The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAgenda - City Council - 06/11/2012 Iry vis40,40,-„ '111 on.. VERMONT AGENDA SOUTH BURLINGTON CITY COUNCIL City Hall 575 Dorset Street SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT Executive/Deliberative Session 5:00 p.m. Monday, June 11, 2012 Consider entering executive session to discuss personnel, contract negotiations and litigation and possible deliberation on Interim Zoning applications. Regular Session & Public Hearing 6:00 p.m. Monday, June 11, 2012 1. Agenda Review: Additions, deletions or changes in order of agenda items. 2. Comments and questions from the public (not related to the agenda). 3. Announcements and City Manager's Report. 4. Consent Agenda: [Nothing at this time]. 5. *** Interim zoning application #IZ-12-05 of Joel S. White & Heidi Boncher to Construct: 1) a 2000 sq. ft. 2-story addition to a single family dwelling, and 2) a 1,064 attached garage and connector, 315 Dorset Heights. 6. ' ' Interim zoning application # IZ-12-06 of John Larkin for phase I of a two (2) phase 71 unit residential developments. Phase I will be for 40 units consisting of: 1) 17 two-family dwellings, and three (3) 3-unit multi-family dwellings, 201 Allen Road. 7. *** Consider approval of LED Street Light"Relamping" Consultant (Ilona Blanchard, Project Director). 8. *** Review Draft Letter Regarding City Council's Disapproval of F-35 Basing at BIA (Councilors). 9. *** Consider approval of Resolution to Transfer Appropriations (tabled from June 4, 2012 —Sandy Miller, City Manager and Bob Rusten, Deputy City Manager). 10. *** Consider approving a transfer from the General Fund to create and Interim Zoning Reserve Fund (Sandy Miller, City Manager and Bob Rusten, Deputy City Manager). 11. Other Business. a. Any items held from the Consent Agenda. b. Other? 12. Consider entering executive session for discussion of personnel matters, litigation and real property matters and possible deliberation on Interim Zoning applications (if needed). Respectfully Submitted: Sanford I. Miller, City Manager *** Attachments Included ### Attachments Sent Separately or Previously South Burlington City Council Meeting Participation Guidelines City Council meetings are the only time we have to discuss and decide on City matters. We want to be as open and informal as possible; but Council meetings are not town meetings. In an effort to conduct orderly and efficient meetings,we kindly request your cooperation and compliance with the following guidelines. 1. Please be respectful of each other(Council members, staff, the public). 2. Please raise your hand to be recognized by the Chair. Once recognized please state your name and address. 3. Please address the Chair and not other members of the public, staff, or presenters. 4. Please abide by any time limits that have been set. Time limits will be used to insure everyone is heard and there is sufficient time for the Council to conduct all the business on the agenda. 5. The Chair will make a reasonable effort to allow everyone to speak once before speakers address the Council a second time. 6. The Chair may ask that discussion be limited to the Councilors once the public input has been heard. 7. Please do not interrupt when others are speaking. 8. Please do not repeat the points made by others, except to briefly say whether you agree or disagree with others views. 9. Please use the outside hallway for side conversations. It is difficult to hear speaker remarks when there are other conversations occurring. Public Sign- In June 11, 2012 City Council Meeting Please Print Name Name Name 11 C NJ4720 18 35 2 le T7q R,4 Ne)14 2 2a 19 36 3 z��- L _� 20 37 4 6 eAlticl 21 38 � ,� �hjl � 22 39 6C-v..�C VI\vcc 23 40 7 f` , Si 4) 24 41 8 e l`n.e. 0,01,v S 25 42 9 (---4-6 iI - 26 43 to .2-Q ha( Cv O7' 27 44 1 1 ' ,, go U4,.._6-, 28 45 12 29 46 13 30 47 14 31 48 15 32 49 16 33 50 17 34 51 Want special notice of programs and events specific to YOUR community? Sign up now to receive email notifications, generally no more than 6-10/year. Want more specially chosen videos delivered directly from Channel 17 to your inbox? Check the box next to "This Week" for weekly emails. Name Email Town Check here Check here to receive to receive "YOURTOWN" "THIS WEEK" notices 6-10 on Monday per year mornings. Glicto ✓1 c4ll etwit 061 southbli o PLANNING & ZONING MEMORANDUM TO: South Burlington City Council & City Manager FROM: Paul Conner, Director of Planning &Zoning SUBJECT: Interim Zoning Application #IZ-12-05 (315 Dorset Heights) DATE: June 11, 2012 City Council meeting Enclosed with this memo are the application materials for the Heidi Boncher and Joel White, 315 Dorset Heights. The applicants are seeking interim zoning approval for additions to their single family home. The proposed development consists of an addition to the house of 2,000 square feet (2 stories at 1,000 sq feet each) connected to the existing house, and the addition of a walkway and garage of 1,100 square feet on 1 story. The applicant has provided a narrative of how they believe they meet the Interim Zoning review criteria in accordance with the guidance prepared by the City Attorney. Representatives for the applicant will be in attendance at the public hearing on Monday. 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburl.com Y ritol 01111 southburlingwil PLANNING & ZONING Permit#IZ-�� - 0,5 (office use only) CONDITIONAL USE APPLICATION FOR THE CITY COUNCIL UNDER INTERLM BYLAWS All information requested on this application must be completed in full. Failure to provide the requested information either on this application form or on the site plan will result in your application being rejected and a delay in the review before the City Council. I understand the requirements and procedures required by State Law (Section 4415 of the Planning& Development Act), and that a legal advertisement must appear a minimum of fifteen(15) days prior to the hearing. 1) OWNER(S) OF RECORD(Name(s) as shown on deed,mailing address, phone& fax#): Toe( S. L L 4-e. cf.rci H I b) GoockK- - ►s Poch or I Click . v'i c)S-(-103 c8"Oa) 3Qq•,D142 2)LOCATION OF LAST RECORDED DEED (book&page#) K ��' Pa_ C245 (sz l C7 3)APPLICANT(name, mailing address, phone, fax#) S . W -► z_ fret t 0 ( a YL-- -E tS iDo r c f-� r1tny- I \TY a-/ '7_ 4) CONTACT PERSON(person who will receive staff correspondence. Include name,mailing address, phone& fax#, if different from above): a. Contact e-mail address: � le-1 c I bantkQ( c(INC IA • C Nlr\ 5)PROJECT STREET ADDRESS: 3 (S Doc-se t 1-1 eta his S. "SO c)k he\ VOS-1/)3 6) TAX PARCEL ID#: 0 SLe(O - DC)3 7 PROJECT ZONING DISTRICT(S) 5 ►gin - Il, RP 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburl.com 8)PROJECT DESCRIPTION a. General Project Description(describe what you are proposing): ft JCL bGKt.„0 l LUv Spa ce o c c b. Existing Uses on Property(including description and size of each separate use): {eS/tcb 41 hc�Q c.Proposed Uses on Property(include description and size of each new use and existing uses to remain): Clainch�._p d.Description Po f �and Summary of all requested provals from the City Council L7 .4.at n ccrA A -a61-8--ekQ. Cs-Q e. Other(list any other information pertinent to this application not specifically requested above, please note if overlay districts are applicable): 9) SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS.A completed application form and required submittal materials for the applicable review before the Development Review Board or Administrative Officer shall be included.In the case of a subdivision or planned unit development, all information required for Sketch Plan Review pursuant to Section 15.05 of the Land Development Regulations(LDRs)are required. In the case of all other types of applications,the applicable LDR submittals are required.Applicants are further encouraged to provide information demonstrating compliance with the review standards set forth in 24 VSA §4415 (d) and(e). 10) PLANS AND FEE Plans shall be submitted which shows the information required by the City's Land Development Regulations. Five(5)regular size copies, one reduced copy(11"x 17"), and one digital(PDF-format) of A/A 11114( Y 3MNf \ 2 Interim Bylaw Council Application Form.Rev. 1-2012 the plans must be submitted. An application fee shall be paid to the City at the time of submitting the application. See the City fee schedule for details. NOTE: NOTIFICATION of ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS: Notification of adjoining property owners, in accordance with 24 V.S.A. §4464(a) and Section 17.06(B)of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations, is the responsibility of the applicant.After deeming an application complete,the Administrative Officer will provide the applicant with a draft meeting agenda or public hearing notice and sample certificate of service. The sworn certificate of service shall be returned to the City prior to the start of any public hearing. • I hereby certify that all the information requested as part of this application has been submitted and is accurate to the best of my knowledge. cQ.2S s' — SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT (hoc Joe-1— c. WlP t t—E SIGNATT'/ OF PROPERTY OWNER PRINT NAME Do not write below this line DATE OF SUBMISSION: 0 /4*91 -- I have reviewed�this application and fmd it to be: Et COMPLETE ❑ INCOMPLETE 3Af// dministrative 0 cer Date The applicant or permittee retains the obligation to identify, apply for, and obtain relevant state permits for this project. Call(802) 879-5676 to speak with the regional Permit Specialist. 3 Interim Bylaw Council Application Form.Rev. 1-2012 Paul, Please add this narrative to our application for Monday: We would like to add additional living space to the north side of our house and a new attached garage to the west of the current structure. An Addition to a single family residence in no way would be contrary to any amendments to the Land Development Regulations that the City plans to adopt. The Addition has been designed by a reputable architectural firm(Michael Minadeo and Partners) in a style that is in keeping with the original architect's design(Marcel Beaudin-circa 1970) and will be constructed by Clearwater Builders who are known for building high-quality custom homes. The living space of the current house is actually much smaller(1/3 to 1/2 the square footage) of neighboring properties that are on much smaller lots to the North on Golf Course Road and to the South on Dorset Heights and Hemlock Lane. The proposed addition would make the house much more comparable in size to the surrounding properties and thus fit in better with the area. The North addition will fit within the footprint of a pool that was originally on the property until 3 years ago so the new building will not add to the existing building footprint at all. The proposed garage and connector fit on the footprint of the original driveway constructed 40 years ago. In terms of Section VI, an addition to an existing single family residence cannot possibly affect the areas' capacity or patterns of use at all. There will be no impact on the land's natural resources because the new building is contained within the original footprint. An addition of this size will not significantly impact the use of renewable energy. In fact, improvements to the existing windows and insulation will increase efficiencies and decrease the use of renewable energy. Building like this preserves the architectural history of the area, is much more environmentally conservative than any new construction and will add value to our property and the surrounding properties. A project like this will employee many local companies and artisans and will be an example of how building should be done in the area. Thank you for your consideration. Joel S.White and Heidi Boncher June 8. 2012 ' ,,,,44.-# .c,,,,,,„,.,„ . , Ift:.1 - , ;•--,,,.,..,-0,:,,,,,,„- , , 7-,,,,,,:,:, ,,, , 44. "'"4/"." ',,'', , „,„ 4,,,',*,,'',,, ,-',"'"', , •"''1'r ''''' ,' LANO3CAPE ARCHliECTS i'7,:Z..', . ,':k141 t',44'17''.4''''''l ,.,'' ''",1;4:4''''''''''''''''''.• W ''''''''e'''''''41141; ;;:t;,41',., %" ' '.-\ ' ",..4.9..*A'4;,..":,'' '1,''' "''''-','P''14'''''.'N,..'' r..,.............,...,(sot•.2..we ' ,o, „,„„i!,,,,44: .7,7,-,-n-wri-„: ,voptitik,s,,,,47.:',,v-.,,,',..,‘,..-.,:i.:;t)',t,:ciii,,,,,,":,..,,,,ri..7;.,%;,-,, ---"40re.v.ttia4szi .,''' ''''.' "`'r' ' 1.,,#'-"„'.',,,;•.4,,,' A„A',..;:4, ':= -' 04'‘, 'Mk't''" % '''''L'''.'":„.„:4. '''*''', '''" •;.r''''''.*. .c•-c..-;,..$.r,-', .i., ,,, ' ''.,- ,''",-,';',4-t-,,:',4:'.-.:'. ''-' ' , „••, *Ill ;'4'''; '4 ''''';'''''Sis," .4r.•.4,, *,,E,..,:,,r A,'':41"'it':"'A;;,:4"''', '''' ;• `4',:g*44:V4'4'''' '',4i7X:AT'A'',7'-41*74?'"4',:,:A1,1::::4''i,„A,1';',-.:::?..:,..;,"4i- .*:- N.:", ,:,- :. ''''‘,-,-': -,„4...k 'AV tt ti f-c;-'' -.?;t4,,*,.,:. .;),...•41,-.4.1W.„,;z.i.,-„v„‘44,„,.7i,z4,-,!--,,,;,,,-4.*:,',,' A„,k,'Vit.,f,'.',z•N..„'- .00,!!,",.7,,' !'rrti--41 .-:!‘ ,,,,.::,.e.,1,',.:„.iit,','„,`,.4., tlt., i4;,•;"2-:kii'4':'s,:,ig':;g51„.-4 : ::;. 4,,•':!'L' ''447'1::.°.,'::ZC:A:A',,r,'3,i,y.,,,,,,4:'',44-,! 1 15:7*." '.'''.:;;,,,,i4,,;.":1;'..e4fowqi.it::.t.,,,:::,---!,14.$4,i-it..44,_-:-,i,--4 za•W'Y-,,,,,...,..',;4*!. ?"' ',,,---,i1P-1.3---;.1 .:-,..-:-.' ",;"''' ',',''''''!--'%,.1.--./A:2t7j4-..itei.,".::::::;"-:',7,-,',i'%'41-i'MN:,j.,:':-,;:,;7 +,I,,,,.„41,,,,,4104 ., tik,:fitifflvitalg:fri-71,11trp:ktin*.*45,t,,. ;:--_,:.:!•:':.,.;,:i.:„*,,,,,t,.,.',..4.','::;,',ViO, ,....'.:;,:s.V„i,,,',-- =.';,-44:.;,,,,--,---tf :,I,,,:.`.'/..-"±',.'2'''',i:;'`..;,,,',; ,,;,:-,r 0,.;:i...:1 t„,,..',::1A.(4,..14,,k.;:'' 1 ,!!.,',y,„', 414 cilm-4,''., :;',;7.11si;:!;.40-:* . •'9 '-V -,' ,--)..'44;,,, •.`too,"'N",-,- '''' *Vd,',,,',',„,•*,A,:*4.',,, ',,`,,,4 ,r2-'..r;.`,".';'rt.,,41, 1 '•• ,r.„,...;,,,,,,,:;.4...;-5--1/4.64,.4., ''.: -t,Not,""Alk,,,,, , yi;';,'„n-",t,'!, 't-. X,,t',,„,A'tat,e tit ,' Vii"- ,t,2,trlAt i,', 5';,1;',.."-",,,,,f, ,,„,,:-,,--..,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,.;.,,,,,,i.,,,,A.z,:ly,!,:o:',,la-,,,-•,„',1,<;,,:tA.-,.',"7-.,j''-',:i'''''''t."7•,°4"..!, 7i'"-.ttli,171P,Nmsze)kr';',". a ,, .-i",,k,„,,,,,,, :;',' , .: ,,,:i". -", -:., '-'„r,. T'-,- -','''.";.' '"-„,, "'', -','.V,e4,4,it'g' ,'.' ,i',,',,:";,,,t,:„ - . ,:4,44'•11,•' 'gra.)'ts f4:,e.„.14:' ".q'"/-f ' ''''-:",-„,''' *tol. „--,i..',-",-01;"6*..''''.'"'"N',":"!,?''' '',''', '..''''"l''' ','''''4i'''''' :''' -.'.;.t"-'','44?-;-:-,; -.:Z*-04.;--‘---- ',,• -."1-',,*,:',F.-r,..,i:•,---, '' -'! ,',,,-;;v,,wt-I,-4i.P'-',7.,ta..,..:,,,:;:..,--.,>;imN,--' ' 44,-,,g.i1,,,,..,;::.,,,,.',.,:,;,,:,Z;',:..:,,Aihk,:.4,,'',„,,,t,„;.,,,!.4',#:,,,,,i,',4i..,;,„.,;;;:7,,,i,,,o..,„-,All,ri.'s,,,,,et i...,-;,-.',,..,,,,,,,,',,f-:-.-4;,,,,,,,,,,,,-.,,,,,:, ,,,3<ti, ,,'''•'-,0 Ale..i 41)-1 ......,.....,......7;7:-.., ,,..., ..,'N, , ,,6••„:0,1,`,t.,4'1....,.40;04,,?;•;,,,,,Ng.-',-,,,,V,F..4,., 41,:**,;4. 3.-Ve44..,. 4; '-,—::'.:.."'''. ,,,''''' ''.,``2",',"A'4 4" ' .,4,'", ,''',, ,'',-,,,..4'1.>,,,,,,,'--.44'4, ,;4 ,, . ',..•'44,','.4.";4'4",,4'44:44,'' ' ''' 1 ',4'844,A;VP 4M.„ ‘,1 8 W'' '4-'.`,4 4''4' ' 'i,,''''''','4'.,"t;':14"..4,`4'4p1,,::44::' -.4,,';.4.`,.,'4.,;,,,.'',.',,"'-',„.',.. .,,,,,t,w,4.., . ,'..t.srkvi;k4.41e- .,,',.7 .''04' .!"1,',, • • 0,4,2,,,.14,-f-,,,,q ,-,fik,'.--,:',,.,.1.•.,• -..,': '. '.'''';•1','":5:44''':"'It'''''''''P.Y%,‘, '''''' 'fa:';';',*''','„Argir.r•-,',, ', „ <.,,, \, ,,,..,... „ ..,4i, '„-,-,r,7,,,,,,,:,,,,e4,,,,y,-,,,,,t,,,',i,i:,,,,. ...,,,,.,---,,„,,r, .4- 7 4:"4'44''':'.i7:::',":44,-.7.414,*!',":4:1::'''7:47,`, 1:.:4''' 'r','.''--,tgezri ,%,.,,,:,,,, -4,g,.. a ,-sq„,,„1.,.-,,,=„4,.-t,;,,,,,--1;,.,:lfz,,•\.,.., -,-,-,..z-, „ , ,,f,,ciy,4'.•,;,-,;,..,,,,4,t,s' Srri,*'''.'e-.. 5,-',1"'''r‘!''' ' • ".%,--,'"U"'"•.1'' .Z.„;;':' ,;:'&-' ?'''''1M7,',:..'.:,; .,.. N";,,,,4,,',---='''''' -I.',4,-,.*:',i'' ''.4,'V.,,,eit:-• ' ''-''''''•,2.-'• Atir,' '' ' ''-F--"--.: 4 :: '''---16'' ' ' .,t, ..A.,-e - --, . -41,,,,f,..g-, ,,,-.:-.-... „;.: - '10.2„:-.-, 2,,-..,,-... --,,,-„t,..,,,,,,, ,,,,',.:CP,*!' TAL ;,'::,1•''' ': '7 ' 'r;• , ,,,-,. ;,,,,r,•,, ,,;46!%,t71-;`,,„.„-,'0,,,, ,--','0i,, ' ,, f" tr'' r:11'',- % , ,r-' ' '' ',•, 'r S,'',''''",='''% ,"'.'::'''''' '1 1,12,:' - - ,,' -'' , ,'1,.:' ,4.4,,t,-A .A.' -.' '',N,-7-." ',N , -. -,--„:441!:.- ..,-,74,‘,.44,-,,,,A,it, ,,t.i,47•',,, , ,,..„-,.. . ....,., . . BONCHER J,Iii.t.--10, ‘„triteik,,,:.,,,,,, ., ,,„:115,,,,Itig .,:, ,,v,-„,, „. ,‘,, „.\c!t,,t it,',:=;;2, " --''',-'t-Wi•,,r"4-i"4.41.2Z,41-402*-Wr '-'4"`'''"7,X, RESIDENCE ,....,4,104,p':.;,_ .„,,,,,e.,„A,14,:, _,;."Al,..,..,,,:it9.'%t, :.'kitf, -,itt"''2,"-" - ' 2,4...,,,'",„+", "-,-,,,,,.'"!,.;"•., - ;•"`","'' / -4i,:-,1,....-",., ,.,--1,,14.1-•.,„,,"''' „ •,,,,,.=.4.,' 1'-''''.:,,',,, rt)5',.,", ',:"' -4/47:4,:,,,044:r '.:4*,.',Z.F.,,,r',--,:,.'5," ,, ,,..,..i. ,--,,4- `..,.',-+.,,t1,-.4[,,5,...,:SA,0,,,,,,,,,, .,.,, ',;,:•,,,„ 4 r--'--"It,k-' .!'''W,'-'"•- ',iNx,'et-Alf,,,..4„':„'".4t.,.ttt""'' goiii, -,'" - ,,-,,,4„2,-;.„,„ „-2-,x,,,,,.1.4, ..,---.:,A 4,..,..:..:.-.,,,,,,,1 Ar.„1'06. ,...P:::°:.,,,,,,,; i'-**.t-ti.:-::tq:9:1V4j'-'440'''S,-' -' "" '',.,* •..-',..„,,,,-i t, " ' :' . ....kk.,..,: -ve.,,,..,„„:„,.:=,..,..,t,*,., :::::,,l..,---A,,,..4, 1-.,,-.41, ,,,,,,-,0,..i,,,,,•,::',.:1",".,.I,.*'''',',''''''*% '''/\''''', .;,,iI"`",b,- ---Ai_ REVISIONS -":,--3,,,,- ,i*"' --'4- •,,2::-',0--,','-x.' t--X- , --4,\ , --,-l2.,2-,,v-- 4,4, -,,,,,.-„ ,.40.; k,-At:- - ;--,,,,.,, „ '.•,'V • •;•:,...,,,,' =?,.., , ',',',,, , „ ,,- ,„-,1,---4,,,, .a,i,,''•',s,-, -,r,,-N'''' --,2,-1----'<P,f,t',ix-Y, ' ,- -, ., — ' " ' `''''''2",ktt,'X r- %-`,' , • ;„.'"vr .:,.`1,Y,.,'''',,,',i',",'"%,:', ,';',.ek,',":%41,7rr- .,,,,,," ,1' t .' - • :::,,,....,•,,,,..40A.,., „,„ .. _,,,,,,,,„,i„,...,„,,„1,,,,,, ,,,,;,„2„,,,,,,,,,:;,,- „..: .'--2",,',---',tx-,,-,'"" . -',.'--,,,,-,'"2-t---",!„---, ,' ': - t,' tz--,, 4'..,°/$-..A ',• •-"-KP-0".,1 -44,x0t2Xx x:„ ','--t""24,'4",'',t."';'-'--, -," -,Xr-,''''%;%,4"r'r . --,:-,,.;,11,1.-,,,,-,* -' ' - 7 . ,,,,,,,,*.,-r .44.'44.1,'"-'4' ,--.. , .1`-' ".:':,'',.!.-q,*(11-7,:,tt-'441-' ',,.. ,,,„,.. it., ,„ : .,:,,,,, -*,.: --.":4;•!,,:-::::',:;,,,m. ;,4,. !--.;,',,,,,,,..- ,'%4,-,:.- r',,,', ,i,,i';V:';'.'', -"• . ,,,‘ ,,, 'of,,,t,'...'•.44,,A4,,i,1'4.."' , ',:, ,4i ,,'!'.''"::=' , AV ' '''-- ..,,N;,,,, , 4,1.,..; .....1., , :-.. „,;,, ,, . ,,:""..4t.,‘*;,---,"-. ,.4,,,,,"""--' ' 44 4.0.111:; f:',,:,:i4P"0 i?,,r:;..3',3,:,''g''.'.:''''.'•''..'.....1'.5'i",:,-,It'' -,--,'A,*ir.',r„L i;;tf..,;O..4• t40*.-'-,„,1''-,'-'-".A;:,.:, . . ' oat 01.112L I 0 • ' -,-,1 2, 11.11111111.111111. ' . _1 F (�I • + f N ;, t � I . . . • • • L =•4 ..� { j 1= 1= "fii f • • f . • • _ I; .i- - _.r _ - lit • -- • \ iI I11 I \ R I \-_• • II • 0 ::s„., ::!;t4. •••••5,••OS —1---- -(--•'•IF-...f ''Li' I —r - C ir - _ • f_.'.....,, . 7 --..:...... .... .c---i.- 11-1--: • . 1 • . .. _q I . • - t I , . . ! A ..: •,.. .. ... . --..- . • _! -- . '• '-'--'L::1 t :r- or • ..i- .1 --a '.,.‘• . ._ ......- r- r -- • .!-- 11 ____ ! .__z ( ,T .. --,.....,, •,,, • ., 1 i ' • -.... --7- - ., -..1..------ „:"-,•••,/ I 1—1 I - -'• --.. ---->-/ • I I I I I •1 ,"\-\,.N., ..., , I I I, • :cr . _ • • II- II [I I, i_-_,___-..._ .. • t I - ! • t1.714 z t!-. -,, , I ,., 1... -: -• . • • 110: ' I • . " • • '71I 1 11,1 1 1'1i1P;-1- 11111! lIl7i i[I t!1-1j1Ir 4-11_, -1 •i.!' ;I ,,,h-F, , ,„:.;_:,i1,11111-i-1.-,,n-i, . 1 =I . , !.!3.,.. !i-- 1-• !...,..i- iii........i.1 -71- IL 't.. "1 I _ i ........ • t, ' �, \ . ; I_ J` r F`t �1� — _ F — �G — - _- - T` T. _ ..._ __,_ • -\ . . _HRiG 4Likil t7 �aNa 6lArrety SlAtt.,BN WAIa,.. G6YXdC61}INbil,V. Wit%4-PAR NBtAt._PAHet,-bAR{cyiz - toMAtl,� {}alSt, (Au4ast inacK). 4%tOTIONIel-tYkriD4 G NoKr'N GPLIKT'YANb WhU. 4M 3/I MA, 0 southi. ` t:3 PLANNING & ZONING MEMORANDUM TO: South Burlington City Council & City Manager FROM: Paul Conner, Director of Planning &Zoning SUBJECT: Interim Zoning Application #IZ-12-06 (Allen Road) — REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCE DATE: June 11, 2012 City Council meeting The applicant has requested that the City Council continue this hearing to late August in order for them to prepare written statement per the City Attorney's guidance. Staff recommends a continuance to the planned August 20`h meeting, or another date following this. Due to this request, the application materials have not been included in the Council's packet. Staff has, however, included a letter provided by a neighbor to the project for the Council's records. Representatives for the applicant will not be in attendance at the public hearing on Monday. 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburl.com Page 1 of 1 Paul Conner From: Skip McClellan [sm©Ihivt.com] Sent: Friday, June 08, 2012 7:28 AM To: Paul Conner Cc: 'John Larkin'; Joe Larkin; Sherman, Deb Subject: Farmstand South Hi Paul, Please continue our application to the City Council for Phase One of the Farmstand South project on Allen Road. We will require a substantial time to gather our resources, so please schedule the hearing for a date in late August.Thank you. Skip McClellan Llewellyn Howley Incorporated 20 Kimball Ave Suite 202N South Burlington, VT 05403 (802)658-2100 SM(&,,LHIvt.com 6/8/2012 Alan F. Sylvester 1985 Spear Street South Burlington, VT 05403 May 30,2012 Rosanne Grecco, Chair South Burlington City Counsel 575 Dorset Street South.Burlington, VT 05403 Re: Interim Zoning Application#IZ-12-06 of John Larkin Dear Ms. Grecco: I received your notice of public hearing scheduled for June 11, 2012 on the above. It was my understanding that the Interim Zoning By-law specifically prohibited a planned development unit in this area. There have been so many applications for the development of this area by Mr. Larkin in the last year or.so.I have had trouble keeping track. It looks like this latest one is exactly the same as the objectionable sketch plan submitted in the Fall of 2011 with one exception. He is now trying to phase in this massive development. I don't see how that makes it any less objectionable. I am enclosing a letter my wife and I sent to the Development Review Board on December 29, 2011 relating to Larkin's Sketch Plan Application#SD-11-21. I would like to make this letter a matter of record to this latest application since the comments apply equally to both. One additional observation: The longstanding zoning laws for this area allows for a maximum of 51 residential units consisting primarily of two residences per acre. I simply can't understand why an applicant should be allowed to increase the number of units by over 40%o with two and three story buildings and infrastructure that would pretty much cover all of the land. Thank you for your consideration. Very truly yours, 414. / Alan F. Sylvester December 29, 2011 City of South Burlington Development Review Board 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 Re: Larkin Sketch Plan Application#SD-11-21 Dear Board: I am writing to comment on the latest version of the applicant's sketch plan. It appears the application covers pretty much every square inch of available land with buildings and infrastructure. The land is zoned R-1 and R-2. This designation has been in effect for at least 40 years. The zoning regulations specifically state that an R-1 district is where low- density single family residential uses are encouraged. And, R-1 districts are located in areas where low densities are necessary to protect scenic views and cultural resources to provide compatibility with adjacent natural areas. The long standing neighborhood immediately adjacent to this plan is the perfect example of compliance with the intent and purpose of the zoning laws. The sketch plan is totally incompatible with the zoning laws, the importance of providing open spaces, and the protection of natural areas and wildlife habitat. We have lived on a roughly 14 acre parcel of land immediately adjacent to the applicant's parcel for close to 40 years. At the time of purchase we, and I am sure others, researched exactly the regulations and policy of the City in this area. If we. thought a project such as the one most recently proposed was going to be an acceptable use, we would have never purchased and built. Our Northern boundary line of approximate 900 feet adjoins the applicant's southerly boundary. Before we built, we had discussions with our neighbors to our immediate west concerning possible obstruction of their views, and the views from Spear Street. We eventually built a one-story home in order preserve the views. Several years ago we received a call from a real estate broker advising she had a client interested in 1971 Spear Street, but was reluctant to buy due to a concern we might build a 2nd level causing views to be obstructed. The homestead located at 1855 Spear Street directly east of the proposed development was in existence prior to our construction in the early '70's. It originally comprised roughly 21/2 acres. Recently, an additional 1'A acres directly north and east of the proposed development were added. The homestead formerly owned by the Brousseau's at 191 Allen Road has also been in existence since the late 1960's or earlier. This home directly adjoins the proposed development on the west and south and sits on an acre of land. The Gentile homestead at 195 Allen Road immediately to the south of the proposed development is well over an acre. All of the foregoing homes, that totally surround the proposed development, are single family one-story, split level, or two stories. Most of them greatly exceed the zoning acreage requirement. None are non-compliant. To allow three-story triple occupant buildings would be totally out of character for the long standing neighborhood, have a significant impact on the views, and transform it from a relatively quiet, low density, aesthetically appealing, environmentally beneficial neighborhood into a mishmash of buildings. The applicant is trying to jam 70 living units plus parking plus all other forms of impervious surfaces on a piece of land surrounded by single family homes, wetlands, and natural areas. We are particularly sensitive to the effect any development of this parcel of land will have on the adjacent wetlands and natural areas. For those of you who may not be familiar with the devastating 1996 proposed development of this land, I would strongly urge you to review the file. Very simply put, the natural areas and wetlands were almost completely destroyed before the State and the City interceded to stop the project. Before this debacle, flora and fauna were bountiful. There were deer, grouse, pheasant, fox, bobcat, opossum, ermine, skunks, rabbits, nesting red tail hawk, nesting horned owl, saw whet owl, turkey, etc. Wild flowers 2 such as lily of the valley,jack-in-the-pulpit, white and pink hepatica and all of the other common wild flowers abounded. There were blue jays, meadowlarks, goldfinches, nut hatches, chickadees, finches, phoebes, Baltimore orioles, cardinals, red-winged blackbirds, cow birds, pilated woodpeckers, salamander, peepers, frogs, turtles etc. The area is in the process of recovering. But, some flowers, animals and amphibians have been lost forever. The neighborhood that exists today is a perfect gateway for vehicles using Allen Rd. to enter our City from the south. It has open spaces, wetlands, natural areas, and scenic views. It would be against everything the City promotes to change it. Any development should continue the minimum practice of single family homes on one acre or more. As you know, there have been multiple sketch plans. Most of them were totally incompatible with the policy, goal, and regulations of the City. However, the sketch plan previous to this latest one, makes some sense. That plan clustered townhouses against a backdrop of woods in the southwest corner of the property. The rest of the land would remain vacant. This would provide for much needed open space, and would give the wetland and natural areas an opportunity to continue to recover from the debacle of 1996. And, it is at least somewhat compatible with the massive four-story building complexes directly across the street. Fortunately, there is a significant amount of open space between them and the residences to the east. Very ly yours, �, / y�� Alan F. Sylvester Diane H. Sylvester 1985 Spear St. So. Burlington, VT 05403 cc: South Burlington City Council 3 41*01 southburlington VERMONT REGULAR SESSION To: Sanford Miller, City Managers From: Ilona Blanchard, Project Dire:VP .Z Subject: Authorize City Manager to contract with Space/Light/Design consultant Date: June 8, 2012 Background: This year,the City agreed to work with Efficiency Vermont and Green Mountain Power to replace City leased High Pressure Sodium and Metal Halide cobra head street lights with LED fixtures. This will reduce the City's street light power consumption by over 50 percent and annual leasing costs by an estimated nine percent. This project will not add or remove lights (except for redundant lights). If a lighting condition is currently non-contiguous, such as in the Southeast quadrant it will remain so. The lights are expected to be in place for a minimum of 15 years and in the time since many of the City's street lights were installed, safe lighting level standards for pedestrian,bicycle and traffic have changed. Therefore, it is appropriate that City ensure that replacement light levels meet current engineering safety standards to the extent feasible. The City solicited quotes from consultants to provide relamping recommendations from among the options available from GMP. Three quotes were received. The lowest cost quote, from Space/Light/Design, is also deemed to be a responsible bidder. The firm has substantial experience in recommending streetlight fixtures based on context, safety engineering standards and level of light output. The City Council is asked to authorize the City Manager to enter into a contract with the lighting consultant because the consultant is an appointed City committee member. The owner of Light/Space/Design, Donna Leban, is also a member of the City's Recreation Pathways Committee. In addition, Ms. Leban is proposing to subcontract to Marc Companion, who is a member of the City's Energy Committee. The Energy Committee is the committee that has spearheaded this project. Neither Ms. Leban nor Mr. Companion was involved in the selection of a consultant and neither was provided additional information beyond what was contained in the request for proposals. Ms. Leban was consulted in addition to two other area lighting consultants, as is standard practice, in order to ascertain the appropriate components of the 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4107 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburl.com request for quotes for services. This project is intended to be cost neutral; Efficiency Vermont will cover the light depreciation costs. As the lights are leased, GMP will cover all capital upgrade and maintenance costs and oversee installation. The consultant fee will be paid in a cost sharing agreement between the City and Efficiency Vermont. This project will change the lighting conditions as the quality of LED is different than then the Metal Halide and High Pressure Sodium streetlights in place currently. Emitted LED lighting improves the ability to see colors (very low in High Pressure Sodium) and evenly distribute light(distinct from all non-LED lights),the color temperature of lights (yellow or white) is also different. The lights also will be uniformly new and therefore at the brightest output of their life cycle. Unlike some area jurisdictions, this is not a street light reduction effort. The City will not remove lights unless they are redundant; i.e. if the consultant discovers duplicate lighting conditions that were previously unknown. Attachments: • Light Space Design Proposal Recommendation: Authorize the City Manager to execute a contract with Space Light Design. Additional This is being brought to the Council now as Green Mountain Power proposes Consideration: to complete the project by September 31, 2012. There are over 600 lights that will need to be replaced. In order to meet this deadline,the City has worked out the following timeline: June 15 —Authorization to proceed with the consultant contract July 15 —Review of consultant work July 31 —Finalize recommendations and submit to GMP September 31 —Complete installation of LED lights Light-Space! Design Looking at our environment in a whole new light May 29,2012 Ilona Blanchard, Project Director City of South Burlington 575 Dorset Street South Burlington,VT 05403 Subject:South Burlington Street Lighting Proposal: Dear Ms Blanchard and Committee Members; I am pleased to submit the following proposal in support of the streetlighting update work being conducted by the City of South Burlington and Green Mountain Power. Based on similar work that I conducted for the Town of Colchester(Bryan Osborne, Public Works Director and Sarah Hadd,Town Planner) I am pleased to bring the same level of skill for the benefit of South Burlington. The work will include the following tasks: 1. Recommend LED fixtures as supplied by Green Mountain Power as required to replace existing cobrahead type High Intensity Discharge luminaires. The goal is to achieve illuminance levels consistent with safe lighting guidelines for existing roadway classifications and other special conditions as identified in the May 18,2012 Request for Proposal. 2. Use AGI32 lighting software to model typical streetlighting conditions at mounting heights typical of GMP's wooden and fiberglass poles. 3. Based on GIS datasets provided by the City, recommend specific light replacement based on LEDway fixtures available through GMP. This information will be updated in writing on printed GIS maps provided by the City that are large enough to clearly convey information specific to each existing fixture and location. 4. Under this proposal, no work shall be required to identify billing for specific light locations. All fixtures identified as replaceable City lights on City supplied mapping will be eligible for replacement. 5. Recommendations for elimination of luminaires will be based on data provided by the City, plus a field verification within the scope of this project. 6. The City of South Burlington shall provide services in support of this project required to print and update GIS maps. Light/Space/Design does not have GIS software. 7. Recommendations will be in a spreadsheet format that can be linked by a light ID to a GIS database. A printed map will also be marked up with recommended new light type as well as fixtures that may be eliminated. P O. Box 4064 E Burlington, VT 05406 D P 802-862-1901 0 F 802-862-0101 Schedule for Completing Tasks An initial report including recommended replacement fixtures will outline each analysis by type of street and use. This will be completed by the end of June 2012. Application of the recommendations to the GIS streetlight mapping will be completed by no later than July 15. After review,an additional week shall be required to complete the dataset of replacement/removal lights. Approach to Project: The Consultant(Light/Space/Design)will create a spreadsheet including each street condition requiring streetlighting based on South Burlington Planning data for street types. These will include street traffic conditions for both residential and commercial zoning districts. Illuminating Engineering Society of North America (IESNA) streetlighting guidelines, as well as new guidelines jointly developed by IESNA and the International Dark Sky Assocation (IDA)will be used as a basis for lighting recommendations. AGI32 software will be used to evaluate each streetlighting condition, both for continuous and non- continuous lighting. Results will be presented in spreadsheet format for City review. Recommendations for both replacement and elimination of lights will be applied to GIS datasets of existing streetlighting. Field verification will be done only as needed to clarify or verify information,and when making recommendation for fixture elimination. Cost Breakout by Task: Development of lighting conditions by Type,and modeling to determine recommendations $2400 Review and Coordination with City $ 600 Apply recommendations to GIS mapping and spreadsheet database,verification $1600 Second review with City and update mapping and spreadsheet database $1000 Total Cost included under this proposal: $5600 Team Members and Qualifications: Lighting design and modeling,and all communications with the City for the purpose of this project will be done by Donna J. Leban,AIA, LC, owner of Light/Space/Design. Light/Space/Design is a woman- owned VT based business providing independent lighting design and consulting services to the business community throughout the Northeastern US since 1999. Please see the attached qualifications and list of projects completed. Knowledge of GMP's streetlighting program and staff,which Ms Leban has extensive experience with from her time at GMP from 1991 until 1999, is one reason for her company's focus on outdoor lighting and specifically LED lighting retrofit and economic analysis. Assistance in coordinating recommendations with GIS database will be done by Marc Companion,who will be a consultant for this project. Marc brings his attention to detail,excellent skills and experience, and dedication in assisting me in translating recommendations to final project detail. His resume is also attached. Thank you very much for this potential opportunity. Donna J. Leban Light/Space/Design 7 Iris Lane South Burlington,VT 05403 The conditions for payment of services are as follows: A. Payment for services rendered as described above.Invoices for services shall be submitted on a monthly basis or at the completion of work. Invoices shall be payable within 30 days after the invoice date. A service charge of 1.5%(or the current legal rate)per month will be applied to the unpaid balance after 40 days. B. The Client agrees to indemnify and hold Consultant harmless from any and all damage,liability,suit,action or cost(including reasonable attorneys'fees and defense costs)to the extent caused by any negligent acts, errors or omissions by the Client,its employees,agents,subcontractors,successors or assigns,which acts, errors or omissions arise from work on any of the projects that are the subject of this Agreement. C. The Client agrees, to the fullest extent permitted by law, to limit the Consultant's total liability to the Client, for any and all damages, actions, suits, liabilities or claims (including reasonable attorney's fees) arising out of this Agreement, from any and all causes, to not more than the amount of the Consultant's fee for the particular project which gives rise to any such damage,action,suit, liability or claim. This Agreement may be terminated upon 14 days'written notice by either party,with or without cause. In the event of termination,the Client shall pay the Consultant for all services rendered up to and including the date of termination(at the applicable rates and fees established herein for varying types of services),plus all reimbursable expenses. Agreement to the terms set forth in this Agreement are indicated by signing below. Please keep a copy for your records. Agreed and Approved:Signature Name Title Company Mailing Address City State Zip Contact Name Contact Phone Number(s) Contact E-mail address Donna J.Leban,AIA,LC,IESNA 7 Iris Lane,South Burlington,VT 05403 802-862-1901 Light/Space/Design,South Burlington,VT Principal 1998-2012 Architectural and Exterior Lighting and Daylighting Design for New Construction and Retrofit,Lighting Energy Auditing,and Professional Training Seminar Development and Delivery. Lighting design focused on high performance retail,commercial, institutional,and outdoor site lighting. Lighting and daylighting focused review for LEED projects throughout the eastern US. Recent Exterior Lighting Projects: Browns River Middle School-Retrofit Site Lighting with LED and Solar/LED luminaires,including specification and economic evaluation of solar installation,completed fall 2011,Laura Nassau,Business Manager. Civil Engineering Associates-Lighting and Act 250 Outdoor Lighting Evaluations for many completed office and school projects in Northern VT,Dave Marshall,Owner-project manager. 802-864-2323 x310 Colchester Updated Streetlighting Standards and Economic Analysis-for Colchester Plannng and Zoning,Sarah Hadd,Planner (currently in effect),Recommendations for LED and Induction Streetlighting upgrade,Bryan Osborne and Warner Rackley,Project Manager. 802-264-5625 Colchester School District-Retrofit Design of all Exterior Lighting at Three Schools to LED,completed 2010. Dyer Residential Development Site Lighting—for Duncan Wisniewski Architects,Shelburne,VT,2011. Efficiency Vermont—LED Streetlighting Analysis and Economic Evaluation for the Town of Colchester,VT, Josh Kelman,EVT Contact. 802-860-4095 x1142 Heritage Auto Group-LED Site Lighting Retrofit for Car Dealership,S.Burlington,VT, for Summit Engineering,Doug Hewitt, Project Engineer. 802-658-5588 IDX Corporation-Exterior lighting -for Kessel Duff Corporation,S.Burlington,VT, Bryan Robie-Project Manager (completed) Rice Lumber—New Site Lighting,Shelburne,VT,Patrick O'Brian Project Manager Seaside Residential Planned Community-Site and unit lighting for high end bay side development,Ocean City,MD;with Jeff Schoellkopf Architects Smuggler's Notch Resort-Site Lighting Retrofit and Residential unit lighting,Smuggler's Notch,VT;Dan Maxon,project manager State of Vermont-Dome and Facade Lighting Study for the Statehouse in Montpelier,VT—Brad McAvoy,Project Manager; Outdoor Lighting Plan Improvements for the Waterbury State Complex,Waterbury,VT—Vince Blaisdell,Project Manager. State of Vermont,Department of Public Service—Municipal Streetlighting Guide and Utility Streetlighting Retrofit Case Study in Plainfield,VT Winooski Downtown Development Project-Decorative street lighting and landscape lighting for a major downtown upgrade, Winooski,VT,for Civil Engineering Associates and Winooski Community Development Corporation(in construction), Dave Marshall,Project Manager for CEA. Professional lighting/daylighting seminars: ASID,Distinguished Speaker Series,Sustainable Lighting for Interior Designers,2007-08 Agency of Natural Resources,outdoor lighting seminars and tours,2001-02 Construction Specifications Institute,Daylighting lecture at 2002 Regional Conference,and Seminar on Lighting Design Process Efficiency Vermont,Better Buildings by Design,Lighting Controls Systems Seminar,2005;ReLighting—Upgrading Existing Lighting Systems,2010. Hanley-Wood Publications,International Pool and Spa Expo,Retail Lighting and Landscape Lighting Seminars and Magazine article,Orlando,FL,2005 Vermont Public Service Department,Series of Commercial Lighting Code Training Seminars 2002 Northeast Energy Efficiency Partnership,Design Lights Consortium,knowhow Series"'research and development on school lighting optimization,2001 Northeast New England Chapter,American Planning Association,outdoor lighting seminar and tour,2001 Northeast Sustainable Energy Association,March 2002 daylong workshop on computer daylighting analysis and artificial lighting integration RedVector.com,Lighting Metrics Online Course created in 2005 Professional Publications: John Wiley&Sons,Lighting Retrofit and Relighting—A Guide to Energy Efficiency,co-author with James Benya,2011. Green Mountain Power Corporation,South Burlington,VT 1991-1999 Outdoor Lighting Program Manager,Account manager for major institutional and commercial customers,Program Manager for energy efficiency education for construction professionals. Completed Projects: Federal Contract Management for the VA Medical and Regional Office Center,Energy Management System Design and Commissioning. Business plan for Outdoor Lighting Services Edited and developed consumer education brochure for Vermont Utility Efficiency Programs,and worked to expand supplier awareness of quality efficient light sources and luminaires. Provided technical direction to the Governor's Task Force which lead to the adoption of a Residential Energy Efficiency Standard for Vermont. The Hillier Group-Princeton,NJ Associate,Project Architect 1983-1990 Lead project design,team supervision and coordination with clients and consultants. Managed projects from preliminary design through construction phase,including contract management.Specialized experience in building rehabilitation and restoration,design for academic environments and computing centers,integrated lighting design. Awards: Master Plan Competition for mixed use development,Reston,VA New Jersey Multi-family Energy Efficient Housing Design-Build Competition Constructed Projects: $5 million,30,000 sf.Library-Hood College,Frederick,MD $4.2 million,Winants Hall Rehabilitation and Exterior Historic Restoration-Rutgers University,NJ $0.8 million,Churchill Hall Adaptive Reuse-Southern New England College,Springfield,MA $10 million,Gateway International Office Complex,Phases I&II,Baltimore,MD $1.2 million Prudential Insurance Company Training Center-Ft.Washington,PA $0.5 million Private residence,swimming pool structure and additions-Andover,NJ Allegheny County Community College,Pittsburgh,PA 1982-1983 Faculty member in the Energy Technology Program Carnegie-Mellon University-Pittsburgh,PA-Department of Architecture 1980-1981 Research Associate. US-DOE Inner City Housing Case Study and Demonstration Project,Retrofit and Rehabilitation Study. Project showcased user-oriented advanced design and construction techniques applied in the Manchester neighborhood of Pittsburgh. Award- Progressive Architecture Citation for Applied Research. Mulach Building Systems,Inc.,Bridgeville,PA 1981-1983 Gunther Kaier Associates Architects,McMurray,PA 1975-1979 Professional Activities Appointee to the Vermont Outdoor Lighting Advisory Board,2007. Responsible for formulating recommendations to state policy regarding outdoor lighting ordinances. Vermont Green Building Network,Advisory Board. 2006-present Board of Directors,American Institute of Architects-Vermont Chapter. 2004 chapter president. Active in local event planning from 2002- 2009. Board of Directors for the environmental magazine/newsletter-Environmental Builder News,Brattleboro,VT. Illuminating Engineering Society of North America-Active in educational programs. IESNA—Advanced Energy Design Guide for Small Office Buildings,part of committee that developed the recommendations and wrote the 2004 published book. Northeast Sustainable Energy Association-Active for 20 years on regional and local Boards of Directors,and as an Advocate and Educator of Energy Conservation and Solar Design. Academic Background Carnegie-Mellon University-Pittsburgh,PA-Master of Science in Architecture/Advanced Building Studies with full scholarship award. 1981 Carnegie-Mellon University-Pittsburgh,PA-Bachelor of Architecture,Honors graduate,awarded Alpha Rho Chi medal 1977 MARC COMPANION 13 Maplewood Drive South Burlington,VT 05403 802-658-9152 ; Marcc2@comcast.net SKILLS SUMMARY: • Fifteen years of experience managing technical assistance programs and projects in dynamic and fast-paced environments. • Demonstrated experience with energy efficiency in municipal, residential, multi-family, commercial and community outreach areas. EDUCATION: MS, Natural Resources Planning, 2000, University of Vermont, Burlington,Vermont BS,Civil Engineering, 1987, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan RELEVANT EXPERIENCE: Energy Efficiency Specialist,Shelter Analytics, Huntington,Vermont. April 2012 to present. Consultant for an energy efficiency program targeted at condominium owners and associations. Assisted with program design and proposal development. Coordinating field outreach activities. Creating a toolbox to guide owners through technical resources, incentive programs, financing options and project management. Project Services Manager, Vermont Fuel Efficiency Partnership, Barre, Vermont. September 2011 to January 2012. Coordinated deep energy retrofit projects in multi-family buildings throughout Vermont. Managed projects in partnership with building owners, weatherization programs, contractors and program partners. Developed work scopes, energy upgrade specifications and bid documents. Energy efficiency and weatherization • City of South Burlington Energy Committee. February 2011 to present. • Business Energy Ambassador through Efficiency Vermont. March to November 2011. • Weatherization installer,Vermont Works for Women, Winooski,VT. July 2011. • Project Manager for energy efficiency upgrades at our home. August 2010 to January 2011. Program Coordinator, Pact, Inc,Juba,Sudan. July 2009 to June 2010(a one year contract). Managed $7.5M of technical assistance and capacity building programs in Southern Sudan. Responsibilities included contract administration, budget oversight, work plan implementation, operations and key performance indicator reporting. As a member of the Leadership Team, facilitated organizational development and improved operating procedures for an organization with 150 staff. Sudan Program Director, NESEI, (now called Africa EL1),Yei,Sudan.August 2008 to May 2009. Led an international team to develop and implement innovative education programs in Southern Sudan. Managed daily operations,supervised staff and facilitated growth into new markets and program areas. Project Manager, ARD> (now called Tetra Tech ARD), Burlington,VT. October 2003 to June 2008. Managed $65M of US Government technical assistance contracts. Coordinated administrative, logistic and technical support to complex projects worldwide. Monitored work plan implementation and the completion of deliverables. Daily responsibilities included overseeing contract compliance, budgets, human resources,subcontracts, procurement, and reporting. Marc Companion,page 2 Education Coordinator,Ocean Arks International, Burlington Vermont.June 1998 to September 2003. Developed environmental education and outreach programs nationwide. Advised and trained clients on green technologies, project design and implementation.Activities included: • Green Design Consultant. Advised on passive solar design and restorative landscape design for an Eco-village at Berea College. Secured a $200,000 contract to engineer and build an on-site ecological wastewater treatment and water reuse system for the project. • Project Manager. Intervale Living Machine Facility, a Department of Energy funded research and outreach facility to explore value-added technologies considered for Burlington's EcoPark. • Small business entrepreneur — educational ecosystems. Created a small business that included product design, marketing,sales,and customer support. Founding Member and Board President, Local Motion, Burlington,Vermont. 2000 to 2005. Non-profit that promotes walking, bicycling and the facilities that make such travel safe and fun. Helped create the organization and develop its programs and administrative systems. Adjunct Instructor, University of Vermont—School of Natural Resources. 2003 and 2008. Taught the three-credit course "Ecological Design" for graduate and undergraduate students. Topics included green technologies, environmental engineering and integrated design for sustainability. instructor,Yestermorrow Design/Build School,Warren,Vermont. 1999 to 2003. Taught one-week and two-day participatory workshops on sustainable design and green technologies. Expedition Leader-Kenya,World Youth for Communication and Conservation. July 1996. Conducted pre-trip orientation and in-country workshops for 20 Vermont high school students on a 3- 1/2 week community and environmental service program in Kenya. Team Leader, Marsabit(Kenya) Development Program, InterAid-Kenya. August 1991 to May 1994. Directed all technical and administrative activities for a $1.2 million infrastructure and environmental conservation program in northern Kenya. Managed budgets and daily operations. Supervised 20 staff. Technical experience in this position included: • Civil Engineer and Project Management Specialist. Designed, rehabilitated and built rural and urban water supply and waste treatment systems. • Natural Resources Management Specialist. Designed and implemented a community-based program to promote land-use planning and environmental conservation around a national forest. US Peace Corps Volunteer in Kenya. Civil Engineer. June 1989 to August 1991. Civil Engineer, FitzPatrick-Llewellyn Inc.,Williston,Vermont. June 1987 to May 1989. References available upon request southburlington VERMONT June 11, 2012 Mr. Nicholas Germanos, HQ ACC/A&PS 129 Andrews St., Suite 332 Langley AFB, VA 23665-2269 Re: South Burlington,Vermont, City Council F-35A Basing Response Dear Mr. Germanos: First and foremost,we all members of the South Burlington City Council want to be absolutely clear that we express our very strong support for and appreciation of the men and women of VTANG for their service in defense of the nation, their dedication and their, and their families', sacrifices on behalf of all of us. For the reasons cited below, on Monday, May 21, 2012 South Burlington City Council voted 4-1 (Grecor, Dooley, Engels, Riehle - aye and Mackenzie - no), to oppose the bed-down of the F-35s at the Vermont City Councilors have an obligation to question developments, including military developments,that may impact our communities and we have an equal obligation to offer comments about such matters. As Councilors we feel we must be most concerned about the impacts on our environment and community and not on the mission of the military. While economic development is an important consideration we question the notion that there should be economic development at any cost. As elected representatives of our community we have many questions and concerns. Not least are safety issues related to a new aircraft being used in the heavily populated areas adjacent to Burlington International Airport. The United States Air Force F-35A Draft Operational Basing Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) dated March 2012, shows that Burlington Air National Guard (ANG) is not the preferred basing for the F-35A. It states that taking no action (that is not basing the F-35A) "would be the environmentally preferable alternative." (page 2-29) Because "the actual number and configuration of aircraft eventually based will be determined by national security factors extant at the time of delivery...." (page 2-25) the South Burlington City Council is basing our assessment of the environmental impact of Scenario 2. The DEIS cites "potential adverse environmental consequences, burdens on the resource, or issues with the resource" for Land Use, Socioeconomics, Community Facilities &Public Services, and Transportation. It additionally cites "unavoidable adverse environmental impact" on Noise, Land Use, and Environmental Justice. (page ES-62) The data presented in the DEIS detailed a negative impact on the lives of our residents in the areas of: Noise,Air Quality, Safety, Land Use, Socioeconomics, Environmental Justice/Protection of Children, Community Facilities and Public Services, Ground Traffic and Transportation, Climate Change, Cumulative Effects and Irreversible Commitment of Resources. We will address each area individually. 1. Noise "Under both scenarios,the overall area affected by noise levels of 65 decibel (dB) Day-Night Average Sound Level (DNL) or greater would increase as would residential land use subject to noise levels 65 to 85 dB DNL. Some residential areas would be newly subject to noise above 65 dB DNL." (ES-10) Under baseline conditions (NOTE: It is unclear which baseline conditions are being used for this assessment.) 1,963 land use areas are affected currently. Basing the F-35A would increase this by 672 to a total of 2,635 land areas. 296 additional acres would be included within the 65 to 85 dB DNL. (Table BR3.10-2, page BR4-61) Under baseline conditions, 3,812 people are affected. Basing the F-35A would increase this by 2,863 more people for a total of 6,675 people. Under baseline conditions, 1,578 households are currently affected. Basing the F-35A would increase this by 1,366 households for a total of 2,944 households. (Table 6-6, page ES-11) The Part 150 2011 Forecast Condition Map contours currently include 1,856 acres as being affected. This would increase under F-35A basing to 2,635 acres. Residential acreage would increase from 103 to 667 acres. (page BR4-62). COMMENT/CONCERN: Because the contour maps do not delineate with much specificity the local roads, it is impossible to determine the actual location of the homes that will be affected. QUESTION/REQUEST: Why were the source materials for the maps not included? We request we be given whatever data points and/or geographic coordinates used to construct the contour lines in the Burlington area. A. Maximum Sound Levels and Sound Exposure Levels Table C-1 on page C-8 lists the representative maximum sound levels for five aircraft. And Table C-2 on page C-19 lists the representative sound exposure levels for five aircraft. However, the F-35A is not listed on either table. COMMENT/CONCERN: Because of lack of data, it is impossible to make an assessment as to the sound levels and exposure for the F-35A. QUESTION: Why is the F-35A not included on these tables? B. Noise Impact- Community Reaction A DNL of 55 dB is a level "requisite to protect public health and welfare with an adequate margin of safety." (page C-14) A DNL of 75 dB "is the lowest level at which adverse healthy effects could be credible." It is stated that the DNL"correlates well with annoyance" (page C-12); and that "DNL does not represent the sound level heard at any particular time, but rather represents the total sound exposure. DNL accounts for the sound level of individual noise events,the duration of those events, and the number of events."(page C-13) A DNL of 65 dB "is most commonly used for noise planning purposes and represents a compromise between community impact and the need for activities like aviation which do cause noise." "Areas exposed to DNL above 65 dB are generally not considered suitable for residential use." COMMENT/CONCERN: 2,635 acres of local land will be exposed to DNL above 65 dB. C. Noise Effects on Classrooms The DEIS cites five sources (U.S. and foreign) and their respective noise level criteria for classrooms. The noise levels (minimum acceptable in classrooms) from a low of 30 dB to a high of 55dBs. (page C-22) COMMENT/CONCERN: The noise levels of the F-35A in the Chamberlin Elementary School would be 68/70 dB DNL. D. Noise Effects on Sleep Disturbance "Sleep, or the lack of quality sleep, has the potential to affect health and concentration, although the relationship between noise levels and sleep disturbance is complex and not fully understood." (page 3-9 and BR4-23) The DEIS uses USEPA criteria to evaluate sleep disturbance, and states that an outdoor DNL of 65 dB would interfere with sleep. (page C-23) "Sleep disturbance is a concern for communities exposed to nighttime noise. The DEIS analysis uses metrics to calculate the probability of being awakened between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m., probably because the DEIS states that F-35A flights will only occur during the day (between 7:00 am and 10:00 pm), and therefore sleep will not be disturbed. COMMENT/CONCERN: This fails to consider and assess the impact on the many area shift-workers (first responders, firefighters, police, hospital workers, food preparers, ferry operators, etc) who sleep during the day. QUESTION/REQUEST: Why were shift workers not considered in the assessment? We request analysis on the disruption to sleep during daytime hours as well as nighttime. E. Noise Effects on Hearing Loss Citing studies done in laboratories, the DEIS reports from these studies that "repeated exposure to military low-altitude flight noise with Lmax greater than 114 dB, especially if the noise level increases rapidly, may have the potential to cause noise induced hearing loss in humans." The DEIS then goes on to say that since airport neighbors will not remain outside 24 hours a day, this is of little concern. COMMENT/CONCERN: This does not take into consideration outdoor construction workers and farmers in the close vicinity. F. Noise on Non-auditory Health Effects The DEIS cites studies showing correlations between noise exposure and cardiovascular problems, birth weight, and mortality rates. Other studies cited conclude, "Intrusive noise can act as a stress-provoking stimulus." And psychological stresses from noise may cause a physiological stress reaction that could result in impaired health. Further studies suggest that noise exposure may cause hypertension and other stress-related effects in adults. (pages C-27 and C-28) COMMENT/CONCERN: Noise may cause cardiovascular problems, birth weight, mortality rates, and physiological stress reaction that could result in impaired health. G. Noise Effects on Children The DEIS states, "there has not been a tremendous amount of research in the area of aircraft noise effects on children. The research reviewed does suggest that environments with sustained high background noise can have variable effects, including noise effects on learning and cognitive abilities, and reports of various noise-related physiological changes." (page C-30) They then further admit, "Physiological effects in children exposed to aircraft noise and the potential for health effects have also been the focus of limited investigation." (page C-32) COMMENT/CONCERN: Noise may affect learning and cognitive abilities, and physiological changes. H. Noise Effects on Domestic Animals and Wildlife "Noise from aircraft operations would increase, but the wildlife in the area of Burlington IAP have become habituated to it." (ES-12) The DEIS makes an assessment on the impact of noise on animals; but also states that there is limited to no research to back up their assessments. The DEIS states at the outset and then repeats again and again "there appears to have been little concerted effort in developing quantitative comparisons of aircraft noise effects on normal auditory characteristics." (page C-32) "Behavioral effects have been relatively well described, but the larger ecological context issues, and the potential for drawing conclusions regarding effects on populations, has not been well developed." (page C-33) They cite conflicting data on the noise effects on cattle, horses, swine, and domestic fowl. They further state that studies have not been done on turkeys, wildlife, such as marine mammals, small terrestrial mammals, reptiles, amphibians, and carnivorous mammals. "The effects of overflight noise on fish, reptiles, and amphibians have been poorly studied...." (page C-45) And regarding birds, they say".... the long-term significance of noise-related impacts is less clear." (page C-40) The effect of noise on animals is stated this way in the Summary section: "The relationships between physiological effects and how species interact with their environments have not been thoroughly studied. Therefore, the larger ecological context issues regarding physiological effects of jet noise (if any) and resulting behavioral changes are not well understood." (page C-46) COMMENT/CONCERN: The relationships between physiological effects and how species interact with their environments have not been thoroughly studied. Therefore, the larger ecological context issues regarding physiological effects of jet noise and resulting behavioral changes are not well understood. I. Noise Effects on Property Values "Property within a noise zone (or Accident Potential Zone) may be affected by the availability of federally guaranteed loans. According to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Federal Housing Administration (FHA), and Veterans Administration (VA) guidance, sites are acceptable for program assistance, subsidy, or insurance for housing in noise zones of less than 65 dB DNL, and sites are conditionally acceptable with special approvals and noise attenuation in noise zones greater than 65 dB DNL." "...HUD, FHA, and VA recommend sound attenuation for housing in the higher noise zones and written disclosures to all prospective buyers or lessees of property within a noise zone (or Accident Potential Zone)." (page C-47) Some studies conclude, "that decreases in property values usually range from 0.5 to 2 percent per dB increase of cumulative noise exposure." (page C-47). "Areas exposed to DNL above 65 dB are generally not considered suitable for residential use." (page C-14) COMMENT/CONCERN: 2,944 homes will now be considered unsuitable for residential use. QUESTIONS: Will the Air Force provide financial reimbursement for City funded mitigation projects? Will the Air Force provide financial reimbursement to the City for the loss of tax revenue due to the loss of homes and home values? J. Noise Exposure "These data indicate that the F-35A would generate generally higher noise levels than the legacy aircraft it is replacing except in afterburner take-off." "The data used for baseline civil and commercial aircraft noise conditions were derived from the updated Burlington IAP Part 150 study (HMMH 2006); baseline F-16 data were provided by Burlington AGS in 2010 and were based on actual F-16 operations." (page BR4-18) QUESTIONS: Which baseline data was used for comparison? Since the Burlington IAP data is not the same as the ANG data, to what baseline were the noise levels of the F- 35A compared? Specifically, was the noise level of 70 dB at Chamberlin School using the incorrect Burlington IAP baseline, or the actual F-16 baseline? "About 81 percent of these proposed operations would consist of departures and arrivals; the remaining 19 percent would involve pattern work in the vicinity of the airport." "Figure BR3.2-3 shows the 65 to 85 dB DNL contour bands for Burlington AGS ANG Scenario 2. Baseline contours are also presented for comparison purposes." (page BR4-30) COMMENT/CONCERN: It is especially concerning that 20 of the 22 representative locations near the airport would be at or above the 65 dB DNL level. QUESTION/REQUEST: What baseline data is being used? We request coordinates so that an accurate assessment of the streets and roads inside the contour areas can be clearly identified. K. Potential for Hearing Loss "Potential for Hearing Loss (PHL) applies to people living in high noise environments where they can experience long-term (40 years) hearing effects. The threshold for assessing PHL is exposure to noise levels greater than 80 dB DNL." "Under baseline conditions, portions of residential areas adjacent to Burlington IAP are exposed to noise levels of 80 dB DNL and greater." (page BR4-24) QUESTIONS: Which baseline conditions are being used for this assessment? How many residential areas will be subject to noise levels of 80 dB or greater? 2. Air Quality "Scenario 2 would involve decreases in four of the seven pollutants. For the other categories, minor increases would result." (ES-12) "Impacts of the proposed action can be evaluated in the context of existing local air quality, baseline emissions for the installation and in the region, and relative contribution of the proposed action to regional emissions. The state of Vermont has adopted the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and no separate state standards exist; therefore, regional air quality is measured in comparison to these standards. Air quality in the Champlain Valley AQCR has been designated as either in "attainment," "unclassified/attainment", or"better than national standards" with the NAAQC for all pollutants (40 CFR 81.346); therefore, no conformity analysis is required." (page BR4-38) QUESTIONS: Does this mean, in simple terms, that because our area currently has clean air, an analysis of the possible additional pollutants from the F-35A was not done? When will another assessment of air quality be done were the F-35A to be based in South Burlington? 3. Safety "The F-35A is a new type of aircraft; historical trends show that mishap rates of all types decrease the longer an aircraft is operational and as flight crews and maintenance personnel learn more about the aircraft's capabilities and limitations...." (ES-12) The DEIS states, "...there have not been enough flight hours to accurately depict the specific safety record for this new aircraft. Therefore, the analysis used similar fighter aircraft safety records." (page 3-29) "RPZs (Runway Protection Zones) are rectangular zones extending outward from the ends of active runways at commercial airports and delineate those areas recognized as having the greatest risk of aircraft mishaps, most of which occur during take-off or landing. Development restrictions associated with RPZs are intended to preclude incompatible land use activities from being established in these areas. The City of Burlington,Vermont utilizes the FAA's airport land-use compatibility guidelines, and as such, the RPZs have allowed development to be compatible with airport operations." (page BR4-44). "Current land uses within the RPZs are industrial, commercial, and open space." (page BR 4-60) QUESTIONS: Does "have allowed development to be compatible,"mean that there are populated facilities within the RPZ? Are any residential homes within the RPZ? If so, what is the safety risk to the individuals living and/or working within these RPZs? "As the F-35A becomes more operationally mature, the aircraft mishap rate is expected to become comparable with a similarly sized aircraft with a similar mission." "In order to provide a broader perspective on the potential mishap rate for a new technology like the F-35A, the following discussion refers to the mishap rates for the introduction of the F-22A (Raptor),the latest jet fighter in the DoD inventory. The F-22 was introduced in 2002.... This new technology is akin to the F- 35A in that it is a new airframe with similar flight capabilities. With that in mind, it is possible that projected mishap rates for the F-35A may be comparable to the historical rates of the F-22A." (page BR4-46) Table BR3.4-1 shows 6 total Class A mishaps for the F-22A in 8 years. QUESTIONS: To date, what are the number of Class A, Class B, Class C, and Class D mishaps for the F-22A? What is the current status regarding the safety of the F-22A? How does the fact that ANG pilots are currently refusing to fly the F-22A because of safety concerns about the aircraft, impact on the safety projections of the F-35A? "The F-35A will have the capability to jettison fuel for emergency situations and would follow procedures similar to those currently required by legacy aircraft." (page BR4-47) The F-35A carries 18,000 pounds of fuel, compared with 7,000 pounds of fuels for the F-16. Current and projected procedures are to jettison fuel over Lake Champlain. QUESTIONS: How will the fuel be jettisoned? Will the fuel be in self-contained pods, similar to the F-16? Will the fuel be in liquid form?Lake Champlain is the area's source for potable water. What effect would 18,000 pounds of F-35A fuel have on the water supply to the residents? 4. Land Use According to the DEIS, guidelines produced by a Federal Interagency Committee (DoD, Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and the Veterans Administration), state that"residential land uses normally are not compatible with outdoor DNL values above 65 dB...." (page C-15) COMMENT/CONCERN: Table C-4 appears to be a representation of compatibility of occupancy in regards to various land uses. However, the table is confusing and seems to be contradictory. Under the residential area, in the column for 65-69 dB, the block listing"A" seems to indicate that"land use and related structures are generally compatible"; but the added note (11) to (A) says residential use "is discouraged in DNL 65-69 and strongly discouraged in DNL 70-74 dB." The table also conflicts with information in the text in other sections of the DEIS. QUESTIONS: Is the table in error? What is this table intending to convey related to residential uses regarding DNL values above 65 dB? Additionally, on this same table, it clearly indicates, "land use and related structures are not compatible and should be prohibited" in the "Clear Zone" and "APZ I" and "APZ II." However, commercial airports are not given APZ (Accident Protection Zone) designations. They are given Runway Protection Zone or RPZ designations. (Vol I page 3-26) COMMENT/CONCERN: Table C-4 on page C-16 in Volume II does not appear to represent the accident potential for commercial airports, such as the Burlington airport. QUESTION/REQUEST: We request information applicable to our area and situation be provided. "The Airport currently has FAA funding to acquire residential properties within the 65 DNL contour shown in the 2011 Forecast Condition Map. The baseline contours depicting current noise levels equal to or greater than 65 dB DNL extend over the cities of South Burlington, Burlington, and Winooski,Vermont." (page BR4-61) "The land use analysis compares the proposed noise contours for each scenario to: 1) baseline noise contours,which show the existing noise environment, and 2) Part 150 2011 Forecast Condition Map contours, used by the City of Burlington for planning purposes." (page BR4-62) COMMENT/CONCERN: No accurate assessment of the specific streets and roads can be made with the maps and figures provided in the DEIS. QUESTIONS/REQUEST: What baseline data is being used—the incorrect noise levels used by the Burlington IAP, or the actual noise levels provided by the ANG? Request coordinates or other specific data points in order to decipher/understand the contour comparison on Figure BR3.10-2 and Figure BR3.10-3. 5. Socioeconomics "...an additional 266 military persons would be required to support 6 more F-35A aircraft." (page BR4-6) COMMENT/CONCERN: South Burlington has little to no affordable housing available. In fact, many affordable houses are being demolished because of current airport noise. Therefore new personnel would have to commute farther distances to their workplace. This will have an associated negative effect on traffic, road conditions, road infrastructure, and pollution. QUESTION/REQUEST: Will the Air Force provide financial assistance to the City to mitigate these negative effects and/or to subsidize new housing elsewhere? Cultural Resources The DEIS mentions, "Cultural resources are historic and traditional cultural properties that reflect our heritage and are considered important to a culture, a subculture, or a community for scientific, traditional, religious, or any other reason." (page 3-34) COMMENT/CONCERN: Tourism is a part of the Vermont culture, and integral to our economy. QUESTION/REQUEST: Why was the effect on tourism not considered in the DEIS? 6. Environmental Justice/Protection of Children "As the data demonstrate, the percentage of minority populations affected under baseline conditions already exceeds the state average of 3.9. This existing issue would be slightly exacerbated under ANG Scenarios 1 and 2.... Implementation of ANG Scenario 1 or 2 would increase the percentage of low-income people above the state average." (ES-13) COMMENT/CONCERN: DEIS used incorrect 2000 US Census data for this assessment. South Burlington's population increased from 2000 to 2010 by 29 percent; not 13 percent as indicated on page BR4-72. In some sections, the most recent U.S. Census 2010 data is used. In other sections 12-year-old U.S. Census data (2000) is being used, some of which is incorrect. For the analysis of environmental justice, the older data is used. This may result in a false conclusion that fewer minority and low-income communities, and children are affected. QUESSTION/REQUEST: We request that current 2010 U.S. Census population data be used to assess impact on our population. And we request that the correct 2000 U.S. Census data be used; and that recalculations be made based on accurate Census data. Minority and Low-Income Populations "The total population affected by noise levels equal to or greater than 65 dB DNL would increase by 48 percent." "When a comparison is made, the increases would be considered to affect these populations (minority and low-income populations) disproportionately...." (page BR4-77) COMMENT/CONCERN: U.S. Census data from 2000 is being used to assess the effect on minority and low-income populations and children. Even using 12-year old data, the DEIS still shows that the total population affected increases by 48 percent. However, the U.S. Census data from 2000 being used is incorrect. The correct Census data shows that the population in South Burlington has increased over 29 percent. Therefore the overall number of persons affected, as cited in the DEIS- 6,675 is incorrect. Likewise, the number of minority and low-income persons and children cited as being affected is also likely incorrect. QUESTION/REQUESTS: We request accurate U.S. Census data be used. We request an updated assessment for all of these population categories. "Children may suffer disproportionately more environmental health and safety risks than adults because of various factors such as: children's neurological, digestive, immunological, and other bodily systems are still developing; children eat more food, drink more fluids, and breath more air in proportion to their body weight than adults; children's behavior patterns may make them more susceptible to accidents because they are less ale to protect themselves; and children's size and weight may diminish their protection from standard safety features." (page 3-43) COMMENT/CONCERN: On page BR4-75 it states, "In 2000, the number of children under the age of 18 living in the City of South Burlington was 3,415 (22 percent of the population). Chittenden County had 24 percent of the population under the age of 18 in 2000." QUESTION/REQUEST: We request this information be re-checked to insure that updated correct Census data is being used to assess the number of children that will be affected by the basing of the F-35A. 7. Community Facilities and Public Services F-35A basing would result in a 24 percent increase (2,576) in population from the baseline (266 personnel and 361 dependents). (page BR 4-80) COMMENT/CONCERN: This population increase will demand city services and natural resources, to include potable water, wastewater treatment, natural gas, electricity, solid waste management, schools, city administrative services, supporting infrastructure, etc) QUESTION/REQUEST: Will the Air Force provide financial assistance to the City to meet these additional demands? Environmental Consequences "Water consumption would be expected to increase...." "Wastewater generation would be expected to increase...." "Electricity consumption would be expected to increase...." "Natural gas consumption would be expected to increase...." "Proposed increases in personnel and equipment use under ANG Scenario 2 would also contribute to an increase in solid waste generation." (pages BR 4-81 to BR 4-84) QUESTION/REQUEST: Will the Air Force provide financial assistance to the City to meet these additional demands? 8. Ground Traffic and Transportation "During UTA weekends, traffic would be expected to increase by 366 trips per day. The proposed increase in employment and associated travel demand would potentially increase peak period travel demand by 24 percent." (page BR 4-84) "A 24 percent increase in personnel would add to traffic volume for ANG Scenario 2, especially on "Guard weekends." This level would exceed the primary (Level of Service) LOS threshold, but not the secondary and more critical threshold." "LOS is a term used to qualitatively describe the operating conditions of a roadway based on factors such as speed, travel time, maneuverability, delay, and safety." A represents the best and F represents the worst. (page 3-44) COMMENT/CONCERN: This level of traffic would exceed the primary Level of Service (LOS) threshold. 9. Cumulative Effects and Irreversible Commitment of Resources Climate Change "...the analysis must also assess how climate change might impact the proposed action and mission. Then it must identify what adaptation strategies could be developed in response. This is a global issue for DoD." (page BR4-42) "For Burlington AGS, adaptation issues requiring evaluation and consideration could revolve around changes in winter and summer temperatures, as well as drought and air quality conditions." "Predicted increases in average temperatures and longer, hotter summers might require the ANG to shift training and maintenance schedules to percent excessive "wear and tear" on aircraft, equipment, and personnel." "...overall warmer temperatures may increase demand for air conditioning and power...." "Predictions from the report suggest that the Northeast could face droughts and scarcity of water supplies. Reduced availability of freshwater is likely to occur, with implications for the base and communities in the Northeast. Water is essential for maintenance and personnel, so strategies dealing with drought would need to be implemented." (page BR4-43) QUESTIONS/REQUESTS: Would mission profiles, training, and maintenance changes result in different flight times and patterns? If so, how would that affect the noise assessments on the local area? What priority would be given to mission requirements over the local population in terms of access to fresh water, power, and other natural resources? What strategies are envisioned to deal with drought conditions and a scarcity of fossil fuels and water? General Concerns BASELINE DATA The "baseline 65 dB DNL Contour Area at Burlington AGS" (page ES-10) was unknown to the City of South Burlington until the publication of the EIS on April 13, 2012. According to Robert McEwing of the Burlington International Airport (BIA), the existence of this alternative contour was unknown to BIA officials until only a few days before DEIS publication. BIA administers an FAA-approved and funded Part 150 Noise Compatibility Program (NCP) under which BIA purchases and removes homes located within the 65 dB DNL Contour Area established for its NCP program. The area within BIA's 65 dB DNL boundary is significantly smaller than that within the baseline 65 dB DNL Contour Area depicted in the DEIS. Since the assessments of environmental impacts are based on a larger area,the overall increase in affected areas appears artificially lower than what the BIA and city residents (and the FAA) have been using for years. COMMENT/CONCERN: Thus, there are two 65 dB DNL boundaries—one established by the FAA and one established for the DEIS. While the latter boundary may be technically correct, it is not the boundary upon which the FAA home buy-out program is based. Making comparisons based on the baseline 65 dB DNL Contour Area contained within the DEIS greatly reduces the perceived impact on land use of the two scenarios for basing the F-35A at Burlington AGS. REQUEST: We therefore request the DEIS be modified to include both 65 dB DNL boundaries, with an explanation of their separate sources and functions. In addition, we request that wherever the draft DEIS uses its baseline 65 dB DNL Contour Area in the determination of F-35A basing impacts in Burlington, that these same determinations be made using BIA's NCP 65 dB DNL boundary. PRECEDENT Where else in the country has the Air Force based high-decibel producing aircraft in which the 65 dB DNL contour area resulting from the basing added over 2800 individuals, including school-age children, low-income and minority groups to the population residing in the contour area? How were property values and property tax revenues affected? Did the schools in the contour area remain open? Did school staff leave the school? Did the population of the new aircraft basing change? If so, how? QUESTIONS/REQUEST: Please provide detailed case studies of these locations. If there have been no comparable basing situations, please provide the Air Force's rationale for putting forth a basing proposal that would generate such unprecedented impacts on the local population. What resources will the Air Force make available to the communities and their residents to prevent the negative impacts, whether anticipated or unanticipated, that may occur as a result of any basing of the F-35A? BASING IMPACTS The following summarizes the residential land use impacts of the basing proposals at the six sites under consideration (page ES-70). These percentages represent the land area affected by noise levels equal to or greater than 65 dB DNL. Burlington Hill Jacksonville McIntire Mountain Home Shaw Scen. 1 >52% <56% <92% No change No change <86% Scen. 2 >89% <24% <71% <100% No change <53% Scen. 3 NA >7% NA NA No change <4% COMMENT/CONCERN: As the data indicate, in only one other site and in only Scenario 3 at that site (Hill),would the basing of the F-35A at that location result in an increase in the residential land area included in the 65 dB DNL contour areas. The others are all either a decrease in the residential area affected or no change. Yet, for Burlington the result would be quite the opposite. REQUESTS: Please identify the specific factors and their scores or weights, including the methodologies used in measuring them and the science upon which the methodologies are based, for all environmental impacts included in the DEIS for each proposed basing location and show how these measurements or weights counterbalance the dramatic and negative human impact that would result from basing the F-35A at Burlington AGS. General Questions 1. Burlington AGS was selected as a "preferred" location prior to the DEIS. How was Burlington selected? In addition to mission, capability, cost, environment, and military judgment,what other (if any) criteria were used the selection process? What weights were given to each criterion? 2. According to the DEIS "Once the F-35A is operating at the selected base(s), the pilots will have either consistently flown the operational profiles defined in this DEIS or modified them to accommodate the unique qualities of the F-35A. At that time,the Air Force proposed to acquire actual F-35A acoustical data to validate the proposed impacts in an appropriate noise study un AICUZ." (page 2-43 and 2-44) What, if any, recourse does the local community have at that time, to challenge the continued basing of the F-35A, or request mitigation measures, including financial assistance,to accommodate the different impacts on the neighborhoods affected by the changes? 3. What is the probability that the F-35A mission or configuration or any other operational factors might change in the future? 4. The baseline conditions listed in the DEIS are not the same as the conditions presented to the Burlington IAP and the FAA in the past; and the baseline 65 dB DNL listed in the DEIS does not match the existing 65 dB DNL currently being used for the FAA buyout program. Will the Air Force assist in correcting this information with the FAA? 5. On page BR4-12 it states, "analysis of baseline conditions provides a benchmark that enables decision-makers to evaluate the environmental consequences of the proposed beddown alternatives at each base." Was inaccurate or incomplete data given to decision-makers? The numerical and percentage changes from baseline to F-35A were incorrect, as was the U.S. Census data. 6. The DEIS states that the Air Force will "Continue to work with Burlington IAP and the City of South Burlington to support purchase and relocation through the Part 150 process and to assess noise abatement measures." (page 2-45) How will this occur? Given a recent statement by the Burlington IAP that they do not intend to add more houses to the FAA buy-out program,what other measures will the Air Force take to purchase and relocate the additional houses affected by the greater noise levels of the F-35A? What action will the Air Force take to assess noise abatement measures? 7. The DEIS states, "Other unavoidable adverse impacts may be identified during public and agency review of the DEIS which cannot be mitigated to an acceptable level. If such unavoidable adverse impacts are identified, they would be detailed for decision-makers in the Final EIS and ROD." (page 2-45) What affect does detailing the adverse impacts to decision-makers have on the decision to base the F-35A? Would the local area be informed on these unavoidable adverse impacts? What factors would be considered `non-acceptable.' 8. Is it likely that when data from the F-35A is available, the environmental impacts will change? 9. What is the probability that the impacts will be more severe? 10. When more accurate data is available,will another DEIS be issued containing the correct data? 11. Will the public be given an opportunity to comment on the corrected data? Errors in the DEIS We need to highlight some significant Air Force and DEIS errors and mistakes. • The baseline data used in the DEIS differed from what has been used as "baseline" for six years by the FAA and BIA officials. The FAA based their home buy-out program on Air Force assessments of the noise level of the F- 16. The Air Force assessments were wrong....by over 70 percent. • The DEIS used incorrect 2000 US Census data for this assessment. By using incorrect data,their findings were off by at least 16 percent. • The DEIS used 12-year old Census data for assessments related to the impact on children, low-income and minority populations,which may have resulted in underestimating the effect on these population categories. • F-16 aircraft configuration changes resulted in dramatic increases to the noise level. Yet no local officials were alerted to this change; and it appears that the FAA was also not informed on the noise increases. We've experienced first-hand the impact of incorrect assessments regarding the F- 16,which has been operationally deployed for ten years. This does not portend well for the residents of South Burlington and neighboring areas should changes in mission profiles, training, maintenance, and aircraft configuration be made in the future to the F-35A. Summary: An argument can be made that our comments, concerns, and questions in relation to the DEIS are moot. This is because, some or all of the environmental impacts detailed in the DEIS, may bear no resemblance to the true environmental impacts, since ....to quote from the DEIS (page ES-61) "Because the F-35A is a new aircraft that is under development, some data normally used to predict noise,air quality,and safety conditions (bold added) cannot be obtained at this time. The data used in this DEIS represent the best available information on the aircraft components engine, flight characteristics, training airspace, and other requirements." Nonetheless,we are dealing with the information which is available to us and,based on the data, South Burlington is not a good choice and it should not be the preferred choice for basing the F-35s. Conclusion: As representatives of the citizens of South Burlington,we must consider issues which are or are likely to be potentially harmful to our residents, neighborhoods and property values. This means we sometimes have to make difficult decisions, but that is our responsibility. It is a great deal easier for individuals not impacted by this issue to take the position that the F-35 basing is good for the many if not for the few. However, this is not our conclusion. We believe the following quotation, attributed to Hillel, represents our perspective: "If I am not for myself, who will be? If I am only for myself,what am I? If not now,when? The four (of five) members of City Council who will sign this document believe the most compelling position for us to take is that we have to stand up for South Burlington and South Burlingtonians who will be impacted if F-35s are based here. If we are not for South Burlington, who will be? Respectfully submitted by the following Council Members: Rosanne Greco, Chair Helen Riehle,Vice-Chair Paul Engels Sandra Dooley Copies to: United States Senators Patrick Leahy and Bernie Sanders Congressman Peter Welch Governor Peter Shumlin Chittenden County Senators Ashe, Baruth, Fox, Lyons, Miller and Snelling South Burlington Representatives Head, Kupersmith, Munger and Pugh CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION A RESOLUTION TO TRANSFER APPROPRIATIONS WHEREAS, Section 13-1307 of the Charter of the City of South Burlington states, "At the request of the manager or school superintendent and within the last three months of the budget year, the council and board of school directors, respectively, may by resolution transfer any unencumbered appropriation balance or portion thereof within the budgets from one department, office or agency under their jurisdiction, to another."; and, WHEREAS, there is currently within the FY 2012 budget over$40,000 in the"Contingency" line in the General Fund Budget not yet appropriated; and, WHEREAS, it had been the intent of the City to spend $40,000 of the Contingency line in the budget to help pay for the unanticipated replacement of the Fire Station 1/City Hall HVAC system; and, WHEREAS, the remaining cost for the replacement of the HVCA system will be paid out of a grant and Fiscal Year 2013 budgeted appropriation; and, WHEREAS, the city does not expect that the actual expenditure of funds for the replacement of the HVAC will occur prior to the end of Fiscal Year 2012; and, WHEREAS, the City Manager requests the transfer of$40,000 from budget line"Contingency Fund"in Section 100-1- 3202 ("Administrative Services") of the Fiscal Year 2012 General Fund Budget. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the South Burlington City Council approves the transfer of$40,000 from the Fiscal Year 2012 Budgeted General Fund Contingency Line and transfers that amount to Fund 315 the Fire Department Building Improvement Special Fund; and FURTHER, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council formally identifies Fund 315 as the Fire Department Building Improvement Special Fund; and FURTHER, BE IT RESOLVED, that the $40,000 Council approves being transferred to Fund 315 shall not be spent for any purpose other than the replacement of the Fire Station 1/City Hall HVAC without approval of the City Council; and FURTHER, BE IT RESOLVED, the transfer of funds shall occur prior to June 30, 2012. APPROVED this day of June, 2012. SOUTH BURLINGTON CITY COUNCIL Rosanne Greco, Chair Pam Mackenzie, Clerk Helen Riehle, Vice Chair Sandra Dooley Paul Engels Resolution to Create An Interim Zoning Reserve Fund Whereas, the City Charter, section 13-310 (7) states,"The city council and the school board,by their own actions, may establish reserve funds to pay for public improvements,replacement of equipment,and planned or unplanned operating expenditures. Monies to be deposited in any fund shall be included in a city or school district budget and shall not be excluded in calculating the net cost of operation pursuant to subsection 1309(a)of this chapter. Reserve funds shall be kept in separate accounts and invested in the same manner as other public funds. The city council and the school board may, from time to time, expend monies in those funds for purposes for which they were established without voter approval."; and, Whereas,the City has identified a number of expenses surrounding the Interim Zoning(IZ) Bylaw approved by Council on February 21, 2012; and, Whereas, the City Council's approval on the Interim Zoning Bylaw occurred approximately one month after Council had approved the Fiscal Year 2013 budget; and, Whereas,because the Interim Zoning Bylaw was approved after the FY 2013 budget was approved by Council none of the now-anticipated IZ expenses were included in the FY 2013 budget; and, Whereas, it is anticipated that there will be a surplus in the FY 2012 General Fund budget; and, WHEREAS, Section 13-1307 of the Charter of the City of South Burlington states, "At the request of the manager or school superintendent and within the last three months of the budget year, the council and board of school directors,respectively, may by resolution transfer any unencumbered appropriation balance or portion thereof within the budgets from one department, office or agency under their jurisdiction, to another."; and, Whereas, it is fiscally prudent to transfer some of the anticipated FY 2012 General Fund Surplus into a Reserve Fund so that money is available to spend on now-anticipated IZ expenses. Now,Therefore, Be it Resolved, that the City Council hereby creates a Reserve Fund whose purpose is to fund Interim Zoning expenses necessitated by the IZ Bylaw: and, Furthermore,Be It Resolved, that all money placed is this Reserve Fund shall only be disbursed for the uses identified in this Resolution. Expenditures from the balance of the reserve fund will only be made with the approval of a basic majority of the South Burlington City Council at an officially Warned City Council meeting and recorded in minutes. Furthermore,Be It Resolved, that the City Council of South Burlington approves the transfer of $75,000 from the Fiscal Year 2012 Budgeted General Fund and transfers that amount to the Interim Zoning Reserve Fund. Dated the 11 th day of June, 2012 City Council Rosanne Greco, Chair Helen Riehle, Vice Chair Pam Mackenzie, Clerk Sandra Dooley Paul Engels June 11, 2012 To: South Burlington City Council From: Joe Randazzo Re: Proposed anti-idling ordinance Dear City Council Members: In South Burlington,we have a great variety of mixed-use zoning. Hotels, motels, and industrial parks abut residential areas. The fouled air and noise pollution from idling vehicles is a serious threat to our citizens. We currently have no laws to prohibit any vehicle from running constantly,the lone exception being Vermont Act 48 which prohibits school buses and other vehicles from idling on school premises. This act is very welcome for the health of our children, but protection should be extended to all our citizens. Good air quality is important for everyone. There are many reasons why an anti-idling ordinance is important to South Burlington. 1 — Fossil fuel emissions from vehicle combustion is the major contributor to greenhouse gasses causing global climate change. 2 - Dozens of studies show that particulate matter(PM) such as those found in diesel exhaust lead to increased hospital admissions for respiratory diseases including asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, pneumonia, heart disease, and up to 60,00o premature deaths annually in the United States. 3 — Increased ozone levels from idling pollutants lower the immune system's ability to fight off bacterial infections and can cause permanent lung damage. Seniors are especially vulnerable. 4 — The United States Environmental Protection Agency(EPA)has determined that diesel exhaust is a likely human carcinogen. According to the Clean Air Task Force,Vermont spent an estimated $78 million in 2010 on health care costs related to diesel exhaust. 5 — South Burlington businesses and organizations will save money by eliminating unnecessary idling of vehicles. One company, Green Mountain Coffee Roasters, in several Vermont locations, saves approximately $20,00o per year in fuel costs as a result of its idling-reduction policy. 6 — Petroleum-based gasoline and diesel fuel are nonrenewable resources and should be conserved when possible. Please review the proposed ordinance. It is a compilation of Bill S.81 and Bill H.97 as passed by the Vermont legislature. The bills were stalled before going to the Senate due to intense lobbying from the transportation industry, and are still awaiting passage. Also included in part are elements from City of Burlington ordinance Article III, Section 20-55, October 9, 1990, for city-owned vehicles,the Town of Putney,Vermont Anti Idling Resolution from 2007, and Regulations for the Control of Air Pollution from the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Health Bureau of Air Quality Control. Additional suggested elements were added that are particular to South Burlington. Our city is one of the Vermont communities participating in the Ten Percent Challenge to reduce greenhouse emissions. In 2008 alone, participants across the country have saved more than $1.1 billion in energy costs and reduced carbon dioxide emissions by more than seven million metric tons. This proposed anti-idling ordinance will increase our quality of life and help save the planet. Proposed South Burlington Anti-Idling Ordinance: 1 Subject: Conservation; motor vehicle operation; idling of vehicles. 2 Statement of purpose: This ordinance proposes to prohibit a motor 3 vehicle from idling while the motor vehicle is stopped for a period of time 4 in excess of five consecutive minutes in any 6o-minute period unless 5 otherwise exempted under rules as outlined below. 6 Section I. FINDINGS 7 (1) There is general scientific agreement that human-made emissions of 8 carbon dioxide and other greenhouses gases (GHGs), primarily from the 9 combustion of fossil fuels, are the major causes of global climate change. 10 (2) Motor vehicle exhaust and gasoline vapors are sources of nitrogen 11 oxides and volatile organic compounds. These compounds are precursors 12 to ground-level ozone,which can trigger a variety of health problems. 13 Dozens of studies link particulate matter (PM) such as those PMs found in 14 diesel exhaust to increased hospital admissions for respiratory diseases 15 including asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), 16 pneumonia, heart disease, emphysema, chest pain, coughing, and throat 17 irritation. PMs worsen bronchitis, lower the immune system's ability to 18 fight off bacterial infections in the respiratory system, cause permanent 19 lung damage, and up to 6o,000 premature deaths annually in the United 20 States. 1 1 (3) The United States Environmental Protection Agency(EPA) has 2 determined that diesel exhaust is a likely human carcinogen. According to 3 the Clean Air Task Force,Vermont spent an estimated $78 million in 2010 4 on health care costs related to diesel exhaust. 5 (4) If every driver of a motor vehicle in South Burlington avoided idling a 6 motor vehicle for just five minutes a day,the City would save many 7 thousands of gallons of fuel, and would prevent thousands of tons of 8 carbon dioxide from entering the atmosphere, contributing to climate 9 change. 10 (5)A typical heavy-duty truck or bus can burn approximately one gallon of 11 diesel fuel for each hour it idles, generating significant amounts of 12 pollution, wasting fuel, and causing excessive engine wear. 13 (6) Diesel trucks have a turbo which is oil-cooled. If the driver runs the 14 vehicle for a period of time and shuts the engine down without idling the 15 engine for a period of 3 to 5 minutes, it won't be long before he/she will 16 have to change the turbo. This is very costly.Also if a driver lets the engine 17 idle for a long period of time, this will also damage the engine. Most 18 newer trucks have an engine idle shutdown installed. This automatically 19 shuts the engine down after idling for 5 minutes. It's important to realize 20 that total idling time does not have to exceed 5 minutes. 21 (7) South Burlington businesses and organizations will save money 22 by eliminating unnecessary idling of vehicles weighing more than 10,000 23 pounds.According to the American Trucking Association, engine wear 2 1 from idling can increase maintenance costs and shorten engine life. Green 2 Mountain Coffee Roasters saves approximately $20,000 per year in 3 fuel costs as a result of its idling-reduction policy. 4 (8) Petroleum-based gasoline and diesel fuel are nonrenewable 5 resources and should be conserved when possible. 6 (9)Along with the Vermont cities and towns of Brattleboro, Burlington, 7 Chelsea, Essex Junction, Hinesburg, Putney, Richmond, and South Hero, 8 South Burlington is participating in the National Ten Percent Challenge to 9 reduce greenhouse emissions. This anti-idling ordinance will greatly io contribute to that initiative. In 2008 alone, the country has saved more ii than $1.1 billion in energy costs and reduced carbon dioxide emissions by 12 more than 7 million metric tons. 3 Section II 1 In order to reduce the impact on the City and on global climate change, 2 South Burlington will enact legislation and implement policies to reduce or 3 eliminate the idling of motor vehicles as follows: 4 (a) On or after September 1, 2012, a person shall not cause, allow, or 5 permit the unnecessary operation of a motor vehicle if the vehicle is 6 stopped for a period in excess of five consecutive minutes in any 60- 7 minute period unless otherwise exempted under rules adopted by the 8 Vermont Department of Motor Vehicles. 9 (b) The following vehicles shall be exempt from this section: io (1) Police, fire, and rescue vehicles, ambulances, and other public safety 11 motor vehicles. 12 (2) Military vehicles. 13 (3)Armored vehicles when a person remains inside to guard the 14 contents. 15 (4)Vehicles delivering fuel or energy products. 16 There are times and circumstances that reasonably require the idling of an 17 engine, including times when it is necessary to operate defrosting, 18 heating, or cooling equipment to ensure the health or safety of the driver 19 or passengers; or to operate auxiliary equipment; and times when the 20 engine is undergoing maintenance or inspection. In adopting these rules, 21 the City of South Burlington shall review standards in effect in other states 22 and shall endeavor to maintain consistency with those standards. 4 1 (c)A person who violates this section commits a traffic violation and, on or 2 after September 1, 2012, if adjudicated of a violation, shall be subject to the 3 following penalties: 4 (1) For a first violation, a warning ticket shall be issued to the vehicle 5 operator and the registered owner. 6 (2) For a second and subsequent violation within a two-year period, the 7 vehicle operator shall be subject to a fine of up to $150.00 and the 8 registered owner shall be subject to a fine of up to $500.00. If the 9 registered vehicle owner and the operator are the same person,that 10 person shall be subject to one fine of up to $500.00. Joe Randazzo 8 Woodside Drive South Burlington,VT o5403 Tel. 802-864-6662 E-mail: wordsmiths_communications@msn.com 5 P,4 Revised 4/2012 Interested Persons Record and Service List southbmiii;gton .ERMONT Under the 2004 revisions to Chapter 117, the Appropriate Municipal Panel (AMP) has certain administrative obligations with respect to interested persons. At any hearing, there must be an opportunity for each person wishing to achieve interested person status to demonstrate compliance with the applicable criteria. 24 V.S.A. §4461(b). The AMP must keep a written record of the name, address and participation of each person who has sought interested person status. 24 V.S.A. §4461(b). A copy of any decision rendered by the AMP must be mailed to every person or body appearing and having been heard by the AMP. 24 V.S.A. § 4461(b)(3). Upon receipt of notice of an appeal to the environmental court, the AMP must supply a list of interested persons to the appellant in five working days. 24 V.S.A. §4471(c). q I HEARING DATE: .� �1 E \I\\ Z®��. C y CboPo I 11J Ater`►91 2©A);A PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY! NAME EMAIL ADDRESS MAILING ADDRESS PROJECT OF INTEREST `\ )`J\ c"3 "r\ ,.N3-N --)) \bey c>l t69,c 3 .'5DR<—t—( [Art\ k.k.413 v1z,ci_c,\A„Ls , co v. )15" (:)-\ 1c), . 41,ketd- �Ieeh�Ce®A�ra�co ,akfitt. Ower240 , 4e,, (441..." E_sky $1.1etfr � � Stil�� - � Vf e l! 141111s O -0�� T4v 0316 l$ovk eAe4 aitdO°I A's Qicp>McA s}. 0 lout r ,co A; r PLANNING & ZONING MEMORANDUM TO: South Burlington City Council & City Manager FROM: Paul Conner, Director of Planning &Zoning SUBJECT: Interim Zoning Application #IZ-12-06 (Allen Road) — REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCE DATE: June 11, 2012 City Council meeting The applicant has requested that the City Council continue this hearing to late August in order for them to prepare written statement per the City Attorney's guidance. Staff recommends a continuance to the planned August 20th meeting, or another date following this. Due to this request, the application materials have not been included in the Council's packet. Staff has, however, included a letter provided by a neighbor to the project for the Council's records. Representatives for the applicant will not be in attendance at the public hearing on Monday. 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburl.com Page 1 of 1 Paul Conner From: Skip McClellan [sm@Ihivt.com] Sent: Friday, June 08, 2012 7:28 AM To: Paul Conner Cc: 'John Larkin'; Joe Larkin; Sherman, Deb Subject: Farmstand South Hi Paul, Please continue our application to the City Council for Phase One of the Farmstand South project on Allen Road. We will require a substantial time to gather our resources, so please schedule the hearing for a date in late August.Thank you. Skip McClellan Llewellyn Howley Incorporated 20 Kimball Ave Suite 202N South Burlington, VT 05403 (802) 658-2100 SM(a�LHIvt.com 6/8/2012 Alan F. Sylvester 1985 Spear Street South Burlington, VT 05403 May 30, 2012 Rosanne Grecco, Chair South Burlington City Counsel 575 Dorset Street South.Burlington, VT 05403 Re: Interim Zoning Application#IZ-12-06 of John Larkin Dear Ms. Grecco: I received your notice of public hearing scheduled for June 11, 2012 on the above. It was my understanding that the Interim Zoning By-law specifically prohibited a planned development unit in this area. There have been so many applications for the development of this area by Mr. Larkin in the last year or.so I have had trouble keeping track. It looks like this latest one is exactly the same as the objectionable sketch plan submitted in the Fall of 2011 with one exception. He is now trying to phase in this massive development. I don't see how that makes it any less objectionable. I am enclosing a letter my wife and I sent to the Development Review Board on December 29, 2011 relating to Larkin's Sketch Plan Application #SD-11-21. I would like to make this letter a matter of record to this latest application since the comments apply equally to both. One additional observation: The longstanding zoning laws for this area allows for a maximum of 51 residential units consisting primarily of two residences per acre. I simply can't understand why an applicant should be allowed to increase the number of units by over 40%with two and three story buildings and infrastructure that would pretty much cover all of the land. Thank you for your consideration. Very truly yours, //0' Alan F. Sylvester December 29, 2011 City of South Burlington Development Review Board 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 Re: Larkin Sketch Plan Application#SD-11-21 Dear Board: I am writing to comment on the latest version of the applicant's sketch plan. It appears the application covers pretty much every square inch of available land with buildings and infrastructure. The land is zoned R-1 and R-2. This designation has been in effect for at least 40 years. The zoning regulations specifically state that an R-1 district is where low- density single family residential uses are encouraged. And, R-1 districts are located in areas where low densities are necessary to protect scenic views and cultural resources to provide compatibility with adjacent natural areas. The long standing neighborhood immediately adjacent to this plan is the perfect example of compliance with the intent and purpose of the zoning laws. The sketch plan is totally incompatible with the zoning laws, the importance of providing open spaces, and the protection of natural areas and wildlife habitat. We have lived on a roughly 14 acre parcel of land immediately adjacent to the applicant's parcel for close to 40 years. At the time of purchase we, and I am sure others, researched exactly the regulations and policy of the City in this area. If we thought a project such as the one most recently proposed was going to be an acceptable use, we would have never purchased and built. Our Northern boundary line of approximate 900 feet adjoins the applicant's southerly boundary. Before we built, we had discussions with our neighbors to our immediate west concerning possible obstruction of their views, and the views from Spear Street. We eventually built a one-story home in order preserve the views. Several years ago we received a call from a real estate broker advising she had a client interested in 1971 Spear Street, but was reluctant to buy due to a concern we might build a 2nd level causing views to be obstructed. The homestead located at 1855 Spear Street directly east of the proposed development was in existence prior to our construction in the early '70's. It originally comprised roughly 2 1/2 acres. Recently, an additional 11/2 acres directly north and east of the proposed development were added. The homestead formerly owned by the Brousseau's at 191 Allen Road has also been in existence since the late 1960's or earlier. This home directly adjoins the proposed development on the west and south and sits on an acre of land. The Gentile homestead at 195 Allen Road immediately to the south of the proposed development is well over an acre. All of the foregoing homes, that totally surround the proposed development, are single family one-story, split level, or two stories. Most of them greatly exceed the zoning acreage requirement. None are non-compliant. To allow three-story triple occupant buildings would be totally out of character for the long standing neighborhood, have a significant impact on the views, and transform it from a relatively quiet, low density, aesthetically appealing, environmentally beneficial neighborhood into a mishmash of buildings. The applicant is trying to jam 70 living units plus parking plus all other forms of impervious surfaces on a piece of land surrounded by single family homes, wetlands, and natural areas. We are particularly sensitive to the effect any development of this parcel of land will have on the adjacent wetlands and natural areas. For those of you who may not be familiar with the devastating 1996 proposed development of this land, I would strongly urge you to review the file. Very simply put, the natural areas and wetlands were almost completely destroyed before the State and the City interceded to stop the project. Before this debacle, flora and fauna were bountiful. There were deer, grouse, pheasant, fox, bobcat, opossum, ermine, skunks, rabbits, nesting red tail hawk, nesting horned owl, saw whet owl, turkey, etc. Wild flowers 2 such as lily of the valley,jack-in-the-pulpit, white and pink hepatica and all of the other common wild flowers abounded. There were blue jays, meadowlarks, goldfinches, nut hatches, chickadees, finches, phoebes, Baltimore orioles, cardinals, red-winged blackbirds, cow birds, pilated woodpeckers, salamander, peepers, frogs, turtles etc. The area is in the process of recovering. But, some flowers, animals and amphibians have been lost forever. The neighborhood that exists today is a perfect gateway for vehicles using Allen Rd. to enter our City from the south. It has open spaces, wetlands, natural areas, and scenic views. It would be against everything the City promotes to change it. Any development should continue the minimum practice of single family homes on one acre or more. As you know, there have been multiple sketch plans. Most of them were totally incompatible with the policy, goal, and regulations of the City. However, the sketch plan previous to this latest one, makes some sense. That plan clustered townhouses against a backdrop of woods in the southwest corner of the property. The rest of the land would remain vacant. This would provide for much needed open space, and would give the wetland and natural areas an opportunity to continue to recover from the debacle of 1996. And, it is at least somewhat compatible with the massive four-story building complexes directly across the street. Fortunately, there is a significant amount of open space between them and the residences to the east. Very ly yours, Alan F. Sylvester Diane H. Sylvester 1985 Spear St. So. Burlington, VT 05403 cc: South Burlington City Council 3 CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION A RESOLUTION TO TRANSFER APPROPRIATIONS WHEREAS, Section 13-1307 of the Charter of the City of South Burlington states, "At the request of the manager or school superintendent and within the last three months of the budget year, the council and board of school directors, respectively, may by resolution transfer any unencumbered appropriation balance or portion thereof within the budgets from one department, office or agency under their jurisdiction, to another."; and, WHEREAS, there is currently within the FY 2012 budget over $40,000 in the "Contingency" line in the General Fund Budget not yet appropriated; and, WHEREAS, it had been the intent of the City to spend $40,000 of the Contingency line in the budget to help pay for the unanticipated replacement of the Fire Station 1/City Hall HVAC system; and, WHEREAS, the remaining cost for the replacement of the HVCA system will be paid out of a grant and Fiscal Year 2013 budgeted appropriation; and, WHEREAS, the city does not expect that the actual expenditure of funds for the replacement of the HVAC will occur prior to the end of Fiscal Year 2012; and, WHEREAS, the City Manager requests the transfer of$40,000 from budget line "Contingency Fund" in Section 100-1- 3202 ("Administrative Services") of the Fiscal Year 2012 General Fund Budget. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the South Burlington City Council approves the transfer of$40,000 from the Fiscal Year 2012 Budgeted General Fund Contingency Line and transfers that amount to Fund 315 the Fire Department Building Improvement Special Fund; and FURTHER, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council formally identifies Fund 315 as the Fire Department Building Improvement Special Fund; and FURTHER, BE IT RESOLVED, that the $40,000 Council approves being transferred to Fund 315 shall not be spent for any purpose other than the replacement of the Fire Station 1/City Hall HVAC without approval of the City Council; and FURTHER, BE IT RESOLVED, the transfer of funds shall occur prior to June 30, 2012. APPROVED this day of June, 2012. SOUTH BURLINGTON CITY COUNCIL Rosanne Greco, Chair Pam Mackenzie, Clerk Helen Riehle, Vice Chair Sandra Dooley Paul Engels Resolution to Create An Interim Zoning Reserve Fund Whereas,the City Charter, section 13-310 (7)states,"The city council and the school board,by their own actions,may establish reserve funds to pay for public improvements,replacement of equipment,and planned or unplanned operating expenditures. Monies to be deposited in any fund shall be included in a city or school district budget and shall not be excluded in calculating the net cost of operation pursuant to subsection 1309(a)of this chapter.Reserve funds shall be kept in separate accounts and invested in the same manner as other public funds.The city council and the school board may, from time to time, expend monies in those funds for purposes for which they were established without voter approval."; and, • Whereas,the City has identified a number of expenses surrounding the Interim Zoning(IZ) Bylaw approved by Council on February 21, 2012; and, Whereas,the City Council's approval on the Interim Zoning Bylaw occurred approximately one month after Council had approved the Fiscal Year 2013 budget; and, Whereas,because the Interim Zoning Bylaw was approved after the FY 2013 budget was • approved by Council none of the now-anticipated IZ expenses were included in the FY 2013 budget; and, Whereas,it is anticipated that there will be a surplus in the FY 2012 General Fund budget; and, WHEREAS, Section 13-1307 of the Charter of the City of South Burlington states,"At the request of the manager or school superintendent and within the last three months of the budget year, the council and board of school directors,respectively, may by resolution transfer any unencumbered appropriation balance or portion thereof within the budgets from one department, office or agency under their jurisdiction,to another."; and, Whereas,it is fiscally prudent to transfer some of the anticipated FY 2012 General Fund Surplus into a Reserve Fund so that money is available to spend on now-anticipated IZ expenses. Now,Therefore,Be it Resolved,that the City Council hereby creates a Reserve Fund whose purpose is to fund Interim Zoning expenses necessitated by the IZ Bylaw: and, Furthermore,Be It Resolved, that all money placed is this Reserve Fund shall only be disbursed for the uses identified in this Resolution. Expenditures from the balance of the reserve fund will only be made with the approval of a basic majority of the South Burlington City Council at an officially Warned City Council meeting and recorded in minutes. Furthermore, Be It Resolved, that the City Council of South Burlington approves the transfer of $75,000 from the Fiscal Year 2012 Budgeted General Fund and transfers that amount to the Interim Zoning Reserve Fund. Dated the l lth day of June, 2012 City Council Rosanne Greco, Chair Helen Riehle, Vice Chair Pam Mackenzie, Clerk Sandra Dooley Paul Engels JLadd From: Sandy Miller Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2012 8:43 AM To: JLadd Cc: Bob Rusten Subject: RE: Council meeting start time on Monday June 11 Yes, the transfer from contingency item is going back on ($40k) and review of the letter re the F-35. There may be one or two more items and I'll let you know. Yes, exec. Session at 5. Saqozd "Sapede 7lld e' 1C MA - Credent.ialed Manager City Manager City of South Burlington 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 Tel: 802-846-4107 Fax: 802-846-4101 l mail: smiller@.sburl.com Website: www.sburl.com From: JLadd Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2012 8:20 AM To: Sandy Miller Cc: Bob Rusten Subject: Council meeting start time on Monday June 11 Good Morning, I'm looking to see if you are having Executive Session at 5pm prior to the 6pm Public Hearing schedule for IZ applications? Right now all I have on the agenda right now is the following.. 1. Application for Boncher&White 2. Application for Larkin 1 Please let me know if there any additional items for the 11'h. Thank you, lattice£add HR Coord. City of South Burlington 575 Dorset St South Burlington, VT 05403 802-846-4118 2 .06 southburling n PLANNING & ZONING PUBLIC HEARING SOUTH BURLINGTON CITY COUNCIL The South Burlington City Council will hold a public hearing in the South Burlington City Hall Conference Room, 575 Dorset Street, South Burlington, Vermont on June 11, 2012 at 6:00 P.M. to consider the following: 1. Interim zoning application #IZ-12-05 of Joel S. White & Heidi Boncher to construct:1) a 2000 sq. ft. 2-story addition to a single family dwelling, and 2) a 1,064 attached garage and connector, 315 Dorset Heights. 2. Interim zoning application #IZ-12-06 of John Larkin for phase I of a two (2) phase 71 unit residential development. Phase I will be for 40 units consisting of: 1) 17 two-family dwellings, and three (3) 3-unit multi-family dwellings, 201 Allen Road. Rosanne Greco, Chair South Burlington City Council Copies of the applications are available for public inspection at the South Burlington City Hall. Participation in the local proceeding is a prerequisite to the right to take any subsequent appeal. May 24, 2012 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburl.com