HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - Planning Commission - 06/28/2022South Burlington Planning Commission
180 Market Street
South Burlington, VT 05403
(802) 846-4106
www.sburl.com
Meeting Tuesday, June 28, 2022
City Hall, 180 Market Street, Auditorium
7:00 pm
Members of the public may attend in person or digitally via Zoom. Participation Options:
• In Person: City Hall Auditorium, 180 Market Street
• Interactive Online: https://us06web.zoom.us/j/9960639517
• Telephone 1 929 205 6099; Meeting ID: 996 063 9517
AGENDA:
1. *Agenda: Additions, deletions or changes in order of agenda items (7:00 pm)
2. Open to the public for items not related to the agenda (7:02 pm)
3. Announcements and staff report (7:05 pm)
4. Presentation and discussion of draft Climate Action Plan Task Force Targets and Actions
5. Introduction to “knowns” for the 2024 Comprehensive Plan; discussion of needed information
6. Follow-up discuss of identifying City neighborhoods in the 2024 Comprehensive Plan.
7. Consider requesting the Economic Development Committee examine future land use goals, objectives,
and regulations associated with the City’s Commercial/Industrial areas
8. Update on items to be requested of City committees following 2022 LDR amendments
9. *Minutes: June 7, 2022 (8:45 pm)
10. Other Business (8:50 pm)
11. Adjourn (9:00 pm)
Respectfully submitted,
Paul Conner, AICP
Director of Planning & Zoning
* item has attachments
South Burlington Planning Commission Virtual Meeting Public Participation Guidelines
1. The Planning Commission Chair presents these guidelines for the public attending Planning Commission meetings to ensure
that everyone has a chance to speak and that meetings proceed smoothly.
2. In general, keep your video off and microphone on mute. Commission members, staff, and visitors currently presenting /
commenting will have their video on.
3. Initial discussion on an agenda item will generally be conducted by the Commission. As this is our opportunity to engage with
the subject, we would like to hear from all commissioners first. After the Commission has discussed an item, the Chair will ask
for public comment.
4. Please raise your hand identify yourself to be recognized to speak and the Chair will try to call on each participant in sequence.
To identify yourself, turn on your video and raise your hand, if participating by phone you may unmute yourself and verbally
state your interest in commenting, or type a message in the chat.
5. Once recognized by the Chair, please identify yourself to the Commission.
6. If the Commission suggests time limits, please respect them. Time limits will be used when they can aid in making sure
everyone is heard and sufficient time is available for Commission to complete the agenda.
7. Please address the Chair. Please do not address other participants or staff or presenters and please do not interrupt others
when they are speaking.
8. Make every effort not to repeat the points made by others. You may indicate that you support a similar viewpoint. Indications
of support are most efficiently added to the chat.
9. The Chair will make reasonable efforts to allow all participants who are interested in speaking to speak once to allow other
participants to address the Commission before addressing the Commission for a second time.
10. The Planning Commission desires to be as open and informal as possible within the construct that the Planning Commission
meeting is an opportunity for commissioners to discuss, debate and decide upon policy matters. Regular Planning Commission
meetings are not “town meetings”. A warned public hearing is a fuller opportunity to explore an issue, provide input and
influence public opinion on the matter.
11. Comments may be submitted before, during or after the meeting to the Planning and Zoning Department. All written
comments will be circulated to the Planning Commission and kept as part of the City Planner's official records of meetings.
Comments must include your first and last name and a contact (e-mail, phone, address) to be included in the record. Email
submissions are most efficient and should be addressed to the Director of Planning and Zoning at pconner@sburl.com and
Chair at jlouisos@sburl.com.
12. The Chat message feature is new to the virtual meeting platform. The chat should only be used for items specifically related to
the agenda item under discussion. The chat should not be used to private message Commissioners or staff on policy items, as
this pulls people away from the main conversation underway. Messages on technical issues are welcome at any time. The Vice-
Chair will monitor the chat and bring to the attention of Commissioners comments or questions relevant to the discussion. Chat
messages will be part of the official meeting minutes.
13. In general discussions will follow the order presented in the agenda or as modified by the Commission.
14. The Chair, with assistance from staff, will give verbal cues as to where in the packet the discussion is currently focused to help
guide participants.
15. The Commission will try to keep items within the suggested timing published on the agenda, although published timing is a
guideline only. The Commission will make an effort to identify partway through a meeting if agenda items scheduled later in
the meeting are likely not be covered and communicate with meeting participants any expected change in the extent of the
agenda. There are times when meeting agendas include items at the end that will be covered “if time allows”.
180 Market Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sb vt.gov
MEMORANDUM
TO: South Burlington Planning Commission
FROM: Paul Conner, Director of Planning & Zoning
SUBJECT: Planning Commission Meeting Memo
DATE: For June 28, 2022 Planning Commission meeting
1. Agenda: Additions, deletions or changes in order of agenda items (7:00 pm)
2. Open to the public for items not related to the agenda (7:02 pm)
3. Announcements and staff report (7:05 pm)
Staff notes:
• Dalila Hall, Zoning Administrator, had her last day was Wednesday 6/22. We thanked her for her
wonderful service to the City of South Burlington over these past four years and expressed the
Commission’s thanks as well. We have posted the position and look forward to welcoming a new
team member.
• Kelsey Peterson, City Planner, stopped by to say hello with her little one. Both are doing well. She
will remain a parental leave for the bulk of the summer.
• Beta Technologies received their zoning permit for construction in late May and are underway with
their project. They have submitted an application that is under review by the DRB for a nearby
hangar as well.
• Champlain Housing Trust has just received approval to convert the Ho Hum Motel on Williston Road
to 20 permanently affordable dwelling units. They made use of the provision for a density bonus for
affordability to reach their desired number of apartments.
• The first design workshop for the bike/ped bridge over I-89 took place last week. There will be two
more through the process.
4. Presentation and discussion of draft Climate Action Plan Task Force Targets and Actions
Members of the Climate Action Plan Task Force, to include Andrew and Michael, will give an overview of
the targets and actions within the draft Climate Action Plan.
5. Introduction to “knowns” for the 2024 Comprehensive Plan; discussion of needed information
See enclosed memo. The next stage of developing the Comprehensive Plan, as discussed in April, will be
to establish the preliminary “knowns” for the Plan. This will include what we know about our current
population and estimates for population change, trends related to development (at a macro-level), and
existing policy that we anticipate carrying forward (such as the Climate Change Resolution). We’ll discuss
what we have collected to date, what we’re anticipating collecting, who we’re talking with to learn more
of what we need, and importantly, what the Commission might preliminarily want us to plan to collect
and analyze.
2
6. Follow-up discuss of identifying City neighborhoods in the 2024 Comprehensive Plan.
At the last meeting, there was some discussion about the importance of neighborhoods to South
Burlington. We’d like to give the Commission a chance to unpack this further. Staff can identify up to 45-
60 different neighborhoods in the City, and if crowd-sourced, we might find even more from an identify
perspective. Meanwhile, a similar assessment back in the early 2010s by the Commission led to the
creation of the 5 planning areas in the Comprehensive Plan, knowing that a much larger number was
unwieldy to discuss in a planning context. At this meeting we’d like to discuss how knowledge of
neighborhoods in the community can help inform the Plan.
7. *Minutes: June 14, 2022 (8:45 pm)
8. Other Business (8:50 pm)
9. Adjourn (9:00 pm)
Climate Action
South Burlington Climate Action Task Force (CATF)
interim update to
South Burlington Planning Commission
SB Climate Change Commitments
•In 2014, the City Council adopted an Energy Efficiency Resolution to reduce energy
usage 20% by 2020 (from 2008 baseline), develop an energy efficiency plan and report
results to City Council on annual basis.
•In August of 2017, the City Council resolved for the City to join the Vermont Climate
Pledge Coalition and commit to meet or exceed the US obligations under the Paris
Climate Agreement to reduce GHGs by 26-28% below 2005 levels by 2025.
•In July of 2021, the City Council:
•acknowledged the “implication of CO2 emissions and their effect on climate change
and its consequent effects on its citizens’ quality of life, health, safety and economic
well being”
•resolved that “the reduction of South Burlington’s carbon footprint is an extremely
important effort”
•tasked a committee to “participate in creating a Plan with specific actions for South
Burlington that conform to the current science in support of the City’s commitments”
and
•resolved to “take actions based on the Climate Action Plan”.
SB’s Draft Climate Action Plan
•The CATF has completed a draft climate action plan
•With tremendous help from CCRPC, the plan contains science-based targets (SBTs) that represent
South Burlington’s fair share of the ambition necessary to meet the Paris Agreement commitment to
keep warming below 1.5 centigrade and are in line with Vermont’s Global Warming Solutions Act
requirements.
•The SBT scenario is built from the 2019 GHG emission inventory, which estimates current
conditions.
•A business as usual (BAU) scenario was also developed to demonstrate the GHG emissions if
there is no climate action taken.
•The SBT scenario is compared to the business as usual (BAU) scenario to project emissions over
time with various actions applied to assist with understanding the impact level of the actions.
•Although the natural area sector does not have an SBT, data is available to understand the role
forest and trees play in carbon removal on an annual basis. Additionally, data on forest conversion
and forest loss is provided to understand emission impacts from development.
•GHG quantification of non-forested land cover (wetland, grassland, cropland) is not
quantifiable due to complexities of soil carbon dynamics and methodology limitations.
•The targets are daunting and illustrate the immense scale of changes that will be necessary to meet
SB’s goals
SB’s Climate Action Plan -Draft SBTs
SBTs and Emission Goals
2030 Emission
Reduction Goal Base Year 2019 (MT Co2e)2030 BAU (MT Co2e)2030 SBTs and GWSA
(MT Co2e)
60.20%195,532 196,071 77,822
Growth Rates Employment Population Grid Emissions VMT
1% annually 1.3% annually 0 1.3% annually
Base Year BAU SBT 2030 Modeled Emissions
Fuel/Sector Year 2019 (MT
Co2e)2030 (MT Co2e)Science Based Target (MT C02e)Sector
Commercial Natural Gas 30,234 30,568 11,259 Commercial EnergyCommercial Electric 2,613 0
Residential Electric 1,048 0 18,641
Residential EnergyResidential Natural Gas 30,630 35,306
Industrial Natural Gas 1,905 1,926 397 Industrial EnergyIndustrial Electric 765 0
On-Road Transportation 128,337 128,270 46,168 Transportation
Total 195,532 196,070 76,465
Forest Tree Disturbances/Forest to
Settlement COe2/yr 1,000 1,000 1,000 Landuse
CO2 e/yr Removal from Undisturbed
Forest/Trees in Settled Areas -8,769 -8,769 -8,769 Natural Areas
Net Total 187,763 188,301 68,696
SB’s Climate Action Plan -Draft SBTs
Measures SBT Scenario Emission Reductions
Residential Electrification/Number of
Housing Units retrofitted (annually)500 housing units -16,665
Home Weatherization (annually)600 homes
Commercial Benchmarking,
Electrification (annually)8% commercial sq. ft -19,309
Industrial Space Heating Reduction
(annually)10% reduction in energy use -1,529
Electric Vehicle Adoption, by 2030 37.5% EV, 37.5% HEV -52,972
VMT Reduction (annually)2.5%-23,540
Compact Development New Units (2,770 units in high
density (> 12.5 du per acre)-5,589
Note: assumes all new buildings/homes will be net zero.
Draft –
Building and
Thermal
Actions
Draft –
Transportation
/Land Use
Actions
Draft –
Natural
Areas
Actions
Burlington’s Ordinance
•As of September of 2021, the City of Burlington requires all new buildings
(residential and commercial) to utilize a “renewable primary heating
system”.
•A “renewable primary heating system” is a heating system that meets at
least eighty-five percent of the buildings design heating load and is fueled
by either electricity, wood pellets or other renewable fuel (including
renewable gas and biofuels).
•A waiver from this requirement may be granted if an applicant demonstrates
that utilizing a renewable primary heating system in a new building would be
uneconomical, factoring in a carbon price of $100 per ton (adjusted for
inflation) of carbon emitted.
•The Burlington ordinance can be found here:
https://www.burlingtonelectric.com/wp-content/uploads/Signed-CC-
Ordinance-Chapter-8.-Building-And-Building-Construction-Addition-of-Article-
V.-Heating-Systems-Signed.pdf
•The City’s attorney has opined that the City has the authority to adopt an ordinance
similar to Burlington’s.
•We recommend that South Burlington adopt, as soon as possible, an ordinance
requiring that, with immediate effect, all new buildings have a “renewable primary
heating system” as defined by the City of Burlington as a condition to permitting. We
recommend adopting a waiver from this requirement consistent with what Burlington
has adopted.
•We also recommend requiring new homes to use heat pump hot water heaters for hot
water needs. An exemption could be made to the extent an applicant can
demonstrate that heat pump hot water heaters cannot reasonably service the needs of
the relevant building (for instance, possibly, in the case of a hotel).
•The CATF notes that the City currently does not have an inspection system for many
items relevant to new owner occupied single family homes (including compliance, more
generally, with the residential building energy stretch code that SB has adopted). We
recommend that over time the City adopt such an inspection system, which should then
include the renewable primary heating system requirement.
•The City may wish to consider developing some expertise in renewable heating systems
to help builders that may have questions about this requirement.
Interim Recommendations of the CATF
Climate Action
...making South Burlington cleaner,
more affordable,
healthier,
and better prepared for the future.
180 Market Street, South Burlington, Vermont 05403 | 802-846-4106 | www.southburlingtonvt.gov
MEMORANDUM
TO: South Burlington Planning Commission
FROM: Paul Conner, Director of Planning & Zoning
SUBJECT: 2024 Comprehensive Plan: Statutory Requirements and “Knowns” leading into the Plan
DATE: May 24, 2022 Planning Commission meeting
Statutory Requirements:
A municipal Plan in Vermont, in order to be “confirmed” (and therefore valid and eligible for a variety of state
programs), must contain certain required elements and must demonstrate consistency with statewide planning
goals.
The Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission (CCRPC) will perform a review of the Plan at the start and
again at the end of the Plan preparation process, followed by a public hearing and action by the CCRPC’s Board
for confirmation. Throughout the process, staff will be working to assure compliance with these requirements.
There have been two changes of note to the enabling statutes in the time since the 2016 Plan was adopted:
• Act 171, Planning for Habitat Blocks and Forest Connectors requires that confirmed municipal plans address
the subject and includes in the Land Use Plan a component that “Indicates those areas that are important as
forest blocks and habitat connectors and plans for land development in those areas to minimize forest
fragmentation and promote the health, viability, and ecological function of forests. A plan may include
specific policies to encourage the active management of those areas for wildlife habitat, water quality,
timber production, recreation, or other values or functions identified by the municipality.”
• Act 174, Enhanced Energy Plans, gives municipalities the option to have greater weight – substantial
deference – in the State’s Section 248 review process for energy generation facilities by developing a plan to
meet identified targets for renewable energy generation and conservation. The Climate Action Plan Task is
looking at this subject and to date has recommended that the City strive to attain this designation if the
targets can be met in a manner that is consistent with the City’s other climate action and planning goals.
Knowns Leading into the Plan:
As presented in the Plan outline last month, the next (and iterative) step in the preparation of the 2024
Comprehensive Plan is to identify and establish “knowns” to serve as a framework for the Plan. These include
basic structural elements, existing adopted City Council resolutions, such as the Climate Change Resolution; and
economic and demographic conditions and projections, known land use conditions, and travel patterns.
The purpose of the knowns is to provide a common set of parameters for all those involved in preparing the Plan
to be cognizant of. Having an understanding of our anticipated population change and new housing will help the
City’s departments assess their service and capital needs, for example. These “knowns” are not intended to be
2
policies in and of themselves – they are a framing, together with the overall vision and goals – to help every be
on the same page as we develop the Plan over the next year.
The “knowns” below are looking back, for the moment, and we anticipate projecting them forward in the
coming weeks as part of a full demographics report. We would welcome Commissioners’ thoughts on what
“knowns” we should be considering.
Overall Policy
• The Plan will meet the Statutory requirements for a regionally-confirmed plan
• The Plan will strive to meet the Statutory option for an Enhanced Energy Plan
• The Plan will incorporate the City Council’s resolution on Climate Change
• The Plan will make use of studies and reports undertaken and completed by the City since adoption of
the 2016 Plan
Population
• Annual population growth since 1990 has been 1.55%, and declined to 1.28 annually between 2010 and
2020. (The 2016 Plan anticipated 1-1.5% annually)
• The City’s population is becoming more diverse. The most recent data showed 11% of the population
speaking a language other than English at home, and increasing.
• The City’s population is aging. Average age is 41.7, which has been trending up. 18.5% of our population
is over 65 years of age.
• Of the City’s 8,801 households, 2,141 include a person with a disability
Housing
• Housing growth was 1.4% annually 2010-2020 (2016 Plan anticipated 1.5-2% annually)
• The City has averaged ~143 dwelling units added annually since 1980. The trend is steady and is
anticipated to remain, and possibly increase slightly based on City Center and State and Federal
incentives for affordable and missing middle housing.
• The majority of new housing since 2000 has been multi-family. Since that time, 64% of new homes have
been multi-family, and overall represent 41% of our total housing. Stand-alone single family homes now
represent 53% of our housing, down from 67% in 2000.
• Since 2010, approximately 85-89% of new housing that has been approved through development review
has been within or immediately adjacent to the City’s Transit Overlay District [note: this does not include
housing that was approved prior to that time and for which construction has been ongoing since]
Employment and Transportation:
• Of the City’s 8,801 households, 752 have no vehicle
• The City’s daytime population is ~24,592
• There are 20,120 employees and 1,418 businesses in South Burlington
• Home and Workplace. There is a lot of travel in a out of the City for work
o 2,613 people live and work in South Burlington.
o 17,639 people live elsewhere and work in South Burlington
o 8,206 people live in South Burlington and work outside the City
SOUTH BURLINGTON PLANNING COMMISSION
MEETING MINUTES
14 JUNE 2022
1
The South Burlington Planning Commission held a regular meeting on Tuesday, 14 June 2022, at
7:00 p.m., in the Auditorium, City Hall, 180 Market Street, and via Zoom remote technology.
MEMBERS PRESENT: J. Louisos, Chair; T. Riehle, M. Mittag, D. Macdonald, P. Engels, A. Chalnick
ALSO PRESENT: P. Conner, Director of Planning and Zoning; S. Dooley
1. Agenda: Additions, deletions or changes in order of agenda items:
No changes were made to the agenda.
2. Open to the public for items not related to the Agenda:
Ms. Dooley asked about a potential change to the LDRs regarding the number of units that
could be on a small lot in the SEQ. The new LDRs reduced this number from 4 to 1.2. Ms.
Dooley said she spoke with Ms. Emery who was supportive of changing this number back to 4.
She asked what needs to happen for the Commission to relook at that change.
Mr. Conner said the Commission voted to put on their draft work plan for the coming year. The
plan has gone to the Council as part of the policy priorities. Ms. Dooley asked whether the
Council could ask the Planning Commission to prioritize this item; Mr. Conner said that yes, the
Council can ask that certain items be prioritized; Mr. Conner added that this year, the
Comprehensive Plan is likely to be the top priority for all committees.
3. Planning Commissioner announcements and staff report:
Mr. Conner announced that City Planner Kelsey Peterson has given birth to a healthy, happy
baby girl. Ms. Peterson will be back at the end of August/beginning of September.
Zoning Administrator Dalila Hall will be moving on. She has been with the City for 4 years and
will be missed. Staff is working to fill that spot and get some support. Mr. Mittag asked that
Mr. Conner relay the Commission’s thanks for all of her work.
Ms. Louisos noted that 180 Market Street is now a year old.
4. LDR Amendment: Minor Technical Changes LDR-22-06:
a. Clarify Uses in 13.03 Table on Bicycle Parking
b. Move Section 15.A.20 (Performance Bonds) to Article 17
c. Renumber Section 13.05 to correct double “A” section
2
d. Delete 17.04C Subdivision Approvals header
e. Correct Appendix E, Subdivision Requirements
Mr. Mittag moved to approve the Minor Technical Changes, LDR-22-06, as presented, for
inclusion in the next round of amendments and public hearing. Mr. Engels seconded. Motion
passed 6-0.
5. LDR-22-05 Transferable Development Rights: Review of Draft:
Mr. Conner noted 2 items that were left for consideration:
The first is how likely PUDs are to be used in the R-7, Swift R-7 and Allen Road areas. Mr.
Conner said there is only one potential scenario where this would be feasible.
The second is whether TDRs could be used for additional height. Staff’s recommendation is to
open a discussion. Mr. Conner stressed that they don’t want to have very tall buildings next to
neighborhoods of “lower” homes. He noted that his recollection is that in the SEQ, any density
higher than 1.2 requires a TDR. The regulations are being checked to verify that. Ms. Louisos
recalled that she described it that way in the public hearing. Mr. Conner said that was the
intent.
Mr. Macdonald asked about the height limit in the C-2. Mr. Conner said the height limit is 28
feet or 40 feet unless the DRB allows a taller building. In C-1, the 5 stories are allowed, and that
is a cap. Mr. Mittag asked if a developer has to buy TDRs to get the extra height. Mr. Conner
said only if they are asking for additional units. Mr. Chalnick said that if it isn’t too complex, he
thought it would be a good idea to require a TDR for the additional height. He asked if that
would be too hard to administer. Mr. Conner explained how an initial discussion occurs with a
developer which most often does not involve a firm plan.
Mr. Conner noted that where there is R-12 density, it is hard to do that in 28 feet. He stressed
that if a developer can get the extra height for free now, if it is changed, there is additional cost
to the project. Mr. Mittag said that if you restrict places where TDRs can be used, you are not
serving the people who gave up their development capability on their property.
Mr. Chalnick said he realized that if you charge for extra height, a developer could choose to
have more smaller units in a lower building and avoid the cost of the extra story.
Mr. Mittag stressed the need to have a separate register of TDRs to be sold. This would be at
the owners’ choice. Mr. Conner said this could be on the website. He noted that all TDR
transactions are recorded in the city’s land records, and there is a map telling where easements
have been severed.
3
Mr. Mittag asked about the use of TDRs in R-1, etc. Mr. Conner reminded the Commission that
last year they decided not to include the use of TDRs in low-density districts. Legal costs would
be equal to the TDR cost. Mr. Mittag suggested relooking at that. He felt it wou ld make TDRs
easier to sell.
Mr. Engels asked how many TDRs have been sold. Mr. Conner said fewer than 100. Many more
(about 600) have been used within a property to reassign density (e.g., South Village).
6. Transfer of Development Rights and Technical Amendments: Possible Action to
Approve Planning Commission Report and Warn A public hearing on proposed
amendments LDR-22-05 and LDR-22-06:
Mr. Conner said the City Attorney would have a legal review in time for a public hearing.
Ms. Louisos moved to submit amendments LDR-22-05 and LD-22-06 and the accompanying
report included in this evening’s meeting packet including clarifying language regarding TDRs
within TNDs in the Southeast Quadrant, and to schedule a public hearing for Monday, 8 August
2022. Mr. Macdonald seconded. Motion passed 6-0.
7. Comprehensive Plan: Structure:
Mr. Conner showed a concept for the Comprehensive Plan structure. He noted that the
terminology will be more oriented toward people and families and not as abstract as in the
past. Climate change would be woven throughout, not in its own chapter.
Mr. Mittag said he would add “resilience” under section “d” and add Climate Change Mitigation
under section “b.”
Mr. Riehle questioned how to connect some outlying neighborhoods (e.g., Cou ntry Club
Estates, Bartlett Bay, Stonehouse).
Mr. Macdonald said one word he does not see is “neighborhood.” He noted that infill in R-1
and R-2 neighborhoods will be a “sticky subject.” Mr. Conner suggested that in the meeting
with the City Council that can be raised as “pedestrian connected neighborhoods.”
Mr. Engels said he would like to see the 2016 Chamberlin Neighborhood report in there
someplace. He also would like to see identification and acknowledgment of all the
neighborhoods in the city and their characteristics. He stressed the need to give the
Chamberlin neighborhood “its due.”
4
Mr. Chalnick felt it is important enough to “call out” climate change. He would change “d” to
“ecosystems.” Ms. Louisos noted that climate change relates to every item under land
resources. She suggested possibly putting climate change up front under the visions and goals
section so it isn’t hidden in a list at the bottom. Mr. Conner explained why it is important that it
gets woven throughout the document. Mr. Macdonald agreed that it should be identified up
front with the notation that it “touches everything.”
Mr. Conner noted that section “b” is more about people, and section “c” is what supports that.
He added that instead of just having topics, there is recognition of what is meant by those
topics. For example, instead of “transportation,” there is “community connections.”
8. Comprehensive Plan: Key Topics:
Members reviewed and added to the list of key topics, including:
a. Addressing climate change
b. Cleating greater emphasis on people, community, equity
c. Chamberlin neighborhood and its interface with the Airport
d. Creating greater measurability in plan objectives
e. Assuring consistency of objectives and policies within the plan
f. Addressing housing affordability
g. Addressing economic activity and resiliency
h. Connecting neighborhoods
i. Identifying neighborhoods and their characteristics
Mr. Conner suggested a possible visioning session as a kickoff to all of this. He suggested
committees have a facilitated discussion with the community followed by neighborhood
meetings (e.g., SEQ, Lakeshore, Chamberlin) to hear concerns in those areas. Mr. Conner noted
that staff has the OK to find a facilitator to make it happen.
Mr. Mittag suggested possibly identifying individuals from neighborhoods who could represent
their neighborhoods at other meetings.
Mr. Engels cited the need to develop a vision for the city. Mr. Conner said that is what the join t
meeting with the City Council will do.
Mr. Macdonald felt they will get more people at neighborhood meetings than at a general
visioning meeting. Mr. Riehle said he didn’t see people from Country Club Estates or Lakeside
coming to those meetings.
5
Mr. Chalnick said there should be a place where in the beginning people can come and talk
unrestrained about what interests them.
9. Minutes of 10 May 2022:
Mr. Mittag moved to approve the minutes of 10 May 2022 as written. Ms. Louisos seconded.
Motion passed 5-0 with Mr. Riehle abstaining.
10. Other Business:
No other business was presented.
As there was no further business to come before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned
by common consent at 8:42 p.m.
___________________________________
Clerk