HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - Natural Resources & Conservation Committee - 05/01/2024
NATURAL RESOURCES & CONSERVATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA
MAY 1, 2024
Participation Options
In Person: 180 Market Street, Third Floor, Conference Room 301
Assistive Listening Service Devices available upon request
Electronically: https://meet.goto.com/132864541
Via phone: +1 (571) 317-3122| Access Code: 132-864-541
Regular Session 6:00 p.m.
1. Welcome (6:00 p.m.)
2. Additions, deletion, or changes in order of Agenda Items (6:01)
3. Comments from the public not related to the agenda (6:04)
4. *Adoption of meeting minutes (6:10)
5. City updates (6:15)
a. *Staff
b. Council
6. Homegrown National Parks https://homegrownnationalpark.org/ (6:30)
7. *Stormwater pond lawn maintenance policies; Mowing and pesticide use review (6:45)
8. *Staff update on VT pesticide ordinance (7:00)
9. *Tree regulation: Strategy for LDR revision draft creation (7:15)
10. Member updates & reports: (7:45)
a. Chair
b. Other Members
11. Other business (7:55)
12. Next meeting, June 5th
13. Adjourn (8:00)
180 MARKET STREET, SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT | (802) 846-4107 | WWW.SOUTHBURLINGTONVT.GOV
Respectfully submitted:
Dave Wheeler
Water Resources Engineer
***Attachments included
PAGE 1
NATURAL RESOURCES & CONSERVATION COMMITTEE
DRAFT MEETING MINUTES
APRIL 03, 2024
The South Burlington NRCC held a regular meeting on Wednesday, 6 April 2024, at 6:00 p.m.,
in Room 301, 180 Market Street, and by GoToMeeting remote participation.
Members present: J. Chaulot, Chair; L. Kupferman, Vice Chair; L. Bailey, J. Bossange, K. Boyk,
L. Yankowski; C. Badalamenti-Smith
Also present: D. Wheeler, City liaison; L. Smith, City Council Liaison; R. Doyle.
1. Welcome:
Mr. Chaulot welcomed everyone.
2. Additions, deletions or changes in the order of Agenda items:
Added introductions, update for the Farrell/Larkin proposed developments and
Herbicide/Pesticides. Mr. Bossange moved to approve the changes to the agenda, Mr.
Kupferman seconded. The motion passed unanimously.
3. Comments and questions from the public not related to the agenda:
No comments.
4. Adoption of Meeting Minutes & Introductions:
4.a: Meeting minutes from February 07,2024- Mr. Bossange moved to approve, Ms.
Boyk 2nd. Meeting minutes from Joint meeting March 06,2024- Mr. Bossange moved
to approve, Ms. Boyk 2nd. Both approved unanimously.
4.b: Introduction of committee members to our new City Council Liaison, Lawrence
Smith.
5. City Updates:
a. Brief Updates
i. Open Space Plan Report
S. Kershner, & A. Matth, Director Rec & Parks, will be presenting the
current draft to the city council April 15, 2024, for feedback and further
direction. (Reference the minutes from February 2024).
NATURAL RESOURCES AND CONSERVATION COMMITTEE MEETING APRIL 6, 2024 | PAGE 2
ii. Land Development Regulations (LDRs) Regarding Trees
Reference the current copy included. There is no update yet since the
Planning Commission has been working on another project. Mr. Bossange
was concerned due to our submitted changes not being evident in the
current document and there is no mention of tree preservation. Mr.
Wheeler commented that the process requires looking at the existing
regulations to see how trees are already regulated and then identifying
what the NRCC thinks should be regulated that is not currently and
determining the best location in the LDRs for those changes or updates.
Several suggestions were discussed with Mr. Wheeler recommending we
wait for this process and Ms. Boyk suggesting this committee review the
current document language evaluating what may or may not need
updating. Mr. Doyle thought some of our changes could be worked into
other parts of the of the LDRs. Mr. Wheeler will pass along our concerns
about the length of time this process is taking while Mr. Smith will
express our concerns to the city council.
iii. Environmental Justic Discussion Update:
Mr. Wheeler has been in touch with State staff, but has not found
anyone willing to come and discuss this topic. Some suggestion were
offered, including the Coming Clean Group www.comingcleaninc.org,
Nature for Justice, and UVM Gund Institute.
iv. Eclipse:
Is Monday April 08, 2024. South Burlington is in the zone of totality. Lots
of people will becoming to Vermont for this event- it is suggested the
committee and residents stay home if possible. A Variable Message
Board has been delivered to Red Rocks Park and the city is looking to have
safety control measures at other parks.
b. Association of Vermont Conservation Commissions
Mr. Wheeler reported that the Association of Vermont Conservation Commissions
(AVCC) had reached out to contact the NRCC. In the past the AVCC has hosted an
annual summit for conservation committees around the State. There is also a
listserv to connect members and share information. Members of the NRCC can join
by emailing: vtconservation+subscribe@googlegroups.com
There is also a handbook: https://vtconservation.com/handbook/
NATURAL RESOURCES AND CONSERVATION COMMITTEE MEETING APRIL 6, 2024 | PAGE 3
Ms. Boyk reminded us we had applied for a small grant to find someone to advise
us how to have a public presentation of the Open Space Plan, but we never heard
back. The AVCC also reminded the committee of a $50 annual due.
6. Updates on public education of wildlife safety:
Ms. Yankowski informed the committee of an event at city hall, outside the library,
April 24 at 4pm. She has contacted a wildlife rehabilitator, 2 game wardens from the
VT Dept of Fish & Wildlife and VINS to send someone. This is to help educate the
citizens of South Burlington as wildlife begin to emerge from winter hibernation and
babies are born. This topic had been discussed and a work group formed. There
seemed to be some confusion by the rest of the committee and the event was put to a
vote to see if the committee was in favor of advertising the event as a NRCC event. Mr.
Bossange motioned to approve the event endorsement by the NRCC, Mr. Kupferman
2nd. Approved with 1 dissenting vote. The event will need to be advertised. Mr.
Wheeler noted that since this would be a NRCC event, he will touch base with the
library and City Hall.
7. Review of DRB Application List:
The Farrell Project for Holmes Rd. Faced a set back with a Class II Wetland. They need
to rework the plans. Rice Memorial High School will be working on paths and fields.
The paths will be replaced with permeable surface materials. Goss Dodge/Jeep wants
to add a walkway down to the sidewalk along Rte7/Shelburne Rd. With landscaping
and an additional building.
8. Member updates and Reports:
a. Chair -
b. Other members – Ms. Boyk attended a focus group for conservation
commissions held by the Vermont Conservation Strategy. This is part of
developing Vermont’s 30x30 and 50x50 Conservation Plan, which was
mandated by the Community Resilience and Biodiversity Protection Act of
2023. They've been holding a series of focus groups for various stakeholders,
and will present a summary of findings at a public listening session in May.
9. Other Business:
Discussed next month’s agenda to include homegrown national parks
(https://homegrownnationalpark.org/), discussion of a pesticide ordinance, approve
any backlog of draft meeting minutes, continue the discussion on the LDRs, and
review any DRB applications.
10. Next Meeting: Wednesday, May 1, 2024 at 6:00 p.m.
City of South Burlington
Natural Resources & Conservation Committee
Meeting Minutes
Date: November 2, 2022
Committee members in attendance: Andrew Bolduc (staff liaison), David Wheeler (staff liaison), Jean-
Sebastien Chaulot (Chair), Larry Kupferman (Vice Chair), Katherine Boyk (taking notes in Lisa’s absence),
John Bossange, Michele Korpos, Linda Bailey, Drew Shatzer, Helen Riehle (City Council Liaison, left at
7:30)
Missing: Lisa Yankowski
Members of the public in attendance: Celia Begonia, Ella Morris, John Evans, Riley Humphrey, Jack
Olender (all UVM students), Kayla Prouty
Start time: 6:03 pm
1. Andrew gave evacuation directions
2. Addition to agenda – discussion of ash trees during/after item 7
3. Comments from the public
a. Committee members introduced themselves to UVM students
b. No public comments
4. Adoption of meeting minutes
a. Larry moved to adopt meeting minutes, seconded by Linda
b. Motion passed 6-0 (Drew abstained)
5. City Updates – Andrew
a. City is budgeting for upcoming year. Costs have increased (gas, wastewater treatment
chemicals, etc.). City pension liability expected to increase 20-30%.
b. Andrew met with Open Space work group and Champlain Valley Conservation
Partnership. CVCP is looking to create an inventory similar to what the work group is
doing. Opportunity to collaborate.
c. Efforts continuing to put a permanent conservation easement on Wheeler Nature Park
with Vermont Land Trust. VLT requested additional survey work and boundary marking.
d. Upcoming City Council agenda items:
i. Public hearing on regulations of residential heating and hot water in new
construction.
ii. Tesla requested change to zoning district along Shelburne Road to allow a car
dealership in the Hannaford plaza.
iii. I-89 bike/pedestrian bridge. Construction is still a few years out.
iv. Public hearing on changes to LDRs to expand the receiving areas for transfer
development rights to include transit overlay districts. This will allow increased
density along Shelburne Rd, Williston Rd. (Sending areas are SEQ.)
e. Updates from Dave:
i. Two new hires in stormwater department.
ii. Current stormwater projects: Spear St/golf course and Lindenwood (bike path
temporarily closed)
f. No updates from Helen
6. FY23 Annual workplan and agenda planning
a. Jean and Andrew put together a spreadsheet/timeline of the committee’s goals
b. Questions from committee members:
i. What are Auclair and Wheeler management plans? City will reach out to NRCC for
a committee member to participate in the development of these plans. Haven’t
started yet.
ii. What does “Open Space Plan - define maintenance goals” mean? Stewardship,
land management
iii. Will open space plan include wildlife corridors? Yes, using maps rather than field
research.
iv. What does PP&S stand for? Policy Priorities and Strategies, means these items
were included in the City’s FY23 plan
c. Discussion on equity, inclusion, access, environmental justice
i. Council recently passed Declaration of Inclusion. City staff are being trained on
equity/diversity. Committee members may have opportunity to get this training
at future annual orientations. Helen asks if committee members are interested
in this sort of training – yes.
ii. City staff have a workgroup looking at equity in city services.
iii. Katherine suggests look at State of Vermont’s environmental justice bill, passed
this year.
iv. Potential to include environmental justice, land acknowledgement, Abenaki
access rights in management plans.
7. ARPA funding presentation
a. City Council is having a special meeting on November 30 for committees to propose
ideas for ARPA funding. Helen suggests providing a short written description and having
committee member(s) attend the meeting to answer questions.
b. Ash trees – Andrew says current City budget (CIP) has $160,000 per year for next 3 years
to remove and replace all city ash trees. Helen says the committee can provide input on
this.
c. First ARPA request – Larry suggests requesting $50,000 to enhance canopy, and allow
city staff to spend this funding as they see fit. Katherine suggests considering using this
funding to treat black ash trees in forests on city-owned parks/lands (maybe Wheeler?)
and/or private land with willing landowners. Would need to identify ash tree locations,
hire a professional to apply treatment.
d. Second ARPA request – Larry suggests requesting $25,000 to hire a consultant/facilitator
to help with development of Open Space Plan. Consultant would help work group to
focus ideas, hold public meeting(s), and develop the plan based on input received.
i. Dave suggests looking at CCRPC UPWP, may be able to do this sort of work
e. Larry will write proposals for both projects. Jean and Larry will attend meeting.
8. Tree Ordinance workgroup
a. Met in September to look at tree ordinance. Want to meet with Craig to ask questions
about the ordinance Dave will help them schedule with Craig.
b. Michelle wants to include language about not cutting/trimming trees during bird nesting
season. Check Vermont state law and maybe include same language.
9. Other Paper articles
a. Katherine and Michelle have committed to write articles, Drew is interested. Michelle
will write an article in March about Japanese knotweed or bird nest surveys before tree
cutting. Katherine will write an inventory of water bodies in South Burlington.
10. Public hearing on Airport drive Stormwater Improvement Project
a. 5 waterways in South Burlington (including Potash Brook) are impaired for stormwater
b. The Flow Restoration Plan identified 162 projects in South Burlington
c. This proposed project on Airport Drive would construct two infiltration chambers to
capture stormwater on vacant home-buyout lots. Soil is sandy, very good for infiltration.
Airport plans for a recreation bike path to be built along this area in the future.
d. VTrans awarded $365,000 to cover 80% of project costs, City will fund the rest. Fuss &
O’Neill hired for project design. The design is anticipated to be completed in 2023 and
construction will begin in 2024.
e. The project is anticipated to manage 2.71 acres of impervious surface and reduce total
suspended solids, phosphorous, and peak flow in Potash Brook.
11. Member updates & reports
a. Skipped due to lack of time
Meeting adjourned: 8:12 pm
Next meeting: Wednesday, December 7, 2022 at 6:00 pm
NATURAL RESOURCE & CONSERVATION COMIITTEE
Meeting Minutes September 07, 2022 6:05pm
Attending: Andrew Bolduc (City Liaison), Jean Sebastien-Chaulot (Chr), Lisa Yankowski, Linda
Bailey, William Wargo, John Bossage, Katherine Boyk, Drew Shatzer, Michele Korpos, Helen
Riehle (City Council Rep).
Missing: Larry Kupferman (Vice Chr)
Also attending: Dave Wheeler, South Burlington Deputy Director for Water Quality,and
Roseanne Greco.
1) Andrew was running late so Dave started the meeting with what to do in an emergency.
2) No changes to the agenda.
3) No comments from the public.
4) John moved to adopt the minutes from August 3, 2022, Bill 2nd.
a. Approved with a correction of removing 1 extra period.
5) City Updates
a. We welcomed Dave Wheeler.
b. The City Council has reviewed the survey for allocating the $3 million ARPA
funds and how SB residents considered they should be used. They have not
decided yet on allocation of funds. Per Helen- the council is planning on a
special meeting on how to use the extra ARPA Funds, hopefully in November.
The council is expecting the city committees to be involved and will have
representatives attending. The attached link is to the council meeting minutes:
1. Agenda - City Council - 09/06/2022 (sbvt-records.info)
c. Helen added, and It has been on the local news: UVM & Snyder/Braverman
Developers have entered into an agreement to build additional low income
housing for students & employees in the South Burlington City Center area.
1. Linda wondered if they would be tax exempt because of UVM. It should
not be tax exempt since UVM will not “technically” own the housing.
Lisa asked if this is for current students or if UVM is trying to increase
their student population which has severely aggravated the housing
market in the Greater Burlington/South Burlington area.
d. The dedication of the Goose Park- Market Street is September 20 at 5pm.
e. Some storm water work that is/will be happening:
BURLINGTON COUNTRY CLUB STORMWATER
PROJECT: Construction of a stormwater gravel wetland on Burlington Country
Club property is scheduled to begin on the week of August 29th. The project will
treat stormwater runoff from five acres of impervious surface, including a section
of Spear Street. The project will impact the multi-use path that runs parallel to
Spear Street, in the vicinity of the UVM Miller Research Farm and Bio Research
Complex. A detour along the multi-use path will keep access for bike and
pedestrian thru-traffic while the path is impacted. Check back for detour
schedule updates.
LINDENWOOD DRIVE STORMWATER PROJECT: Construction of a
stormwater collection system and stormwater pond along Lindenwood Drive is
scheduled to begin on on the week of August 29th. The project will require a
closure of the multi-use path connecting Lindenwood Drive to Farrell Park and
all bike and pedestrian traffic will need to use a marked detour along Swift Street.
A schedule for the necessary path detour will be posted here when finalized.
STONEHEDGE SWALE IMPROVMENTS: Maintenance and dredging of an
existing drainage swale between Stonehedge Dr and the Szymanski Park
stormwater pond is complete.
STONEHEDGE BIKE PATH: The contactor working on the Stonehedge Swale
Improvements will begin maintenance/repaving of a section of bike path
connecting the Stonehedge neighborhood to Szymanski Park. The bike path will
be closed from 8/29 through 9/9. 1. Michele had questions about some of the changes that would be
happening due to the work. Dave explained what was happening.
Katherine asked if SB has an MS4 perrmit- we do. And John asked if the
city is going to able to keep up with infrastructure upgrades, staffing
challenges, budgets. The city is looking for new employees in the Storm
Water division.
6) Priorities & strategies
a. The city council has approved our work list, ref the list included with the
meeting information. The NRCC will be listed under the committees column:
1. Comprehensive Plan Update,
2. Affordable & Community Strong
3. Green & Clean
4. Core Municipal Services & Administration
a. “Bike Rack for the herbicide/fungicide pledge proposed work.
b. Andrew suggested an agenda plan to look at what we are working on and what
still needs to be worked on. We need to get ourselves organized. The Open Space
work group will start meeting again beginning Wednesday 09/14.
7) The budget for FY ’23 is just starting. The only funding there was for replacing trees was cut.
Tom feels we need an agenda item to discuss getting funding added back in for FY’24 Budget.
Roseanne hopes we get working on this subject sooner rather than later.
8) Weed Warriors.
a. Future Weed Warrior events are coming up. Larry Had emailed about one of
the events later this month Check with Drew.. Michele asked if the group is
looking at Wild parsnip and working to prevent further spreading. And she had
thoughts about including Japanese knotweed. Her thought is it could be used to
make tinctures against Lyme disease. Katherine asked if burdock would added
to the list to control. Mike Bald who organizes and educates the Weed Warriors
has this as a possible item.
9) Tree Ordinance and proposed amendments
a. The question was presented about modifying the Tree Ordinance to include
protection of private trees. The ordinance currently protects city owned trees
from indiscriminate cutting. John will head up a work group with Michele, Drew
& Linda joining him. They will look at the LDRs and obligations developers have
for trees on a proposed site for development.
1. Michele had some questions about the current ordinace:
a. DBH should be defined (Diameter at Breast Hght)
b. What about tree removal or trimming during nesting season.
c. Sec 4, E & F need better clarification
d. Section 5- person not personal. Should others beside the city
arborist remove city trees?
e. Few other suggestions she can bring to the work group.
10) Members & Staff reports
a. Lisa for the Common Area for Dogs Committee (CAD). Fencing is up around the
new proposed park at Wheeler. The committee elected not to have a “soft”
opening due to issues..
1. Limited access for ieveryone with a dirt berm between the
gated entrance and the parking lot. The gates and access are not ADA
compliant. The fencing is enclosing a much smaller area than had been
approved by the DRB. The CAD committee felt safety would currently
be an issue. The group went before the city council about the issues
and submitted a letter about the issues.
2. Helen added that the city council is working on trying to get
some of the issues rectified so the park can be used. Additional funds
have been earmarked.
b. Climate Action Committee (CAC)- Bill Wargo
1. They have been very busy. Reference the latestClimate Action Plan we
were sent. We each need to review and email Bill any thoughts and/or
changes. See page 54.
a. This lead Michele to inquire about the composition of the
material used to fill in the basements where the airport
removed houses. What emissions or soil pollution might be off-
gassing. Was “dirty” soil used? Helen assured the group there
are requirements for the fill used and this should not be an
issue.
b. Katherine asked Dave about methane gases from the waste
water plants. It is captured and used except from a small
amount that gets burned off. Bill wants the CAC to look into
this.
c. Land Trust- John Bossange
1. The group sent a letter to the city council in support of the Climate
Action Plan and preserving open land.
d. CVPC did not meet in August.
Meeting adjourned at 8:00 pm
OUR NEXT MEETING IS WEDNESDAY OCTOBER 5, 2022 at 6PM
FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
-Tree replacement funding added back into the FY ’24 city budget.
- spreadsheet looking at what we are involved with and need to look at. To help develop future
agendas.
-work group report- update the committee on their projects.
-Michele will report back about airport land use.
- we hope for some feedback from the city attorney
- expecting Tom DiPietro to attend.
- Need to discuss using ARPA Funds.
-
NATURAL RESOURCE & CONSERVATION COMMITTEE
Meeting Minutes April 6, 2022 at 6:00 PM
Virtual Meeting only
Attending: Ashley Parker, Jean Sebastien-Chaulot (Chr), Larry Kupferman (Vice Chr), Drew Shatzer, Bill
Wargo, John Bossange, Katherine Boyk & Lisa Yankowski.
Missing: David Crawford
Also Attending: Craig Lambert City Arborist and Chris Trombley from the Affordable Housing Committee
1) Virtual meeting protocol reviewed by Ashley.
2) No additions, deletions or changes to the agenda.
3) No comments from the public.
4) John moved to approve the minutes from March 02. Lisa 2nd. Approved unanimously with 1
correction.
a. Corrected minutes have been submitted to Ashley.
5) Emerald Ash Borer city control protocol discussion with Craig Lambert.
a. Jean and other committee members have been wondering about the removal of ash
trees, the schedule for removal, for planting and if there may be better methods that
could be employed. The concern was a fear of large swaths of the tree canopy being
clear cut. Trees sequester CO2 and help cool the earth. Drew had mentioned treating
the trees to prevent issues from the borers. Craig reassured us - removal is a staggered
pattern happening during the winter. Removal started with trees that are in the worse
shape. Varying varieties of replacement trees, 2.5 inch caliper are planted in the spring.
Trying to plant first could damage the new trees when the old were removed. Removal
first before the ash trees can be affected by any borers since the borers cause rapid
decline and other issues could happen. Trying to treat the trees would be expensive
since treatment would have to continue indefinitely and may not save the tree. The
original goal was to have this project done within 5-6 years. Katherine suggested
stretching the time line out, but it has already been delayed due to the pandemic and
budget issues. Funds are lost at the end of the fiscal year instead of rolling over. This
has affected the ability to bid for labor and pricing on the new trees.
b. How can we help Craig! We need to push to have a dedicated line item in the budget
that allows unused funds for the project to roll over into the next fiscal year. We are too
late for 2023, so we can start with 2024. Larry asked about the possibility of using any
of the ARPA, (American Rescue Plan Act). Katherine thought this might be an issue due
to the rules for the funds. Ashley is sending us the city council’s list for the funds and a
new rule that just came out.
6) Pesticide discussion.
a. John has written a potential draft for an ordinance on pesticide use to be adopted by
the city. (Reference materials included in the information packet for this meeting.)
Ashley reminded us that our committee needs to be directed by the city council to take
this up and we need approval by the council. If we get approval then we need to get
staff time for someone to work with us developing the ordinance. Per advice from
Ashley: Larry moved to have Jean write to the city council about our interest in
developing a herbicide/pesticide usage ordinance for the City of South Burlington. John
2nd. Unanimously approved.
i. Katherine asked if there were any rules governing application during rain or
winds. Only what a manufacturer may have under instructions for use.
Licensed applicators may be under different constraints.
7) Larry move to approve the tiny grant application written by Katherine and sent to the city
council. Lisa 2nd. Approved, (reference documents for this meeting for the application).
8) NRCC’s role in conjunction with the DRB (Development Review Board).
a. We need to remember that we are an advisory committee. We can offer suggestions on
proposed developments and hope the DRB will side with us or the developer will
consider. We cannot tell them they have to do this. We have already submitted a letter
to Marla in the Planning Dept with the hope it will be given to developers to consider as
they plan future developments. It lets them know items we consider important. We
offer ourselves to evaluate a plan if asked. We have been glad to do this in the past.
Larry suggested we touch base with planning to remind them, there has been a lot going
on over the last couple of years.
9) Red Rocks Management Plan Review
a. Ashley thought we had a great meeting. Most of the NRCC group had attended virtually.
Lisa was there for Red Rocks Park. One item Larry felt needed to be added to the plan is
source protection for Queen City Park’s water. This old community has their own water
source the surrounding land has bans on harmful chemical applications. Lisa mentioned
her greatest fear is the park being developed. Ashley reassured her and all of us that
due to the nature of the funds used to purchase the park- the purpose of the park
cannot be changed from the original reason the funds were used. This will also be
added as a reminder for future committee members and city staff. Katherine thought
the habitat map in the appendixes should be moved to the main body of the plan.
b. Larry moved we recommend the city council accept the new revised Red Rocks
Management Plan, with the 2 additions. Approved unanimously.
10) Per John- nothing new to report from the SB Land Trust.
11) Climate change task force- reference the packet of minutes and information provided by Bill W.
The documents were included in our information packets. They are focusing on building
standards and weatherization.
12) Member & Staff reports
a. The brontosaurus is done working at Wheeler and Audubon will not do anything else
until fall. The management plan is due to be updated but had to wait for the Land Trust
to receive the land conservation easement document. The archeological work is still
pending for Hubbard Park.
b. Lisa had sent an email including a letter to the City Council what the Common Area for
Dogs Committee would like to see added, (similar to the letter the NRCC had sent).
With new apartment buildings being built- the projects should include an area for dogs
to their “business”.
c. The CVCP is planning upcoming events- Ashley is sending an email.
i. St George, VT has rescheduled their Town Meeting. They would like to get
feedback on conservation. See the announcement.
d. The Land Trust is looking to have a roundtable get together on conservation.
e. The NRCC work group needs to meet again to look at what we have so far.
NEXT MEETING IS………….. MAY 4, 2022 at 6:00pm
FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
John, Jean Drew & Katherine are forming a work group to look at our work plan- needs to be
updated.
NATURAL RESOURCES & CONSERVATION COMMITTEE
Meeting Minutes for Wednesday 06/02/2021 at 6:05 pm
Attending: Ashley Parker, Larry Kupferman (Interim Chr), Drew Shatzer, Jean Sebastien-Chaulot, Cory
Santorello, Lisa Yankowski,
Missing: David Crawford
1) We passed on a review of the virtual meeting process.
2) Additions, deletions or changes to the agenda.
a. Larry wanted to discuss communications from former Chr Ray Gonda, how did
committee members feel about getting emails. The email are very informative and if a
topic catches our interest we may want to add it to our agenda so it is warned.
3) Comments from the public- no attendees.
4) Adoption of minutes from 05/05/21
a. Lisa moved to adopt, Corey 2nd- approved.
5) VT Master Naturalist Class
a. The workshop is created by Alicia Daniels. The course encompasses the environment
and natural resources. You need to know what is happening to be to get involved, be
active and understand. The curriculum is based around a specific town or area
attendees usually reside in. This year long course includes field trips, onsite field
activities , learning , awareness of issues and expert guest speakers.
b. Jean asked about financial support. The Regional group may be sponsoring at class that
would include South Burlington, Williston, St George, Shelburne & Hinesburg. Ashley
thinks we the NRCC should until we have a defined vision of information we want to
learn about. Ashley will check in with Alicia and see what she thinks about the group
doing the course. After all, the more “experts” you have, the better you can engage and
educate the public.
6) Work plan.
a. Larry is trying to understand the work plan in conjunction with working with developers.
He would like to get a list or map that shows the 25 identified sites of interest from the
IZ Report. Peer Yens Hilke- the federal government has given the Fish & Wildlife
funding that could be accessed by committees for projects of land protection. Ashley
feels we should develop a list of recommendations for possible projects. Keeping in
mind the parcels would need to be identified and the owners of these parcels. Projects
could be developed in conjunction with other committees. Keep in mind, the city
council is the final decision maker and what might be future maintenance costs.
7) SB Wildlife Video Project
a. Jean hasn’t managed to get the material yet. Needs to get the clips from Ray and will
check with other residents that have game cameras.
8) Member and staff reports
a. Chair- Larry brought up the proposed development on the Long Property and how
residents from both South Meadow & South Point had weighed in on dislikes about the
proposed layout. Both had some good feedback and suggestions to mitigate impacts to
the views from their own developments. It was hard to tell if any of the suggestions will
be incorporated or considered by the Longs. Larry had been at city hall and saw a large
map that had clear delineation lines on LDRs that would be helpful to have. Ashley will
see if it is possible to get a copy from Paul Conner. The LDR work has been a 3 year
work in progress that will soon be finished with input from another group Ray Gonda
and several others have been providing input on. Ray has been emailing the NRCC with
information about the LDRs. Lisa still needs to get in contact with council member Tim
Barritt about protecting monarch butterfly breeding plants milkweed, by not mowing
around the Cider Mill storm water pond.
b. Reference the update from Ashley. At least 2 rangers have been hired for Red Rocks to
help mitigate damage, dogs and issues at the park which gets lots of visitors during the
summer. The last of the survey work is done, now to get permits. There will a sign asking
people please keep their distance from the Wolf Tree to prevent anyone getting hurt.
She is getting older and branches are starting to come down. New signage is expected
to be installed at Wheeler and trail maintenance is continuing. The SE Group is working
on design elements for Underwood. Discussions with the state are beginning since Act
250 permits will be required.
i. Community Hike Series has been very successful and the upcoming 6/5 Bird
Walk is full with a waiting list.
ii. There are 2 more Weed Warrior events planned.
1. June 19th at Wheeler
2. June 26th at Red Rocks
9) Future agenda items
a. Larry doesn’t feel the committee really needs bylaws. We are an advisory committee.
Kevin sent an email on the roll of committee chairs- we can use this to guide us. We
should all look at the current work plan and think about which areas we feel we can
have the most impact, knowledge or curiosity about. We will need orientation time for
new NRCC committee members.
10) The next meeting is Wednesday July 07 at 6pm.
Lisa moved to adjourn, Drew 2nd. 7:35pm
1
Joint meeting of the Recreation and Parks, Natural Resources and Conservation,
Bicycle and Pedestrian, and Dog Park Committees on Tuesday 10/27/20 at 5:30
pm.
Attending:
Staff: Holly Rees and Ashley Parker
Committee members: David Crawford (Natural Resources & Conservation),
Amanda Holland (Bicycle & Pedestrian), Barb Sirvis (Dog Park), Bob Britt (Bicycle &
Pedestrian), Catherine Frank (Bicycle & Pedestrian), Colin MacIntosh (Natural
Resources & Conservation), Corey Santorello (Natural Resources & Conservation),
Dana Farr (Bicycle & Pedestrian), Drew Shatzer (Natural Resources &
Conservation), Havelah Gagne (Bicycle & Pedestrian), Eric Silverman (Bicycle &
Pedestrian), Katie Langrock (Recreation & Parks), Linda Chiasson (Dog Park), Lisa
Yankowski (Natural Resources & Conservation), Muriel More (Dog Park), Nic
Anderson (Bicycle & Pedestrian), Ray Gonda (Natural Resources & Conservation),
Shawn Goddard (Bicycle & Pedestrian), William Barber (Recreation & Parks), Will
Sudbay (Recreation & Parks), Elizabeth Milizia (Dog Park), Donna Leban (Bicycle &
Pedestrian), Larry Kupferman (Natural Resources & Conservation; Dog Park)
Members of the public: Andrew Chalnick, Sophie Mazowita
1) Presentation/Discussion of the Underwood Project: (Meeting of the
Recreation and Parks, Natural Resource and Conservation, and Bicycle and
Pedestrian Committees)
Ashley shared the current site plan and described several elements of the
shared use portion under discussion tonight. Some areas of concern are
parking, speed on Nowland Farm Rd, access points to Underwood. Striping is
planned to Nowland Farm Rd to designate parking spots on the side of the
road. Trail assessment underway to make good connections between the
woodland and meadow trails
Comments:
Cathy F: comments on the end of the shared use path at the southern end
joining the end of Parkside Drive sidewalk becoming an access point.
2
Nic A: why is the shared use path not following the existing mowed path?
Ashley: the proposed shared use path follows a course that will affect wetland
areas with the least disturbance and still be able to connect to other planned
paths and the viewpoint.
Nic A: have you consider a 12 ft path rather than the current 10 ft wide? And
will it be plowed?
Ashley: yes, all SoBu paved paths are ploughed thus the 10’ wide design.
Nic A also asked about the design and engineering of a crosswalk (location?)
and Ashley will look into that question.
Muriel M asked about an access point from Spear St at the south end of the
property so that her neighborhood could access the park from across the
street.
Ashley points out Class II wetlands in that immediate area and issues with
people crossing the wetlands.
Holly mentioned funds might be available to provide an access point at Spear
and Pheasant Way.
Discussion about crossings between Deerfield and South Village and how
penny for paths might be used for a bike lane, crossings and additional
infrastructure on Spear St.
2) Presentation/Discussion of Dog Recreation Management in South
Burlington Natural Areas: (Meeting of the Recreation and Parks, Natural
Resources and Conservation and Dog Park Committees)
Holly : management plans for Wheeler Homestead and Natural area, Red
Rocks Park include significant concern for public safety and maintenance of
fragile natural systems in place. If dogs are allowed access to these areas, what
should it look like and if restrictions are considered, then how should they be
implemented.
She suggested we look at these questions through three lenses: natural
resources, recreation and dog activities and asked about reactions to how/who
3
should proceed with proposals as described in the materials prepared by staff
for the meeting entitled “Dog Recreation in South Burlington; Strategies for
Natural Resources Protection and Management while Sharing Outdoor Spaces
with Dogs”.
Holly referenced the research that the Dog Park Committee did to select an
area (Wheeler Homestead, northern sloped area) as a site for a new dog park.
Discussion:
Larry K: would rather see a task force comprised from various committees in
order to look thru the “lenses” as Holly referenced.
Linda C: described the process used by the Dog Park committee to reach the
decision to recommend Wheeler Homestead as a site for a dog park.
Muriel M: supports an expanded mission for the Dog Park Committee,
referenced some of the research Dog Park members did about “dog
recreation” and described the work in Boulder CO as a good resource for
future research into best practices. She questioned the pros and cons of a dog
permit and further suggests that any plan should include off leash options and
use the regional partnership as a source.
Elizabeth M agrees that a task force be created to address the issues.
Lisa Y: comments on dog issues at Red Rocks and the number of out of
towners using Red Rocks as a place to walk their dog. She suggests better
monitoring.
Holly says a broader perspective at play now to rework the management plans
with a tiered approach with feasibility of monitoring to better address issues
as well as improve or create educational campaigns.
Ray G: concerned with off leash behavior without a closer look at wildlife and
habitat focus; sees Underwood as part of the wildlife corridor through that
part of town leading south.
Ashley offers that research shows that communities value land according to
usage and that potential future strategies should come from committees
assigned to the tasks.
4
Colin M: traffic at Red Rocks from Burlington and how would a So. Burlington
permit proposal affect that usage?
Holly: been working with her counterpart at Burlington Parks Dept since there
is no dog park facility in the southern section of Burlington. She would like to
see a social agreement about the affects of dog waste as part of dog
permitting (and licensing?)
Elizabeth M: Friends of Dog park group has created a trifold handout and could
do more with feedback from others as to what information should be
included. She sees the role of the Friends group to volunteer and offer
educational materials.
Holly: general sense from the meeting that a task force comprised of members
from the 3 committees be proposed to Council and have the chairs of each
make the presentation. We should vet the idea thru the committees and
consider a time in January for Council action.
Minutes taken by Larry K.
NRCC Staff Update
May 1, 2024
Growing Urban
Forests in the Face of
Emerald Ash Borer
Grant
•44 Trees have been
interplanted between existing
Ash Trees on Nowland Farm
Rd & Midland Drive
2024 Community Tree Planting Grant
Ash Tree Injections
•Work will begin once the ash
trees leaf out at the end of
May
•Weed Warrior -Join Mike
Bald at Wheeler
Homestead on May 4th to
remove invasive plants.
There will be two time
groups: 1-3 pm and 3-5
pm. More info to come!
Oakbrook
Pines
Subdivision
State Stormwater Permit
Presentation
May 8, 2024
Stormwater
Staff
Presenting to
Neighborhood
Parks & Open Spaces Master
Plans
Silken Kershner, Transportation & Open Spaces Project Manager &
Adam Matth, Director of Recreation & Parks
Staff
Presented to
Council on
4/15
Timeline
Step 1 – Kick off
(Spring 24)
Joint Committee
Mtg (March 2024)
Presenting to
Council (WE ARE
HERE)
Consultant
Selection, Bid and
Award
(Spring/Summer 24)
Step 2 – Listening &
Learning
(Summer/Fall 24)
Step 3 – Evaluation
(Winter 2024-2025)
Step 4A – Options
and Goals, PARKS
(Spring 25)
Step 5A – Bring it
Together, PARKS
(Summer 25)
Step 4B – Options
and Goals, OPEN
SPACES (Fall 2025)
Step 5B – Bring it
Together, OPEN
SPACES (Winter
2025)
Staff
Presented to
Council on
4/15
Water Ordinance
Proposed Updates to the South Burlington Water Ordinance
April 1, 2024
Staff
Presented to
Council on 4/1
Back to
Council on
5/20
Water
Ordinance
Update
Overview
Definitions
Abbreviations
Sec. 38-71. Required Connections
Sec. 38-72. Permits to Construct
Sec. 38-73. Water Main Construction
Sec. 38-78. Hydrant Maintenance
Sec. 38-80. Private Water Mains and Hydrants
Sec. 38-106. Service Connections
Sec. 38-107. Water Meters
Sec. 38-108. Internal Piping
Sec. 38-109. Ownership Responsibilities
Sec. 38-114. Seasonal Water Service
Sec. 38-116. Water Allocation
Sec. 38-151. Department Rights in an Emergency
Staff
Presented to
Council on 4/1
Back to
Council on
5/20
Water
Ordinance
Update
Overview
Sec. 38-152. Liability
Sec. 38-156. Consent to Ordinance
Sec. 38-181. Interference
Sec. 38-185. Water Conservation
Sec. 38-186. Waterline Mark Out
Sec. 38-187. Protection from Freezing
Sec. 38-212. Authority affecting safe potable water
Sec. 38-233. Civil Penalties
Sec. 38-234. Violations
Sec. 38-266. Authority to Establish Rates
Sec. 38-269. Minimum Customer Fees
Sec. 38-271. Excess Revenue
Sec. 38-277. Final Water Readings
Sec. 38-280. Abatement
Staff
Presented to
Council on 4/1
Back to
Council on
5/20
Existing Ordinance
Most recently updated in 2002
Staff
Presented to
Council on 4/1
Back to
Council on
5/20
City Conducting
Industrial User Survey (IUS)
& Lead Service Line
Inventory (LSLI)
•IUS: Conducting outreach to industries to determine wastewater pollutants from industrial users. The City’s wastewater ordinance will be updated related to industrial discharges identified through the survey.
•LSLI: Conducting a lead service line inventory to identify any lead pipes in the water distribution system. Work is ongoing, but no lead pipes have been found.
City Committees Discussion
- May 29th at 5:00 pm
The City Charter states that Council can appoint committees it “feels to be in the best interests of the City.” In the adopted FY24 Policy Priorities and Strategies, includes a priority to “consider revamping the Committee structure after the adoption of the City Plan 2024.”
In March the City Council gave direction for staff and Committee Chairs to work together to develop recommendations for Council to consider that ensure that the Council’s policy advising committees are aligned to the work of the City as outlined in the City Plan 2024.
Recommendations may include anything from keeping some or all committees as they are, to modifying areas of responsibility, to establishing one or more new committees or merging existing committees.
Key questions we will ask are:
•How do we best establish committees that will ensure the principles and work outlined in the City Plan 2024 get accomplished as effectively and efficiently and with the most engagement from the community?
•How do we make the best use of staff time to support this policy and community work?
•How do we ensure that volunteer committee members’ time is well spent and aligned to the vision of the community, Council, and Plan?
On May 29th at 5:00, a conversation between Staff Liaisons, Committee Chairs will meet to discuss.
Municipal Stormwater
Operations and
Maintenance
South Burlington,
Vermont
May 1, 2024
Presentation by:
David Wheeler, Water Resources Engineer
South Burlington Department of Public Works
Plowing
Outfall Inspections
Street Sweeping
Shelburne Street Sweeping
Catch Basin Cleaning
Shelburne CB Cleaning
Pond Mowing
STP Inspections
Shelburne Pond Mowing
STP Repairs
DecemberNovemberOctober
Stormwater Maintenance Schedule
MarchFebruaryJanuary SeptemberAugustJulyJuneMayApril
Equipment Used in
Stormwater O&M
Equipment Used
in Stormwater
O&M
Maintaining
Conveyance
Infrastructure
•Stormwater Pipes (80 Miles!)
•Storm Drains (3,400)
•Culverts
•Swales
•Stone lined ditches
Grass Swales & Stone Lined Ditches
Pipes &
Culverts
Sinkholes
Catch
Basins
•Remove Sediment
•Inspect
•Mark with “No Dumping” label
Sometimes we
rescue baby ducks
Maintaining
Treatment
Infrastructure
•Wet Ponds
•Treatment Wetlands
•Bioretention
•Underground Storage
•Infiltration
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Year
Number of Stormwater Treatment Practices (STPs) Maintained by the
South Burlington Stormwater Utility by Year
Stormwater Treatment Practices Maintained by
South Burlington by Type
Bioretention
Wet Pond
Permeable Pavement
Sand Filter
Dry Swale
Swirl Separator
Gravel Wetland
Storage Vault
Dry Detention Pond
Wet Ponds
•Mow side slopes twice per year
•Remove woody growth
•Inspect side slopes for sloughing or
animal burrows
•Inspect outlet orifice for clogging after
large storms
•Remove sediment from pretreatment
•Exercise valves
Bioretention / Rain
Gardens & Treatment
Wetlands
•Mow side slopes twice per year
•Remove woody growth, weed
planted areas and replant as
necessary
•Inspect side slopes for
sloughing or animal burrows
•Inspect outlet orifice for
clogging after large storms
•Remove sediment from
pretreatment
STP Inspections
Street
Sweeping
•Sweep twice per year, once in
the spring after snowmelt and
once (or more) in the fall after
leaf drop
•Sweep Class II roads more
frequently, as needed
Plowing/De-Icing
Plowing
Outfall Inspections
Street Sweeping
Shelburne Street Sweeping
Catch Basin Cleaning
Shelburne CB Cleaning
Pond Mowing
STP Inspections
Shelburne Pond Mowing
STP Repairs
DecemberNovemberOctober
Stormwater Maintenance Schedule
MarchFebruaryJanuary SeptemberAugustJulyJuneMayApril
STAFF UPDATE ON
VT PESTICIDE
ORDINANCE
May 1, 2024
H.706
BILL SUMMARY
•This bill would ban certain
uses of neonicotinoid
pesticides beginning on July 1,
2025 and the use of
neonicotinoid treated article
soybean and cereal grains crop
seeds starting January 1, 2029.
•It would also create an
exemption order process at the
Agency of Agriculture, Food,
and Markets (AAFM), which
would allow use of specified
neonicotinoid products in
certain applications.
ANALYSIS
•Overall, whether there are fiscal impacts caused by the ban ultimately
depends on market response. If producers of pesticides are granted
exemption orders or register new products or uses that comply with the
bans, the actual fee revenue loss would decrease.
•In addition to potential revenue losses, the exemption orders process,
which would start in fiscal year 2026, could require additional staff time at
AAFM to implement. This additional workload could create budgetary
pressure if there is a need for more staff to complete exemptions, however,
this potential pressure is likely to be limited.
NEONICOTINOID
USE
•Neonicotinoids are a class
of neurotoxic, systemic
insecticides that are
extremely toxic to bees and
other pollinators.
Neonicotinoids are the
most widely used class of
insecticides in the world
and include imidacloprid,
clothianidin,
thiamethoxam,
acetamiprid, dinotefuran,
thiacloprid, and nithiazine
NEONICOTINOID
USE
•Note that these data do
not include usage by
certified private
applicators, who may apply
pesticides (including those
classified as restricted use)
on their own property and
are not required to report
their individual usage
data, or usage from seeds
treated with
neonicoinoids, which is
discussed separately below
ESTIMATED NEONICOTINOID USE ON
TREATED SEEDS
•A significant quantity of neonicotinoid insecticide is used in Vermont on treated
seed “treated articles”.
•According to seed sales reported to the Agency in 2022, approximately 99.6% of
corn planted is treated with neonicotinoids with 87% of the treated corn using
clothianidin as an active ingredient.
•The remaining 13% is treated with thiamethoxam.
•Agency estimates of neonicotinoid use via treated seeds:
•0.25 - 1.25 mg/seed * 30,000 seeds/acre * 99.6% of 90,000 acres ≈ 1,482 – 7,410 lbs
neonicotinoid per year in Vermont for corn
•The Agency estimates 63-193 lbs neonicotinoid per year for soybeans
TOTAL USE VS. APPLICATION RATE
•Including the use of neonicoinoids on treated seed significantly increases
the total pounds of neonicotinoids used, with treated seed use contributing
more than any other treatment type. However, when evaluating pesticide
use, the most useful metric is the rate of application per acre, not the total
amount used in a geographic area.
•When comparing the data on a rate per acre basis, the lawn care and
ornamental industry apply imidacloprid (the most commonly used
neonicotinoid) at a maximum rate of 0.4 lb active ingredient per acre per
year and planting of treated seed (as estimated above) applies a maximum
rate of 0.08 lb active ingredient per acre per year.
LEGISLATION
•(a) No person shall sell, offer for sale or use, distribute, or use any
neonicotinoid treated article seed for soybeans or for any crop in the cereal
grains crop group (crop groups 15, 15-22, 16, and 16-22).
•(b) The Secretary of Agriculture, Food and Markets, after consultation
with the Secretary of Natural Resource, may issue a written exemption
order to suspend the provisions of subsection (a) of this section. Such
written exemption order shall not be valid for more than one year.
LEGISLATION
§ 1105C. NEONICOTINOID PESTICIDES;
PROHIBITED USES
•(a) The following uses of neonicotinoid pesticides are prohibited:
•(1) the outdoor application of neonicotinoid pesticides to any crop during bloom;
•(2) the outdoor application of neonicotinoid pesticides to soybeans or any crop in the
cereal grains crop group;
•(3) the outdoor application of neonicotinoid pesticides to crops in the leafy vegetables,
brassica, bulb vegetables, herbs and spices, and stalk, stem, and leaf petiole vegetables crop
groups harvested after bloom;
•(4) the application of neonicotinoid pesticides to ornamental plants; and
•(5) the application of neonicotinoid pesticides to turf.
•(b) The Secretary of Agriculture, Food and Markets, after consultation with the
Secretary of Natural Resources, may issue a written exemption order to suspend
the provisions of subsection (a) of this section.
1
Dave Wheeler
From:John Bossange <johnbossange@gmail.com>
Sent:Friday, April 19, 2024 4:44 PM
To:Laurie Smith
Cc:47central; Jean-Sebastien Chaulot; Julian Keenan; Katherine Boyk; Linda; LISA
YANKOWSKI; Michele Korpos; Dave Wheeler; Jessie Baker; Steve Locke
Subject:'EXTERNAL'Re: Meeting follow up
This message has originated from an External Source. Please use proper judgment and caution when
opening attachments, clicking links, or responding to this email.
Jean-Sebastien,
What do you think? Not much new here, but probably the best we can expect for now,
On Fri, Apr 19, 2024, 10:21 AM Laurie Smith <lsmith@southburlingtonvt.gov> wrote:
Dear NRCC members,
First, please remember to not "reply all" to this email to avoid any chance of violating the Open Meeting Law.
At the April 3rd NRCC meeting I said that I would follow up on how the process for inclusion of tree preservation
language into the LDRs would proceed.
I had a conversation with Paul Conner regarding this matter and he fully understands the sense of urgency that
the NRCC has regarding getting the tree preservation language incorporated into the LDRs. The intention of staff is
to get to this issue as soon as the Commission has been able to complete the LDR changes that are needed to
bring the city into compliance with the new State S100 housing regulations. While staff cannot precisely identify
the timing of completion, they are anticipating having the bulk of the S.100 work completed by June such that
staff and the Commission would begin to have capacity to take on other projects. He did note, importantly, that
the City Council has also prioritized that the Commission prepare updates to the City Center Form Based Code and
the Official Map and as such the Commission will need to balance several priorities this summer.
At the 10/24/23 commission meeting, during presentation that the NRCC made to the Planning Commission,
Kelsey said that staff would check everywhere in the LDRs that trees are mentioned. Staff has done this, and
Kelsey's intention in forwarding these excerpts was to give you the opportunity to review what already exists so
2
that you have that background information as you prepare for a follow up presentation to the PC. At the end of
the 10/24 meeting Kelsey recommended that the NRCC review their policy positions and prepare to resubmit to
the PC for future discussion.
Staff indicated to me that given the timing, the NRCC could potentially help speed up the Commission’s
review by doing a comparison of the committee’s working proposal with the existing LDR language as
provided by Kelsey, identifying where there might be redundancy or conflicts, updating the proposal based on
any findings, and summarizing what the Committee is proposing that would potentially become new city
policy/regulations.
The intention of staff is to make room on the PC agenda for revisiting this issue once the S100 compliance issues
are dealt with. At that time the staff is prepared to forward the NRCC recommendations to the PC in advance of
the meeting so the information can be reviewed by the commissioners in preparation for a thorough discussion
about how to proceed. How a tree preservation policy ultimately gets incorporated into the LDRs will be a
technical/legal process, but a clearly written policy statement from the NRCC will provide the PC with the
recommendations and guidance needed to help them complete this process efficiently.
If you have any further questions or concerns about this you can email me directly, but again please make sure
not to "reply all".
Regarding the April 24th event, please let me know if you would like me to promote the event on the SB FPFs.
I will be out of town for the May meeting but look forward to seeing you all in July,
Best,
Laurie
802-363-8070
1
Dave Wheeler
From:Kelsey Peterson
Sent:Monday, March 11, 2024 10:32 AM
To:Jean Sebastien Chaulot; Jessica Louisos
Cc:Jessie Baker; Dave Wheeler
Subject:RE: 'EXTERNAL'Tree ordinance integration review
Attachments:KP Notes - Current LDRs to NRCC 2024-03-11.docx
Hi Jean Sebastien,
Thanks for checking in. The Planning Commission is continuing to work through updating the LDRs to comply with
Act 47/S.100, as the City regulations have been out of compliance with State requirements since July 2023. Since
that time, completing City Plan 2024 and working on Act 47/S.100 compliance have had to be the Planning
Commission’s top priorities.
As previously discussed, Staff will not be recommending that a tree regulation be dropped into the LDRs as a
standalone section. There are already several sections that include regulation of trees to varying extents and for
varying purposes throughout the LDRs. It would be most effective for any additional, increased, or changed
regulation to be in the relevant parts of the LDRs. I’ve attached the early work I’ve done to identify where trees are
mentioned in the LDRs to this email. My next steps will be to compare what the NRCC has proposed with the
existing regulations to map out potential areas of change.
I will be able to turn my attention to the proposed tree regulations as soon as this LDR update has moved forward. I
am hopeful that we’ll be able to move what the PC is working on now forward to public hearing by the beginning of
April.
I hope that helps. Let me know if you have further questions. I am also cc’ing your Staff Liaison, Dave Wheeler, on
this email.
Best,
Kelsey
Kelsey Peterson (she/her)
Senior City Planner
City of South Burlington
180 Market Street
South Burlington, VT 05403
(802) 846-4106
www.sbvt.gov
Notice - Under Vermont’s Public Records Act, all e-mail, e-mail attachments as well as paper copies of documents received or prepared for
use in matters concerning City business, concerning a City oƯicial or staƯ, or containing information relating to City business are likely to be
2
regarded as public records which may be inspected by any person upon request, unless otherwise made confidential by law. If you have
received this message in error, please notify us immediately by return email. Thank you for your cooperation.
From: Jean Sebastien Chaulot <chaulot@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, March 7, 2024 4:09 PM
To: Kelsey Peterson <kpeterson@southburlingtonvt.gov>; Jessica Louisos <jlouisos@southburlingtonvt.gov>
Cc: Jessie Baker <jbaker@southburlingtonvt.gov>
Subject: 'EXTERNAL'Tree ordinance integration review
This message has originated from an External Source. Please use proper judgment and caution when
opening attachments, clicking links, or responding to this email.
Good afternoon Kelsey and Jessica,
The NRCC presentation of the draft tree ordinance to the PC last November drew a lot of interest from
the commission members. Other priorities postponed the review and integration of the tree language in
the LDRs. The estimated hold was until February at the time.
Please let me know when the PC agenda will be including this topic.
The NRCC wants renew our offer to help.
Thank you.
Jean Sébastien Chaulot
1
ARTICLE 2 DEFINITIONS
[12] Caliper. The diameter of a tree trunk measured at six (6) inches above the ground for trees
up to and including four (4) -inch caliper size, and as measured at twelve (12) inches above the
ground for larger sizes.
[12] Canopy tree. Any large maturing tree which at maturity provides a crown width sufficient
to shade a minimum of twelve hundred (1,200) square feet.
[26] Large maturing tree. A tree whose height is greater than thirty-five (35) feet at maturity
and meets the specification of “American Standards for Nursery Stock” published by the
American Association of Nurserymen. See also canopy tree.
[40] Significant tree. A tree other than an evergreen with a caliper of eighteen (18) inches or
more.
[40] Silviculture (forestry). Shall include the following land use activities conducted in
accordance with state-defined proper forest management: the growing and harvesting of trees
or timber for purposes other than their fruit; and the use of temporary processing equipment
such as chippers and portable sawmills, which are used in association with harvesting
operations and are removed from the site once harvesting operations are complete.
[41] Small maturing tree. A tree whose height is thirty-five (35) feet or less at maturity and
meets the specification of “American Standards for Nursery Stock” published by the American
Association of Nurserymen. See also canopy tree.
ARTICLE 8 – CITY CENTER FORM-BASED CODE DISTRICT
[116] G. Landscaping Requirements.
(2) Within the City Center FBC District, the minimum landscaping budget may be applied to
non-bulb perennial vegetation, or other amenities, as detailed in Table 8-2 and Article 11.B, Civic
Space Types, as part of a cohesive landscaping plan for the site that provides adequate planting
of trees and shrubs appropriate to the site.
[128] T3 – Street trees
[133] T4 – Street trees
[135] T5 – Street trees
ARTICLE 9 - SEQ
[149] 9.08 SEQ-NRN Sub-Districts; Specific Standards
A. Landscape and Fence Buffer Standards, SEQ-NRN Sub-District.
(2) Existing Vegetation.
2
(a) Existing vegetation that can effectively serve as landscape buffer to potentially
incompatible uses and/or are significant, heathy trees shall be retained to the maximum
extent possible, while accommodating the permitted level of development.
(3) Landscape Buffer Types.
(c) Type II – Informal Plantings. A Type II landscaped buffer must be composed of a
split rail fence (or equivalent approved by the DRB), major trees, a partial understory of
small trees, and a berm with a mixture of shrub type plantings. The minimum amount
of planting per 100 horizontal feet of buffer shall be a full ground cover, two trees of at
least 3” caliper, three ornamental or understory trees of at least 2” caliper, and any
combination of shrubbery that occupies at least 50% of the area at the time of planting,
all of which shall be distributed throughout the minimum buffer width described in Table
9-2A. With approval of the City Council, up to 10 feet of the green space between a
recreation path and a property line may be used to enable the installation of the split rail
fence and a portion of a berm.
ARTICLE 11A STREET TYPOLOGIES
[171] Pedestrian Street
Greenbelt / Furniture Zone: Landscaping - Street trees shall be installed on one side at spacing
requirements of applicable district
[172] Avenue
The greenbelt may consist principally of hardscape elements but must include sufficient access
to soil for required trees
Medians measuring 9’ or more in width shall be planted with street trees at an average spacing
of no more than 50’ on center.
ARTICLE 11B CIVIC SPACE/SITE AMENITY REQUIREMENTS
[174] Site Amenities – Streetfront Open Space - Slight, gentle, and undulating berms from 1-3
feet in height are encouraged to block views of parking areas. Ever-green landscaping is
required. Include canopy trees whose branches are above the average visual line of sight,
located throughout the space, with no more than 40 feet between any two such trees or
between a tree and the street or parking area. Landscaping should aim to distract from parking
beyond, but should not create dense walls of shrubbery or trees. Artwork is also highly
encouraged.
[174] Wooded Area - Naturally occurring area with predominance of canopy trees with
enhancement and public access.
[174] Sun Terrace; [174] Courtyard; [174] Pedestrian Pass;
3
ARTICLE 12
[183] (2) Small On-Site Habitat Block Exchange. An applicant may apply to exchange a portion
of a Habitat Block not to exceed two (2) acres or ten (10) percent of the application’s total land
area, whichever is less, for an equal amount of land within the same Planned Unit Development
or Site Plan upon written request, without requiring a Habitat and Disturbance Assessment.
Such land exchange must not include Core Habitat Block Areas and shall not eliminate existing
Habitat Connectors. The land to be protected through the exchange may be located separate
from the Habitat Block. To approve a small on-site habitat block exchange, the Development
Review Board shall require the applicant to:
(a) Retain a similar or greater quality and maturity of vegetation within the proposed areas for
exchange; and
(b) Prioritize the retention of forest stands that include trees measuring 9 inches diameter at
breast height (dbh) within the exchange area.
[184] F. Standards for Habitat Block Protection.
(1) General Standards. Except as specifically exempted pursuant to Subsections 12.04(G)(1)
and (2) below, approved by the DRB pursuant to subsection 12.04(G)(3) below, or modified in
accordance with Section 12.04(D) above, all lands within a Habitat Block must be left in an
undisturbed, naturally vegetated condition. Specifically:
(a) The clearing of trees and understory vegetation is prohibited except as specified in this
section.
[185] G. Exempted Uses and Activities.
The following uses and activities are exempt from review under this section:
(2) Removal of invasive species, removal of diseased vegetation, and removal of dead or dying
trees posing an imminent threat to buildings or infrastructure
[185] 12.04 Habitat Block Overlay District, H. Development Within Habitat Blocks
The encroachment of new development activities into, and the clearing of vegetation,
establishment of lawn, or other similar activities in Habitat Blocks is prohibited. However, the
DRB may allow the following types of development within a Habitat Block pursuant to the
standards contained herein:
(1) Restricted Infrastructure Encroachment, pursuant to Section 12.02 and the following
supplemental standards:
4
a. . . .
b. The clearing of vegetation adjacent to the facility shall be strictly limited to the
minimum width necessary for the facility to function for its intended purposes
(street tree requirements shall not apply in these areas). Street lighting shall be
prohibited in these areas except as necessary to meet State or Federal law; and,
c. . . .
[187] C. Standards for Protection of Habitat Connectors.
(4) Relocation of Mapped Habitat Connector. An applicant may apply to relocate a Habitat
Connector from its mapped location on the Habitat Block and Habitat Connector Overlay
Districts Map but must connect to Habitat Connectors or Habitat Blocks on adjacent parcels.
Any relocated portion shall be accompanied by a restoration plan, prepared by a qualified
consultant (e.g., landscape architect, professional wildlife biologist or equivalent). The
restoration plan must include a robust planting plan of native tree and shrub species, specific
actions to minimize disturbance to any existing vegetation supporting a habitat function, and a
maintenance plan to ensure its growth. The restoration plan must design the relocated Habitat
Connector to support the movement of mammal species such as fisher, bobcat, river otter,
mink and coyote within a period of ten (10) years.
(5) Restoration of Habitat Connector. The DRB shall require restoration of a Habitat Connector
on parcels where development is proposed and pre-existing conditions consist of Habitat
Connectors that are less than 150 feet in width along the entire length of the Habitat
Connector. Restoration must include a robust planting plan of native tree and shrub species
and specific actions to minimize disturbance to any existing vegetation supporting a habitat
function within areas of the Habitat Connector less than 150 feet wide. The applicant may
request, in writing, to waive this requirement. The DRB may grant a waiver only if restoration
of the Habitat Connector is not possible due the placement of pre-existing structures on the
subject parcel.
12.07 River Corridor Overlay District - RCO
[194] I. Development Standards.
(2) Natural Vegetation Requirement. All lands within the River Corridor must be left in an
undisturbed, naturally vegetated condition. The clearing of trees and other vegetation is
generally prohibited. This standard also does not apply to forestry operations or silvicultural
(forestry) activities exempt from local zoning regulation or the removal of trees that are dead,
diseased, heavily damaged by ice storms or other natural events, or identified as an invasive
species. The placing or storing of cut or cleared trees and other vegetation is also prohibited.
[207]
5
(3) Development in the Floodplain Overlay District. All development in the Floodplain Overlay
District shall comply with the following standards:
(p) Erosion Control Measures on Lake Champlain. The installation of erosion control measures
within may be approved by the DRB provided the following standards are met: (iv) The project
shall preserve, maintain and supplement existing trees and ground cover vegetation to the
greatest extent possible.
ARTICLE 13 SUPPLEMENTAL REGULATIONS
[215] 13.04 Landscaping, Screening, and Street Trees
A. Purpose.
The City of South Burlington recognizes the importance of trees, vegetation, and well-planned
green spaces in bringing nature into the city and using these as a resource in promoting the
health, safety, and welfare of city residents through improved drainage, water supply recharge,
flood control, air quality, sun control, shade, and visual relief. Landscaping and screening shall
be required for all uses subject to site plan and planned unit development review. Street tree
planting shall be required for all public streets in a subdivision or planned unit development. In
evaluating landscaping, screening, and street tree plan requirements, the Development Review
Board shall promote the retention of existing trees while encouraging the use of recommended
plant species. In making its decisions, the Development Review Board may refer to the
Vermont Tree Selection Guide, published by the Vermont Urban & Community Forestry
Program and/or the recommendation of the City Arborist.
[215-16] B. Landscaping of Parking Areas.
(4) Landscaping Requirements.
(a) Landscaping shall include a variety of trees, shrubs, grasses and ground covers. All planting
shall be species hardy for the region and, if located in areas receiving road runoff or salt spray,
shall be salt-tolerant.
(b) At least one (1) major deciduous shade tree shall be provided within or near the perimeter of
each parking area, for every five (5) parking spaces. The trees shall be placed evenly
throughout the parking lot to provide shade and reduce glare. Trees shall be placed a minimum
of thirty (30) feet apart.
(c) Trees shall have a caliper equal to or greater than two and one-half (2 ½) inches when
measured on the tree stem, six (6) inches above the root ball.
(d) Where more than ten (10) trees are installed, a mix of species is encouraged; the species
should be grouped or located in a manner that reinforces the design and layout of the parking
lot and the site.
6
(e) Within the City Center FBC District, landscaping required within this section shall not count
towards meeting minimum landscape budget requirements as detailed in Section 13.04(G).
[217] (6) Solar Canopies. Where canopies that serve as solar electricity generation facilities are
proposed over surface parking areas, the requirements of this section shall be modified as
follows:
(a) The requirements for interior landscaping and planting islands shall not apply to any area
covered by solar panels or their support structures, and;
(b) The requirements for perimeter trees shall not apply where such trees would interfere with
the installation or function of the panels; instead, alternate means of providing screening and
reducing glare from parking area perimeters, including hedges, fencing, or art installations shall
be provided.
[220] C. Screening or Buffering.
The Development Review Board will require landscaping, fencing, land shaping and/or
screening along property boundaries (lot lines) whenever it determines that a) two adjacent
sites are dissimilar and should be screened or buffered from each other, or b) a property’s
appearance should be improved, which property is covered excessively with pavement or
structures or is otherwise insufficiently landscaped, or c) a commercial, industrial, and multi-
family use abuts a residential district or institutional use, or (d) a parking or loading area is
adjacent to or visible from a public street.
[220] (6) Recreational vehicle parking areas shall be screened with evergreen trees and shrubs
and such landscaping plan shall be part of the application.
[220] G Landscaping Standards.
(1) The Development Review Board shall require compliance with any Tree Ordinance or
Landscaping Design Standards enacted by the City of South Burlington, subsequent to the
effective date of these regulations.
(2) Overall, there shall be a mix of large canopy tree species within each landscaping plan.
(3) Landscaping Budget Requirements. The Development Review Board shall require minimum
planting costs for all site plans, as shown in Table 13-4 below. In evaluating landscaping
requirements, some credit may be granted for existing trees or for site improvements other
than tree planting as long as the objectives of this section are not reduced. The costs below
are cumulative; for example, a landscaping budget shall be required to show a planned
expenditure of three percent of the first $250,000 in construction or improvement cost plus
two percent of the next $250,000 in construction or improvement cost, plus one percent of the
7
remaining cost over $500,000. The landscaping budget shall be prepared by a landscape
architect or professional landscape designer.
[221] I. Landscape Maintenance.
Maintenance and responsibility. All planting shown on an approved site plan shall be
maintained by the property owner in a vigorous growing condition throughout the duration of
the use. Plants not so maintained shall be replaced with new plants at the beginning of the
next immediately following growing season. Trees with a caliper of less than 5” may be
replaced on an inch-by-inch basis with trees of the same genus of at least 2” caliper each. No
permit shall be required for such replacements provided they conform to the approved site
plan. Replacement of trees with a caliper of greater than 5” shall require an amendment to the
site plan.
E. Transition Zone.
[304] (b) Acceptable design techniques and modifications applied within a Transition Zone,
subject to DRB review and approval, include but may not be limited to:
(ii) Using existing natural features, such as changes in topography, waterways, or tree stands to
visually screen or functionally separate different forms and intensities of development.
ARTICLE 14 SITE PLAN AND CONDITIONAL USE REVIEW
[235] B. Excluded from Site Plan Review.
Specifically excluded from the provisions of this article are:
(10) Any clearance of scrub or brush not including trees, plants or shrubs approved as part of a
planting plan for site plan approval. Removal of any trees of caliper greater than 5” shall require
site plan approval. See also Section 13.06 (I) for maintenance and responsibility for landscaping
improvements.
ARTICLE 15.A SUBDIVISION REVIEW
15.A.12 Resource Protection Standards
[268] C. Resource Identification.
Site features or resources to be incorporated in subdivision layout and design, as shown to
scale on sketch and master plans, must be field verified and delineated on the ground by the
applicant as specified in Article 12 of these Regulations for each resource, and as indicated on
preliminary and final subdivision plans and plats. (1) Existing Site Features. Existing site
8
features of significance to the City, to be considered in subdivision layout and design include:
(b) Prominent shade trees, street trees, or documented specimen or witness trees.
ARTICLE 15.C TND
[307] E. Conservation PUD Sub-Zones.
A Conservation PUD must include the following Sub-Zones, as designated on the PUD Master
Plan, and as more specifically identified and delineated on preliminary and final subdivision
plans and plats:
(1) Conservation Area. A Conservation PUD must include one or more designated
“Conservation Areas” which at minimum comprise 70% of the total tract or parcel area; and
which, to the maximum extent physically feasible, are contiguous or linked to resource or other
open space areas located on adjacent parcels or in the immediate vicinity of the proposed PUD.
Any tract or parcel area, or portion thereof, which is subject to a conservation easement that
prohibits or otherwise limits future subdivision and/or other development held by the City or a
qualified nonprofit organization may be included in and incorporated into a designated
Conservation Area so long as said tract or parcel, or portion thereof, and the proposed
Conservation Area otherwise meet the requirements of this Section 15.C.05.E.
(a) The designated Conservation Area(s) must include and incorporate:
(iii) Other locally identified natural or open space resource areas present on the tract or parcel,
as necessary to meet the minimum 70% allocation requirement. These may include:
• Woodland or mature tree stands located outside of Habitat Blocks and Habitat Connectors
regulated under Article 12.