HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - City Council - 12/21/2009 south :m l
Charles E. Hafter, City Manager
AGENDA
SOUTH BURLINGTON CITY COUNCIL
CITY HALL CONFERENCE ROOM
575 DORSET STREET
SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT
REGULAR MEETING 7:00 P.M. MONDAY, December 21, 2009
1) Comments and Questions from the public (not related to the Agenda).
2) Announcements and City Manager's Report.
* 3) Continuation of public hearing from December 7, 2009 on proposed amendments to the Land
Development Regulations, second reading of same
* 4) Review of proposed language for ballot items and proposed charter amendments for March, 2010 ballot;
Set public hearing dates for charter change hearings.
* 5) Consideration for Loan Agreements with the Vermont Municipal Bond Bank for the Stromwater System
improvements- Quarry Ridge $74,000 (AR1-014); Twin Oaks $213,316 (AR1-070); Ridgewood/Indian
Creek $198,281 (AR1-071); Winding Brook $90,310.70 (AR1-072); Harbor Heights $104,000 (AR1-073)
*
6) Consideration of appointment of city representatives to condominium Executive Board.
7) Discussion of City Manager selection process; Update from Chair Boucher on citizen interest in serving
on the selection committee.
*
8) Acceptance of resignation of Sandra Lindberg from Board of the Community Library.
* 9) Review and approve minutes from special & regular City Council meeting held on Dec. 3 & 7th, 2009.
10) Sign disbursement orders.
11) Adjourn
Respectfully Submitted:
Charles Haft r, City Manager
575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4107 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburl.com
Page 1 of 2
Mark Boucher
From: Charles Hafter[chaffer@sburl.com] Sent: Mon 12/21/2009 9:27 AM
To: Mark Boucher; Bill
Cc: Sandy Dooley; Meaghan Emery; James Knapp; Frank Murray; Paul Conner;jadinklage@myfairpoint.net
Subject: RE: Airport DRB vote
Attachments:
Mark: Regarding the communication from DRB member Bill Stuono, Steve Stitzel does not believe that communications
from a DRB member to City Council on the reasons for a particular vote violates any legal or ethical
provisions. The DRB member is under no obligations to explain his/her vote to the Council, but may do so.
Two conditions are that the member should copy the Chair of the DRB so that the chair is aware of the communications.
(Other members of the DRB may be copied as well.) And,Councilors should not respond to the e-mail other than to
acknowledge that they received it.
Hope this answers your questions.
Chuck Rafter
City Manager
At 09:50 AM 12/19/2009, Mark Boucher wrote:
Bill,
I appreciate your point of view. You don't need to justify any of your votes to the Council.
However, I am uncertain whether this is an appropriate dialogue for member of the DRB to be
having with the City Council. As a quasi judicial board, the DRB's decisions are subject to appeal
directly to the Environmental Court. The City Council should not get involved in individual
decisions. Personally, I don't think that the Council should even be involved in an individual's
thought process behind these decisions.
I am very concerned about maintaining the proper relationship between the DRB and the
Council. This relationship is subject to judicial review. From a process standpoint, if you feel
there is a hole in the current zoning (I think is what you're explaining below), you should raise
this issue with planning &zoning staff. At that point staff will take the concern to the Planning
Commission (or directly to the Council) to assess the issue.
The Council should discuss communication between DRB members and Council in open session.
Perhaps Chuck can have a discussion with Steve Stitzel in advance of Monday's meeting.
I have also copied DRB Chair Dinklage and Paul Conner in this email.
Bill, with all this said, I could be all wet. But I'd like the City's attorney to tell me that. Lastly, I
have spoken with Chuck whose feelings are similar to mine.
Regards,
Mark L Boucher
20 Knoll Circle
South Burlington, VT 05403
From: Bill [ rrailto:wstuonoguvr ,edu]
Sent: Fri 12/18/2009 1:19 PM
To: Mark Boucher; Sandy Dooley; Meaghan Emery; James Knapp; Frank Murray; Chuck Hafter
https://mail2.sburl.com/exchange/mboucher/Inbox/RE:%20Airport%20DRB%20vote-3.E... 12/21/2009
Page 2 of 2
Subject: Airport DRB vote
Dear Councilors (and Chuck),
Today the Free Press reported on the DRB approval for the Airport
parking garage expansion. It mentioned that I was the lone dissenting
vote, but did not offer my reasons. I wanted to briefly clarify this to
you.
Overall, I support the garage expansion. It was my concern that as
submitted South Burlington may end up with a half-completed project.
The airport testified that they likely will only be seeking funding from
the Burlington voters for Phase 1 of this project, with no real timeline
for phase 2. They provided no images of how this garage expansion will
look with only half of it completed. Ray Belair testified that once a
project is approved and a permit issued, there is an unlimited time
frame allowed for completion.
With financial issues facing Burlington, and airport ridership down, my
fear is that only half of this project may be built in the foreseeable
future. The DRB received no images of just how this will appear.
Procedurally, in my opinion the airport should propose to finance the
entire project at this time, or else have applied for approval on only
Phase 1. Or, at the very least, provide the City with images of how the
garage will look and function with only Phase 1 completed.
Thanks. Have good weekend everyone.
Bill Stuono
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG -www.avg.corn
Version: 9.0.717/Virus Database: 270.14.116/2579- Release Date: 12/21/09 02:36:00
https://mail2.sburl.com/exchange/mboucher/Inbox/RE:%20Airport%20DRB%20vote-3.E... 12/21/2009
001
southburfintlfon
,
PLANNING & ZONING
MEMORANDUM
TO: South Burlington City Council & City Manager
FROM: Paul Conner, Director of Planning & Zoning
SUBJECT: Land Development Regulation Public Hearing (continued)
DATE: December 21, 2009 City Council meeting
At the last meeting, the Council opened its formal public hearing on the draft amendments
to the Land Development Regulations. At that meeting, I highlighted one minor correction,
regarding the calculation of affordable housing units. The math error has been fixed!
Also last meeting, I relayed that our attorneys had requested the hearing be continued so
that they could complete their review of a couple of other sections. Those proposed
clarifications are included in the enclosed draft and described below.
Following the closure of the public hearing, I recommend approval of the full set of
amendments, including the clarified items discussed herein. Our attorneys have indicated to
me that none of these changes rise to the level of"substantial," (which would require a
newly-warned hearing by the City Council).
1. HOMES IN THE SEQ-NATURAL RESOURCE PROTECTION DISTRICT
The amendment approved by the Planning Commission would clarify that a property in
the SEQ-NRP district that is less than 15 acres in size (and which has not been
subdivided since 1992) may have one house built upon it. This has been our
interpretation of the regulations since their adoption back in 2006, but the language
could be far clearer. It also states that an existing house in the SEQ-NRP may be
replaced, either on the same footprint or in a less-intrusive area on the property. This is
not at all clear under the current regulations.
Our attorneys have requested further clarifications, which include:
(1) Providing a more clear reference to the applicable section from the prior section.
(2) Matching the word usage for homes on properties of less than 15 acres with the word
existing word usage for homes on properties of more than 15 acres.
1
The revised language now reads:
9.12 SEQ-NRP;Supplemental Regulations
A. Any lot that lies substantially or entirely within a SEQ-NRP sub-district is subject to the following
supplemental regulations:
(1) Such lot shall be conveyed to the City of South Burlington as dedicated open space or to a qualified
land trust and any portion of such lot located within the SEQ-NRP sub-district shall not be
developed with a residence, or
(2)
(3) Such lot may be developed with uses other than residences,as listed in Table C-1, subject to the
Development Review Board's approval of a conservation plan that balances development or land
utilization and conservation. Such lot may also include the following additional development/activities:
(a) Driveways, roads, underground utility services, or other appurtenant improvements to serve
approved development or uses. Utility service components, such as transformers and amplifiers,
may be installed at ground level where such accords with standard industry practices.
(b) Landscaping, regrading, or other similar activities necessary to the creation of a buildable lot.
B. A lot that was in existence on or before June 22, 1992 and which lies substantially or entirely within a
SEQ-NRP sub-district may be improved with one or more a single family detached homes,subject to
conditional use review. house.
(1) Where the lot is less than fifteen(15)acres in contiguous area,the Development Review
Board may allow one single family home only if:
district and another SEQ sub distric' and:
La)the portion of the lot in any other(non-NRP)SEQ sub-district is insufficient to accommodate the
construction and use of a single family house in compliance with these Regulations,and
(b) the Development Review Board finds that the location of structures,yards,and access
drives will the site plan does not compromise the aey conservation objectives values articulated in
the Comprehensive Plan,and,
(c)no structures,yards,or access drives are within a designated primary natural
community or its related buffer.
(2) Where the lot is fifteen(15)acres or more in contiguous area,the Development Review Board may
allow a subdivision of no more than three lots, pursuant to an approved conservation plan that
maximizes resource values(s). Such lots shall have a minimum size of 12,000 square feet per dwelling
unit. Such lots shall abut one another and shall have no portion within a designated primary natural •
community or its related buffer.The dwelling units shall be detached single family houses. Such
subdivision plan shall be subject to the Development Review Board's approval of a conservation plan
in a form acceptable to the City Attorney that permanently encumbers the land against further land
subdivision and development.
2
D. An existing single family home on a lot that lies substantially or entirely within a SEQ-NRP sub-
district may be removed and replaced,provided that:
(1)the footprint of the principal structure remains the same or is reduced,or
(2)The Development Review Board,through a conditional use review,finds that the location of
structures,yards,and access drives will not compromise the conservation objectives
articulated in the Comprehensive Plan,and,that no structures,yards,or access drives are
within a designated primary natural community or its related buffer.
2. LOCATION OF PARKING ON A PARCEL
The amendment approved by the Planning Commission was made in light of the
Supreme Court's decision on JAM Golf last year, which struck certain elements of our
old regulations due to a lack of "specific standards." This amendment gives the DRB
more specific standards to apply in determining when an exception can be made to the
requirement that parking be placed to the side or rear of buildings. Furthermore, it limits
the amount of parking that can be placed to the sides of a building where there are
multiple buildings on a lot, to implement the City's goal of fostering greater pedestrian
activity and having buildings, not parking, be the primary activity along roads.
After reviewing the language approved by the Planning Commission, our attorneys have
recommended a more clear approach. This approach clearly states, for the DRB and the
applicant, that parking is prohibited in front of buildings, except under certain specific
circumstances. While the prior draft language carried the same exact intent, our
attorneys carefully parsed out the language and discovered that some of the language
could be interpreted in multiple ways. Staff has discussed the revised approach with the
Planning Commission, and they concur that it carries the same intent and is more
defensible. Below is the revised language:
Section 2.02 Specific Definitions:
Building width.The average length of a building measured along the side most closely parallel to its adjacent public
street(s).
Section 5.08 Supplemental Standards for All Commercial Districts
C. Parking,Access,and Internal Circulation
Section 14.06 General Review Standards
C. Relationship of Proposed Structures to the Site
3
(2)
(a) Parking shall be located to the rear or sides of buildings.
(b)The Development Review Board may approve parking between a public street and one or more
buildings if the Board finds that one or more of the following criteria are met.The Board shall approve
only the minimum necessary to overcome the conditions below.
1. The parking area is necessary to meet minimum requirements of the Americans with
Disabilities Act;
2. The parking area will serve a single or two-family home;
3. The lot has unique site conditions such as a utility easement or unstable soils that allow for
parking, but not a building,to be located adjacent to the public street;
4. The lot contains one or more existing buildings that are to be re-used and parking needs cannot
be accommodated to the rear and sides of the existing building(s);or,
5. The principal use of the lot is for public recreation.
1G1
(c)Where more than one building exists or is proposed on a lot,the total width of al parking areas
_prod ` both to the side of a building and between the front lot line and the
building line of the building on the lot that is closest to the public street shall not exceed one-half of the
total building width of all buildings on the lot that are located adjacent to the public street. Buildings
separated from the front lot line by parking approved pursuant to 14.06(C)(2)(b)shall be considered
adjacent to the public street. Buildings separated from the front lot line by any other parking areas shall
not be considered adjacent to the public to the public street.
(d)The DRB shall require that the majority of theparking on through lots and corner lots be located
between the building(s) and the side yards or between the building and the front yard adjacent to the
public street with the highest average daily volume of traffic. Where the rear yard of a lot abuts an
Interstate or its interchanges,the majority of parking shall be located between the building and the side
yards or between the building and the yard that is adjacent to the Interstate.
Section 15.02 Authority and Required Review
A.Authority
(3)In conjunction with PUD review,the modification of these Land Development Regulations is permitted subject to
the conditions and standards in this Article and other applicable provisions of these Regulations. However,with the
exception of side yard setbacks in the Central District 1, in no case shall the DRB permit the location of a new
structure less than five(5)feet from any property boundary. In no case shall be the DRB allow land development
creating a total site coverage exceeding the allowable limit for the applicable zoning district in the case of new
development,or increasing the coverage on sites where the pre-existing condition exceeds the applicable limit. In
no case shall the DRB permit the location of parking not in compliance with Section 14.06(C)(2).
4
3. MINOR LOT LINE ADJUSTMENTS
The purpose of this amendment is to relieve the Development Review Board from having
to review small-scale projects such as these. The amendment would give the authority to
the city's Zoning Administrator to approve minor adjustments of lot lines, and also
allows this person to refer it to the DRB if need be. Our attorneys have recommended one
small change, to add a few words to the definition of such an activity. The revised
language reads as follows:
2.02 Specific Definitions
Subdivision.
(C) Division of land such as for minor realignment of property boundary lines of pre-existing lots,for municipal
purposes which conform to the Comprehensive Plan (such as road widening,easements,sidewalks, parks, etc.),
or enlargement alteration of existing lots as specifically permitted under these Land Development Regulations,
shall not be deemed a subdivision,but is known as a minor lot line adjustment.provided that no new
lots than before the adjustment.
15.19 Minor Lot Line Adjustments
A. Any application for a minor lot line adjustment shall be accompanied by a plat prepared by
a Vermont licensed land surveyor and indicating all lots that are proposed to be modified as
a result of theproposed lot line adjustment.The survey shall be sufficient to clearly indicate
the area,metes,bounds,and ties of each of the affected lots.The survey shall include all
structures and site improvements and delineate all building/structure setbacks, lot
coverage,parking spaces and any other details as may be specified by the Administrative
Officer.
B. The Administrative Officer shall approve an application for a minor lot line adjustment,
provided that the following criteria are met:
(1) No new lots are created through the adjustment;
(2) The sale or exchange of parcels of land is between adjacent property owners;
(3) The relocation of the lot-line does not result in the creation of a non-conforming lot,
structure or use;and
(4) The proposed change does not violate any conditions imposed from prior municipal
approvals.
C. Where,there is uncertainty as to whether an application comprises a minor lot line
adjustment,the Administrative Officer may refer the application to the Development Review
Board for review as a subdivision of land.
5
11
4,111
5
4
„.44
south . a
PLANNING & ZONING
MEMORANDUM
TO: South Burlington City Council & City Manager
FROM: Paul Conner, Director of Planning & Zoning
SUBJECT: Draft Land Development Regulations Approved by Planning Commission
DATE: November 2, 2009 City Council meeting
_ r
The Planning Commission voted on September 29`11 to approve a series of amendments to
the Land Development Regulations and forward them to the City Council for consideration.
The amendments consist of a number of disparate items that had been collected over the
course of the past year. The vote by the planning commission to approve the amendments
was unanimous on all items.
Below is a brief description of each of the proposed amendments. The letters correspond to
each of the items in the enclosed draft amendment. Attached as well is a brief summary
report describing the relationship between the proposed amendments and the City's
Comprehensive Plan, as required by State law. I recommend the City Council proceed by
holding a Public Hearing to consider the adoption of these amendments.
A. Bartlett Bay Stormwater Overlay District Boundary
This amendment to the Overlay District Map would adjust the Bartlett Bay Stormwater
Overlay District to better reflect the actual hydrology and topography of the area. Last
fall, we enacted a series of changes to our Stormwater Management regulations,
encouraging Low Impact Development Techniques and requiring greater analysis of
current and anticipated water flow. The map amendment would complement these
changes.
B. Design Review Overlay District Boundaries
This amendment to the Overlay District Map would resolve an inconsistency between the
underlying "Central" zoning districts and the design review overlays. Over the years, the
City has made a series of amendments to the Central District map, but we have not
matched those amendments with adjustments to the Design Overlay. The result is that
several parcels zoned "Central" are not subject to Design.Review. These map
amendments would ensure that all areas zoned "central" would also be subject to design
review criteria that were established for each of the central districts. The proposed
1
amendments also include an exemption for all properties less than 15,000 square feet in
size, and for municipally operated educational facilities. These exemptions would allow
single family home owners, and the School District, to make additions/renovations
without being subject to design review. However, if and when redevelopment takes place
in the area, new projects would be subject to this review.
Homes in the SEQ-Natural Resource Protection
`./ This amendment would clarify that a property in the SEQ-NRP district that is less than
15 acres in size (and which has not been subdivided since 1992) may have one hous6
built upon it. This has been our interpretation of the regulations since their adoption
back in 2006, but the language could be far clearer. It also states that an existing house in
the SEQ-NRP may be replaced, either on the same footprint or in a less-intrusive area on
the property. This is not at all clear under the current regulations.
4)' Location of Parking on a parcel
In light of the Supreme Court's decision on JAM Golf last year, which struck certain
elements of our old regulations due to a lack of"specific standards", we've been going
through the LDRs to identify similar problems. This proposed amendment gives the DRB
more specific standards to apply in determining when an exception can be made to the
requirement that parking be placed to the side or rear of buildings. Furthermore, it limits
the amount of parking that can be placed to the sides of a building where there are
multiple buildings on a lot, to implement the City's goal of fostering greater pedestrian
activity and having buildings, not parking, be the primary activity along roads.
E. Parking Standards for Assisted Living
This amendment would create a separate parking standard for "Assisted Living" Facility.
The term is clearly and separately defined in the Definitions chapter of the LDRs, but
under the parking standards chapter, it is coupled together with "Congregate Housing."
The principal difference between these uses is the fact that Assisted Living Facilities
receive licensure from the State of Vermont as care facilities. Typically, residents in these
types of facilities do not have vehicles of their own. Based upon research from the
Institute of Traffic Engineers "Parking Generation" manual, and a survey completed of
an Assisted Living Facility in Shelburne, a parking standard of 0.6 parking spaces per
dwelling unit of Assisted Living, rather than the 1.2 spaces per unit plus 1 space for every
4 units that is used for Congregate Housing is recommended. The end result of this
change will be to ensure that we do not require areas to be created for parking.
F. New use: Pet Grooming
The amendment would create a new use that recognizes that pet grooming is a separate
use from pet day cares and kennels. Pet grooming has no medium or long-term
accommodations and no outdoor exercise areas. The use would be permitted where other
service-type uses, such as barber shops, are permitted.
G. Outdoor Exercise Areas for Animals
This amendment would attach standards for the design and operation of outdoor
exercise areas for commercial pet day cares and kennels, establishing hours of use for the
exercise areas as well as screening requirements.
2
H. Gated driveways and roads
This amendment would ensure that no driveways serving more than one dwelling unit,
or public/private roads be gated. We have not had much trouble with this in the past, but
in the interest of public safety and overall community benefit, this would be a positive
pre-emptive step to make sure we do not have issues in the future.
I. Outdoor Storage and Display
This amendment would clarify the difference between outdoor storage and outdoor
display, with accompanying definitions.
�X
1 , J. Accessory Structures
This amendment would permit accessory structure of up to 25' in height where the
structure is located at least 30' from all property lines, he structure has a pitched roof,
and the subject property is at least one (1) acre in size. Where the accessory structure is
proposed to be taller than the principal structure, it would be subject to conditional use
review. It would also allow accessory structures to be heated, an unenforceable
prohibition under the current regulations. The purpose of this amendment is to allow for
some greater flexibility for property owners in limited circumstances.
K. Structures in the Residential 4 District
This amendment would clarify that no structure in the R4 district may contain more than
4 dwelling units. At present, there are no limitations on the number of housing units in a
structure in this district, only a maximum number of units per acre (4, plus any
affordability bonus). I expect we will be looking at the standards for this district as a
whole in greater depth in the near future, but this is a minor amendment that is worth
pursuing in the short term.
L. Exterior Lighting
The proposed amendment clarifies that energy efficient lighting is permitted and
encouraged.
M. Self-Storage in the Commercial-Industrial District
This amendment would permit self storage facilities in the CI district, but ONLY as an
accessory use and not occupying more than 20% of the gross floor area of the principal
use. In addition, the self storage units would need to be accessed via an internal entrance
and would only be accessible during business hours with an employee on site.
N. Child Care Facilities
This amendment would require child care homes serving more than six full-time
students to be subject to site plan review. Last fall, when we amended the LDRs with
respect to child care homes and facilities, the PC had towards the end of the process
decided that it would be preferable to have child care homes be subject to site plan
review. The Council adopted the amendments without this change, but asked that the
change be re-submitted.
3
O. Minor Lot Line Adjustments
This amendment would allow adjustments to parcel boundaries to be approved
administratively, so long as there are no new lots created, no non-conformities are
created, and prior municipal approvals are not violated. At present, all lot line
adjustments must be reviewed by the Development Review Board.
P. Additional Technical Corrections
• May Not versus Shall Not: Staff has reviewed the LDRs and identified all of the places
where the word "may not" is used when it really was intended to be "shall not." For
example, "Dead end streets may shall not exceed 200 feet in length." By making these
fixes, we "may" avoid unnecessary legal problems in the future. (note: in some cases,
the language is part of a `regulating plan' which is recommendation rather than a
requirement. However, changing "may not" to "shall not" remains an important
clarification.
• Outdoor Storage vs. Outside Storage. At present, our regulations refer to both outdoor
and outside storage. Staff proposes the LDRs be clarified by only using the term
"outdoor storage," which is defined.
• Free-Standing Signs. The amendment removes the requirement that free-standing sign
locations be shown on site plans. This change is at the request of our attorneys, who
have advised us to keep this separate because signs are subject to a completely
separate city ordinance.
• Affordable Housing: The amendment clarifies unclear language regarding the number
of units that need to be affordable where there is an uneven number of units
proposed.
• Off-Street Parking: The amendment clarifies that the DRB may apply a 25% parking
waiver to both public and private parking facilities.
• Retaining Walls. The amendment classifies retaining walls as separate from other
`accessory structures.' As accessory structures, they could not be placed in the front
yard and were limited in number. Retaining walls over 8' in height would require an
engineer's evaluation.
• Animal hospital /veterinary hospital. This amendment clarifies the terms used in the
regulations.
4
AMENDMENTS to the SOUTH BURLINGTON LAND DEVELOPMENT
REGULATIONS
SOUTH BURLINGTON CITY COUNCIL, DECEMBER 21, 2009
The South Burlington City Council hereby ordains:
Key to the Amendments
1. Proposed new text is shown in Bold Underline
2. Proposed deletions are sown in
3. Plain and plain underlined is existing and will remain.
4. Descriptive text explaining tables and maps are in ALL CAPS
A. BARTLETT BROOK STORMWATER OVERLAY DISTRICT BOUNDARY
• Adjust Bartlett Bay Watershed Overlay District boundary to more accurately depict the
actual watershed area per the attached map.
• See Attached Map
B. DESIGN REVIEW OVERLAY DISTRICT BOUNDARIES
• Extend Design Overlay District 1 to include Central School property, excluding
municipal educational facilities.
• Establish Design Overlay District 2 on Mary Street properties that are within the CD
district.
• Extend Design Overlay District 3 on Market Street east to Hinesburg Road and north
to include properties in CD district 2.
• Extend Design Overlay District 3 on Dorset Street to include one missing property
that is in the Central District.
• See Attached Map
11.01 City Center Design Review Overlay District CCDR
D. Activities Subject to Design Review.
(3) Any construction or alternation of municipal education facilities in Design
Review Overlay District 1 shall not be subject to design review.
(4) Any construction or alternation of one or two family homes on parcels of
15,000 square feet or less in Design Overlay Districts 2 and 3 shall not be
subject to design review.
575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburl.com
Land Development Regulations
Approved by the City Council 12/21/2009
C. HOMES IN THE SEQ-NATURAL RESOURCE PROTECTION DISTRICT
9.12 SEQ-NRP; Supplemental Regulations
A. Any lot that lies substantially or entirely within a SEQ-NRP sub-district is subject
to the following supplemental regulations:
(1) Such lot shall be conveyed to the City of South Burlington as dedicated
open space or to a qualified land trust and any portion of such lot located
within the SEQ-NRP sub-district shall not be developed with a residence,
or
(2) sidcncc or residences pursuant to a
below.
(3) Such lot may be developed with uses other than residences, as listed in
Table C-1, subject to the Development Review Board's approval of a
conservation plan that balances development or land utilization and
conservation. Such lot may also include the following additional
development/activities:
(a) Driveways, roads, underground utility services, or other appurtenant
improvements to serve approved development or uses. Utility service
components, such as transformers and amplifiers, may be installed at
ground level where such accords with standard industry practices.
(b)Landscaping, regrading, or other similar activities necessary to the
creation of a buildable lot.
B. A lot that was in existence on or before June 22, 1992 and which lies substantially
or entirely within a SEQ-NRP sub-district may be improved with one or more a
single family detached homes, subject to conditional use review. house.
(1) Where the lot is less than fifteen (15) acres in contiguous area, the
Development Review Board may allow one single family home only if:
_T_he 1 t is sub stantiall tl ' CE/l NRP b d e tL SEQ
+--- --- -- �-.����++-+�++J ••�..++++.. .n v+..r� K1J Ll lam.{. lAl1K Cl1lV llll,l JL�
alb district, and:
(a) the portion of the lot in any other (non-NRP) SEQ sub-district is
insufficient to accommodate the construction and use of a single family
house in compliance with these Regulations, and
(b) the Development Review Board finds that the location of structures,
yards, and access drives will the site plan does not compromise the any
conservation objectives values articulated in the Comprehensive Plan,and,
2
Land Development Regulations
Approved by the City Council 12/21/2009
(c) no structures,_yards, or access drives are within a designated primary
natural community or its related buffer.
D. An existing single family home on a lot that lies substantially or entirely within
a SEQ-NRP sub-district may be removed and replaced, provided that:
(1) the footprint of the principal structure remains the same or is reduced, or
(2) The Development Review Board, through a conditional use review, finds that
the location of structures, yards, and access drives will not compromise the
conservation objectives articulated in the Comprehensive Plan, and, that no
structures, yards, or access drives are within a designated primary natural
community or its related buffer.
D. LOCATION OF PARKING ON A PARCEL
Section 2.02 Specific Definitions:
Building width. The average length of a building measured along the side most closely
parallel to its adjacent public street(s).
Section 5.08 Supplemental Standards for All Commercial Districts
C. Parking, Access, and Internal Circulation
,
Section 14.06 General Review Standards
C. Relationship of Proposed Structures to the Site
(2)
(a) Parking shall be located to the rear or sides of buildings. to the greatest extent
practicable.
(b) The Development Review Board may approve parking between a public street
and one or more buildings if the Board finds that one or more of the following
criteria are met. The Board shall approve only the minimum necessary to overcome
the conditions below.
1. The parking area is necessary to meet minimum requirements of the
Americans with Disabilities Act;
2. The parking area will serve a single or two-family home;
3
Land Development Regulations
Approved by the City Council 12/21/2009
3. The lot has unique site conditions such as a utility easement or unstable
soils that allow for parking, but not a building, to be located adjacent to the
public street.,
4. The lot contains one or more existing buildings that are to be re-used and
parking needs cannot be accommodated to the rear and sides of the existing
building(s); or,
5. The principal use of the lot is for public recreation.
(c) Where more than one building exists or is proposed on a lot, the total width of
all parking areas proposed in a location on a lot that is both to the side of a building
and between the front lot line and the building line of the building on the lot that is
closest to the public street shall not exceed one-half of the total building width of
all buildings on the lot that are located adjacent to the public street. Buildings
separated from the front lot line by parking approved pursuant to 14.O6(C)(2)(b)
shall be considered adjacent to the public street. Buildings separated from the front
lot line by any otherparking areas shall not be considered adjacent to the public to
the public street.
(d) The DRB shall require that the majority of the parking on through lots and
corner lots be located between the building(s) and the side yards or between the
building and the front yard adjacent to the public street with the highest average
daily volume of traffic. Where the rear yard of a lot abuts an Interstate or its
interchanges, the majority of parking shall be located between the building and the
side yards or between the building and the yard that is adjacent to the Interstate.
Section 15.02 Authority and Required Review
A. Authority
(3) In conjunction with PUD review, the modification of these Land Development
Regulations is permitted subject to the conditions and standards in this Article and
other applicable provisions of these Regulations. However, with the exception of side
yard setbacks in the Central District 1, in no case shall the DRB permit the location of
a new structure less than five (5) feet from any property boundary. In no case shall be
the DRB allow land development creating a total site coverage exceeding the allowable
limit for the applicable zoning district in the case of new development, or increasing
the coverage on sites where the pre-existing condition exceeds the applicable limit. In
no case shall the DRB permit the location of parking not in compliance with Section
14.06 (C) (2).
4
Land Development Regulations
Approved by the City Council 12/21/2009
E. PARKING STANDARDS FOR ASSISTED LIVING
Table 13-1 - Parking
• Assisted Living: 0.6 per du.
F. NEW USE: PET GROOMING
2.02 Specific Definitions
Pet grooming. Any establishment where domestic pets are bathed, clipped,
combed, or otherwise cleaned for the purpose of enhancing their aesthetic value or
health, but not including any outdoor exercise facilities.
Table 13-1 - Parking
• Pet Grooming: 4 per 1,000 GFA
Table C-1 Table of Uses
• Pet Grooming. P where personal services are permitted.
G. OUTDOOR EXERCISE AREAS FOR ANIMALS
13.23 Outdoor exercise facilities for animal shelters, commercial kennels, pet day
cares, and veterinary hospitals
A. Specific Standards:
(1) All outdoor exercise areas shall be fully enclosed and screened on all sides.
(2) Animals shall not be permitted in outdoor exercise areas between 9:00 pm and
7:00 am.
(3) Where a planned outdoor exercise facility is adjacent to or within fifty (50)
feet of the boundary of a residential district or existing residential use, the
required side or rear setback for the outdoor exercise facilities shall be sixty-
five (65) feet from the residential or residentially-zoned property. A strip not
less than fifteen (15) feet wide within the sixty-five (65) foot setback shall be
landscaped with dense evergreens, fencing, and/or other plantings as a screen.
New external light fixtures shall not be permitted within the fifteen (15) foot
wide buffer area.
5
•
Land Development Regulations
Approved by the City Council 12/21/2009
H. GATES DRIVEWAYS AND ROADS
15.12 Standards for Roadways, Parking and Circulation in PUDs and Subdivisions
A. Street Layout. The arrangement of streets in the subdivision shall provide for the
continuation of arterial, collector and local streets of adjoining subdivisions and
for proper projection of arterial, collector and local streets through adjoining
properties that are not yet subdivided, in order to make possible necessary fire
protection, movement of traffic and construction or extension, presently or when
later required, of needed utilities and public services such as recreation paths,
sewers, water and drainage facilities. Where, in the opinion of the Development
Review Board, topographic or other conditions make such continuance
undesirable or impracticable, the above conditions may be modified. In no case
shall gates of any kind be permitted across public or private roads, or driveways
serving more than one dwelling unit.
I. OUTDOOR STORAGE AND DISPLAY
Section 13.05 Outside Outdoor Storage and Display
A. Outdoor Storage General Requirements. Outside Outdoor storage of goods,
materials, vehicles for other than daily use, and equipment shall be subject to the
following provisions:
(1) Any outside outdoor storage and/or display shall be appurtenant to the
primary use of the property and shall be allowed only in nonresidential
districts and upon approval of the DRB in conjunction with a site plan,
conditional use and/or PUD application.
(2) The Development Review Board may require that outside outdoor storage
areas in connection with commercial or industrial uses be enclosed and/or
screened where the storage area may comprise an attractive nuisance, where
the proposed use of the storage areas present opportunities for theft, or
where the Board finds that said storage areas are in view of residentially-
zoned parcels.
(3) Outside display of equipment is prohibited where such equipment is fitted
wt}1 a� lift l 1 tl, t tl t l 1 t ,-1 .7 l 1,
.---- ---"--, -'-'-, ---- .., � ...�..., r..waw «.a..., a.a..0 vim. a..ia..ru�l.,u uaiu YY 11c1G JLILZI
masts, bridges, or canopies.
B. Outdoor Display. Outdoor display of goods, materials, vehicles for other than
daily use, and equipment shall be subject to the following provisions:
6
Land Development Regulations
Approved by the City Council 12/21/2009
(1) Any outdoor display shall be appurtenant to the primary use of the property
and shall be allowed only in nonresidential districts and upon approval of
the DRB in conjunction with a site plan, conditional use and/or PUD
application that clearly indicates the location of any outdoor display areas.
(2) Outdoor display of equipment is prohibited where such equipment is fitted
with arms, lifts, buckets, or other parts that can be elevated and where such
parts are displayed in an elevated manner. This does not include boats with
masts, bridges, or canopies.
J. ACCESSORY STRUCTURES
3.10 Accessory Structures and Uses
(10) Accessory structures shall not exceed fifteen (15) feet in height, except that:
a. For industrial uses in non-residential districts, height standards for principal
structures shall apply for accessory structures; and,
b. For residential uses, accessory structures up to twenty-five (25) feet in height shall
be permitted where the structure is located at least thirty (30) feet from all
property lines, the structure has a pitched roof, and the lot on which the structure
is proposed is at least one (1) acre in size; and,
c. Accessory structures exceeding the height of the principal structure on the
property shall require approval by the Development Review Board as a conditional
use, pursuant to Article 14, Conditional Use Review. The applicant shall
demonstrate to the Board that the accessory structure will be clearly secondary to
the principal structure in function and in appearance from the public right-of-way.
(11) No accessory structure shall be constructed with a cellar or below-grade story, and
no heating shall be installed in any part of such accessory structure unless the
accessory structure is a duly approved location of a home occupation, agricultural
use, or accessory residential unit.
7
Land Development Regulations
Approved by the City Council 12/21/2009
K. STRUCTURES IN THE RESIDENTIAL 4 DISTRICT
Section 4.03 Residential 4 District — R4
F. Additional Standards. Mutli-family dwellings shall be subject to site plan review, as
per Article 14, and shall be limited to a maximum of four (4) dwelling units per
structure.
L. EXTERIOR LIGHTING
Section 13.07 Exterior Lighting
A. General Requirements. All exterior lighting for all uses in all districts except for
one-family and two-family uses shall be of such a type and location and shall have
such shielding as will direct the light downward and will prevent the source of
light from being visible from any adjacent residential property or street. Light
fixtures that are generally acceptable are illustrated in Appendix D. "Source of
light" shall be deemed to include any transparent or translucent lighting that is an
integral part of the lighting fixture(s). Site illumination for uncovered areas shall
be evenly distributed. Where feasible, energy efficient lighting is encouraged.
M. SELF STORAGE IN THE MIXED INDUSTRIAL-COMMERCIAL DISTRICT
Section 13.22 Self Storage in the Mixed Commercial-Industrial (CI) District
A. General Requirements. In the Commercial-Industrial District, the Development
Review Board may grant site plan approval for a self-storage facility, according
to the following regulations.
B. Specific Standards:
(1) The facility shall be clearly secondary to a permitted principal use in this
district
(2) The facility shall not occupy more than 20% of the gross floor area of the
principal use
(3) The facility shall only be accessible through an interior entrance
(4) Access to storage units shall only be available during business hours,
with an employee on site.
8
Land Development Regulations
Approved by the City Council 12/21/2009
N. CHILD CARE FACILITIES
14.03 Uses and Actions Subject to Site Plan Approval
***
B. Excluded from site plan review
***
11.Licensed and registered family child care homes.
O. MINOR LOT LINE ADJUSTMENTS
2.02 Specific Definitions
Subdivision.
(C)Division of land such as for minor realignment of property boundary lines of pre-
existing lots, for municipal purposes which conform to the Comprehensive Plan
(such as road widening, easements, sidewalks, parks, etc.), or enlargement
alteration of existing lots as specifically permitted under these Land Development
Regulations, shall not be deemed a subdivision, but is known as a minor lot line
adjustment. provided that no new developable lots result or no lot in existence
prior to the adjustment is so enlarged by thc adjustment that it is therefore capable
of subdivision into more lots than bcforc thc adjustment.
15.19 Minor Lot Line Adjustments
A. Any application for a minor lot line adjustment shall be accompanied by a
plat prepared by a Vermont licensed land surveyor and indicating all lots
that are proposed to be modified as a result of the proposed lot line
adjustment. The survey shall be sufficient to clearly indicate the area,
metes, bounds, and ties of each of the affected lots. The survey shall
include all structures and site improvements and delineate all
building/structure setbacks, lot coverage, parking spaces and any other
details as may be specified by the Administrative Officer.
B. The Administrative Officer shall approve an application for a minor lot
line adjustment, provided that the following criteria are met:
(1) No new lots are created through the adjustment;
9
Land Development Regulations
Approved by the City Council 12/21/2009
(2) The sale or exchange of parcels of land is between adjacent property
owners;
(3) The relocation of the lot-line does not result in the creation of a non-
conforming lot, structure or use; and
(4) The proposed change does not violate any conditions imposed from
prior municipal approvals.
C. Where, there is uncertainty as to whether an application comprises a
minor lot line adjustment, the Administrative Officer may refer the
application to the Development Review Board for review as a subdivision
of land.
P. ADDITIONAL TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS
2.02 Specific Definitions
Accessory use. A use of land or property or a building, or a portion thereof, whose
area, extent, or purpose is incidental and subordinate to the principal use of the
building or land. The accessory use shall be located on the same lot. An accessory
use may shall not be accessory to another accessory use.
Animals/pets (each definition below is distinct):
Animal shelter. A place where animals are provided with short-term shelter
typically operated by a humane society or other non-profit organization.
Such establishment may have either or both of an educational component
or a residence, occupied by a household with at least one person employed
full or part time in a caretaking capacity for the facility, as an accessory use
or additional principal permitted use on the site. May or may not include
associated outdoor exercise facilities.
Commercial kennel. A lot, premises, use, or structure intended and used
for the breeding, training, sale, and overnight boarding of well dogs, cats, or
other small domestic animals belonging to a person or persons other than
the owner of the lot, but not including a veterinary hospital clinic. May or
may not include associated outdoor exercise facilities.
Pet day care. A commercial service provided to pet owners whereby pets are
cared for outside of their home by the business owner during normal
business hours, with no overnight boarding, training, sale, or breeding of
pets. May or may not include associated outdoor exercise facilities.
10
Land Development Regulations
Approved by the City Council 12/21/2009
Private kennel. An accessory structure used for the outdoor
accommodation of small domestic animals and not operated on a
commercial basis.
Veterinary hospital. A place where animals are given medical care and the
boarding of animals is limited to short-term care for a certain period of
time. May or may not include associated outdoor exercise facilities.
Animal hospital. A place where animals arc given medical care and the boarding of
animals is limited to short term care for a certain period of time. Scc Also known
as a veterinary hospital. Such hospitals may be associated with animal boarding
facilities, animal breeding facilities, and/or laboratories.
; of primarily for the overnight boarding or
grooming of well animals; not permitting outdoor cages, pens, or runs for the
Commercial kcnncl/pct day care. A place where dogs or domesticated animals arc
boarded, groomed, bred, trained or sold.
Bus terminal. Any premises for the short term parking (i.e., fewer than 12 hours)
of motor-driven buses and loading and unloading of passengers. Bus terminals may
include ticket purchase facilities, but may shall not include bus maintenance
facilities. Bus terminals may also include hubs where three or more routes
converge and allow the transfer of passengers between routes.
Outdoor display. An outdoor arrangement of products for sale, together with
accompanying display structure, typically not in a fixed position and capable of .
rearrangement, and typically with products brought indoors when the business is
closed.
3.08 Temporary Structures and Uses
D. Temporary Outside Outdoor Storage. Temporary outside outdoor storage used
in conjunction with the principal use or uses on that property shall be permitted
for a period up to one month during a calendar year. Permits for temporary
outside outdoor storage shall be issued by the Administrative Officer in accordance
with the provisions of this section.
3.09 Multiple Structures and Uses
B. Multiple Uses in a Structure and Umbrella Approval.
11
Land Development Regulations
Approved by the City Council 12/21/2009
(1) The Development Review Board may approve two or more separate uses, one
or more of which is a conditional use in the underlying zoning district, in a
principal building or structure as a conditional use if it determines that:
(b) Such uses can suitably share common facilities, such as parking and outside
outdoor storage areas, within the requirements of these regulations for any lot.
Section 3.11 Non-Conforming Uses and Non-Complying Structures and Lots
D. Alterations to Non-Complying Structures.
(3) In the CD1, CD2, CD3, and CD4 zones, the aggregate cost of such alteration
shall not exceed thirty-five percent (35%) of the current assessed value of the
structure being altered. Notwithstanding the foregoing, within the CD1, CD2, CD3
and CD4 zones, a non-complying building or structure may shall not be altered by
increasing the height or increasing the footprint, or otherwise increasing the
square footage of the building or structure. The Development Review Board may
approve an alteration that results in an aggregate cost that exceeds thirty-five
percent (35%) of the current assessed value of the structure being altered and/or
which involves an increase in the height or the footprint, or otherwise an increase
in the square footage of the building or structure, provided all of the following
criteria are met:
8.03 Prohibited Uses - All Districts
(7) outside Outdoor storage in connection with any permitted use, except
dumpsters which must be reviewed for adequate screening during the
development approval process.
(10) Commercial kennels, and veterinary animal hospitals, and pet day care
9.08 SEQ-NRT and SEQ-NR Sub-Districts; Specific Standards
A. Street, block and lot pattern.
(2) Interconnection of Streets
(b) Dead end streets (e.g. culs de sac) are strongly discouraged. Dead
end streets nifty shall not exceed 200 feet in length.
9.09 SEQ-VR Sub-District; Specific Standards
A. Street, Block and Lot Pattern
(2) Interconnection of Streets
12
Land Development Regulations
Approved by the City Council 12/21/2009
(b) Dead end streets (e.g. culs de sac) are discouraged. Dead end streets
may shall not exceed 200 feet in length.
9.10 SEQ-VC Sub-District; Specific Regulations
A. Street, block and lot pattern.
(2) Interconnection of Streets
(b) Dead end streets (e.g. cul de sacs) are discouraged. Dead end streets
may shall not exceed 200 feet in length.
10.03 Scenic View Protection Overlay District
I. Alteration and Expansion.
(1) Notwithstanding the provisions of these Regulations, any structure which
fails to comply with the requirements of this Section 10.03 may shall not:
(a) be expanded or altered in any way which increases its degree or
extent of non-compliance, except in strict conformance with the
requirements set forth in this Section 10.03(J) herein.
Section 13.01 Off Street Parking and Loading
N. Exemptions, Waivers, and Modifications of Requirements
(2) Waivers. Where the Development Review Board determines that a proposed
land use or structure is adequately served by existing or proposed pulalie
parking facilities, the Development Review Board may waive the off-street
parking space requirements stipulated in Tables 13-1 through 13-6, by no
more than twenty-five percent (25%).
Table 13-1 - Parking
o Animal shelter, commercial kennel, veterinary hospital or deg pet day care
1 per employee plus 0.5 per 1,000 SF GFA
• Animal shelter 1 per employee plus 0.5 per 1,000 SF GFA
13.08 Specific Requirements for Nighttime Illumination of Governmental Flags.
A. The City encourages those who fly the Flag of the United States to observe
the custom prescribed in the United States Flag Code of displaying the flag from
sunrise to sunset. However, if governmental flags are to be flown at night and are
to be illuminated, the regulations in this Section apply.
(2) Flag Type. Only governmental flags may be illuminated. Nongovernmental
flags may shall not be flown on a pole with an illuminated governmental
13
Land Development Regulations
Approved by the City Council 12/21/2009
flag. No more than three (3) governmental flags may be flown on the same
pole.
Section 13.14 Affordable Housing (Below Market Rate Housing)
C. Density Increase
(1) Affordable Housing Development. The Development Review Board may
grant a density increase of no more than fifty percent (50%) in the total
number of allowed dwelling units for an Affordable Housing Development.
The total of below market rate units shall be at least half fifty percent (50%)
and no more of the total proposed dwelling units. Where the total
proposed dwelling units is an uneven number, the total of below market
rate units shall be calculated as at least the total proposed dwelling units,
less one (1), divided by two. Such application shall be subject to Article 15,
Planned Unit Development and Article 14, Site Plan and Conditional Use
Review.
Section 13.24 Retaining Walls
A. General Requirements. In this section, a retaining wall shall be distinct from a
fence or wall.
B. Specific Requirements. All retaining walls shall be subject to the following
requirements:
(1) All retaining walls shall require a zoning permit from the Administrative
Officer.
(2) A retaining wall shall be erected within the boundaries of the applicant's
property and shall be set back at least five (5) feet from all property boundaries.
(3) No part of any retaining wall shall be placed in such manner as to visually
obstruct vehicular or pedestrian traffic. If determined necessary by the
Administrative Officer, the placement of retaining walls near the corner of a
property at the intersection of two roads shall provide for a clear vision area
defined as a triangular area formed by the right-of-way lines at points which are
thirty (30) feet distant from the intersection of the right-of-way lines and
measured along such lines.
(4) A retaining wall over eight (8) feet in height shall require approval by the
Development Review Board as a conditional use subject to the provisions of
Article 14, Conditional Use Review, and shall include a demonstration by a
certified engineer that the retaining wall is structurally sound to serve its
intended purpose.
(5) Retaining walls shall be maintained in a safe and substantial condition.
14
Land Development Regulations
Approved by the City Council 12/21/2009
14.05 Application, Review, and Approval Procedure
D. Application for Site Plan.
Development data:
(b) One set of preliminary plans, elevations, floor plans, and sections of
proposed structures showing the proposed location, use, design and
height of all structures, roads, parking areas, access points, sidewalks
and other walkways, loading docks, outside outdoor storage areas,
sewage disposal areas, landscaping, screening, site grading, and
recreation areas if required. Plans shall also show any proposed
division of buildings into units of separate occupancy and location of
drives and access thereto.
(l) The general location of any free standing signs.
Adopted this day of , 2009
City Clerk
Mark Boucher, Chair
Sandra Dooley,Vice Chair
James Knapp, Clerk
Meaghan Emery, Councilor
Francis Murray, Councilor
15
1
Bartlett Brook Watershed Overlay (Existing and Revised)
_r----:_•-- ,...„,, 4
__ __
, ,_. Ili .1 I I 11Wsbfri. •
se IlIilt II
.....,.
z,,,,,„,„„,
•„LAt!.t-,kielI,f ie,..t,4=
n.
.. --..Ji--- ,1i t11111lleff liEdi`I'
r sanmmaarke111 41
141101
__.,..
STONEHEDGE D,' .
WA
,Ici fit
mr,:„,: :„ .J. ..,,,,. H., , ,_. -
B C ,,,.... t_ 7
.i D ORCHA-v - mu! -:_ :, - ...;, ii ::, :7,-:,-,..
liiiiitti-:'' ‘-'-_---:: ' :- :, , :::,=,r. ,',-..:. lii
MIMI
IOW NII
1,,,,04....,,,,,,,..„......,,,,,„,„
a ._, _: .............„,,................,„,...,,,,„ ,
„,,,,, ,,,„, ..„,., ,tons,-,,. •,- — '- •'•G:',,,,
■ n r. s .,i ' a e 1,
._
- .
co'
'''7.11:41111itribigWialaita Ell''''''''
OL ..+ �, -, ail '` ® ,� +� . , ?«..r., ■5
to
'
.. ' -i IP Al
8 x sA i i v °i. , fps T,'- . r
ii
s' " :_--„1----: ',1:4,,,;',"fiti-:ii;:,,..i-,:, 5Pr.,'.;:-4:.,-,:rzttlt.'7tft.,-41=27,7,-..: ,:;','„ -:1:E'-•:l'*-,;',' ,7-77771:A-.1i:':-,v, :VA al. ;',,,:'. ,..'',.. ;_•,' 7:7
7119:_ r_ Pri,,1‘2W-.14..c'3--''''4iiiE--. .4'6'- ir,-.4'.-4.11 -,:,:',i :::,i),':--,,,i'', .:,' ;',.'.. 4:,',V5':::4"j:11.2.-,- :-.--t-",--,',,---7,i177,C1.:;1:t:.:F4,::.STry,ITIN-.:;47,,,:;:::-Iiii,,-.I afeem.t.
.\
,,,,,1 71 , .;, __ ._._ .. ,::'::,'-:i5,..,M.14-43,:„.."4.3:7".1':::.:1. ,".1:.,:\4:,-,,*tci7e.- '1:'-4-; l'-_itg'0 b , ,,,,,.----:,'' ,-,-.4,-':„.1;.,--, .i,,,,,,Ki„,E-,,,:T my__--------„,..., I 1-;i '----,',' ',- '- 1-,—.
RVIE�1J RD .v !$
/ _ HARED _ `_fig : . ‘ ,-:i:',?:,,
\..
q ,<(--��
STI DRY 1 , _I i
ii V ALLkN RD
N 7j ei.
ni
71`
S �.
V _
, _
.„
„,,,:.,,,
aL,H
0 500 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000
Feet southhv i ,; == .
Sandra Lindberg
52 Pinnacle Drive
So. Burlington, VT 05403
December 7, 2009
Mr. Charles Hafter, City Manager
City of South Burlington
575 Dorset St.
South Burlington, VT 05403
Dear Mr. Hafter:
I wish to resign from the Board of the South Burlington
Library, effective immediately.
My resignation does not indicate a lack of support for
the Community Library, the Library Director, or the current
leadership of the Board. I have accepted the Presidency of
another organization and need to focus my efforts on that for
the remainder of my term.
I am confident that there will be some new enthusiastic
people who will be able to serve the Board well.
Sincerely,
Sandra Lindberg
cc: Louise Murphy
CITY COUNCIL BUDGET WORK SESSION 3 DECEMBER 2009
The South Burlington City Council held a budget w ork session on Thursday,
3 December 2009, at 6:30 p.m., in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset St.
Members Present: M. Boucher, Chair; S. Dooley, M. Emery, J. Knapp, F. Murray
Also Present: C. Hafter, City Manager; D. Gravelin, Assistant City Manager; D.
Kinville, City Clerk; P. Conner, Director of Planning&Zoning; Chief T. Whipple, Police
Department; L. Murphy, Community Library; T. Hubbard, Recreation Department
Director; S. Crosby, Water Quality Department Head; M. Young
1. Planning& Zoning Department:
Mr. Conner said his budget is very similar to last year's. To keep the budget low, they
reduced the printing budget and are"going more digital." There will be fewer printed
copies of the Comprehensive Plans and Zoning Regulations. People will be able to get
these on-line. At present, those who want a printed copy pay$25.00, which does not
cover the cost.
Mr. Boucher noted there have been questions about inspections of apartments for
livability issues. He asked Mr. Conner whether he felt the city should look conceptually
at increasing fees to cover a building inspector role. Mr. Conner replied that"building
codes"would require a whole new set of regulations. It could be pursued, but it would
necessitate a separate staff person. Mr. Hafter noted that homeowners are given
information on what they should know/do, information they should have, etc. Mr. Knapp
said if the city were to do this, it would have to be a big enough effort to work well. Mr.
Hafter said the State is considering doing this but would be pushing it onto the
communities. Additional "side-effects"would include increased housing costs and a
tremendous liability on the part of the city. Mr. Knapp added that if the city signs off on
a building or an apartment and something then goes wrong, the city becomes a defendant.
Mr. Conner said he knows there has been some talk in the Council about city building
needs. He indicated his willingness to participate in that discussion within the existing
budget.
2. Recreation Department:
Mr. Hubbard gave members an updated program analysis. He noted that the budget
includes a slight cutback for Red Rocks Park and the removal of lifeguards from that
location. He said the most people that were in the water on the nicest days were 12.
With regard to the summer playground program, this year a fee was charged for the first
time, and this went fairly well. Mr. Hubbard didn't think the number of participants
warranted having 2 programs at different locations in the city. For next year, he is
CITY COUNCIL BUDGET WORK SESSION
3 DECEMBER 2009
PAGE 2
recommending one program at Central School. This would reduce the staff by half
The budget includes 2 capital item requests: roof repairs at the JC Park"warming hut"
and storage building, and replacement of rec path signs at Dorset Park and Farrell Park.
There is a grant from Lake Champlain Byways which has done all the mockups for the
signage. It will cost$2000 to do the signs. Mr. Hafter noted that both of these capital
requests are in the proposed budget.
3. Community Library:
Ms. Murphy noted that the one increase in personnel costs is due to a reclassification of
an employee to a higher classification(a$4000 jump). Mr. Hafter noted that the job
classification audit done in the city showed only 2 positions that were out of line salary-
wise.
There is a capital budget request to replace 5 computers. Mr. Hafter asked the School to
share in that cost since the computers are used by students and the School District agreed.
Ms. Murphy said there is a supplemental request(not in the proposed budget)to make the
Children's Librarian a full-time position. This would enable the person to provide
services to pre-teen and teens. The present Children's Librarian is leaving this year, and
she is at the top of the pay scale. With a new, less experienced person, they could get 6
additional hours per week for the same money as the present person. Mr. Hafter
encouraged adding the 6 hours for a new hire but did not support making it a full time
position this year.
Ms. Dooley asked whether impact fees could be used to fund the building of a new
Library. Mr. Hafter said they would have to change the designation of what those funds
can be used for,but it can be done.
4. City Clerk:
Ms. Kinville said the major budget increase is due to there being more elections this year.
There is a capital request for $400.00 for a new table in the lobby to be used for people
who vote early.
Ms. Kinville noted there are now fewer property tax appeals but more abatement
requests.
CITY COUNCIL BUDGET WORK SESSION
3 DECEMBER 2009
PAGE 3
5. Police Department:
Chief Whipple said there is an increase in the overtime budget since they always spend
more than budgeted. Overtime generally runs about 10%of permanent salaries. This is
the same as in Burlington and Williston.
Clothing supplies are down a bit as they have switched to a less costly outfit.
A question arose as to whether Public Works can handle all the snow removal needs at 19
Gregory Drive and still keep streets plowed. To address this, money was added to the
budget to cover snow plowing by the person who does this for Bob Miller(the same
person also does landscaping).
Chief Whipple noted that there is no money in the proposed budget for police
accreditation. The cost would be $8,100. The Chief felt it was a good priced"insurance
policy." There are 700 standards to meet for accreditation and the process forces the
department to be accountable and not let things slide. He felt it is a valuable process and
has added it as a"supplemental request."
The Chief noted that cars are actually$1000 cheaper this year.
There was a brief discussion of patrol of the rec path. Chief Whipple said they have had
almost no complaints even though there is no regular police patrol. There is occasional
motorcycle patrol during the summer.
6. Water Quality Department:
Mr. Crosby reported that the Airport Parkway Treatment Plant is now under construction
for the proposed upgrades. A major issue will be staying in compliance during the
construction. Mr. Crosbie said he was told that the major responsibility for this is with
the contractor. He felt the upgrade would not result in significant budget changes until
the 2011-12 budget.
At the Bartlett Bay plant, replacement equipment is costing twice the original price. Mr.
Crosby distributed photos of Bartlett Bay equipment.
There is a need for a new computer in the Department,but this can wait until the Airport
Parkway system is put in so both locations can have the same equipment.
Mr. Crosby said that maintenance of pump stations is the department's biggest challenge.
He will be doing a detailed plan this year. He showed photos of both the Twin Oaks and
CITY CUNCIL BUDGET WORK SESSION
3 DECEMBER 2009
PAGE 4
Lane Press pump stations which will be totally replaced this year($130,000 is in the
budget for this). Both are 30-40 years old.
7. Bonded Debt:
Mr. Hafter reviewed the amount to come from taxes and the amount from the Rooms &
Meals tax. Mr. Boucher cited the need to work toward a capital maintenance plan.
S. Other Entities:
Mr. Halter said he had budgeted a 2% increase,but that is subject to change when exact
information is available.
9. Revenues:
Mr. Hafter noted that Airport payment in lieu of taxes is up. Ms. Emery said she would
like to see an accounting of what the Airport is actually paying for the houses they buy.
10. Supplemental Requests:
Mr. Hafter noted a request to put back money for road paving. In addition to this there
are requests totaling$55,000.
Mr. Murray said he supports what staff has proposed without supplemental.
Mr. Hafter said he would like to add the CCTV"clickable agendas"since its omission
was a city error.
Both Ms. Dooley and Ms. Emery felt the Library has been "shortchanged"over the years.
Mr. Knapp felt the Firefighters should have the hoses they requested, and he asked that
the $7500 be put in the budget. He recommended adding all the requests except the
$130,000 for roads. Mr. Boucher said he had hoped for no tax increase except for the
Police Station the voters approved. Mr. Hafter noted the supplemental would increase
the tax rate by 2/10 of a cent. Ms. Emery agreed with Mr. Knapp that they shouldn't be
"pinching pennies."
Mr. Boucher noted that health insurance amounts to 26+% of the budget and the pension
plan 22%. He felt this is not sustainable.
Mr. Hafter felt he could find the$5,000 and$7500 in the budget. He argued for the
CITY COUNCIL BUDGET WORK SESSION
3 DECEMBER 2009
PAGE 5
money for roads. Mr. Boucher suggested going to the voters for that. Other members
agreed.
Mr. Knapp felt they should look at the Library in a more comprehensive way. Mr. Hafter
said he didn't feel this was the time to add any personnel.
Members agreed to let the Police Accreditation lapse and to go to the voters for money
for roads.
As there was no further business to come before the Council, the meeting was adjourned
at 9:55 p.m.
Clerk
CITY COUNCIL 7 DECEMBER 2009
The South Burlington City Council held a regular meeting on Monday, 7 December
2009, at 7:00 p.m.,in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset St.
Members Present: M. Boucher, Chair; S. Dooley, M. Emery, J. Knapp, F. Murray
Also Present: C. Halter, City Manager; D. Gravelin, Assistant City Manager; P. Conner,
Director of Planning&Zoning; B. Stuono, K. Donahue, M. Young, B. Gilbert, Lt. Col.
A. T. Rice, Col. D. E. Fick, VTANG
1. Comments & Questions from the Audience, not related to Agenda Items:
Mr. Donahue referred to a plan before the Development Review Board(DRB) to put 90
units in a development near Spear St. via TDRs. He said he originally thought TDRs
were great and would be used to build up the core portion of the city. He didn't think the
city would be"saving one area by ruining another." He asked how TDRs can be
repealed.
Mr. Boucher read a letter written by the City Manager to Mr. Friedholm addressing the
same issue. It explained the rules under which the DRB operates. Mr. Boucher stressed
that the City Council cannot discuss any development issues with the DRB. Citizens can
communicate to the Planning Commission about issues without regard to any specific
development.
Mr. Donahue also raised an issue with the interconnecting of neighborhoods. Mr. Conner
noted that both the Comprehensive Plan and the Zoning Regulations call for that inter-
connection. He also explained that TDRs are to be used only in the Southeast Quadrant.
Mr. Hafter said TDRs weren't applied to the City Center because zoning density there
was already very high.
Mr. Murray explained that even if in the future TDRs were to be repealed, the current
application would be heard under the rules that exist today.
Mr. Stuono asked what would happen if the City Council opposed a DRB decision. Mr.
Hafter said the City would hire an attorney for the DRB, and the City Attorney would
defend the city's position.
2.Announcements & City Manager's Report:
Ms. Emery asked that there be a"tweak"in the budget for the Recreation Department
summer playground program. She suggested a weekly fee which would allow a family to
pay$5 for a week instead of having to pay$30 for the whole summer. She also
suggested possibly having a discounted full summer fee.
CITY COUNCIL
7 DECEMBER 2009
PAGE 2
Ms. Emery also noted that the CCTV holiday party will be on Thursday, 17 December.
Ms. Dooley advised that a group of people had spent some time with Tom Hubbard at
Red Rocks Park. They noticed areas in need of some maintenance. She noted that the
more the park is used, the more problems there will be. Mr. Hubbard will be pursuing
some funding options.
Mr. Murray asked for an update on the City Manager search. Mr. Hafter advised that the
ad appeared today. VLCT will start reviewing applications on 11 January. Mr. Boucher
noted there are 3 requests from people to be on the search committee.
Mr. Boucher said the other search is for a Public Works Director. That committee has
narrowed applicants down to 3 or 4 from the 8 who were interviewed. Mr. Halter will
continue the process of selection from there.
Mr. Hafter: Noted the following upcoming meetings: CWD Board, 8 December, noon;
Preconstruction meeting for Airport Parkway Treatment Plant, 9 December; Tilley Dr.
Bike Path, 9 December; VLCT 10 December, 10:30 a.m.; 10 December, Exit 12B
"creative financing,"2 p.m.; 17 December, County budget pre-hearing
3. Consideration of Items Related to Purchase of 19 Gregory Drive:
A. Consideration of Approval of Declaration for 19 Gregory Drive,A
Condominium
B. Consideration of Approval of Fit-Up Agreement
C. Consideration of$7,200,000 Bond Anticipation Note for the
purchase and renovation of 19 Gregory Drive:
Mr. Hailer said there are still a few issues to work through, and the attorneys are talking
with each other. He asked for a special meeting to finalize the agreements.
Members agreed to meet on 14 December, 5 p.m. for this purpose.
Mr. Halter noted that in the Condominium document"unit 1" should read "unit 2"
throughout. In addition, on p. 8 of 35, unit 1 shall have exclusive use of 60 parking
spaces, and unit 2 shall have exclusive use of 93 parking spaces.
Ms. Emery moved that the Council hold a special meeting on Monday, 14 December
2009, at 5 p.m. to consider items related to the purchase of 19 Gregory Drive. Mr. Knapp
seconded. Motion passed unanimously.
CITY COUNCIL
7 DECEMBER 2009
PAGE 3
4. 158 FW's Security Improvements-Relocation of National Guard Avenue:
Lt. Col. Rice said the aim is to back the road away from fuel tanks. He noted that the
City Manager feels there should be some improvements made to the intersection of
Airport Parkway. The problem is the project is funded through Sen. Leahy, and is only
eligible for expenditures within the project area.
Mr. Murray noted that if the Guard were any other developer, they would be required to
make those improvements. He suggested the Guard explain this to Sen. Leahy's office
and request the funds.
Col Fisk said that as a daily driver of that road, he would love to see it improved. He said
their project does not add any capacity to that area and traffic flow will be the same. Mr.
Murray stressed that the city is looking to the Guard to help get the road improved. Mr.
Boucher added it is one of the most dangerous intersections in the State. Col. Fisk asked
if the city could provide a preferred plan for the intersection that they would present that
to Sen. Leahy.
Lt. Col. Rice then explained what they plan to do with the road and showed which section
of the road will be relocated.
Mr. Boucher stated that the City intends to accept the new road provided it is built to city
standards. Mr. Hailer will provide a letter to that effect.
Mr. Knapp moved that the City Manager issue a letter of intent for the city to maintain
the newly constructed relocation of National Guard Avenue if it is constructed in
accordance with City standards. Ms. Emery seconded. Motion passed unanimously.
5. Public Hearing on Proposed Amendments to Land Development
Regulations; Request to Continue Hearing to Next Meeting:
Mr. Murray moved to open the public hearing. Mr. Knapp seconded. Motion passed
unanimously.
Mr. Conner said the Planning Commission held a public hearing on 29 September and
voted unanimously on what is before the Council. There is, however, a request from the
City Attorney to continue this to a future date to "tweak" some things.
Mr. Conner noted there was some public feedback regarding the formula by which
density bonuses are calculated. It should read"divided by 2"not"divided by half."
CITY COUNCIL
7 DECEMBER 2009
PAGE 4
Mr. Murray moved to continue the Public Hearing on Proposed Amendments to Land
Development Regulations until 21 December 2009. Ms. Dooley seconded. Motion
passed unanimously.
6.Discussion of draft ballot item permitting use of existing open space levy
for stewardship expenses:
Mr. Halter read the proposed item and said it was the result of the LANDS presentation
on November 16, 2009. Mr. Conner noted that the Natural Resources Committee is very
supportive of the ballot item.
Members agreed to put it on the March ballot. Mr. Halter will get final wording from the
City Attorney.
7. Consideration for Capital Equipment Refunding Notes for the Department
of Public Works:
Mr. Halter noted the notes are at 2.4%.
Mr. Murray moved to approve the Capital Equipment Refunding Notes and
accompanying documents for the Department of Public Works as presented. Ms. Emery
seconded. Motion passed unanimously.
8. Review and Approve Minutes of 16 November and 23 November 2009:
In the Minutes of 16 November, Ms. Emery noted that with the regard to Greyhound
relocating its terminal to the Airport, she wants to hear all the facts before saying"no."
Ms. Emery moved to approve the Minutes of 16 November as amended. Mr. Knapp
seconded. Motion passed 4-0 with Mr. Murray abstaining.
Ms. Emery moved to approve the Minutes of 23 November as written. Mr. Murray
seconded. Motion passed unanimously.
9. Sign Disbursement Orders:
Disbursement Orders were signed.
10. Executive Session:
Ms. Emery moved the Council meet in Executive Session to discuss contract negotiations
and to
CITY COUNCIL
7 DECEMBER 2009
PAGE 5
resume regular session to approve contracts and/or adjourn. Mr. Knapp seconded.
Motion passed unanimously.
11. Regular Session:
The Council returned to regular session. Mr. Knapp moved the approval of a labor
contract with the Water Pollution Control Association for a two-year period starting July
1, 2009. Ms. Emery seconded. The motion passed unanimously.
Mr. Knapp moved the approval of a labor contract with the Public Works and City Hall
Employee Association for a two-year period starting July 1, 2009. Ms. Dooley seconded.
The motion passed unanimously.
Mr. Knapp moved that the City Manager salary be set by contract at$115,000 annually
for the period starting July 1, 2009. Ms. Emery seconded. The motion passed
unanimously.
Mr. Knapp moved adjournment. Mr. Murray seconded. The motion passed
unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 9:45pm.
Clerk
4,
southbudington
Charles E. Hafter, City Manager
December 18, 2009
Chair and City Council
South Burlington, VT 05403
Re: Review of proposed language for ballot items and proposed charter amendments for
March, 2010 ballot; Set public hearing dates for charter change hearings
To All Members:
Attached are drafts of the proposed language for the ballot questions for the March ballot.
The language has been prepared by the City attorney. The proposed questions are:
• Annual budget approval
• Use of Conservation Tax Levy
• Use of Funds for Road Improvements
• Charter change on budget approval process
• Charter change on Australian ballot requirements
I have included a timeline for approval of charter changes. The Council should set the
hearing dates for the two hearings tonight, although the language can be fmalized at the
next meeting, if necessary. I would prefer alternative dates from those recommended by
Steve Stitzel and will contact him to determine our flexibility prior to Monday night.
Sincerely,
(kt6 -
Chuck Hafter
City Manager
575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4107 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburi.corn
Proposed March, 2010 City of South Burlington Ballot Questions:
APPROVAL OF CITY BUDGET
Shall the City adopt the City Council's proposed budget for FY 2010-2011 totaling
$22,151,098 of which it is estimated$ $9,802,828 will be raised by local property
taxes?
MODIFICATION OF USE OF ANNUAL CONSERVATION TAX LEVY
Shall the voters authorize expenditure, on an annual basis, of not more than five
percent (5%) of the annual tax levy for the Conservation Fund)approved by the
voters at the Annual City Meeting on May 16, 2000;to pay for maintenance of and
conservation activities on City-owned open space in South Burlington?
UL CF FUNDS for ROAD IMPROVEMENTS
Shall the voters fund a portion of the cost of repaving and repairing City streets in FY
2011 with $130,000 of City Rooms and Meals Tax revenues and $80,000 of fees
?r ,;N,'/collected from persons p_erfonnivag private work within the limits of City streets?
4. Charter question of budget process: See attached language from Attorney
5. Charter question on floor votes: See attached language from Attorney
•
Proposed Charter Amendments :
§ 503. Special city and school district meetings
Special city meetings, and special school district meetings,
shall be called in the manner provided by the laws of the state,
and, except as provided below, the voting on all questions shall
be by the Australian ballot system. The council or board of
school directors may, if action on a s ,iecific matter may not be
delayed for consolidation with. an Australian ballot vote on other
matters because of_ un:anticioated circumstances, conduct the vote
on the floor of a meeting of City voters if a vote in such manner
is authorized under ,general law.
§ 13-110. Annual city report
The annual city and school district reports shall be made
available and noticed to the legal voters of the city and school
district, ,' -- l Lt not
later
atwenty'
. 20h days -urior to the. annual city and school
terith net
§ 13-1302 . Preparation and submission
(a) The city manager and superintendent of schools shall prepare
the budgets for the city and school district, respectively, and
submit same to the council and board of school directors at such
time as required by said boards ; The budgets shall' contain:
(b) The council and the board of school directors shall
cause copies of the proposed budgets to be delivered to each
member of the steering committee forthwith after the final
preparation of said budgets, but not less than -6& 45 days;prior
to the date of the annual city and school district. meeting; The
steering committee may hold a meeting for the review of such
budgets, giving notice of the meeting as required in Section. 1102
subchapter 10 . , ] r>-
arid. the 3�tith Lurling-Dn u 1 - it;7.rict, No less than 45 35 days
prior to the annual city and school district. meeting, the
steering committee may submit to the council and the board of
school directors its report and recommendations concerning the
proposed budgets.
(c) 141 !:tuncZ -1 fix .7.7..hkr. T.Iittreand s✓i ce-f--c ll.'l --n
1
•
-ci y d ; trict meet-in q, , The council shall warn then
review the city budget �> u IL for submission to the
voters not less ..than30 days before the annual city meeting 7
4hri`�:11 o1- r u Chatig=2"; and in the same manner the board of
school directors shall warn review its budget for
submission to the voters/
§ 13-1303. City and school district annual meeting warning and
budget
The proposed, budgets of the city and school district shall
be dt ,a:tsuLe made available to the legal voters of the city and
school district at least, 10 20 days before the annual city and
school district meeting ,:F11;2.-11ic l,o-siiiig ,the bu geLe Not more
than forty (40) nor less than thirty ;30; days t.rior to LILITe
warnings for the annual city and school district meeting, notice
shall be published in a newspaper having general circulation
within the city informing voters of the date of a oOblic'hearing'
on the budgets and availability of the warnings for the annual
city and school district meetings, the oro-t;osed city and school
district` budgets and the city and school district annual resorts
T
:arthual meetings and the r J 11 cX t f r. the ci i ,1 ei is.l S _h'i .at
alzt:ll 7 x .. i.��v >�c - to ,J, i .� : The council and the board
of school directors shall hold a public hearing on their
rescective 'budgets not more than 10 days before the anrival city:
and; school district meetings ,
2
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS
ON PROPOSED CITY CHARTER AMENDMENTS
CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON
The Council of the City of South Burlington hereby gives
notice that public hearings will be held on January 2010
and February , 2010, both hearings to begin at 7 : 00 PM and to
be held at the South Burlington City Hall at. 575 Dorset Street to
consider proposed amendments to the charter for the City of South
Burlington.
PROPOSED CITY CHARTER AMENDMENTS
Shall the voters amend the following sections of the City
Charter:.
§ 503. Special city and school district meetings
§ 13-110. Annual city report
§ 13-1302 . Preparation and submission [of budgets]
§ 13-1303. City and school, district annual meeting warning
and budget
The complete text of the proposed amendments is available for
review on the City' s Web Site, www. sburl .com, and at the City
Offices 'at 575 Dorset Street during normal business hours .
Dated at South. Burlington, Vermont this day of
2009
CITY OF SOUTH 'BURLINGTON
Charles E. Hatter,
City Manager
Received and posted this day of , 2009 ,
Dorina Kinville,
City Clerk
.1
In Page 1 of 1
From: Steven Stitzel <SStitzel@firmspf.com>
To: Charles Halter <chafter@sburl.com>
Subject: Charter Adoption Schedule
Below is a schedule of"no later than" dates for action on the City Charter amendments.
December 29th Latest day to post public hearing notice for hearing on
January 29th
January 19th-29th Post Warningfor Annual CityMeeting
January29th
Latest day to hold first public hearing
February 9th Potential day for second public hearing
February 10th Latest day to modify charter changes
March 2nd Annual City Meeting
Steven F. Stitzel, Esq.
Stitzel, Page& Fletcher, P.C.
171 Battery Street
P.O. Box 1507
Burlington, VT 05402-1507
Telephone: (802) 660-2555
Fax: (802) 660-2552
www.firmspf.com
This Electronic Mail transmission and any accompanying documents contain information
belonging to the sender which are CONFIDENTIAL and legally PRIVILEGED. This information
is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to whom this transmission was
addressed, as indicated above. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying,
distribution, or action taken in reliance on the contents of the information in this transmission is
strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please reply to the sender at
802-660-2555 or the above address and delete this message and all attachments from your
storage files. Thank you.
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 9.0.717 /Virus Database: 270.14.113/2573 - Release Date: 12/18/09 02:35:00
Printed for Charles Hafter<chafter@sburl.com> 12/18/2009
41400.
111.0"-
southburtington
December 4, 2009 Charles E. Hatter, City Manager
Chair and City Council
South Burlington,VT 05403
Re: Consideration of charter amendment proposals from City Charter Committee
To All Members:
The City Charter Committee met to consider two amendments to the City Charter. Due
to unavoidable absences, and committee vacancies, only Bill Cimonetti was able to
attend. We discussed two amendments to the City Charter to address issues which have
recently arisen.
First is the need to redefine the budget approval process to work more effectively with a
March vote,rather than a May vote. The approval process also should be more effective
in encouraging public participation than the current process which was based on the
approval mechanisms prior to the charter amendment to require a public vote on the
budgets. By requiring certain warned legal meetings too early,the budget approval
process concludes before citizens are even thinking about public budgets. The attached
charter amendment complies with state law and puts South Burlington in line with other
municipalities throughout the state. The school administration has reviewed this proposal
and agrees.
A second amendment addresses the requirement to have an Australian ballot on every
question that comes before the voters. As you are aware,the timing of the federal
stimulus money forced the City to hold two votes (one by voice and one by Australian
ballot reconfirming the voice vote)to obtain the funding. Not were efficient. The attached
amendment addresses this issue.
Please discuss.
Sincerely,
Chuck Hafter
City Manager
575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4107 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburl.com
Charter Change Proposal
Budget Preparation and Approval Timeline
The current charter budget approval timeline is based on old charter language that
envisions a May ballot date and did not require a public vote if spending limitations were met.
Thus, the key avenue for public input was the budget public hearing which was set at an early
date to allow amendments based on public input as the budget was not voted upon. With the
change in the charter to allow public vote,the current budget timeline language results in a
process that starts too early to encourage public participation. The requirement for a public
vote also allows us to realign the charter to match general state requirement.
Current Proposed
Budgets to steering committee 60 prior to vote 45 days prior to vote
Optional SC meeting and warning 30 days prior 30 days prior
Budget mailed to residents 10 days prior to PH 10 days prior to PH
50 days prior to vote 20 days prior to vote
Public Hearing 40 days prior to vote 10 days prior to vote
The schedule would be more in line with the needs for a March vote:
Budget to SC 45 days before vote
Warning approved by Boards 30 days before vote
Budget mailed to homes 20 days prior to vote
Public Hearing 10 days prior to vote
Newspaper publication 10 days prior to vote
Design Review Overlay District Amendments
/ 4,,
,,,,, �
r I
// �� �l CAI STON Ro 70
0
Added
_--- - fAreaAddd
Area
70 (
i 7,
UMall
Property /1 ..
Added o
� `Area
t4t,
I.
Added
Area
\ \
YST
\ /
f
I SIMPSON CT
1
co
mcn
o ts;z 2 Ip c o -4 SUNSET AV
°, Added
LEGEND Area -+
m
I BASE ZONING DISTRICTS I -4 -I LILAC LN
1 I I CENTRAL DISTRICT 1 ;,,;;„ (p _..
CENTRAL DISTRICT 2
1 < I CENTRAL DISTRICT 3
1- CENTRAL DISTRICT 4 4. .-�-s -- 1
CURRENT DESIGN OVERLAYS Y� "
DESIGN DISTRICT 1
VA DESIGN DISTRICT 2 _L -
N nT..
DESIGN DISTRICT 3
POTENTIAL ADDITIONS
TO DESIGN OVERLAY DISTRICT W /�\ E
I I DESIGN DISTRICT 1
r� DESIGN DISTRICT 2 S 4
Ile% DESIGN DISTRICT 3 0 250 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 ..
Feettihbt.t '' 'on
1 i t'INlNC S 2dell Nil
south
PLANNING & ZONING
MEMORANDUM
TO: South Burlington City Council & City Manager
FROM: Paul Conner, Director of Planning & Zoning
SUBJECT: Land Development Regulation Public Hearing (continued)
DATE: December 21, 2009 City Council meeting
At the last meeting, the Council opened its formal public hearing on the draft amendments
to the Land Development Regulations. At that meeting, I highlighted one minor correction,
regarding the calculation of affordable housing units. The math error has been fixed!
Also last meeting, I relayed that our attorneys had requested the hearing be continued so
that they could complete their review of a couple of other sections. Those proposed
clarifications are included in the enclosed draft and described below.
Following the closure of the public hearing, I recommend approval of the full set of
amendments, including the clarified items discussed herein. Our attorneys have indicated to
me that none of these changes rise to the level of"substantial," (which would require a
newly-warned hearing by the City Council).
1. HOMES IN THE SEQ-NATURAL RESOURCE PROTECTION DISTRICT
The amendment approved by the Planning Commission would clarify that a property in
the SEQ-NRP district that is less than 15 acres in size (and which has not been
subdivided since 1992) may have one house built upon it. This has been our
interpretation of the regulations since their adoption back in 2006, but the language
could be far clearer. It also states that an existing house in the SEQ-NRP may be
replaced, either on the same footprint or in a less-intrusive area on the property. This is
not at all clear under the current regulations.
Our attorneys have requested further clarifications, which include:
(1) Providing a more clear reference to the applicable section from the prior section.
(2) Matching the word usage for homes on properties of less than 15 acres with the word
existing word usage for homes on properties of more than 15 acres.
1
The revised language now reads:
9.12 SEQ-NRP;Supplemental Regulations
A. Any lot that lies substantially or entirely within a SEQ-NRP sub-district is subject to the following
supplemental regulations:
(1) Such lot shall be conveyed to the City of South Burlington as dedicated open space or to a qualified
land trust and any portion of such lot located within the SEQ-NRP sub-district shall not be
developed with a residence, or
(2) encc or residences pursuant to a conservation plan approvcd by
13-1 Such lot may be developed with uses other than residences, as listed in Table C-1, subject to the
Development Review Board's approval of a conservation plan that balances development or land
utilization and conservation. Such lot may also include the following additional development/activities:
(a) Driveways, roads, underground utility services, or other appurtenant improvements to serve
approved development or uses. Utility service components, such as transformers and amplifiers,
may be installed at ground level where such accords with standard industry practices.
(b) Landscaping, regrading, or other similar activities necessary to the creation of a buildable lot.
B. A lot that was in existence on or before June 22, 1992 and which lies substantially or entirely within a
SEQ-NRP sub-district may be improved with one or more e single family detached homes,subject to
conditional use review.house.
(1) Where the lot is less than fifteen(15)acres in contiguous area,the Development Review
Board may allow one single family home only if: The lot is substantially within a SEQ NRP sub
district and another SEQ sub district,and:
Lai the portion of the lot in any other(non-NRP)SEQ sub-district is insufficient to accommodate the
construction and use of a single family house in compliance with these Regulations,and
lb] the Development Review Board finds that the location of structures,yards,and access
drives will the site plan does not compromise the any conservation objectives values articulated in
the Comprehensive Plan, and,
(c)no structures,yards,or access drives are within a designated primary natural
community or its related buffer.
(2) Where the lot is fifteen(15)acres or more in contiguous area, the Development Review Board may
allow a subdivision of no more than three lots, pursuant to an approved conservation plan that
maximizes resource values(s). Such lots shall have a minimum size of 12,000 square feet per dwelling
unit. Such lots shall abut one another and shall have no portion within a designated primary natural
community or its related buffer.The dwelling units shall be detached single family houses. Such
subdivision plan shall be subject to the Development Review Board's approval of a conservation plan
in a form acceptable to the City Attorney that permanently encumbers the land against further land
subdivision and development.
2
D. An existing single family home on a lot that lies substantially or entirely within a SEQ-NRP sub-
district may be removed and replaced,provided that:
(1)the footprint of the principal structure remains the same or is reduced,or
(2)The Development Review Board,through a conditional use review,finds that the location of
structures,yards,and access drives will not compromise the conservation objectives
articulated in the Comprehensive Plan,and,that no structures,yards,or access drives are
within a designated primary natural community or its related buffer.
2. LOCATION OF PARKING ON A PARCEL
The amendment approved by the Planning Commission was made in light of the
Supreme Court's decision on JAM Golf last year, which struck certain elements of our
old regulations due to a lack of"specific standards." This amendment gives the DRB
more specific standards to apply in determining when an exception can be made to the
requirement that parking be placed to the side or rear of buildings. Furthermore, it limits
the amount of parking that can be placed to the sides of a building where there are
multiple buildings on a lot, to implement the City's goal of fostering greater pedestrian
activity and having buildings, not parking, be the primary activity along roads.
After reviewing the language approved by the Planning Commission, our attorneys have
recommended a more clear approach. This approach clearly states, for the DRB and the
applicant, that parking is prohibited in front of buildings, except under certain specific
circumstances. While the prior draft language carried the same exact intent, our
attorneys carefully parsed out the language and discovered that some of the language
could be interpreted in multiple ways. Staff has discussed the revised approach with the
Planning Commission, and they concur that it carries the same intent and is more
defensible. Below is the revised language:
Section 2.02 Specific Definitions:
Building width.The average length of a building measured along the side most closely parallel to its adjacent public
street(s).
Section 5.08 Supplemental Standards for All Commercial Districts
C. Parking,Access,and Internal Circulation
Section 14.06 General Review Standards
C. Relationship of Proposed Structures to the Site
3
(2)
(a)Parking shall be located to the rear or sides of buildings.to the greatest extent practicable.
(b)The Development Review Board may approve parking between a public street and one or more
buildings if the Board finds that one or more of the following criteria are met.The Board shall approve
only the minimum necessary to overcome the conditions below.
1. The parking area is necessary to meet minimum requirements of the Americans with
Disabilities Act;
2. The parking area will serve a single or two-family home;
3. The lot has unique site conditions such as a utility easement or unstable soils that allow for
parking, but not a building,to be located adjacent to the public street;
4. The lot contains one or more existing buildings that are to be re-used and parking needs cannot
be accommodated to the rear and sides of the existing building(s);or,
5. The principal use of the lot is for public recreation.
(c)Where more than one building exists or is proposed on a lot,the total width of all parking areas
proposed in a location on a lot that is both to the side of a building and between the front lot line and the
building line of the building on the lot that is closest to the public street shall not exceed one-half of the
total building width of all buildings on the lot that are located adjacent to the public street. Buildings
separated from the front lot line by parking approved pursuant to 14.06(C)(2)(b)shall be considered
adjacent to the public street. Buildings separated from the front lot line by any other parking areas shall
not be considered adjacent to the public to the public street.
(d)The DRB shall require that the majority of the parking on through lots and corner lots be located
between the building(s)and the side yards or between the building and the front yard adjacent to the
public street with the highest average daily volume of traffic. Where the rear yard of a lot abuts an
Interstate or its interchanges,the majority of parking shall be located between the building and the side
yards or between the building and the yard that is adjacent to the Interstate.
Section 15.02 Authority and Required Review
A.Authority
(3) In conjunction with PUD review,the modification of these Land Development Regulations is permitted subject to
the conditions and standards in this Article and other applicable provisions of these Regulations. However,with the
exception of side yard setbacks in the Central District 1, in no case shall the DRB permit the location of a new
structure less than five(5)feet from any property boundary. In no case shall be the DRB allow land development
creating a total site coverage exceeding the allowable limit for the applicable zoning district in the case of new
development, or increasing the coverage on sites where the pre-existing condition exceeds the applicable limit. In
no case shall the DRB permit the location of parking not in compliance with Section 14.06(C)(2).
4
3. MINOR LOT LINE ADJUSTMENTS
The purpose of this amendment is to relieve the Development Review Board from having
to review small-scale projects such as these. The amendment would give the authority to
the city's Zoning Administrator to approve minor adjustments of lot lines, and also
allows this person to refer it to the DRB if need be. Our attorneys have recommended one
small change, to add a few words to the definition of such an activity. The revised
language reads as follows:
2.02 Specific Definitions
Subdivision.
(C) Division of land such as for minor realignment of property boundary lines of pre-existing lots,for municipal
purposes which conform to the Comprehensive Plan (such as road widening, easements, sidewalks, parks, etc.),
or enlargement alteration of existing lots as specifically permitted under these Land Development Regulations,
shall not be deemed a subdivision,but is known as a minor lot line adjustment.provided that no new
therefore capable of subdivision into more lo+s t afl before the adjustment.
15.19 Minor Lot Line Adjustments
A. Any application for a minor lot line adjustment shall be accompanied by a plat prepared by
a Vermont licensed land surveyor and indicating all lots that are proposed to be modified as
a result of the proposed lot line adjustment.The survey shall be sufficient to clearly indicate
the area,metes, bounds,and ties of each of the affected lots.The survey shall include all
structures and site improvements and delineate all building/structure setbacks, lot
coverage,parking spaces and any other details as may be specified by the Administrative
Officer.
B. The Administrative Officer shall approve an application for a minor lot line adjustment,
provided that the following criteria are met:
(1) No new lots are created through the adjustment;
(2) The sale or exchange of parcels of land is between adjacent property owners;
(3) The relocation of the lot-line does not result in the creation of a non-conforming lot,
structure or use;and
(4) The proposed change does not violate any conditions imposed from prior municipal
approvals.
C. Where,there is uncertainty as to whether an application comprises a minor lot line
adjustment,the Administrative Officer may refer the application to the Development Review
Board for review as a subdivision of land.
5
-40
S
PLANNINGOuth
& ZONING
MEMORANDUM
TO: South Burlington City Council & City Manager
FROM: Paul Conner, Director of Planning & Zoning
SUBJECT: Draft Land Development Regulations Approved by Planning Commission
DATE: November 2, 2009 City Council meeting
The Planning Commission voted on September 29`h to approve a series of amendments to
the Land Development Regulations and forward them to the City Council for consideration.
The amendments consist of a number of disparate items that had been collected over the
course of the past year. The vote by the planning commission to approve the amendments
was unanimous on all items.
Below is a brief description of each of the proposed amendments. The letters correspond to
each of the items in the enclosed draft amendment. Attached as well is a brief summary
report describing the relationship between the proposed amendments and the City's
Comprehensive Plan, as required by State law. I recommend the City Council proceed by
holding a Public Hearing to consider the adoption of these amendments.
A. Bartlett Bay Stormwater Overlay District Boundary
This amendment to the Overlay District Map would adjust the Bartlett Bay Stormwater
Overlay District to better reflect the actual hydrology and topography of the area. Last
fall, we enacted a series of changes to our Stormwater Management regulations,
encouraging Low Impact Development Techniques and requiring greater analysis of
current and anticipated water flow. The map amendment would complement these
changes.
B. Design Review Overlay District Boundaries
This amendment to the Overlay District Map would resolve an inconsistency between the
underlying "Central" zoning districts and the design review overlays. Over the years, the
City has made a series of amendments to the Central District map, but we have not
matched those amendments with adjustments to the Design Overlay. The result is that
several parcels zoned "Central" are not subject to Design Review. These map
amendments would ensure that all areas zoned "central" would also be subject to design
review criteria that were established for each of the central districts. The proposed
1
amendments also include an exemption for all properties less than 15,000 square feet in
size, and for municipally operated educational facilities. These exemptions would allow
single family home owners, and the School District, to make additions/renovations
without being subject to design review. However, if and when redevelopment takes place
in the area, new projects would be subject to this review.
C. Homes in the SEQ-Natural Resource Protection
This amendment would clarify that a property in the SEQ-NRP district that is less than
15 acres in size (and which has not been subdivided since 1992) may have one house
built upon it. This has been our interpretation of the regulations since their adoption
back in 2006, but the language could be far clearer. It also states that an existing house in
the SEQ-NRP may be replaced, either on the same footprint or in a less-intrusive area on
the property. This is not at all clear under the current regulations.
D. Location of Parking on a parcel
In light of the Supreme Court's decision on JAM Golf last year, which struck certain
elements of our old regulations due to a lack of"specific standards", we've been going
through the LDRs to identify similar problems. This proposed amendment gives the DRB
more specific standards to apply in determining when an exception can be made to the
requirement that parking be placed to the side or rear of buildings. Furthermore, it limits
the amount of parking that can be placed to the sides of a building where there are
multiple buildings on a lot, to implement the City's goal of fostering greater pedestrian
activity and having buildings, not parking, be the primary activity along roads.
E. Parking Standards for Assisted Living
This amendment would create a separate parking standard for "Assisted Living" Facility.
The term is clearly and separately defined in the Definitions chapter of the LDRs, but
under the parking standards chapter, it is coupled together with "Congregate Housing."
The principal difference between these uses is the fact that Assisted Living Facilities
receive licensure from the State of Vermont as care facilities. Typically, residents in these
types of facilities do not have vehicles of their own. Based upon research from the
Institute of Traffic Engineers "Parking Generation" manual, and a survey completed of
an Assisted Living Facility in Shelburne, a parking standard of 0.6 parking spaces per
dwelling unit of Assisted Living, rather than the 1.2 spaces per unit plus 1 space for every
4 units that is used for Congregate Housing is recommended. The end result of this
change will be to ensure that we do not require areas to be created for parking.
F. New use: Pet Grooming
The amendment would create a new use that recognizes that pet grooming is a separate
use from pet day cares and kennels. Pet grooming has no medium or long-term
accommodations and no outdoor exercise areas. The use would be permitted where other
service-type uses, such as barber shops, are permitted.
G. Outdoor Exercise Areas for Animals
This amendment would attach standards for the design and operation of outdoor
exercise areas for commercial pet day cares and kennels, establishing hours of use for the
exercise areas as well as screening requirements.
2
H. Gated driveways and roads
This amendment would ensure that no driveways serving more than one dwelling unit,
or public/private roads be gated. We have not had much trouble with this in the past, but
in the interest of public safety and overall community benefit, this would be a positive
pre-emptive step to make sure we do not have issues in the future.
I. Outdoor Storage and Display
This amendment would clarify the difference between outdoor storage and outdoor
display, with accompanying definitions.
J. Accessory Structures
This amendment would permit accessory structure of up to 25' in height where the
structure is located at least 30' from all property lines, he structure has a pitched roof,
and the subject property is at least one (1) acre in size. Where the accessory structure is
proposed to be taller than the principal structure, it would be subject to conditional use
review. It would also allow accessory structures to be heated, an unenforceable
prohibition under the current regulations. The purpose of this amendment is to allow for
some greater flexibility for property owners in limited circumstances.
K. Structures in the Residential 4 District
This amendment would clarify that no structure in the R4 district may contain more than
4 dwelling units. At present, there are no limitations on the number of housing units in a
structure in this district, only a maximum number of units per acre (4, plus any
affordability bonus). I expect we will be looking at the standards for this district as a
whole in greater depth in the near future, but this is a minor amendment that is worth
pursuing in the short term.
L. Exterior Lighting
The proposed amendment clarifies that energy efficient lighting is permitted and
encouraged.
M. Self-Storage in the Commercial-Industrial District
This amendment would permit self storage facilities in the CI district, but ONLY as an
accessory use and not occupying more than 20% of the gross floor area of the principal
use. In addition, the self storage units would need to be accessed via an internal entrance
and would only be accessible during business hours with an employee on site.
N. Child Care Facilities
This amendment would require child care homes serving more than six full-time
students to be subject to site plan review. Last fall, when we amended the LDRs with
respect to child care homes and facilities, the PC had towards the end of the process
decided that it would be preferable to have child care homes be subject to site plan
review. The Council adopted the amendments without this change, but asked that the
change be re-submitted.
3
O. Minor Lot Line Adjustments
This amendment would allow adjustments to parcel boundaries to be approved
administratively, so long as there are no new lots created, no non-conformities are
created, and prior municipal approvals are not violated. At present, all lot line
adjustments must be reviewed by the Development Review Board.
P. Additional Technical Corrections
• May Not versus Shall Not: Staff has reviewed the LDRs and identified all of the places
where the word "may not" is used when it really was intended to be "shall not." For
example, "Dead end streets may shall not exceed 200 feet in length." By making these
fixes, we "may" avoid unnecessary legal problems in the future. (note: in some cases,
the language is part of a `regulating plan' which is recommendation rather than a
requirement. However, changing "may not" to "shall not" remains an important
clarification.
• Outdoor Storage vs. Outside Storage. At present, our regulations refer to both outdoor
and outside storage. Staff proposes the LDRs be clarified by only using the term
"outdoor storage," which is defined.
• Free-Standing Signs. The amendment removes the requirement that free-standing sign
locations be shown on site plans. This change is at the request of our attorneys, who
have advised us to keep this separate because signs are subject to a completely
separate city ordinance.
• Affordable Housing: The amendment clarifies unclear language regarding the number
of units that need to be affordable where there is an uneven number of units
proposed.
• Off-Street Parking: The amendment clarifies that the DRB may apply a 25% parking
waiver to both public and private parking facilities.
• Retaining Walls. The amendment classifies retaining walls as separate from other
`accessory structures.' As accessory structures, they could not be placed in the front
yard and were limited in number. Retaining walls over 8' in height would require an
engineer's evaluation.
• Animal hospital/veterinary hospital. This amendment clarifies the terms used in the
regulations.
4
AMENDMENTS to the SOUTH BURLINGTON LAND DEVELOPMENT
REGULATIONS
SOUTH BURLINGTON CITY COUNCIL, DECEMBER 21, 2009
The South Burlington City Council hereby ordains:
Key to the Amendments
1. Proposed new text is shown in Bold Underline
2. Proposed deletions are sown in
3. Plain and plain underlined is existing and will remain.
4. Descriptive text explaining tables and maps are in ALL CAPS
A. BARTLETT BROOK STORMWATER OVERLAY DISTRICT BOUNDARY
• Adjust Bartlett Bay Watershed Overlay District boundary to more accurately depict the
actual watershed area per the attached map.
• See Attached Map
B. DESIGN REVIEW OVERLAY DISTRICT BOUNDARIES
• Extend Design Overlay District 1 to include Central School property, excluding
municipal educational facilities.
• Establish Design Overlay District 2 on Mary Street properties that are within the CD
district.
• Extend Design Overlay District 3 on Market Street east to Hinesburg Road and north
to include properties in CD district 2.
• Extend Design Overlay District 3 on Dorset Street to include one missing property
that is in the Central District.
• See Attached Map
11.01 City Center Design Review Overlay District CCDR
D. Activities Subject to Design Review.
(3) Any construction or alternation of municipal education facilities in Design
Review Overlay District 1 shall not be subject to design review.
(4) Any construction or alternation of one or two family homes on parcels of
15,000 square feet or less in Design Overlay Districts 2 and 3 shall not be
subject to design review.
575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburl.com
Land Development Regulations
Approved by the City Council 12/21/2009
C. HOMES IN THE SEQ-NATURAL RESOURCE PROTECTION DISTRICT
9.12 SEQ-NRP; Supplemental Regulations
A. Any lot that lies substantially or entirely within a SEQ-NRP sub-district is subject
to the following supplemental regulations:
(1) Such lot shall be conveyed to the City of South Burlington as dedicated
open space or to a qualified land trust and any portion of such lot located
within the SEQ-NRP sub-district shall not be developed with a residence,
or
(2) Such lot may be developed with a residence or rcsidcnccs pursuant to a
conservation plan approved by the Development Review Board. Sec 9.12(B)
below.
(3) Such lot may be developed with uses other than residences, as listed in
Table C-1, subject to the Development Review Board's approval of a
conservation plan that balances development or land utilization and
conservation. Such lot may also include the following additional
development/activities:
(a) Driveways, roads, underground utility services, or other appurtenant
improvements to serve approved development or uses. Utility service
components, such as transformers and amplifiers, may be installed at
ground level where such accords with standard industry practices.
(b)Landscaping, regrading, or other similar activities necessary to the
creation of a buildable lot.
B. A lot that was in existence on or before June 22, 1992 and which lies substantially
or entirely within a SEQ-NRP sub-district may be improved with one or more a
single family detached homes, subject to conditional use review. house.
(1) Where the lot is less than fifteen (15) acres in contiguous area, the
Development Review Board may allow one single family home only if:
The lot is substantially within a SEQ NRP sub district and another SEQ
sub district, and:
(a) the portion of the lot in any other (non-NRP) SEQ sub-district is
insufficient to accommodate the construction and use of a single family
house in compliance with these Regulations, and
(b) the Development Review Board finds that the location of structures,
yards, and access drives will the site plan does not compromise the any
conservation objectives values articulated in the Comprehensive Plan, and,
2
Land Development Regulations
Approved by the City Council 12/21/2009
(c) no structures, yards, or access drives are within a designated primary
natural community or its related buffer.
D. An existing single family home on a lot that lies substantially or entirely within
a SEQ-NRP sub-district may be removed and replaced, provided that:
(1) the footprint of the principal structure remains the same or is reduced, or
(2) The Development Review Board, through a conditional use review, finds that
the location of structures, yards, and access drives will not compromise the
conservation objectives articulated in the Comprehensive Plan, and, that no
structures, yards, or access drives are within a designated primary natural
community or its related buffer.
D. LOCATION OF PARKING ON A PARCEL
Section 2.02 Specific Definitions:
Building width. The average length of a building measured along the side most closely
parallel to its adjacent public street(s).
Section 5.08 Supplemental Standards for All Commercial Districts
C. Parking, Access, and Internal Circulation
(2) Parking shall be placed to the side or rear of the structures. if possible,
Section 14.06 General Review Standards
C. Relationship of Proposed Structures to the Site
(2)
(a) Parking shall be located to the rear or sides of buildings. to the greatest extent
practicable.
(b) The Development Review Board may approve parking between a public street
and one or more buildings if the Board finds that one or more of the following
criteria are met. The Board shall approve only the minimum necessary to overcome
the conditions below.
1. The parking area is necessary to meet minimum requirements of the
Americans with Disabilities Act;
2. The parking area will serve a single or two-family home;
3
Land Development Regulations
Approved by the City Council 12/21/2009
3. The lot has unique site conditions such as a utility easement or unstable
soils that allow for parking, but not a building, to be located adjacent to the
public street;
4. The lot contains one or more existing buildings that are to be re-used and
parking needs cannot be accommodated to the rear and sides of the existing
building(s); or,
5. The principal use of the lot is for public recreation.
(c) Where more than one building exists or is proposed on a lot, the total width of
all parking areas proposed in a location on a lot that is both to the side of a building
and between the front lot line and the building line of the building on the lot that is
closest to the public street shall not exceed one-half of the total building width of
all buildings on the lot that are located adjacent to the public street. Buildings
separated from the front lot line by parking approved pursuant to 14.O6(C)(2)(b)
shall be considered adjacent to the public street. Buildings separated from the front
lot line by any other parking areas shall not be considered adjacent to the public L
tkagpsiplic street.
(d) The DRB shall require that the majority of the parking on through lots and
corner lots be located between the building(s) and the side yards or between the
building and the front yard adjacent to the public street with the highest average
daily volume of traffic. Where the rear yard of a lot abuts an Interstate or its
interchanges, the majority of parking shall be located between the building and the
side yards or between the building and the yard that is adjacent to the Interstate.
Section 15.02 Authority and Required Review
A. Authority
(3) In conjunction with PUD review, the modification of these Land Development
Regulations is permitted subject to the conditions and standards in this Article and
other applicable provisions of these Regulations. However, with the exception of side
yard setbacks in the Central District 1, in no case shall the DRB permit the location of
a new structure less than five (5) feet from any property boundary. In no case shall be
the DRB allow land development creating a total site coverage exceeding the allowable
limit for the applicable zoning district in the case of new development, or increasing
the coverage on sites where the pre-existing condition exceeds the applicable limit. In
no case shall the DRB permit the location of parking not in compliance with Section
14.06 (C) (2).
4
Land Development Regulations
Approved by the City Council 12/21/2009
E. PARKING STANDARDS FOR ASSISTED LIVING
Table 13-1 - Parking
• Assisted Living: 0.6 per du.
F. NEW USE: PET GROOMING
2.02 Specific Definitions
Pet grooming. Any establishment where domestic pets are bathed, clipped,
combed, or otherwise cleaned for the purpose of enhancing their aesthetic value or
health, but not including any outdoor exercise facilities.
Table 13-1 - Parking
• Pet Grooming: 4 per 1,000 GFA
Table C-1 Table of Uses
• Pet Grooming. P where personal services are permitted.
G. OUTDOOR EXERCISE AREAS FOR ANIMALS
13.23 Outdoor exercise facilities for animal shelters, commercial kennels, pet day
cares, and veterinary hospitals
A. Specific Standards:
(1) All outdoor exercise areas shall be fully enclosed and screened on all sides.
(2) Animals shall not be permitted in outdoor exercise areas between 9:00 pm and
7:00 am.
(3) Where a planned outdoor exercise facility is adjacent to or within fifty (50)
feet of the boundary of a residential district or existing residential use, the
required side or rear setback for the outdoor exercise facilities shall be sixty-
five (65) feet from the residential or residentially-zoned property. A strip not
less than fifteen (15) feet wide within the sixty-five (65) foot setback shall be
landscaped with dense evergreens, fencing, and/or other plantings as a screen.
New external light fixtures shall not be permitted within the fifteen (15) foot
wide buffer area.
5
Land Development Regulations
Approved by the City Council 12/21/2009
H. GATES DRIVEWAYS AND ROADS
15.12 Standards for Roadways, Parking and Circulation in PUDs and Subdivisions
A. Street Layout. The arrangement of streets in the subdivision shall provide for the
continuation of arterial, collector and local streets of adjoining subdivisions and
for proper projection of arterial, collector and local streets through adjoining
properties that are not yet subdivided, in order to make possible necessary fire
protection, movement of traffic and construction or extension, presently or when
later required, of needed utilities and public services such as recreation paths,
sewers, water and drainage facilities. Where, in the opinion of the Development
Review Board, topographic or other conditions make such continuance
undesirable or impracticable, the above conditions may be modified. In no case
shall gates of any kind be permitted across public or private roads, or driveways
serving more than one dwelling unit.
I. OUTDOOR STORAGE AND DISPLAY
Section 13.05 Outside Outdoor Storage and Display
A. Outdoor Storage General Requirements. Outside Outdoor storage of goods,
materials, vehicles for other than daily use, and equipment shall be subject to the
following provisions:
(1) Any outside outdoor storage and/or display shall be appurtenant to the
primary use of the property and shall be allowed only in nonresidential
districts and upon approval of the DRB in conjunction with a site plan,
conditional use and/or PUD application.
(2) The Development Review Board may require that outside outdoor storage
areas in connection with commercial or industrial uses be enclosed and/or
screened where the storage area may comprise an attractive nuisance, where
the proposed use of the storage areas present opportunities for theft, or
where the Board finds that said storage areas are in view of residentially-
zoned parcels.
(3) Outside display of equipment is prohibited where such equipment is fitted
with arms, lifts, buckets, or other p t ' d -' h h
parts arc displayed in an elevated manner. This does not include boats with
masts, bridges, or canopies.
B. Outdoor Display. Outdoor display of goods, materials, vehicles for other than
daily use, and equipment shall be subject to the following provisions:
6
Land Development Regulations
Approved by the City Council 12/21/2009
(1) Any outdoor display shall be appurtenant to the primary use of the property
and shall be allowed only in nonresidential districts and upon approval of
the DRB in conjunction with a site plan, conditional use and/or PUD
application that clearly indicates the location of any outdoor display areas.
(2) Outdoor display of equipment is prohibited where such equipment is fitted
with arms, lifts, buckets, or other parts that can be elevated and where such
parts are displayed in an elevated manner. This does not include boats with
masts, bridges, or canopies.
I. ACCESSORY STRUCTURES
3.10 Accessory Structures and Uses
(10) Accessory structures shall not exceed fifteen (15) feet in height, except that:
a. For industrial uses in non-residential districts, height standards for principal
structures shall apply for accessory structures; and,
b. For residential uses, accessory structures up to twenty-five (25) feet in height shall
be permitted where the structure is located at least thirty (30) feet from all
property lines, the structure has a pitched roof, and the lot on which the structure
is proposed is at least one (1) acre in size; and,
c. Accessory structures exceeding the height of the principal structure on the
property shall require approval by the Development Review Board as a conditional
use, pursuant to Article 14, Conditional Use Review. The applicant shall
demonstrate to the Board that the accessory structure will be clearly secondary to
the principal structure in function and in appearance from the public right-of-way.
(11) No accessory structure shall be constructed with a cellar or below-grade story, and
cation of a homc occupation, agricultural
usc, or accessory residential unit.
7
Land Development Regulations
Approved by the City Council 12/21/2009
K. STRUCTURES IN THE RESIDENTIAL 4 DISTRICT
Section 4.03 Residential 4 District — R4
F. Additional Standards. Mutli-family dwellings shall be subject to site plan review, as
per Article 14, and shall be limited to a maximum of four (4) dwelling units per
structure.
L. EXTERIOR LIGHTING
Section 13.07 Exterior Lighting
A. General Requirements. All exterior lighting for all uses in all districts except for
one-family and two-family uses shall be of such a type and location and shall have
such shielding as will direct the light downward and will prevent the source of
light from being visible from any adjacent residential property or street. Light
fixtures that are generally acceptable are illustrated in Appendix D. "Source of
light" shall be deemed to include any transparent or translucent lighting that is an
integral part of the lighting fixture(s). Site illumination for uncovered areas shall
be evenly distributed. Where feasible, energy efficient lighting is encouraged.
M. SELF STORAGE IN THE MIXED INDUSTRIAL-COMMERCIAL DISTRICT
Section 13.22 Self Storage in the Mixed Commercial-Industrial (CI) District
A. General Requirements. In the Commercial-Industrial District, the Development
Review Board may grant site plan approval for a self-storage facility, according
to the following regulations.
B. Specific Standards:
(1) The facility shall be clearly secondary to a permitted principal use in this
district
(2) The facility shall not occupy more than 20% of the gross floor area of the
principal use
(3) The facility shall only be accessible through an interior entrance
(4) Access to storage units shall only be available during business hours,
with an employee on site.
8
Land Development Regulations
Approved by the City Council 12/21/2009
N. CHILD CARE FACILITIES
14.03 Uses and Actions Subject to Site Plan Approval
***
B. Excluded from site plan review
***
11.Licensed and rcgistcrcd family child care homes.
O. MINOR LOT LINE ADJUSTMENTS
2.02 Specific Definitions
Subdivision.
(C)Division of land such as for minor realignment of property boundary lines of pre-
existing lots, for municipal purposes which conform to the Comprehensive Plan
(such as road widening, easements, sidewalks, parks, etc.), or enlargement
alteration of existing lots as specifically permitted under these Land Development
Regulations, shall not be deemed a subdivision, but is known as a minor lot line
adjustment. provided that no new developable lots result or no lot in existence
prior to the adjustment is so enlarged by the adjustment that it is therefore capable
of subdivision into more lots than before the adjustment.
15.19 Minor Lot Line Adjustments
A. Any application for a minor lot line adjustment shall be accompanied by a
plat prepared by a Vermont licensed land surveyor and indicating all lots
that are proposed to be modified as a result of the proposed lot line
adjustment. The survey shall be sufficient to clearly indicate the area,
metes, bounds, and ties of each of the affected lots. The survey shall
include all structures and site improvements and delineate all
building/structure setbacks, lot coverage, parking spaces and any other
details as may be specified by the Administrative Officer.
B. The Administrative Officer shall approve an application for a minor lot
line adjustment, provided that the following criteria are met:
(1) No new lots are created through the adjustment;
9
Land Development Regulations
Approved by the City Council 12/21/2009
(2) The sale or exchange of parcels of land is between adjacent property
owners;
(3) The relocation of the lot-line does not result in the creation of a non-
conforming lot, structure or use; and
(4) The proposed change does not violate any conditions imposed from
prior municipal approvals.
C. Where, there is uncertainty as to whether an application comprises a
minor lot line adjustment, the Administrative Officer may refer the
application to the Development Review Board for review as a subdivision
of land.
P. ADDITIONAL TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS
2.02 Specific Definitions
Accessory use. A use of land or property or a building, or a portion thereof, whose
area, extent, or purpose is incidental and subordinate to the principal use of the
building or land. The accessory use shall be located on the same lot. An accessory
use may shall not be accessory to another accessory use.
Animals/pets (each definition below is distinct):
Animal shelter. A place where animals are provided with short-term shelter
typically operated by a humane society or other non-profit organization.
Such establishment may have either or both of an educational component
or a residence, occupied by a household with at least one person employed
full or part time in a caretaking capacity for the facility, as an accessory use
or additional principal permitted use on the site. May or may not include
associated outdoor exercise facilities.
Commercial kennel. A lot, premises, use, or structure intended and used
for the breeding, training, sale, and overnight boarding of well dogs, cats, or
other small domestic animals belonging to a person or persons other than
the owner of the lot, but not including a veterinary hospital clinic. May or
may not include associated outdoor exercise facilities.
Pet day care. A commercial service provided to pet owners whereby pets are
cared for outside of their home by the business owner during normal
business hours, with no overnight boarding, training, sale, or breeding of
pets. May or may not include associated outdoor exercise facilities.
10
Land Development Regulations
Approved by the City Council 12/21/2.009
Private kennel. An accessory structure used for the outdoor
accommodation of small domestic animals and not operated on a
commercial basis.
Veterinary hospital. A place where animals are given medical care and the
boarding of animals is limited to short-term care for a certain period of
time. May or may not include associated outdoor exercise facilities.
animals is limited to short term care for a certain period of time. Sec Also known
as a veterinary hospital. Such hospitals may be associated with animal boarding
facilities, animal breeding facilities, and/or laboratories.
treatment of animal physical disorders; not primarily-for the overnight boarding or
confinement of animals; and not used for the training of animals.
boarded, groomed, brcd, trained or sold.
Bus terminal. Any premises for the short term parking (i.e., fewer than 12 hours)
of motor-driven buses and loading and unloading of passengers. Bus terminals may
include ticket purchase facilities, but utay shall not include bus maintenance
facilities. Bus terminals may also include hubs where three or more routes
converge and allow the transfer of passengers between routes.
Outdoor display. An outdoor arrangement of products for sale, together with
accompanying display structure, typically not in a fixed position and capable of
rearrangement, and typically with products brought indoors when the business is
closed.
3.08 Temporary Structures and Uses
D. Temporary Outside Outdoor Storage. Temporary outside outdoor storage used
in conjunction with the principal use or uses on that property shall be permitted
for a period up to one month during a calendar year. Permits for temporary
outside outdoor storage shall be issued by the Administrative Officer in accordance
with the provisions of this section.
3.09 Multiple Structures and Uses
B. Multiple Uses in a Structure and Umbrella Approval.
11
Land Development Regulations
Approved by the City Council 12/21/2009
(1) The Development Review Board may approve two or more separate uses, one
or more of which is a conditional use in the underlying zoning district, in a
principal building or structure as a conditional use if it determines that:
(b) Such uses can suitably share common facilities, such as parking and outside
outdoor storage areas, within the requirements of these regulations for any lot.
Section 3.11 Non-Conforming Uses and Non-Complying Structures and Lots
D. Alterations to Non-Complying Structures.
(3) In the CD1, CD2, CD3, and CD4 zones, the aggregate cost of such alteration
shall not exceed thirty-five percent (35%) of the current assessed value of the
structure being altered. Notwithstanding the foregoing, within the CD1, CD2, CD3
and CD4 zones, a non-complying building or structure may shall not be altered by
increasing the height or increasing the footprint, or otherwise increasing the
square footage of the building or structure. The Development Review Board may
approve an alteration that results in an aggregate cost that exceeds thirty-five
percent (35%) of the current assessed value of the structure being altered and/or
which involves an increase in the height or the footprint, or otherwise an increase
in the square footage of the building or structure, provided all of the following
criteria are met:
8.03 Prohibited Uses - All Districts
(7) outside Outdoor storage in connection with any permitted use, except
dumpsters which must be reviewed for adequate screening during the
development approval process.
(10) Commercial kennels, and veterinary animal hospitals, and pet day care
9.08 SEQ-NRT and SEQ-NR Sub-Districts; Specific Standards
A. Street, block and lot pattern.
(2) Interconnection of Streets
(b) Dead end streets (e.g. culs de sac) are strongly discouraged. Dead
end streets may shall not exceed 200 feet in length.
9.09 SEQ-VR Sub-District; Specific Standards
A. Street, Block and Lot Pattern
(2) Interconnection of Streets
12
Land Development Regulations
Approved by the City Council 12/21/2009
(b) Dead end streets (e.g. culs de sac) are discouraged. Dead end streets
may shall not exceed 200 feet in length.
9.10 SEQ-VC Sub-District; Specific Regulations
A. Street, block and lot pattern.
(2) Interconnection of Streets
(b) Dead end streets (e.g. cul de sacs) are discouraged. Dead end streets
may shall not exceed 200 feet in length.
10.03 Scenic View Protection Overlay District
I. Alteration and Expansion.
(1) Notwithstanding the provisions of these Regulations, any structure which
fails to comply with the requirements of this Section 10.03 may shall not:
(a) be expanded or altered in any way which increases its degree or
extent of non-compliance, except in strict conformance with the
requirements set forth in this Section 10.03(J) herein.
Section 13.01 Off Street Parking and Loading
N. Exemptions, Waivers, and Modifications of Requirements
(2) Waivers. Where the Development Review Board determines that a proposed
land use or structure is adequately served by existing or proposed pie
parking facilities, the Development Review Board may waive the off-street
parking space requirements stipulated in Tables 13-1 through 13-6, by no
more than twenty-five percent (25%).
Table 13-1 - Parking
o Animal shelter, commercial kennel, veterinary hospital or dog pet day care
1 per employee plus 0.5 per 1,000 SF GFA
• Animal shcltcr 1 per cmploycc plus 0.5 per 1,000 SF GFA
13.08 Specific Requirements for Nighttime Illumination of Governmental Flags.
A. The City encourages those who fly the Flag of the United States to observe
the custom prescribed in the United States Flag Code of displaying the flag from
sunrise to sunset. However, if governmental flags are to be flown at night and are
to be illuminated, the regulations in this Section apply.
(2) Flag Type. Only governmental flags may be illuminated. Nongovernmental
flags may shall not be flown on a pole with an illuminated governmental
13
Land Development Regulations
Approved by the City Council 12/21/2009
flag. No more than three (3) governmental flags may be flown on the same
pole.
Section 13.14 Affordable Housing (Below Market Rate Housing)
C. Density Increase
(1) Affordable Housing Development. The Development Review Board may
grant a density increase of no more than fifty percent (50%) in the total
number of allowed dwelling units for an Affordable Housing Development.
The total of below market rate units shall be at least half fifty percent (50%)
and no more of the total proposed dwelling units. Where the total
proposed dwelling units is an uneven number, the total of below market
rate units shall be calculated as at least the total proposed dwelling units,
less one (1), divided by two. Such application shall be subject to Article 15,
Planned Unit Development and Article 14, Site Plan and Conditional Use
Review.
Section 13.24 Retaining Walls
A. General Requirements. In this section, a retaining wall shall be distinct from a
fence or wall.
B. Specific Requirements. All retaining walls shall be subject to the following
requirements:
(1) All retaining walls shall require a zoning permit from the Administrative
Officer.
(2) A retaining wall shall be erected within the boundaries of the applicant's
property and shall be set back at least five (5) feet from all property boundaries.
(3) No part of any retaining wall shall be placed in such manner as to visually
obstruct vehicular or pedestrian traffic. If determined necessary by the
Administrative Officer, the placement of retaining walls near the corner of a
property at the intersection of two roads shall provide for a clear vision area
defined as a triangular area formed by the right-of-way lines at points which are
thirty (30) feet distant from the intersection of the right-of-way lines and
measured along such lines.
(4) A retaining wall over eight (8) feet in height shall require approval by the
Development Review Board as a conditional use subject to the provisions of
Article 14, Conditional Use Review, and shall include a demonstration by a
certified engineer that the retaining wall is structurally sound to serve its
intended purpose.
(5) Retaining walls shall be maintained in a safe and substantial condition.
14
Land Development Regulations
Approved by the City Council 12/21/2009
14.05 Application, Review, and Approval Procedure
D. Application for Site Plan.
Development data:
(b) One set of preliminary plans, elevations, floor plans, and sections of
proposed structures showing the proposed location, use, design and
height of all structures, roads, parking areas, access points, sidewalks
and other walkways, loading docks, outside outdoor storage areas,
sewage disposal areas, landscaping, screening, site grading, and
recreation areas if required. Plans shall also show any proposed
division of buildings into units of separate occupancy and location of
drives and access thereto.
(1)
Adopted this day of , 2009
City Clerk
Mark Boucher, Chair
Sandra Dooley, Vice Chair
James Knapp, Clerk
Meaghan Emery, Councilor
Francis Murray, Councilor
15
Bartlett Brook Watershed Overlay (Existing and Revised)
-.., ,__ ,, - t-,2r4zram-r-.--- kv,.
' i \ . 1 1R� 111i�;J
., y�, ■
il
STONEHEDGE
i ! 1-.1 i..:j _
al
6147%
,,,-.1
OOr. 111Pliii
RCH•- � `1 _ ``
CO-.da ;�R s , -4, ';.\--.11:31**.":7:-.14-141
. 1 _ / . WA
� ii
4 r=- SCC5TSDALE RD Pnaaclp ,
X. a IMPERIAL DRp �'.-)i,, - us ut�r + �;�
illa
'
w Li B ING RD .___ # ■
{i7-{OLME - LDXDR rf<-: r --,_: 1: _ -7` ;i• a ■
il/311111 -I
1 1
C _-1 _— � ? Q NO�yLANp. _ _. ;
! 1 i O , y
_ -r
we 1
cc
s� - 'I , w
•Y tv
o Et
a i r,
w i j // t y A L RUN P EPSRNT YYY a'. UP rtEPT N
m __I 1 I , ) �- j { t � I ,--3 \i, SORT
t -----\ CAL r{ ,i 1 } 1 4 7,-- ;�_,
i ,y- 11 -
\AV'RD I , ' E
I' HARBOR ; - —��. }_.-,�;; ENE IgV-r
_I— r
STI DR ,
t
AI
N 0I. i•s r
W \!E ! i, j��,IG `
S
\--
L J
K.
0 500 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000
1 Feet southi i'I to
PLAMNl9G &ZONIS&
Sandra Lindberg
52 Pinnacle Drive
So. Burlington, VT 05403
December 7, 2009
Mr. Charles Hafter, City Manager
City of South Burlington
575 Dorset St.
South Burlington, VT 05403
Dear Mr. Hafter:
I wish to resign from the Board of the South Burlington
Library, effective immediately.
My resignation does not indicate a lack of support for
the Community Library, the Library Director, or the current
leadership of the Board. I have accepted the Presidency of
another organization and need to focus my efforts on that for
the remainder of my term.
I am confident that there will be some new enthusiastic
people who will be able to serve the Board well.
Sincerely,
J
Sandra Lindberg
cc: Louise Murphy
641
south : w , hn
Charles E. Hatter, City Manager
December 18,2009
Chair and City Council
South Burlington, VT 05403
Re: Consideration of appointment of city representatives to condominium Executive
Board
To All Members:
Following the approval of the Condominium documents for 19 Gregory Drive at the
special council meeting on December 14, 2009, the Council asked me to prepare a
recommendation as to the two City appointments to the Condo Executive Board.
At this time, I would like to recommend that the City's two members be the Chief of
Police and the Assistant City Manager.
Sincerely,
02`-j1- ;,94
Chuck Hafter
City Manager
575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4107 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburl.com
Page 1 of 2
Mark Boucher
From: Mark Boucher Sent: Thu 12/10/2009 12:54 PM
To: Meaghan Emery; Frank Murray; James Knapp; Sandy Dooley
Cc: Chuck Hafter
Subject: RE: City Manager Search Committee
Attachments:
More updates-A library trustee and John Everitt
Regards,
Mark L Boucher
20 Knoll Circle
South Burlington, VT 05403
From: Mark Boucher
Sent: Wed 12/9/2009 9:08 PM
To: Sandy Dooley; Meaghan Emery; Frank Murray; James Knapp
Cc: Chuck Hafter
Subject: RE: City Manager Search Committee
Here's an update:
Regards,
Mark L Boucher
20 Knoll Circle
South Burlington, VT 05403
From: Mark Boucher
Sent: Wed 12/9/2009 8:46 AM
To: Sandy Dooley; Meaghan Emery; Frank Murray; James Knapp
Cc: Chuck Hafter
Subject: City Manager Search Committee
To date I have the following requests for participation in the search committee:
Citizens: 13
Chris Smith;
Michele Kupersmith; 1e..e4, c oK� _ fc.jl -IL S-><P
Jaime Heins;
Ted Riehle; 3 Cr,45ot\
Joan Boehm; /'
Bill Stuono; 3Dt
Marcel Beaudin;
MJ Reale;
Dan O'Rourke;
Stephen Dates; and
A Library Trustee
Department Managers: —'-
Doug Brent
Donna Kinville
https://mail2.sburl.com/exchange/mboucher/Sent%20ltems/RE:%20City%20Manager%2... 12/21/2009
Page 2 of 2
School Administration -
John Everitt
Thanks,
Mark
Mark L Boucher
20 Knoll Circle
South Burlington, VT 05403
https://mail2.sburl.com/exchange/mboucher/Sent%20ltems/RE:%20City%20Manager%2... 12/21/2009
�s
southburtington
Charles E. Hafter, City Manager
December 18, 2009
Chair and City Council
South Burlington, VT 05403
•
Re: Review of proposed language for ballot items and proposed charter amendments for
March, 2010 ballot; Set public hearing dates for charter change hearings
To All Members:
Attached are drafts of the proposed language for the ballot questions for the March ballot.
The language has been prepared by the City attorney. The proposed questions are:
• Annual budget approval
• Use of Conservation Tax Levy
• Use of Funds for Road Improvements
• Charter change on budget approval process
• Charter change on Australian ballot requirements
I have included a timeline for approval of charter changes. The Council should set the
hearing dates for the two hearings tonight, although the language can be finalized at the
next meeting,if necessary. I would prefer alternative dates from those recommended by
Steve Stitzel and will contact him to determine our flexibility prior to Monday night.
Sincerely,
(q
Chuck Hafter
City Manager
575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4107 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburl.com
Proposed March, 2010 City of South Burlington Ballot Questions:
APPROVAL OF CITY BUDGET
Shall the City adopt the City Council's proposed budget for FY 2010-2011 totaling
$22,151,098 of which it is estimated $ $9,802,828 will be raised by local property
taxes?
MODIFICATION OF USE OF ANNUAL CONSERVATION TAX LEVY
Shall the voters authorize expenditure, on an annual basis, of not more than five
percent (5%) of the annual tax levy for the Conservation Fund approved by the
voters at the Annual City Meeting on May 16, 2000 to pay for maintenance of and
conservation activities on City-owned open space in South Burlington?
u . CI' FUNDS for ROAD IMPROVEMENTS
Shall the voters fund a portion of the cost of repaving and repairing City streets in FY
2011 with $130,000 of City Rooms and Meals Tax revenues and $80,000 of fees
collected from persons performing private work within the limits of City streets?
4. Charter question of budget process: See attached language from Attorney
5. Charter question on floor votes: See attached language from Attorney
Proposed Charter Amendments:
503. Special city and school district meetings
Special city meetings, and special school district meetings,
shall be: called in the manner provided by the laws of the state,
and, except as provided below, the voting on all questions shall
be by the Australian ballot system. The council or board of.
school directors may, if action on a s-: ecific matter may not be
delayed for consolidation with an Australian ballot vote on other
matters_ because of unanticioated circumstances, conduct the vote
on the floor of a meeting of city voters if a vote in such manner
is authorized under general law.
§ 13-110. Annual city report
The annual city and school district reports shall be made
available and noticed to the legal voters of the city and school
district: _ __t �� .I : � L not
later than twent7 .;20) days prior to the annual city and school
district meeting March 1 .
§ 13-1302 . Preparation and submission
(a) The city manager and superintendent of schools shall prepare
the budgets for the city and: school district, respectively, and.
submit same to the council and:. board of school directors at such
time as required by said boards . The budgets shall contain:
(b) The council and the board of school directors shall
cause copies of the proposed budgets to be delivered to each
member of the steering committee forthwith after the final
preparation of said budgets, but not less than GO 45 days prior
to the date of the annual city, and school district meeting. The
steering committee may hold a meeting for the review of such
budgets, giving notice; of the meeting as required in Section 1102
subchapter 10.
an.:a the 5c ut i Lur ling ..;an c .Jl i,;tri ,'; No less than 45 35 days
prior to the annual city and school district meeting, the.
steering committee may submit to the council and the board of
school directors its report and: recommendations concerning the
proposed budgets.
(c) The tix, the time and i� T1 1`1 L- II3.( r.:
119,4,x'j•ng on the bhdlet6 tci the of t y o the ch l
�z, all., shallive .notice 'of tie hea,Ll ag at 1e.a3t 1_0 days
•
=0 I"t' mnjire than , i/ 1 J�"� ho .,T atc. of the annual
city..Nn,i t5c, 1 . iu"tri �; mt!, inq, , The council shall warn then
ieview the city budget for submission to the
voters not less than 30 days before the annual_ city meeting -
y ,i cI aojj, and in the same manner the board of
school directors shall warn review its budget and approve it for
submission to the voters, with o1„ w'LCia...�,L..t. u�lariq
§ 13-1303. City and school district annual meeting warning and
budget
The proposed budgets of the city and school district shall
be .. , stri_,ua c made available to the legal voters of the city and
school district at least 10 days before the annual city and
school district meeting ; �t, .l.i.c he ,f z cart do the :1u 1 Not more
than forty (40) nor less than thirty (30) days ',prior to The
warnings for the annual city and school district meeting, notice
shall be published in a newspaper having general circulation
within the city informing voters, of the date of a public hearing
on the budgets and availability of the warnings for the annual
city and school district meetings, the ororosed city and school
district budgets and the city and school district annual resorts-
,)1. by cl c..--.tr aic Iiicarl`>, at lcaz„,t 10 ,-,-„;a Li ., c C,,'). the 4 d e o ; h('
hnu al rl,eetings and t e Zuf,gets' t,DE the. -city and schc,31
h .:uti,1 j hc� . The council and the board
of school directors shall hold a public'hearing on their.
,rescective budgets not more than 10 days before the annual city
and school district meeting .
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS
ON PROPOSED CITY CHARTER AMENDMENTS
CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON
The, Council of the City of South Burlington hereby gives
notice that public hearings will be held on January , 2010 .
and February' , 2010, both hearings to begin at 7 : 00 PM and to
be held at the South Burlington City Hall at 575 Dorset Street to
consider proposed amendments to the charter for the City of South
Burlington.
PROPOSED CITY CHARTER AMENDMENTS
Shall the voters amend the following sections of the City
Charter:
§ 503. Special city and school district meetings
13-110 . Annual city report
§ 13-1302 . Preparation and submission [of budgets]
§ 13-1303. City and school district annual meeting warning
and: budget
The complete text of the proposed amendments is available for
review on the City' s Web Site, www. sburl .com, and at the City
Offices at 575 Dorset Street during` normal business hours.
Dated at South Burlington, Vermont this day of
2009
CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON
Charles E. Hatter,
City Manager
Received and posted this dayof
� 2009 ,
Donna Kinville,
City Clerk
In Page l of l
From: Steven Stitzel <SStitzel@firmspf.com>
To: Charles Hafter <chafter@sburl.com>
Subject: Charter Adoption Schedule
Below is a schedule of"no later than" dates for action on the City Charter amendments.
December 29th Latest day to post public hearing notice for hearing on
January 29th
40°4—
January 19th-29th Post Warningfor Annual CityMeeting
January 29th Latest day to hold first public hearing
February 9th Potential day for second public hearing
February 10th Latest day to modify charter changes
March 2nd Annual City Meeting
Steven F. Stitzel, Esq.
Stitzel, Page & Fletcher, P.C.
171 Battery Street
P.O. Box 1507
Burlington, VT 05402-1507
Telephone: (802) 660-2555
Fax: (802) 660-2552
www.firmspf.com
This Electronic Mail transmission and any accompanying documents contain information
belonging to the sender which are CONFIDENTIAL and legally PRIVILEGED. This information
is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to whom this transmission was
addressed, as indicated above. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying,
distribution, or action taken in reliance on the contents of the information in this transmission is
strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please reply to the sender at
802-660-2555 or the above address and delete this message and all attachments from your
storage files. Thank you.
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 9.0.717 /Virus Database: 270.14.113/2573 - Release Date: 12/18/09 02:35:00
Printed for Charles Hafter<chafter@sburl.com> 12/18/2009
4110
%,41110
south urtington
December 4, 2009 Charles E. Hafter, City Manager
Chair and City Council
South Burlington,VT 05403
Re: Consideration of charter amendment proposals from City Charter Committee
To All Members:
The City Charter Committee met to consider two amendments to the City Charter. Due
to unavoidable absences, and committee vacancies, only Bill Cimonetti was able to
attend. We discussed two amendments to the City Charter to address issues which have
recently arisen.
First is the need to redefine the budget approval process to work more effectively with a
March vote,rather than a May vote. The approval process also should be more effective
in encouraging public participation than the current process which was based on the
approval mechanisms prior to the charter amendment to require a public vote on the
budgets. By requiring certain warned legal meetings too early,the budget approval
process concludes before citizens are even thinking about public budgets. The attached
charter amendment complies with state law and puts South Burlington in line with other
municipalities throughout the state. The school administration has reviewed this proposal
and agrees.
A second amendment addresses the requirement to have an Australian ballot on every
question that comes before the voters. As you are aware,the timing of the federal
stimulus money forced the City to hold two votes (one by voice and one by Australian
ballot reconfirming the voice vote)to obtain the funding.Not were efficient. The attached
amendment addresses this issue.
Please discuss.
Sincerely,
Chuck Hafter
City Manager
575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4107 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburl.com
Charter Change Proposal
Budget Preparation and Approval Timeline
The current charter budget approval timeline is based on old charter language that
envisions a May ballot date and did not require a public vote if spending limitations were met.
Thus, the ley avenue for public input was the budget public hearing which was set at an early
date to allow amendments based on public input as the budget was not voted upon. With the
change in the charter to allow public vote,the current budget timeline language results in a
process that starts too early to encourage public participation. The requirement for a public
vote also allows us to realign the charter to match general state requirement.
Current Proposed
Budgets to steering committee 60 prior to vote 45 days prior to vote
Optional SC meeting and warning 30 days prior 30 days prior
Budget mailed to residents 10 days prior to PH 10 days prior to PH
50 days prior to vote 20 days prior to vote
Public Hearing 40 days prior to vote 10 days prior to vote
The schedule would be more in line with the needs for a March vote:
Budget to SC 45 days before vote
Warning approved by Boards 30 days before vote
Budget mailed to homes 20 days prior to vote
Public Hearing 10 days prior to vote
Newspaper publication 10 days prior to vote
southburlington
Charles E. Hafter, City Manager
December 18,2009
Chair and City Council
South Burlington, VT 05403
Re: Consideration of appointment of city representatives to condominium Executive
Board
To All Members:
Following the approval of the Condominium documents for 19 Gregory Drive at the
special council meeting on December 14, 2009,the Council asked me to prepare a
recommendation as to the two City appointments to the Condo Executive Board.
At this time,I would like to recommend that the City's two members be the Chief of
Police and the Assistant City Manager.
Sincerely,
Chuck Hafter
City Manager
575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4107 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburl.com
Sandra Lindberg
52 Pinnacle Drive
So. Burlington, VT 05403
December 7, 2009
Mr. Charles Hafter, City Manager
City of South Burlington
575 Dorset St.
South Burlington, VT 05403
Dear Mr. Hafter:
I wish to resign from the Board of the South Burlington
Library, effective immediately.
My resignation does not indicate a lack of support for
the Community Library, the Library Director, or the current
leadership of the Board. I have accepted the Presidency of
another organization and need to focus my efforts on that for
the remainder of my term.
I am confident that there will be some new enthusiastic
people who will be able to serve the Board well.
Sincerely,
`�
Sandra Lindberg /
cc: Louise Murphy