETING MINUTES
11 MAY 2021
1
The South Burlington Planning Commission held a regular meeting on Tuesday, 11 May 2021, at 7:00
p.m., via Go to Meeting remote technology.
MEMBERS PRESENT: J. Louisos, Chair; B. Gagnon, Acting Chair for this Meeting; T. Riehle, M. Ostby, M.
Mittag, D. Macdonald, P. Engels
ALSO PRESENT: P. Conner, Director of Planning and Zoning; L. Ravin, C. & A. Long, A. Chalnick, Ryan, J.
Giebink, K. Ryder, D. & D. Long, J. Bellavance, R. Greco, S. Dopp, Wayne, F. MacDonald, L. Kingsbury, S.
Dooley, D. Peters, D. Rosensweig
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:
Ms. Ostby: At the Affordable Housing Committee, O’Brien Brothers brought an update on Inclusionary
Zoning. They are hoping to be able to take advantage of COVID funding. There was also a presentation
regarding how the State looks at wetlands. UVM students will be releasing a report of a comparison of
regulations of the state’s most populated towns. Ms. Ostby also said the Commission should start to
think about getting back into “PUD mode.”
Ms. Louisos: Updated the Commission last week’s City Council meeting included the extending of
Interim Zoning until 13 November. The Council encouraged the Commission to finish its IZ work before
that date. They are also interested in coming back to PUDs after the environmental standards. Ms.
Louisos provided updates on the Commission’s I-89 comments and an update on Swift Street Extension
discussions.
Mr. Conner: Regional “bike-share” has officially become an e-bike program. They will add more sites
in the area and are now at the Airport. There is an effort to reach lower income constituents. Mr.
Gagnon suggested the Commission have a discussion regarding e-bikes on roads and bike paths.
4. Discussion and responses to public input on Land Development Regulations:
Mr. Gagnon said that tonight’s meeting was to answer questions and listen to public input. There would
be no policy discussions. He also noted there were copies of letter received from the public in the
meeting packet.
PLANNING COMMISSION
11 MAY 2021
2
Mr. Conner showed a map indicating existing and new environmental protection standards, areas that
are already conserved, and the NRP District. This is the source of the numbers posted on the website.
He drew attention to what has been added (e.g., the additional 50 feet of buffer). Mr. Gagnon said the
maps will be available on the website.
Ms. Ostby noted these maps are not going to end up in Article 12. They are interactive tools and
demonstration of where the resources are. The important thing is to look at the language. Mr. Conner
said that is generally correct. The habitat blocks are mapped, similar to a zoning district. Some maps
are FEMA controlled; if FEMA changes, South Burlington changes. Mr. Conner added that the
expectation is to have a map that the DRB can use. He also noted that the wetlands on this map would
be a starting point for someone to hire a wetlands consultant for field delineation.
Mr. Gagnon said the Library is not open, and people can check maps there. He suggested printing this
map in an enlarged form and posting it in the Library and other places for people who do not have
computers. Mr. Conner said that can be done.
Mr. Engels noted UVM property on both sides of Swift Street (in light and dark blues) and said that has
now been added as part of the 974 acres of newly protected land. Mr. Gagnon stressed that the
acreage figures are approximations. Mr. Engels said there should be accurate information. Mr. Conner
said the only way to do that is to field delineate the whole city. What is provided is the best estimate
given State information. Mr. Mittag said the public expects that the 974 acres is accurately represented
in the information the Commission has been putting out. Ms. Louisos said that every time the
Commission has talked about number, it has been a “plus-minus” basis. Ms. Ostby suggested indicating
on maps what is “actual” and what is “estimated.”
Mr. Conner then showed a map of wetland and buffers as proposed, then added other protections. Mr.
MacDonald noted these are all Class 2 wetlands.
Mr. Mittag said people want a very simple map of what is newly protected and felt the Commission
should try to provide that. Mr. Gagnon said they have also been asked to show that plus what was
previously protected. Mr. Conner said it is technically possible, but it will look strange. Mr. Gagnon felt
it could be even more confusing and misleading. Mr. Conner said it is hard to get accurate numbers on
things that can be a matter of feet.
Mr. Macdonald said the information people are looking for is on this map, everything in light blue is
new.
Mr. Chalnick noted an area near the high school that is conserved which isn’t shown on the map. He
also questioned the 974 acre calculation and said the blue area doesn’t seem to be that much. Mr.
Gagnon said this can be verified by the RPC.
Ms. Greco said for those without skills to interpret the interactive map, it is hard to do. She also noted
that “protecting,” “preserving” and “conserved” mean different things. If there is no conservation
easement, it can be changed by a City Council at any time.
PLANNING COMMISSION
11 MAY 2021
3
Mr. Conner noted that wetlands are regulated by the State and the Army Corps of Engineers and the
Feds, and they are part of the 974 acres. The buffers were expanded from 50 to 100 feet, which is
counted in the 974 acres. These are wider and more stringent than state rules.
Ms. Dopp asked for a simple paper map of what is newly protect3ed and a map of any area that will lose
protection. She felt very little Southeast Quadrant (SEQ) is additionally protected and that was what
people wanted, to protect the SEQ from more housing development.
Mr. Conner noted that “detail” and “readability” do not always go together. He also noted that a Level 2
resource is not a “no build” area.
Ms. Dooley said she had no problem with the maps, but the “silent majority” may have a problem with
them. She felt the “little strips” of conserved areas add up to much more than it appears.
Francis MacDonald was concerned that habitat blocks were looked at differently and the buffer was
subtracted from the blocks which seems contrary to protecting habitat. Ms. Ostby said the habitat
blocks that are mapped are not only the “core.” Mr. Conner confirmed this. He noted that
Arrowwood’s method was to include mature areas and those in transition to forested areas. Ms. Ostby
said they have not disregarded buffers to habitat blocks. She said there is confusion as to whether there
should be delineation of those blocks. It should be clear this is not a field delineation. It is based on the
Arrowwood report.
Regarding a map of what is no longer protected, Ms. Ostby said there is a question of how much
grassland was actually protected. If Conservation PUDs are accepted, grasslands can be
Included. She was concerned that a map of what is no longer protected would be misleading. Mr.
Conner said it is not as simple as “it was and now it is not.” Ms. Ostby said there is a question as to
whether the City Council thinks a Conservation PUD should be the only choice in the SEQ. If so, mapping
would be much different. Mr. Gagnon said that will have to be sorted out in a policy discussion.
Mr. Engels asked if the Commission will indicated what is removed from the Arrowwood report. Mr.
Macdonald said this is not something that was “lost.” It was never protected before. Mr. Conner noted
that grasslands outside the SEQ have never been protected.
Ms. Greco said some people don’t understand this and don’t see what the Commission understands.
Ms. Ostby was concerned that the more they try to explain, the more confusing it seems to become.
Mr. Gagnon said they will take the map from this meeting, blow it up, and put a legend to it. There will
also be a map of what is newly protected. Mr. Conner said staff will try to do that. He said there is
nothing in the new draft that that reduces protected areas in Article 10 and 12. There is no reduction in
streams, flood plains, etc.
Ms. Louisos said there is a question as to where Article IX applies. She stressed that it applies only to the
SEQ. Mr. Conner said he can draw a box around the SEQ zoning district on the maps in Article 9.
PLANNING COMMISSION
11 MAY 2021
4
Mr. Engels noted the vote in the Commission was 4-3. He felt it would be great if they could all agree,
but if not, they should say it was 4-3. Mr. Gagnon agreed.
Mr. Macdonald said that Chris Shaw had a good point when he asked whether large landowners in the
SEQ have been invited to the table. Mr. Conner said there have been no direct mailings to property
owners, but there has been information in The Other Paper, City Newsletter, etc. Mr. Gagnon said the
Commission has heard from some of those landowners. Mr. Conner said it would be easier to mail to
everyone in the city, but that is a big undertaking which is why The Other Paper is used. Mr. Gagnon
suggested a “blast” before the public hearing.
Ms. Ostby read from Mr. Shaw’s letter about the importance of letting people know what can and
cannot be done in the 500-year flood plain. She felt that should be clarified.
Ms. Ostby also recalled the issues that led to the 4-3 vote: 9.06(b)(3), designating buffers around habitat
areas, and including prime ag, grasslands and farmlands. Ms. Louisos said she did tell that to the
Council.
5. Meeting Minutes of 23 and 31 March, 6, 13, and 27 April 2021:
Mr. Macdonald noted he should not be listed as present at the joint meeting with the Council.
Mr. Mittag moved to approve the Minutes of 23 and 31 March, and 6, 13, and 27 April 2021 with the
above correction. Ms. Ostby seconded. Motion passed unanimously.
6. Other Business:
Mr. Conner noted the Colchester Planning Commission item involves “tweaks” to the Form Based Code
which the City should keep an eye on to see what they are learning. There is also an item regarding
electric vehicle charging.
Mr. Conner reminded members and the public that the Planning Commission public hearing next week
is on Thursday, 20 April.
As there was no further business to come before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned by
common consent at 9:08 p.m.
___________________________________
Clerk