Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - Planning Commission - 11/09/2022SOUTH BURLINGTON PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES 9 NOVEMBER 2022 1 The South Burlington Planning Commission held a regular meeting on Tuesday, 9 November 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; K. Peterson, City Planner; H. Riehle, Council Liaison; D. Peters 1. Instructions on exiting the building in case of an emergency: Ms. Louisos provided instructions on emergency exit from the building. 2. Agenda: Additions, deletions or changes in order of agenda items: Ms. Louisos noted that under Other Business, she will add a response from The Other Paper. 3. Open to the public for items not related to the Agenda: No issues were raised. 4. Planning Commissioner announcements and staff report: Ms. Louisos reported that the City Council held its first reading of LDR-22-08 and set a public hearing for 5 December, 9 p.m. Mr. MacDonald advised that he had reached out to Chris Trombly of the Affordable Housing Committee and had a good discussion with him. There will be some things to bring to a future agenda. Mr. Mittag said he applied to serve on a sub-committee for redevelopment of housing. Mr. Engels advised that at a City Charter Committee meeting earlier in the day, it was agreed that there would be no expansion of the Planning Commission. It appears there will be a request for a Charter change regarding replacement of fossil fuels in older homes. Mr. Chalnick said the request is being made of the City Council and could go to the Charter Committee. Mr. Conner said the requests mirrors what the City of Burlington is doing, giving the municipality the right to regulate heating in all buildings with a method to be determined later. It would have to be an action of the City Council, if the intention is to have a vote in March. Mr. Conner noted there are very specific requirements for Charter changes. If this is not decided upon by mid-December, it cannot be on the March ballot. Mr. Conner advised that on 21 November, the School District will have a discussion with the City Council regarding the possibility of imposing impact fees for ZEMs to increase school capacity for 8-10 years. Impact fees could cover about 90% of the $6,000,000 cost. The fee as presented in the report would be in the neighborhood of $10,000 for larger dwelling units. 2 5. ARPA Funding recommendations to City Council: Mr. Mittag moved to approve the previously discussed first, second and third suggestions for the use of ARPA funding. Mr. Chalnick seconded. Motion passed with all present voting in favor. 6. VT DHCD Municipal Planning Grant application: Ms. Peterson noted that the city gets 1-1/2 to 2 years to spend Municipal Planning Grant money. Staff’s recommendation for this application is to use the funds to develop an equity planning process. The $26,000 grant would help to get the process started. Ms. Peterson noted that staff often flounders when trying to engage underserved populations. These funds would help get more tools to facilitate that effort. Mr. Conner specifically noted the effort to engage low-income families, renters, younger people, and people living in multi-family housing. He also noted an issue with interpreting very technical language to people for whom English is not a first language. Mr. Riehle moved to as the City Council to apply for a Municipal Planning Grant to address equity issues as outlined by Planning staff. Ms. Louisos seconded. Motion passed with all present voting in favor. 7. Street names for South Village: Ms. Peterson noted that Douglas Lane and Wilson Lane were chosen as former Vermont Governors. Mr. Conner showed their location on a map and noted that both are very short roads. After a brief discussion, members agreed to accept Farm Way, Douglas Lane and Wilson Lane as presented. 8. Comprehensive Plan: Information inputs and use of the Future Land Use Map: Ms. Peterson said that special meetings are being set up regarding reaching out to committees on key topics for the Comprehensive Plan. The Future Land Use Map will be more the Planning Commission’s contribution to the Plan as it is the real touchstone for the public and developers for the future. Ms. Peterson then showed the Future Land Use Map and indicated areas previously designated as low, medium and medium to higher densities. She asked members what information they would need to make decision regarding what various densities should be. Considerations include: conserved land, sewer/water lines, transit lines, current parks and access, location of habitat blocks, currently built/unbuilt areas, location of housing units built or approve in the past 10 years, and consistency with the current zoning map. Ms. Peterson asked members how they want to use this map, how they would want to categorize uses, and what the map should look like. She also reminded members that any future zoning changes need to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 3 Members questioned whether the map needs to be “fuzzy.” Mr. Conner said there is no requirement for it to be fuzzy though he had advocated for it. He said there is a difference between a “regulatory” map and a “visionary” map. Mr. Mittag suggested there could be a range of densities in an area. Mr. Riehle liked the idea of a vision, a broad picture and then subsequent maps to show what that really means. People should be able to see what is available to develop and whether it has the right zoning. Mr. Chalnick said he liked the fuzziness. He also cited the inconsistency between some of the maps. Maps 7 and 8 are used in development, and one says no development in an area and the other says minimal development in the same area. He added that he would also like to see areas yet to be protected. Ms. Peterson said the intent is to see where all things intersect via the use of overlays. The future land use map would become the summary of everything. Mr. Macdonald said he remembers the fuzzy map as an “aspirational document.” He felt it would be helpful to have more “knowns” to make it more accurate, but still have it fuzzy. Conserved land and habitat blocks should be identified. Airport property should also be identified as belonging to the City of Burlington. Ms. Louisos asked how they can make sure that there are no “parkless” areas in the city. Mr. Conner said the Open Space Plan did an analysis of the distance of homes from parks. Ms. Peterson questioned whether residential, non-residential and mixed use are relevant as categories and whether “intensity of use” is relevant. Mr. Conner noted that buy law the Comprehensive Plan must include natural resources, transportation, community facilities, and future land use. Mr. Mittag said there should be other well-defined maps (e.g., land use in the 500-year flood plain). Mr. Chalnick suggested looking at Comprehensive Plans from other communities. Mr. Riehle said it would be helpful for him to see where things are being built, what is in the hopper, what can potentially be built, how may units are likely to be built in the next few years, etc. He also asked when the Commission will be discussing residential use in commercial areas. Ms. Peterson said those requests have been passed on to the Economic Development Committee. Mr. Conner said they could also go to the Affordable Housing Committee. Mr. Riehle said he saw that as an ancillary use, not having residential take over commercial areas. Ms. Peterson noted they would have to recognize that the Future Land Use Map is not necessarily consistent with current zoning. 4 Mr. Conner said staff has learned that the State updates maps from time to time. He would like to update maps 7 and 8 with the latest State designations. Mr. Macdonald advocated for keeping it simple. It is an aspirational document and shouldn’t be overloaded. Mr. Mittag felt it shouldn’t be aspirational. It should be something the city has to follow. Mr. Chalnick felt it works well as aspirational. It should just be consistent. Ms. Peterson stressed that the Comprehensive Plan is a guidance document for possibly zoning changes in the future, etc. Ms. Louisos suggested the possibility of an employment map, if such a thing exists, so they can be sure there is housing near where people work. Mr. Conner explained that gathering employment data is “tricky.” 9. Other Business: a. City of Burlington Comprehensive Development Ordinance Amendments: ZA-22-04, ZA-23- 01: Mr. Conner explained that this is a clarification in the South End/industrial area. All uses must total at least 51% of a building. It is not a policy change. There is a policy change regarding parking in the south end. There is proposed housing on the east side of the train tracks. He showed a map that indicated “nodes” with different building heights and indicated where Champlain Parkway ends. This area is to be called the South End Innovation Area. Ms. Louisos then provided an update on discussions with the Other Paper regarding articles on what the Commission is doing. Articles should be 750 words maximum, no acronyms, use of graphics OK, no logos. The writer’s name should be included. Ms. Louisos said she also reached out to other committees to come up with possible topics but have the articles written by a Planning Commission member. Mr. Engels suggested something on the Comprehensive Plan, what it is, how to get involved, etc. Ms. Conner suggested an article on each of the Vision/Goals categories. As there was no further business to come before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned by common consent at 8:52 p.m. ___________________________________ Clerk