Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - Planning Commission - 01/14/2014 SOUTH BURLINGTON PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES 14 JANUARY 2014 The South Burlington Planning Commission held a regular meeting on Tuesday, 14 January 2013, at 6:30 p.m. in the Conference Room, City Hall 575 Dorset Street. Members Present: J. Louisos, Chair; T. Harrington, T. Riehle, S. Quest, B. Benton, G. Calcagni Also Present: P. Conner, Director of Planning & Zoning; J. Barlow, City Attorney; S. Dopp, J. Russell, M. Lalonde. E. Fitzgerald, R. Greco, M. Simoneau, P. Nowak, J. Benoit, E. Goldberg, T. McKenzie Executive Session: Ms. Harrington moved to enter executive session to discuss documents provided by Legal Counsel which are accepted from access to public records, with Paul Conner, Director of Planning & Zoning, and Jim Barlow, Legal Counsel. Ms. Quest seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Regular Session: 2. Agenda: Additions, deletions or changes in order of agenda items: No changes were made to the agenda. 3. Open to the Public for items not related to the agenda: No issues were raised. 4. Planning Commissioner Announcements and Staff Report: Mr. Conner: The City Center Task Force gave its final report to the City Council at Saturday’s meeting. The report received very positive comments. Work continues on amending Paul Dreher’s contract. Jim Barlow has been hired as Legal Counsel. 5. Discuss School Safety Overlay District Proposed by South Burlington School Board: Ms. Louisos noted the Commission had asked for an opinion from legal counsel. Mr. Russell said there should be a “happy medium” somewhere. City Center is based on raising tax revenue based on dense use. He felt the School District’s concerns could be handled by “controlling” rather than “eliminating” certain uses. He questioned whether there could be a viable City Center if certain uses were eliminated. He also didn’t want to see a lot of “unintended consequences” and felt there were other tools to get the same result. Mr. Simoneau asked if the School District’s proposal is legal. Ms. Louisos said the opinion is that there are some things proposed that could have ramifications to the city. Mr. Russell said he has helped negotiate the Airport garage and the Circ Highway and would be willing to volunteer to help. Mr. Riehle asked about the reasoning behind the areas around the schools. He noted the areas around Marcotte School, the High School and the Middle School are very broad. Chamberlin is not. Mr. Lalonde, member of the School Board, said they looked at walking patterns, classes held outside the school, etc. Chamberlin is all residential, so there is not so much of a threat. And the uses they are concerned about are not allowed there. The School Board’s main concern is with uses (e.g., bars selling alcohol during school hours) that could result in impaired driving. Ms. Quest suggested the Commission wait to make a decision until the issues in Court can be settled. In the meantime, the Commission could be thinking of a plan where everyone wins. Mr. Simoneau agreed. He said everyone wants children to be safe and for the City Center to succeed. Mr. Russell said the economics of City Center are such that you won’t see a small bar. He questioned whether the school district would oppose a drug store which sells Class 2 drugs. Ms. Harrington said the question is where you draw the line. She saw the possibility of a “domino effect.” Mr. Lalonde said there is no data regarding drug stores, but there is data for methadone clinics, pain clinics, etc. Ms. Calcagni said the hope is that City Center would become a transportation hub and people could take public transportation rather than drive there to drink. Members agreed that it makes sense to wait for the Court ruling before considering a decision. 6. Review and consider approval of proposed FY2014 mid-year adjustment and FY2015 Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission Unified Planning Work Program project request: Mr. Conner noted this year the Regional Planning Commission has an open invitation for input as to what projects it should undertake. There is a match component for these projects and the city would propose an “in kind” match rather than cash in most cases. A list of 6 proposals developed by a team of staff was presented for consideration. He noted each had been previously discussed through the Capital Improvement Plan or at community meetings. Ms. Quest said she would support all 6. She asked about adding the missing sidewalk on a portion of Spear St. Mr. Conner read from the C.I.P. regarding that proposed work. Ms. Louisos said she would like to see a sidewalk on Patchen Rd. to the Winooski line. Mr. Conner noted that is already in the works with a Burlington project on the current S. D. Ireland property. Mr. Riehle questioned the increased investment in CCTA and noted that the buses he sees have 2, 3, or 4 riders at best. He felt there is a stigma about riding on the bus and that there shouldn’t be more buses until people figure out how to fill the buses. Mr. Conner said that one of the proposed projects would examine when there is a “breaking point” under the current transportation system. If there is no advance planning, the answer could be something like an enlarged Exit 14, which would cost everyone money. Mr. Riehle asked about the overhaul of the traffic overlay district. Mr. Conner explained the nature of the traffic overlay district and how many peak hour trip ends there can be. What staff is finding is that it’s a “blunt instrument” and not a very creative tool (e.g., no credit is given for busing employees to the mall). The hope is to replace this with something more creative. The current system has precluded any new restaurants in that area and most buildings taller than one story. The hope is to replace “can’t have” with “can have if…” Ms. Nowak cited the importance of thinking outside the box and said it was fortunate to have Regional Planning working with the city to do that. Ms. Harrington moved to approve the submission of all 6 suggested projects to the City Council for approval. Mr. Riehle seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 7. Continue Review of draft City Center Form Based Code: a. Discuss Application Review Process Mr. Conner noted that staff had worked on the details of how this would function. He noted there are places for Planning Commission discussion on policy decisions. Staff looked at where DRB review would be required and how an applicant might meet a deadline for notification, etc., for a plan that doesn’t go to the DRB. Ms. Louisos noted the public now believes that if something large is going in, there is a public review and not an administrative review “behind closed doors.” Mr. Conner said anything like a site plan decision would have to be posted on the property. He added that with administrative review, there is a 30-day period for a decision after the administrator makes a decision. Ms. Quest felt neighbors should be aware of what is in the works. Mr. Conner noted that the Form Based Codes Committee is looking to draft a “black‐white” decision process. Ms. Louisos felt it doesn’t seem transparent not to have a time period in which a person could give input. Mr. McKenzie said the concept is that with Form Based Code you don’t care what goes into a building; if the building meets the standards, they’re good with it. Ms. Greco felt you can still “surprise” residents. Ms. Nowak questioned whether the city really wants Form Based Code for the whole city. People may want more say in other places. Ms. Dopp asked where public amenities fit into the review process. Mr. Simoneau said there has to be 5% of square footage for public amenities when you exceed 50,000 sq. ft. Mr. Conner said there could be a pallet of option and specified lighting, benches, etc. Mr. McKenzie said it’s OK with him if the public doesn’t want Form Based Codes, but to wind up with a “hybrid” isn’t the way to go. He said the committee worked hard to meet the expectations of the community, and it isn’t right to take pieces of it. When parameters are set, the developer has to live within them. Mr. Simoneau noted that the Town of Williston has set parameters. There is a menu of options to satisfy a requirement. Ms. Harrington asked if any other community with Form Based Code utilizes a DRB. Mr. Conner said Mr. Dreher has noted that anything larger than 40,000 sq. ft. goes to the DRB. Ms. Nowak asked people to keep in mind what has already been accomplished. Only 2 places in Vermont have Form Based Codes: Newport, which was already built, and Huntington which has 2 general stores. Neither is like South Burlington. Mr. Conner added that South Burlington is somewhat unique in New England. Mr. Conner noted that an application would be deemed complete when the Fire Department and Public Works input have been received. Members agreed to continue this discussion at the work session on Saturday, 25 January, 1 p.m. 8. Discuss Scope of City-Wide Regulation/Code update for Dreher Designs contract: a. Consideration of elements of the current Regulations to be excluded from contract b. Consideration of geographic areas to be excluded and/or have limited revisions Mr. Conner directed attention to the list of topics proposed not to be included in Mr. Dreher’s scope of work. Members agreed with the list. Mr. Conner then asked about geographic areas that may be excluded. These could include the Airport/Chamberlin area and other areas where a separate, robust planning process is planned or may be warranted. Ms. Quest suggested the Southeast Quadrant which also has separate ideas. Members agreed with both of these. Mr. Simoneau urged taking time to do this correctly. Ms. Nowak said people need to see what this would be outside of a limited area. Mr. Simoneau said the code can be customized to go with the “DNA” of a specific area, but the aim is to have one code for the whole city. Ms. Louisos suggested possibly excluding the Lakeshore area. Members asked to have Mr. Dreher provide a first draft of this area and the Commission can see from there. Mr. Conner said the flood plain areas would be excluded as no development is allowed there. As there was no further business to come before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 10:00 p.m. Clerk Published by ClerkBase ©2019 by Clerkbase. No Claim to Original Government Works. 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburl.com MEMORANDUM TO: South Burlington Planning Commission FROM: Paul Conner, Director of Planning & Zoning; Justin Rabidoux, Director of Public Works; Ilona Blanchard, Project Director; Todd Goodwin, Recreation & Parks Director SUBJECT: Proposed FY 2014 Adjustment and FY 2015 CCRPC Unified Planning Work Program projects DATE: January 14, 2013 Planning Commission meeting Again this year the Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission is seeking input on possible transportation planning projects they should undertake in their next fiscal year. Last year the CCRPC funded a portion of the Form Based Codes project, initiated Transportation Demand Management planning for City Center, and undertook certain intersection analyses. An accessibility study for City Parks and signalization project are slated to be underway as well. For FY 2015 (and possible FY 2014 mid-year budget adjustments), staff from Planning & Zoning, Recreation & Parks, Public Works, and the City Manager’s Office reviewed a number of potential projects and has proposed a series of six (6) candidate projects for your consideration. Each of these projects has a history that led to the request at this time; through adopted policy documents, community input, in-the-field assessments, or needs identified by the Board or Committee. The process has changed slightly this year; municipalities are being asked to have their legislative bodies take action. Therefore the Commission’s vote will be to recommend that the City Council submit candidate projects to the CCRPC. They are: 1.Williston Road Corridor Land Use – Transportation Impact Assessment 2.Chamberlin Neighborhood-Airport area plan 3.Traffic Overlay District replacement 4.Mutli-Site Stormwater scoping study 5.Multi-Site Recreation Path / Sidewalk scoping study 6.Post-adoption LDR adjustments Please feel free to review the draft Comprehensive Plan for additional ideas. We look forward to gathering feedback on these or other concepts at the meeting, and to having the Planning Commission provide a formal recommendation to the City Council. Staff is happy to answer questions about any of the proposed projects. SouthBurlingtonWillistonRoadCorridor LandUse/TransportationAssessment 1 PROJECTAPPLICATIONFORM FY2015UnifiedPlanningWorkProgram 1.GENERALINFORMATION Submittedby(Name,Title):PaulConner,DirectorofPlanning&Zoning Municipality:CityofSouthBurlington Telephone:(802)8464106 Email:pconner@sburl.com 2.PROJECTINFORMATION ProjectTitle : WillistonRoad/DorsetStreetCorridor LandUse/TransportationImpactAssessment ProjectLocation (nameofroadway,intersection,geographicarea,etc.): WillistonRoad/DorsetStreetcorridor(toinclude existingandpotentialadjacenttransportation routes)approximatelybetweentheStaplesPlaza andPatchen/HinesburgRoad. ProjectDescription (100wordsmax): Thisprojectwouldconsistofatransportation/land useanalysisoftheprimarycorridor(s)serving theCityCenterplusarea.Theanalysiswould servemultipleobjectives:tochartthebuildout potentialoftheareaandunderstandthe transportationinfrastructureneededtomeetthis development;toestablishtransportation systemperformanceobjectives;to scopeandidentify opportunitiestoimprovethecurrentstreetsystem throughtheadditionalofsupportstreetsand consolidationofcurbcuts;andtoidentifytransportation demandmanagementtoolsthatcanmeet theseneedsinacosteffectiveandsmartgrowthorientedmanner. ScopeofWorkOutline : Theproposedscopeofworkfortheprojectisasfollows: Charttheanticipatedlandusebuildoutinthe areaandadjacentareasthatwouldrelyon thetransportationnetworkinthearea EstablishaperformancegoalforWillistonRoad thatfocussesonTDMandmodeshare PerformascopingassessmentofaparallelroadtoWillistonRoadonthenorthside Workwithpropertyownerstoidentifyopportunities toclosecurbcutsalongWillistonRoad &tocreatestreetintersections Developasubareatransportationmodeltoutilizeintheestimation offuturetransportation systemperformanceandimprovements Determinewhatthepoint(ieamountofdevelopment)atwhichthecurrenttransportation infrastructurewillnolongerbesufficient Identifytransportationimprovementsthatcanbe madetoaccommodatethebuildout,with afocusonmeetingtheperformancegoal Provide abasiccostingofTDM&networkimprovementsvs.roadwaywidening improvements. Deliverables: SeetheScopeofWorkabove.Eachscope itemwouldhaveacommensuratedeliverable,alongside meetingsasappropriatewithpublicbodies. 110WestCanalStreet,Suite202 Winooski,VT054042109 8028464490 www.ccrpcvt.org SouthBurlingtonWillistonRoadCorridor LandUse/TransportationAssessment 2 OtherProjectParticipants (e.g.,otheragencies,nonprofits,consultants,communitygroups): Projectparticipants,inadditiontoCityOfficials,board&committeemembers,andthegeneral publicwouldlikelyinclude:areabusinesses&propertyowners,VermontAgencyofTransportation, regionalserviceproviders&advocacygroupssuchas CATMA,CCTA,LocalMotion,andtheCCRPC. ProjectMatchRequirement: SeetheattachedletterindicatingtheCity’s commitmenttomeetthematchrequirements. PublicMeetingRequirement: Theproposedprojectwasdiscussedandapprovedby thePlanningCommissiononJanuary14,2014 andbytheCityCouncilonJanuary21,2014.Various componentshavealsobee ndiscussedwiththe CityCouncilduringregular stormwaterbriefings. Budget: RequestedUPWPAmount $ NonFederalCashMatch $ InKindMatch $ TotalProjectCost $ ProjectSchedule (assumeJuly2014start)–addmorelinesifneeded Milestone Month/Year Projectinitialization&steeringcommitteeestablishment 2/2014 (proposedto startinFeb2014) Establishaperformancegoalthatfocusses onTDMandmodeshare 6/2014 Workwithpropertyownerstoidentify opportunitiestoclosecurbcuts alongWillistonRoad&tocreatestreetintersections 8/2014 Developasubareatransportationmodeltoutilizeintheestimationof futuretransportationsystemperform anceandimprovements 8/2014 Charttheanticipatedlandusebuildouti ntheareaandadjacentareasthat wouldrelyonthetransportationnetworkinthearea 11/2014 Determinewhatthepoint(ieamountofdevelopment)atwhichthe currenttransportationinfrastructurewillnolongerbesufficient 1/2015 Identifytransportationimprovementsthatcanbemadetoaccommodate thebuildout,withafocusonmeetingtheperformancegoal 3/2015 PerformascopingassessmentofaparallelroadtoWillistonRoad 3/2015 ProvideabasiccostingofTDM&networkimprovementsvs.roadway wideningimprovements. 5/2015 FinalReport 6/2015 Stages,asappropriate,wouldinclude publicmeetingsasdet erminedthroughafi nalscopeofwork. 3.BENEFITSTOREGIONALANDLOCALPLANNING Identifywhichstrategiesandactionsfrom theECOSPlanthisprojectwilladdress. (www.ecosproject.com–seeChapter3) Theproposedprojectwilladdressakeystrategy andseveralactionsfromtheECOSPlan: (1)Strivefor80%ofnewdevelopment inareasplannedforgrowth,wh ichamountsto15%ofourland SouthBurlingtonWillistonRoadCorridor LandUse/TransportationAssessment 3 area 1. InvestinAreasPlannedforGrowth– a. Establishwastewater,w aterinfrastructureandpublictran sitinareascurrentlydeveloped and/orplannedforgrowth 2. MunicipalPlanningandZoningStrengthen anddirectdevelopmenttowardareasplannedfor growththroughinfilldevelopment andadaptivereuseofexistingbuildingsthroughmunicipal planandbylawrevisionsands tatedesignationprograms b. Integratecapitalplanningand budgetinginplanning effortstoprovidetherightmixof infrastructureovertime.Officialmapscanalsob eausefultooltodriveinfrastructure improvementsintheareasplannedforgrowth. 3. AffordableHousing–Producingmoreaffordablehousing helpsmeetbasicne eds,createsjobs and50yearhardassets.Thisisacriticalpart oftheinfrastructureofth ecommunityandthe economy a. Implementincentivesthatencouragemorehousingc onstructionthatislowercostincluding, butnotlimitedto,affordableandsupportiveho using.Thishousingsho uldbeintegrated withinourcommunitiesthroughouttheCountyto provideamixofhousingfordifferent incomesandaccesstojobsand services.Theseac tionsinclude: ii. Increasedensityinareasplannedfor growthconsideringcommunitycharacterand design iii. Reviseinfrastructurerequirementswith agoalofreducingcostsfordevelopers 4. Energy b. Decreasegreenhousegasemissions,tosupport theState’sgoalofreducinggreenhousegas emissions50%from1990levelsby2028 iii. Reducefossilfuelconsumptioni nthetransportationsector. 5. State/LocalPermittingCoordination&Improvement c. Developatransportationassessment processthatsupportsexisting andplannedlanduse densitiesandpatternsinCenter,Metro,Suburban,Village,and EnterprisePlanningAreasto allowformorecongestionandgreater modechoicethanallowedbycurrentstandards... 6. MetropolitanTransportationPlanInvestments a. Adequatelyfundthemaintena nceandpreservationofour existingtransportationassets includingroads,bridges,rail,transit,walking/bikingfacilities,andtransportationdemand management(TDM)programsandfacilities c. Futureprojectinvestmentsandspecificfocala reasfortargetedimplementationimpact include: ii. ExpandIntelligentTransportationSystems(ITS)fortheroadwaynetwork,andtrafficand transitoperations,toimprovesafetyandreducecongestion; iii. ExpandtheGo!ChittendenCountyTran sportationDemandManag ement(TDM) program(includingparkandridefacility development)toreduce singleoccupancy vehicle(SOV)trips iv. IncreaseinvestmentinCCTA transitservicesto increaseuseraccessibility v. Expandwalkingandbikinginfrastructuret osupportactivetransportationandtoprovide interconnectionwiththeregion’stransitsystem Assessment:Theproposedprojectisintendedtohelpestablish theconditionsthatwillallowfor acompact,mixeduse,urbanbuildoutofthis area.TheRegionalPlanidentifiesthisareaas “employmentzoningwithsewerservice(map1)anda sCenterandMetrointhe futurelanduse SouthBurlingtonWillistonRoadCorridor LandUse/TransportationAssessment 4 map(map2).Thecomponentsofthisprojecta redesigned,further,toestablishconditionsfora transportationsystemthatisbothcosteffectivea ndsupportiveoftheurbanenvironment beingcreatedthroughtheuseof transportationdemandmanagementtechniques. Doesthisprojectaddressaneedidentifiedinalocalplanningdocument? Yes.SouthBurlingtonComprehensivePlanobjectives: Page51:“Tocreatethroughtheblendingand arrangingofanappropriatemixofuses,adiverse, dynamicandpeopleorientedSouthBurlingtonCityCenter.” Page121:“Promoteawellroundedtransportation systemthatshouldprovide,inaseconomicala manneraspossible,safety,efficiency,attractiveness,convenience,andservicecommensuratewith need;”“TheCityencouragesgreateruseofmasstransit ofallforms,andotheralternativemodesof transportationincludingwalking,bikingandridesharing;”“Promotegoodaccessmanagement whenplanningnewroads,improvingexistingroads,andreviewingnewdevelopment;”“[T]concept ofatransportationcorridor…shouldbeadher edtoasfullyaspossible.” Fortransportationandlanduseprojects,how willtheprojectbenefitthefollowing: Thesafe,effective operationofthetransportationsystem? Theproposedprojectwillplanfor theefficientmovementofpeo pleandgoodsinanarea slatedforsignificantdevelopmentthrough eachofthetoolsdescribedabove. Regionaland/orlocaleconomicdevelopment? Theproposedprojectwillidentifythetransportation improvementsneededtoallowforthe significantcompact,mixedusedevelopment beingplannedforforthisarea. Multimodaltraveloptions,connections,and/orreduce traveldelaysforpeopleand goods? Theproposedprojectfocusesonestablishinga performancegoalfortheareaandthen identifyingthetransportationimprovementsthatwill meetthatgoalthroughcosteffective methodspossible,suchasTDMpractice s,ratherthantraditionalroadwaywidening. Increasethelivabilityoflocalcommunities? AtransportationsystemthatusesTDMpractices tomeetinsteadoftraditionalsuburban styleimprovementsresultsinamorepede strianfriendly,andlivableenvironment. Complementotherlocal/regionalactivitiesorinitiatives? ThisprojectiscloselyalignedwiththeTransportation actionsdescribedfromtheECOSPlan Forotherplanningprojects,pleasedescribehow theprojectbenefitsthelocalcommunity.N/A Howdoesthisprojecthelptoachievegreater equity?Howaredisparitiesfordisadvantaged communitiesimprovedthroughthisproject? Theproposedprojectwillassistthisgoalby:first,creatingtheconditionsforcompactlivingand employment,whichwillreducehouseholdneeds forcarsandallowforgreaterhousing affordability;andsecond,focusingonTDMpracticesthatprovide optionsforalltypesofusers. Howdoestheprojectdemonstrateacosteffe ctivesolutiontoapotentialorrecognizedproblem? Theprimarygoalofthisprojectistofindthe mostcosteffectivetransportationsolutionsthat willallowforthefullbuildoutofa compact,pedestrianfriendly,mixeduseenvironment. Howwillthisprojectbeimplementedwhenplanningiscomplete? Theprojectwillbeimplementedthroughanumberof means,includingprovidingguidanceto theprivatesectorindevelopmentproposals,futureamendmentstocityordinances,citycapital planning,andpossibletransportationgrants. SouthBurlingtonChamberlin AirportPlanningProject 1 PROJECTAPPLICATIONFORM FY2015UnifiedPlanningWorkProgram 1.GENERALINFORMATION Submittedby(Name,Title):PaulConner,DirectorofPlanning&Zoning Municipality:CityofSouthBurlington Telephone:(802)8464106 Email:pconner@sburl.com 2.PROJECTINFORMATION ProjectTitle : ChamberlinNeighborhoodAirportArea TransportationLandUsePlanning ProjectLocation (nameofroadway,intersection,geographicarea,etc.): ChamberlinNeighborhood–BurlingtonInternationalAirportvicinity ProjectDescription (100wordsmax): Theprojectwillbetodevelopaneighborhood andnoisecompatibilityplanandforthetransition areabetweentheBurlingtonInternationalAirport andadjacentChamberlinneighborhood,hometo someofthecity'smostaffordablefamily housingandChamberlinElementarySchool. TheChamberlinneighborhood,whichbeginsdirectlyacross AirportDrivefromtheBurlington InternationalAirport,hasbeenwitnesstoaradical transformationinthepastde cade.Federalnoise compatibilityprogramshaveorwilll ikelyresultinpurchaseandremoval ofnearly200homesinthe area. ScopeofWorkOutline : Theproposedprojectwouldcombinefundingfrom theCCRPCtogetherwithStateMunicipal PlanningGrantfunds,localcontributions,andposs ibleotherfundstodevelopacoordinatedand completeplanningprojectfortheaffected area.TheScopeofWorkwouldinclude: EstablishProjectTeamandSteeringCommitteetooverseeproject; Developandimplementarobustpublicengagementplan fortheentireprocess,includingbut limitedtoitemshighlightedbelow; ReviewexistingdocumentssuchasAirportMasterPlan andNoiseCompatibilityPlan,aswellas publicinputoverthepastfiveyears; Developin graphicaland/orwrittenformasummaryofexistin gconditionsandbegintoidentify keytopicsandproblempointsintheneighborhood/airportinterfacearea; Hostaseriesofvisioningworkshopsforthe communityandstakeholderstoidentifyproblems andopportunitiesinthearea.Detailedapproachwill bedevelopedbytheconsultantworking withtheProjectCommittee; Prepareasummaryoffundingandprogramsavailable fornoiseaffectedareas,includingnoise abatementreuseofland,andneighborhoodstabilization; 110WestCanalStreet,Suite202 Winooski,VT054042109 8028464490 www.ccrpcvt.org SouthBurlingtonChamberlin AirportPlanningProject 2 Developdraftconceptplanfor thefutureuseofland,transportation,andnoiseabatement withinthearea; Prepareprioritizedrecommendationsforimplementationo ftheconceptplan,includingcost estimates. Deliverables: Proposeddeliverablesaredescribedabove withineachoftheScopeofWorkelements. OtherProjectParticipants (e.g.,otheragencies,nonprofits,consultants,communitygroups): Projectparticipants,inadditiontoCityOfficials,board&committeemembers,andthegeneral publicwouldlikelyinclude:significantinvolvement ofneighborhoodresidentsandrepresentatives; CityofBurlington/BurlingtonInternationalAirport;VermontAirNationalGuard;VermontAgency ofTransportation;CCRPC;FederalAgency&delegationrepresentatives. ProjectMatchRequirement: SeetheattachedletterindicatingtheCity’s commitmenttomeetthematchrequirementsthrough inkindtimeandotherfundingsources. PublicMeetingRequirement: Theproposedprojectwasdiscussedandapprovedby thePlanningCommissiononJanuary14,2014 andbytheCityCouncilonJanuary21,2014.Ithas alsobeenpreviouslydisc ussedasaprojectwith thePlanningCommissionandCityCouncila tmultiplemeetingsinthepast. Budget: RequestedUPWPAmount $100,000 NonFederalCashMatch $ InKindMatch $ TotalProjectCost $125,000 ProjectSchedule (assumeJuly2014start)–addmorelinesifneeded Milestone Month/Year EstablishProjectTeamandSteeringCommitteetooverseeproject; 7/2014 SelectConsultantanddevelop/implementarobustpublicengagement planfortheentireprocess,includingbutlimitedtoitemshighlighted below; 9/2014and throughout Developingraphicaland/orwrittenformasummaryofexistingconditions andbegintoidentifykeytopics andproblempointsintheneighborhood/ airportinterfacearea; 11/2014 Hostaseriesofvisioningworkshopsforthecommunityandstakeholdersto identifyproblemsandopportunitiesin thearea.Detailedapproachwillbe developedbytheconsultantworking withtheProjectCommittee; 2/2015 Prepareasummaryoffundingandprograms availablefornoiseaffected areas,includingnoiseabatementre useofland,andneighborhood stabilization; 4/2015 SouthBurlingtonChamberlin AirportPlanningProject 3 Developdraftconceptplanforthefut ureuseofland,transportation,and noiseabatementwithinthearea; 5/2015 Prepareprioritizedrecommendationsforimplementationoftheconcept plan,includingcostestimates. 6/2016 3.BENEFITSTOREGIONALANDLOCALPLANNING Identifywhichstrategiesandactionsfrom theECOSPlanthisprojectwilladdress. (www.ecosproject.com–seeChapter3) Theproposedprojectwilladdressakeystrategy andseveralactionsfromtheECOSPlan: (2) Strivefor80%ofnewdevelopmentinareasplan nedforgrowth,whichamountsto15%ofourland area 1. InvestinAreasPlannedforGrowth– b.Targetreuse,rehabilitation,redevelopment,infill,and brownfieldinvestmentstothenonrural PlanningAreas. d.Improvedesignqualityofhighdensityareas,andallowflexibilityfor creativesolutions. 2. MunicipalPlanningandZoningStrengthen anddirectdevelopmenttowardareasplannedfor growththroughinfilldevelopment andadaptivereuseofexistingbuildingsthroughmunicipal planandbylawrevisionsands tatedesignationprograms a. MunicipalDevelopmentReviewRegulationsshouldb erevisedtoimprovethe mixofuses, sharedparking,supportfor transit,accesstoavarietyof services(forexamplerestaurants, grocerystores,parks,entertainment)viaactive transportation,energyefficiency,renewable energyandtheaffordabilityofhousing.Aparticular emphasisisneededonprovidingfor affordablerentalhousing. 3. AffordableHousing–Producing moreaffordablehousinghelpsmeet basicneeds,createsjobs and50yearhardassets.Thisisacriticalpart oftheinfrastructureofth ecommunityandthe economy. a. Implementincentivesthatencouragemorehousingc onstructionthatislowercostincluding, butnotlimitedto,affordableandsupportiveho using.Thishousingsho uldbeintegrated withinourcommunitiesthroughouttheCountyto provideamixofhousingfordifferent incomesandaccesstojobsand services.Theseac tionsinclude: (5)Increaseopportunityforeverypersonin ourcommunitytoachieveoptimalhealthandpersonal safety. 1. Basicneeds–Investmentin thehealth,safetyanded ucationofcitizensisthe tidethatliftsall boats.Providethebasicneedsof allpeoplethroughaccesstohe althyfood,accesstosafe shelter,greaterandmore equitableopportunitiesforeduc ation,jobtraining,jobs,affordable housingandpublictransportation. (8)Ensurethattheprojectsandac tionsinallECOSstrategiesassess equityimpacts,and thatthedesign anddevelopmentofprograms areinclusiveofalland engageunderrepresented populations. 3. CivicEngagementIncreaseopportunitiesand removebarriersforcivicengagementforall, includingunderrepresentedpopulations. Assessment:Theproposedprojectwillfocusonpla nningtostabilizeaneighborhoodthathas seensignificantupheavalinrecentyearsand collaborativelydevelopaplanforhowtocreatean SouthBurlingtonChamberlin AirportPlanningProject 4 effective,attractive,functionaltransitionfrom theBurlingtonInternationalAirporttothe adjacentneighborhood. Doesthisprojectaddressaneedidentifiedinalocalplanningdocument? Yes.TheSouthBurlingtonComprehensive Planstates:"Therearesomea reasofconflictthatthe CityandtheAirportshallstrivetoameliorate.Principally,thesearethepreexistingresidential neighborhoodsintheimmediateenvironsoftheA irport.Theseneighborhoodswillcontinuetobe subjectedtohighlevelsanddurationofnoiseasaircraft operationsexpand.Theeffectofenlarged aircraftapproachanddepartur eareasshouldbeminimizedoverexistingresidentialneighborhoods. Inaddition,astheterminalareadevelopsand AirportDriveisextended,conflictsbetween commercialandresidentialuseswillgrow."(p.116) Fortransportationandlanduseprojects,how willtheprojectbenefitthefollowing: Thesafe,effective operationofthetransportationsystem? Severalaspectsofthisprojectareproposedto addressthisitem.Aneffectiveplanfor transitionbetweentheAirportandChamberlin neighborhoodwillprovidesolutionsfor surfacetransportationaswellastheovera llaviationoperationsattheAirport. Regionaland/orlocaleconomicdevelopment? TheBurlingtonInternationalAirportisoneofthe primaryeconomicdriversintheRegion. Planningforaneffectivetransitiontothe adjacentneighborhoodwillsupportthefuture vitalityofboth. Multimodaltraveloptions,connections,and/orreduce traveldelaysforpeopleand goods? Planningforthisareawillexamineissuesrel atedtotransportationtoandfromtheAirport astheyhavelongaffectedtheadjacentneighborhood. Increasethelivabilityoflocalcommunities? Aprimarygoalofthisprojectistostabilize andenhancethelivabilityoftheChamberlin Neighborhood. Complementotherlocal/regionalactivitiesorinitiatives? ThisprojectiscloselyalignedwiththeTransportation andLandUseactionsdescribedfrom theECOSPlan Forotherplanningprojects,pleasedescribehow theprojectbenefitsthelocalcommunity.N/A Howdoesthisprojecthelptoachievegreater equity?Howaredisparitiesfordisadvantaged communitiesimprovedthroughthisproject? TheChamberlinneighborhoodhasbeenidentifiedas beinghometocomeoftheCity’smost affordablehousing.Bydevelopingaplanforthe futureofthisareaanditsinterfacewiththe Airport,itwillaidinsupportingthelivesof allresidentsandusersofthisarea. Howdoestheprojectdemonstrateacosteffe ctivesolutiontoapotentialorrecognizedproblem? Theneedforthisplanning efforthasbeenknownandunderscored formanyyearsinlightofthe directimpactsthattheAirportanditsusershav ehad.Acollaborativeplanningeffortsiscriticalto thefutureofthisarea. Howwillthisprojectbeimplementedwhenplanningiscomplete? Itisenvisionedthattheprojectwillinclude aseriesofrecommendednextsteps,whatmay includeamendmentstoLandDevelopmentRegulations,capitalprojects,seekingFederalfunds formitigationofimpacts,etc. SouthBurlingtonTrafficOverlayDistrict 1 PROJECTAPPLICATIONFORM FY2015UnifiedPlanningWorkProgram 1.GENERALINFORMATION Submittedby(Name,Title):PaulConner,DirectorofPlanning&Zoning Municipality:CityofSouthBurlington Telephone:(802)8464106 Email:pconner@sburl.com 2.PROJECTINFORMATION ProjectTitle : OverhaulofCity’sTrafficOverlayDistrict ProjectLocation (nameofroadway,intersection,geographicarea,etc.): Citywide ProjectDescription (100wordsmax): TheCity’sRegulationspresentlycontainaTrafficOverlay Districtthatsetsa“cap”onthenumberof pmpeakhourtripsapropertyispermittedtogenerate,basedonlotsizeandmodifiablebasedon accessmanagementimprovements.Whilethe Districthasservedavaluablerole,itisnolonger consistentwiththeCity’sPathtoSustainabilityefforts.Ithasbecomealimitationtoinfill developmentinmixeduseareas(includingCity Center).Thisprojectproposestoreplacethe Districtwithamoredynamictoolthat wouldallowfordevelopmentwhilepromoting transportationmanagementenhancementsby theprivatesector. ScopeofWorkOutline : Theproposedscopeofworkfortheprojectisasfollows: ReviewexistingTransportationOverlayDistrict&ident ifyelementsthathaveworkedwell andelementsthathavenot; Reviewexistingcorridorstudiescompletedforaffectedareas Developanapproachtotransportationmanagement inthedevelopmentreviewprocess, makinguseofrecentworkincludinglocal corridorstudies,streettypologiesdeveloped undertheFormBasedCode,transportation performancegoals(seeproposedWilliston Roadcorridorlandusetransportationproject proposal)andstatewidefinanceallocation studyresults PreparedraftamendmentstotheLand DevelopmentRegulationsthatwouldreplaceor revisetheTrafficOverlayDistrict. Deliverables: Proposeddeliverableswouldinclude: Summary analysis of problems and opportunities for transportation management regulations within key transportation corridors of the City. Proposed approach to revision or replacement of Traffic Overlay District for review and approval; 110WestCanalStreet,Suite202 Winooski,VT054042109 8028464490 www.ccrpcvt.org SouthBurlingtonTrafficOverlayDistrict 2 Specific draft amendments to the Land Development Regulations to revise or replace the Traffic Overlay District (initial draft and revisions needed for Planning Commission approval) OtherProjectParticipants (e.g.,otheragencies,nonprofits,consultants,communitygroups): Projectparticipants,inadditiontoCityOfficials,board&committeemembers,andthegeneral publicwouldlikelyinclude:areabusinesses&propertyowners,VermontAgencyofTransportation, regionalserviceproviders&advocacygroupssuchas CATMA,CCTA,LocalMotion,andtheCCRPC. ProjectMatchRequirement: SeetheattachedletterindicatingtheCity’s commitmenttomeetthematchrequirements. PublicMeetingRequirement: Theproposedprojectwasdiscussedandapprovedby thePlanningCommissiononJanuary14,2014 andbytheCityCouncilonJanuary21,2014.Ithas alsobeenpreviouslydisc ussedasaprojectwith thePlanningCommissionatpastmeetings. Budget: RequestedUPWPAmount $24,000 NonFederalCashMatch $ InKindMatch $ TotalProjectCost $30,000 ProjectSchedule (assumeJuly2014start)–addmorelinesifneeded Milestone Month/Year Projectinitialization&steeringcommitteeestablishment 7/2014 ReviewexistingTransportationOverlayDistrict &identifyelementsthat haveworkedwellandelementsthathavenot; 8/2014 Reviewexistingcorridorstudiescompletedforaffectedareas 9/2014 Developandsubmitapproachtotransportationmanagementinthe developmentreviewprocess,makinguseo frecentworkincludinglocal corridorstudies,streettypologiesdeveloped undertheFormBasedCode, transportationperformancegoals(see proposedWillistonRoadcorridor landusetransportationprojectproposal)andstatewidefinanceallocation studyresults 11/2014 Submitdraftamendmentstothe LandDevelopmentRegulationsthat wouldreplaceorrevisetheTrafficOverlayDistrict. 2/2015 Completefinaldraftamendmentsfor submittaltoCityCouncil 4/2015 3.BENEFITSTOREGIONALANDLOCALPLANNING Identifywhichstrategiesandactionsfrom theECOSPlanthisprojectwilladdress. (www.ecosproject.com–seeChapter3) SouthBurlingtonTrafficOverlayDistrict 3 Theproposedprojectwilladdressakeystrategy andseveralactionsfromtheECOSPlan: (1)Strivefor80%ofnewdevelopment inareasplannedforgrowth,wh ichamountsto15%ofourland area 1. InvestinAreasPlannedforGrowth– a. Establishwastewater,w aterinfrastructureandpublictran sitinareascurrentlydeveloped and/orplannedforgrowth 2. MunicipalPlanningandZoningStrengthenanddirect developmenttowardareasplannedfor growththroughinfilldevelopment andadaptivereuseofexistingbuildingsthroughmunicipal planandbylawrevisionsands tatedesignationprograms a. MunicipalDevelopmentReviewRegulationsshouldb erevisedtoimprovethe mixofuses, sharedparking,supportfor transit,accesstoavarietyof services(forexamplerestaurants, grocerystores,parks,entertainment)viaactive transportation,energyefficiency,renewable energyandtheaffordabilityofhousing. 4. Energy b. Decreasegreenhousegasemissions ,tosupporttheState’sgoalofreducinggreenhousegas emissions50%from1990levelsby2028 iii. Reducefossilfuelconsumptioninthetransportationsector. 5. State/LocalPermittingCoordination&Improvement c. Developatransportationassessment processthatsupportsexisting andplannedlanduse densitiesandpatternsinCenter,Metro,Suburban,Village,and EnterprisePlanningAreasto allowformorecongestionandgreater modechoicethanallowedbycurrentstandards... 6. MetropolitanTransportationPlanInvestments c. Futureprojectinvestmentsandspecificfocala reasfortargetedimplementationimpact include: ii. ExpandIntelligentTransportationSystems(ITS)fortheroadwaynetwork,andtrafficand transitoperations,toimprovesaf etyandreducecongestion; iii. ExpandtheGo!ChittendenCountyTran sportationDemandManag ement(TDM) program(including parkandridefacilitydeve lopment)toreducesingl eoccupancy vehicle(SOV)trips iv. IncreaseinvestmentinCCTA transitservicesto increaseuseraccessibility v. Expandwalkingandbikinginfrastructuret osupportactivetransportationandtoprovide interconnectionwiththeregion’stransitsystem Assessment:Theproposedprojectwillremoveregula tionsthatcurrentlyserveasbarriersto higherdensity,pedestrianfriendlyinfill developmentalongtheCity’sprincipaltransportation corridorsandreplacethemwithtoolsthatallow forandincentivizethisdevelopmentthrough effective,multimodaltransportationmanagement techniques.Theseprojectobjectivesarein closealignment withtheabovelistedstrategyandactionsoftheECOCPlan. Doesthisprojectaddressaneedidentifiedinalocalplanningdocument? Yes.SouthBurlingtonComprehensivePlanobjectives: Page121:“Promoteawellroundedtransportationsystem thatshouldprovide,inaseconomicala manneraspossible,safety,efficiency,attractiveness,convenience,andservicecommensuratewith need;”“TheCityencouragesgreateruseofmasstransit ofallforms,andotheralternativemodesof transportationincludingwalking,bikingandridesharing;”“Promotegoodaccessmanagement whenplanningnewroads,improvingexistingroads,andreviewingnewdevelopment;”“[T]concept SouthBurlingtonTrafficOverlayDistrict 4 ofatransportationcorridor…shouldbeadher edtoasfullyaspossible.” Attached,further,isananalysisreportfromBFJ,Inc.submittedaspartoftherecentCCRPCfunded CarstoPeopleprojectthatrecommendedthis overhauloftheTrafficOverlayDistrictbe undertaken.(BFJ,notably,isthesamefirm thatassistedintheDistrict’screation). Fortransportationandlanduseprojects,how willtheprojectbenefitthefollowing: Thesafe,effective operationofthetransportationsystem? ThecurrentDistrictprovidesverylimited toolstomitigatetransportationimpactsofnew development,especiallyasitrelatestomultimodaltransportationand/orTransportation DemandManagement.Arevisedorreplaced Districtwouldpromotemoreefficientand effectiveoperationofthetransportationsystem. Regionaland/orlocaleconomicdevelopment? Asnotedabove,thecurrentDistrictessentiallypla cesa“cap”ondevelopmentinareaswell servedbywater,sewer,transit,andotherservices andasaresultcanbeadepressanton economicdevelopmentintheareasbestsuitedf orit.Arevised/replacedDistrictwould addressthis. Multimodaltraveloptions,connections,and/orreduce traveldelaysforpeopleand goods? ThecurrentDistrictdoes notprovideincentivesforcommitmentstomultimodal transportationand/ortransportationdemandmanagement.A revised / replaced District would address this. Increasethelivabilityoflocalcommunities? ThecurrentDistrictpromulgatesalanduse patternalongtheCity’smajortransportation corridorsofwidelyspaced,singlestory buildings.Byincentivizinginfilldevelopment throughreplacementofthisDistrictandthrough theongoingoverhauloftheLand DevelopmentRegulations,residentsandvisitors’experiences andabilitytohavesafe, attractivepedestrianandbicycleoriente denvironmentswillbegreatlyenchaned. Complementotherlocal/regionalactivitiesorinitiatives? ThisprojectiscloselyalignedwiththeTransportation andLandUseactionsdescribedfrom theECOSPlan Forotherplanningprojects,pleasedescribehow theprojectbenefitsthelocalcommunity.N/A Howdoesthisprojecthelptoachievegreater equity?Howaredisparitiesfordisadvantaged communitiesimprovedthroughthisproject? Theprojectadvancesequitybyremovingand replacingregulationswhichcurrentlyserveto propagateanautoorientedlandscapeandmaintain barrierstotransportationbyothermeans. Howdoestheprojectdemonstrateacosteffe ctivesolutiontoapotentialorrecognizedproblem? Theproposedprojectwillcreatetoolsforthe privatesectortodevelopcreativeandneeded transportationsolutionswhileallowingforinfilldevelopment. Howwillthisprojectbeimplementedwhenplanningiscomplete? Theprojectwillbeimplementedthroughadoption ofamendmentstotheCity’sLand DevelopmentRegulations. SouthBurlingtonStormwaterInfrastructureScoping 1 PROJECTAPPLICATIONFORM FY2015UnifiedPlanningWorkProgram 1.GENERALINFORMATION Submittedby(Name,Title):PaulConner,DirectorofPlanning&Zoning Municipality:CityofSouthBurlington Telephone:(802)8464106 Email:pconner@sburl.com 2.PROJECTINFORMATION ProjectTitle : MultiSiteStormwaterInfrastructureScopingAssessment ProjectLocation (nameofroadway,intersection,geographicarea,etc.): Theprojectisproposed asamultisitescopingassessment.Theselectedsitesare: TheOrchardsNeighborhood PineTreeTerracearea SpearStreetandDeerfieldAvenue BartlettBayRoadCulvert ButlerFarms–OakCreekVillageCulvertDesign ProjectDescription (100wordsmax): Theproposedprojectwouldcombinethe preliminaryscopingofseveralneededstormwater improvementsinexistingneighborhoods.Eachoftheabovesiteshas beenidentifiedashaving existingoremergingstormwaterconcerns,directly affectinglocalandregionalwaterqualityand potentialforflooddamagetoprivateandpublicpr operties.Theprocessforscopingtheseprojects isverysimilarandthereforea combinedscopingeffortisacosteffectiveapproach,aswellasto provideaworkproductthati sconsistentthroughouttheCity ScopeofWorkOutline : Theproposedscopeofworkforthe combinedscopingeffortisasfollows: 1. Identifyexistinginfrastructureateachlocation 2. Run10and25yeareventstormwatermodelsthroughtheexistinginfrastructure 3. Basedonresults,recommendupgradesas neededandpreparepreliminarycostestimates foreach 4. Presentfindingstoapplicablepublicbody Deliverables: Deliverableswouldinclude: 1. Completeinventoryofexistingstormwaterinfrastructureforeachlocation 2. Resultsofmodelrunsfor10and25yea rstormwatereventsforeachlocation 3. Recommendationsandpreliminarycostestimatesfor stormwaterimprovementsforeach location 110WestCanalStreet,Suite202 Winooski,VT054042109 8028464490 www.ccrpcvt.org SouthBurlingtonStormwaterInfrastructureScoping 2 OtherProjectParticipants (e.g.,otheragencies,nonprofits,consultants,communitygroups): TheCity’sStormwaterUtilitywouldbe aclosepartnerintheproject.TheUtilityhashistorically servedserveasliaisontoaffectedneighborhoodsand woulddosowiththesescopingstudies..Over thepastseveralyears,theUtilityhas developedarobustoutreachprogramforproject identification,scoping,design,andconstruction. ProjectMatchRequirement: SeetheattachedletterindicatingtheCity’scommi tmenttomeetthematchrequirementsofthe UPWP. PublicMeetingRequirement: Theproposedprojectwasdiscussedandapprovedby thePlanningCommissiononJanuary14,2014 andbytheCityCouncilonJanuary21,2014.Various componentshavealsobee ndiscussedwiththe CityCouncilduringregular stormwaterbriefings. Budget: RequestedUPWPAmount $60,000 NonFederalCashMatch $7,500 InKindMatch $7,500 TotalProjectCost $75,000 ProjectSchedule (assumeJuly2014start)–addmorelinesifneeded Milestone Month/Year Projectinitialization 7/2014 Completeidentificationofexisting infrastructureateachlocation 9/2014 Completerecommendedupgradesand preliminarycostestimatesforeachsite 2/2015 Presentfindingstopublicbody 3/2015 3.BENEFITSTOREGIONALANDLOCALPLANNING Identifywhichstrategiesandactionsfrom theECOSPlanthisprojectwilladdress. (www.ecosproject.com–seeChapter3) Theproposedprojectwilladdressand implementseveralstrategiesand actionsfromtheECOS Plan.Specifically: (3)Improvethesafety,waterquality,an dhabitatforourriver,streams,wetlandsandlakesineach watershed 1. Riverhazardprotection–Developand implementadaptationstrategiestoreducefloodingand fluvialerosionhazards. a. Identifyproblemlocations–Conducto nthegroundinventoriesandmapflowand SouthBurlingtonStormwaterInfrastructureScoping 3 sedimentattenuationlocationandproblematic infrastructure(undersizedculverts, erodingroadways,“vulnerableinfrastructure”–in frastructuresubjecttorepeatdamage andreplacement,etc.). Assessment:Theproposedprojectwillfocusidentifying,inventorying,anddeterminingneeded improvementstostormwaterinfrastructurethathas beenidentifiedascausingproblemsdueto undersizedculverts,dete riorationofoutdatessystems,orfloodingfromrecentstormevents. 2. NonpointSourcePollution–Whilewehave addressedpointsourceso fpollution,nonpoint sourcesarestillcontributin gpollutantstoourwaterbodies a. AssembledataWorkfromexistingda tacollectedandfurtheridentifythelocationsthat arecontributingtowaterqualitypollutionsuchasflow,sediment,pathogenand nutrient.Whereneeded,conductonthegroun dinventoriesofweaterqualityand biologicalassessment(instream),wetla nds,subwatershed,rivercorridors(bufferedor not)andgeomorphology. c. ImplementnonregulatoryapproachesIdentifyandimplementnonregulatory approachestonutrient,pathogenandsedimentpollutionm anagement.UndernewMS4 permitrequirements,municipalities willbedevelopingflowre storationplanstoachieve thetotalmaximum dailyloadrequirementsfor impairedstreams,rivers,andLake Champlain.Theseplansmay requireadditionalpublicinvestm entinstormwater facilitiesorinvestmentsoractions byindividualpropertyowners. Assessment:SeveralwatershedwithinSouthBurlingtonarelistedasstormwaterimpaired.The proposedscopingstudywillallowtheCitytoadvance theefforttoreducenonpointsource pollutionasenvisionedwithintheECOSPlanactionsabove. (7)Developfinancingand governancesystemstomaket hemostefficientuseof taxpayerdollarsand reducecosts 1. CommunityDevelopmentFinanceToolsExpanda ndimproveimplementationoffinancingtools availabletomunicipalitieswith particularemphasis onoptionsthatleve ltheplayingfield betweengreenfielddevelopmentandinfilldevelopmentandto helpdirectnewinvestment dollarstostrengthenexistingneighborhoods.This wouldincludetaxincrementfinancing(TIF), LocalOptionSalesTaxes,ImpactFees,SpecialAs sessmentDistricts,andcapitalplanningand budgeting. Assessment:Theproposedscopingstudywillenablethe Citytopursuethefinancingand constructionnecessarytoaddresstheseexistingand emergentstormwaterproblems.The completionofthescopingstudieswillallowthecityt opursueFederalandStatedesignand constructiongrants,refinelocalcapitalbudgetplans,andpursuespecialassessmentdistrictas applicable.Inthepast,theCityhasused acombinationofeachofthesetoolstocomplete stormwaterretrofitprojects. Doesthisprojectaddressaneedidentifiedinalocalplanningdocument? Yes.Page148oftheSouthBurlingtonComprehensivePlan states:“TheCityshouldundertakea comprehensiveinventoryofstormdrainageanddevelopment aplanforthefuturegrowthofthe systemandprotectionoftheenvironm entfromstormsewereffluent.” SouthBurlingtonStormwaterInfrastructureScoping 4 Fortransportationandlanduseprojects,how willtheprojectbenefitthefollowing: Thesafe,effective operationofthetransportationsystem? N/A Regionaland/orlocaleconomicdevelopment? Stormdamageiscausingdirectandindirectlossin propertyvalueandrecoverycosts.This scopingstudywillsetthestageforaddressi ngtheproblemscausedbyfloodinginseveral neighborhoodswithintheCity. Multimodaltraveloptions,connections,and/orreduce traveldelaysforpeopleand goods? N/A Increasethelivabilityoflocalcommunities? N/A Complementotherlocal/regionalactivitiesorinitiatives? Theproposedprojectfitspreciselywiththemission oftheSouthBurlingtonStormwater Utilityaswellastheregionalstatewideefforts toimprovewaterqualityandmeetTMDL standards. Forotherplanningprojects,pleasedescribehow theprojectbenefitsthelocalcommunity. Theproposedprojectwillallowseveralneighborhoods throughoutthecitytomoveforwardin addressingexisting andemergingstormwaterfloodingissues.Scopingtheseprojectswillenable thecityandneighborhoodstoprocesst odesign,financing,andultimatelyconstructionof improvementsthatwillprovideameasurable benefittothelocalandregionalcommunity. Howdoesthisprojecthelptoachievegreater equity?Howaredisparitiesfordisadvantaged communitiesimprovedthroughthisproject? Theproposedprojectsetsthecommunityupto pursueamyriadoffinancingmechanisms,most importantlytheabilitytoapplyforgrantst osignificantlylowerthecoststoindividual neighborhoodsinretrofittingstormwaterinfrastructure.Thisapproachhasproven,in numerouspastprojects,tosignificantlyreduceind ividualhomeownerburdensbyspreading costsmorewidelywithgrantingagencies. Howdoestheprojectdemonstrateacosteffe ctivesolutiontoapotentialorrecognizedproblem? Theproposedprojectdemonstratescosteffe ctivesolutionsintwomanners.First,byscoping theseprojects,theCityisabletoidentifythe mostcosteffectiveways toundertakeretrofitsto identifiedstormwaterinfrastructureproblems.Seco nd,bycombiningthescopingofmultiple similarprojectsitesatonce,significantadministrativeandmodelrunsavingsisaccrued. Howwillthisprojectbeimplementedwhenplanningiscomplete? Afterscopingiscomplete,theCitywouldproceedtoconceptualand finaldesignofprojects usingstormwaterutilityfunds.Onceadesigniscomplete,it canbeputintothecapitalplanfor construction,andotherfinancialtoolssuchas grantsandspecialassessmentcanbeleveraged. SouthBurlingtonStormwaterInfrastructureScoping 1 PROJECTAPPLICATIONFORM FY2015UnifiedPlanningWorkProgram 1.GENERALINFORMATION Submittedby(Name,Title):PaulConner,DirectorofPlanning&Zoning Municipality:CityofSouthBurlington Telephone:(802)8464106 Email:pconner@sburl.com 2.PROJECTINFORMATION ProjectTitle : ScopingforMultipleRecreationPath/Sidewalkprojects ProjectLocation (nameofroadway,intersection,geographicarea,etc.): Theproject isproposedasamultisitescoping assessment.Theselectedsitesare: AllenRoadrecreationpathconnectionstoexistingpaths SpearStreetjughandlerecreationpath AirportDrive/AirportParkwaytoLimeKilnBridgeRecreationPath DorsetStreetRecreationPathOldCrossRoadtonorthofAutumn HillRd. ProjectDescription (100wordsmax): Theproposedprojectwouldcombinethepreliminary scopingofseveralrecreationpath/sidewalk projectsidentifiedwithintheCity’sCapitalImprovement Plan.Eachofthefour(4)projectabove scopesagapinthecurrentbicyclepedestrianinfrastructure thatseesfrequentunsafeuse. ScopeofWorkOutline : Theproposedscopeofworkforthe combinedscopingeffortisasfollows: 1. Identifyexistinginfrastructureateachlocation 2. Identifylandscapefeatures,opportunitiesandobstacles 3. Communicatewithpotentiallyaffectedpropertyowners andmeetwithCityCommitteeto discussobjectives 4. Preparerecommendationsfordesignandpreliminarycostestimatesforrecreationpath/ sidewalkimprovements 5. Presentfindingstoapplicablepublicbody Deliverables: Deliverableswouldinclude: 1. Completeinventoryofexistinginfrastructureforeachlocation 2. Recommendationsandpreliminarycostestimatesforimprovementsforeachlocation OtherProjectParticipants (e.g.,otheragencies,nonprofits,consultants,communitygroups): TheCity’sPublicWorksandRecreation&Parks Departments,andassignedcommittees,wouldplay acloseroleinthedevelopmentofthisproject alongsideoutreachtoaffectedpropertyownersand, 110WestCanalStreet,Suite202 Winooski,VT054042109 8028464490 www.ccrpcvt.org SouthBurlingtonStormwaterInfrastructureScoping 2 inthecaseofthejudghandle,the UniversityofVermontandChamplainCollege. ProjectMatchRequirement: SeetheattachedletterindicatingtheCity’scommi tmenttomeetthematchrequirementsofthe UPWP. PublicMeetingRequirement: Theproposedprojectwasdiscussedandapprovedby thePlanningCommissiononJanuary14,2014 andbytheCityCouncilonJanuary21,2014.Theseprojects havealsobeenidentifiedintheCity’s CapitalImprovementPlanwhichwasreviewed bymultiplecommitteesandtheCityCouncil. Budget: RequestedUPWPAmount $150,000 NonFederalCashMatch $ InKindMatch $ TotalProjectCost $ ProjectSchedule (assumeJuly2014start)–addmorelinesifneeded Milestone Month/Year Projectinitialization 7/2014 Identifyexistinginfrastructureateachlocation 9/2014 Communicatewithpotentiallyaffected propertyownersandmeetwithCity Committeetodiscussobjectives 10/2014 Preparerecommendationsfordesignand preliminarycostestimatesforrecreationpath/ sidewalkimprovements 1/2015 Presentfindingstoapplicablepublicbody 3/2015 3.BENEFITSTOREGIONALANDLOCALPLANNING Identifywhichstrategiesandactionsfrom theECOSPlanthisprojectwilladdress. (www.ecosproject.com–seeChapter3) Theproposedprojectwilladdressand implementseveralstrategiesand actionsfromtheECOS Plan.Specifically: (2) Strivefor80%ofnewdevelopmentinareasplan nedforgrowth,whichamountsto15%ofourland area 4. Energy b. Decreasegreenhousegasemissions,tosupport theState’sgoalofreducinggreenhousegas emissions50%from1990levelsby2028 iii. Reducefossilfuelconsumptioninthetransportation sector. 5. State/LocalPermittingCoordination&Improvement SouthBurlingtonStormwaterInfrastructureScoping 3 c. Developatransportationassessment processthatsupportsexisting andplannedlanduse densitiesandpatternsinCenter,Metro,Suburban,Village,and EnterprisePlanningAreasto allowformorecongestionandgreater modechoicethanallowedbycurrentstandards... 6. MetropolitanTransportationPlanInvestments c. Futureprojectinvestmentsandspecificfocala reasfortargetedimplementationimpact include: v. Expandwalkingandbikinginfrastructuret osupportactivetransportationandtoprovide interconnectionwiththeregion’stransitsystem (5)Increaseopportunityforeverypersonin ourcommunitytoachieveoptimalhealthandpersonal safety 3. ObesityCreatepoliciesandenvironmental supportsthatincreaseaccesstoactive transportation,activerecreation,andhealthyfoods Assessment:Theproposedscopingstudywillenablethe Citytopursuethefinancingand constructionoftheseprojects,eachofwhichis intendedtofillunsafe“gaps”inthecity’sand region’sbicyclepedestriannetworka longmajortravelroutes. Doesthisprojectaddressaneedidentifiedinalocalplanningdocument? Yes.Page110oftheSouthBurlingtonComprehensive Planstates:“Theintegrationofthe recreationpath,pedestrian trails,andcitysidewalksshouldbeasseamlessaspossibleand encouragenonmotorizedcommuting.” Fortransportationandlanduseprojects,how willtheprojectbenefitthefollowing: Thesafe,effe ctiveoperation ofthetransportationsystem? Theproposedprojectwouldmoveseveralproject sforwardthatareintendedtoclosegaps inthebicycleandpedestriannetworkofthecity. Regionaland/orlocaleconomicdevelopment? Bicycleandpedestrianfacilitiesareincr easinglyslowingaclearrelationshiptoeconomic activity. Multimodaltraveloptions,connections,and/orreduce traveldelaysforpeopleand goods? Seeaboveunder“safe,effectiveoperationofthetransportationsystem” Increasethelivabilityoflocalcommunities? Byclosinggapsintherecreationpath/sidewalknetwork,thelivabilityofnearby neighborhoodsissignificantlyimproved. Complementotherlocal/regionalactivitiesorinitiatives? Theproposedprojectfitspreciselywiththe missionoftheSouthBurlingtonStormwater Utilityaswellastheregionalstatewideefforts toimprovewaterqualityandmeetTMDL standards. Forotherplanningprojects,pleasedescribehow theprojectbenefitsthelocalcommunity.N/A Howdoesthisprojecthelptoachievegreater equity?Howaredisparitiesfordisadvantaged communitiesimprovedthroughthisproject? Theproposeprojectwillenablethecityto pursuedesignandconstructionofprojectsthat affordgreatermobilityandmodeoptions forallresidentsandvisitors. SouthBurlingtonStormwaterInfrastructureScoping 4 Howdoestheprojectdemonstrateacosteffe ctivesolutiontoapotentialorrecognizedproblem? Bycombiningthescopingofmultiplesimilarprojectsitesatonce,significantadministrativeand analysissavingsareaccrued. Howwillthisprojectbeimplementedwhenplanningiscomplete? Afterscopingiscomplete,theCitywouldproceedt oconceptualandfinaldesignofprojects usingfundstoincluderecreationimpactfees andcapitalfunds.Onceadesigniscomplete,it canbeputintothecapitalplanforconstruction,andotherfinancialtoolssuchasgrantsand specialassessment canbeleveraged. SouthBurlingtonpostadoptionLDRadjustments 1 PROJECTAPPLICATIONFORM FY2015UnifiedPlanningWorkProgram 1.GENERALINFORMATION Submittedby(Name,Title):PaulConner,DirectorofPlanning&Zoning Municipality:CityofSouthBurlington Telephone:(802)8464106 Email:pconner@sburl.com 2.PROJECTINFORMATION ProjectTitle : SouthBurlingtonLDR/FormBased Codepostadoptionadjustments ProjectLocation (nameofroadway,intersection,geographicarea,etc.): Citywide ProjectDescription (100wordsmax): TheCityisintheprocessofamendingitsCity CenterandCityWideLandDevelopmentRegulations. TheCityCenterportionisbeforethePlanning Commissionpresently,whiletheremainderofthe CityisunderdevelopmentbytheCity’s consultantandFormBasedCodesCommittee. Thisproposedprojectitemwouldfundpost adoptionadjustmentstotheseregulations.Itiswidely understoodthatdramaticoverhaulstoZoning andSubdivisionregulationssuchasthese undoubtedlyrequireasecondroundofadjustmentsto addressissuesnotenvisionedduringthe initialadoption.Clearly,nonfunctionalelementsofa newregulationaredetrimentaltoallaspects ofcommunities. ScopeofWorkOutline : Theproposedscopeofworkfortheprojectisasfollows: Performaninitialanalysisofthefunctionand operationoftheregulationsadoptedforthe Cityin2013; Identifyomissionsandotheradjustmentsneeded toensurefunctionalityoftheregulations Workwith assignedcommittee(s),reviewanddevelopneededamendments. Deliverables: Proposeddeliverableswouldinclude: Amendmentstothelanddevelopmentregulations readyforconsiderationbytheCity Council. OtherProjectParticipants (e.g.,otheragencies,nonprofits,consultants,communitygroups): Projectparticipants,inadditiontoCityOfficials,board&committeemembers,andthegeneral publicwouldlikelyinclude:areabusinesses&propertyownersandselectedconsultant(s). ProjectMatchRequirement: 110WestCanalStreet,Suite202 Winooski,VT054042109 8028464490 www.ccrpcvt.org SouthBurlingtonpostadoptionLDRadjustments 2 SeetheattachedletterindicatingtheCity’s commitmenttomeetthematchrequirements. PublicMeetingRequirement: Theproposedprojectwasdiscussedandapprovedby thePlanningCommissiononJanuary14,2014 andbytheCityCouncilonJanuary21,2014.Ithas alsobeenpreviouslydisc ussedasaprojectwith thePlanningCommissionatpastmeetings. Budget: RequestedUPWPAmount $20,000 NonFederalCashMatch $0 InKindMatch $5,000 TotalProjectCost $25,000 ProjectSchedule (assumeJuly2014start)–addmorelinesifneeded Milestone Month/Year Performaninitialanalysisofthefunctionandoperationoftheregulations adoptedfortheCityin2013; 1/2015 Identifyomissionsandotheradjustmentsneededtoensurefunctionalityof theregulations 1/2015 Workwithassignedcommittee(s),reviewanddevelopmentneeded amendments. 3/2015 Draftandfinalamendmentstothe RegulationsforconsiderationbyCity Council 5/2015 3.BENEFITSTOREGIONALANDLOCALPLANNING Identifywhichstrategiesandactionsfrom theECOSPlanthisprojectwilladdress. (www.ecosproject.com–seeChapter3) Theproposedprojectwilladdressakeystrategy andseveralactionsfromtheECOSPlan: (1)Strivefor80%ofnewdevelopment inareasplannedforgrowth,wh ichamountsto15%ofourland area 1. InvestinAreasPlannedforGrowth– a. Establishwastewater,w aterinfrastructureandpublictran sitinareascurrentlydeveloped and/orplannedforgrowth 2. MunicipalPlanningandZoningStrengthenanddirect developmenttowardareasplannedfor growththroughinfilldevelopment andadaptivereuseofexistingbuildingsthroughmunicipal planandbylawrevisionsands tatedesignationprograms a. MunicipalDevelopmentReviewRegulationsshouldb erevisedtoimprovethe mixofuses, sharedparking,supportfor transit,accesstoavarietyof services(forexamplerestaurants, grocerystores,parks,entertainment)viaactive transportation,energyefficiency,renewable energyandtheaffordabilityofhousing. d. Empowerlocalofficialsthroughtrainingsandeduc ationonstrategiesto achievetheabove SouthBurlingtonpostadoptionLDRadjustments 3 planandbylawamendments,andimplementationofthemduringdevelopmentreview.This couldincludehowtoeffec tivelyanalyzedevelopmentcostsand benefits,andselect appropriatemultimodalcongestionmitigationmeasures Assessment:Theproposedprojectwouldhelpto ensurethattheregulationsadoptedforthe CityCenterandremainderoftheCityfunction asintended,reinforcingthelocalandregional goalsthatledtotheproject’sinitiation. Doesthisprojectaddressaneedidentifiedinalocalplanningdocument? Yes.SouthBurlingtonComprehensivePlanobjectives: "TheCityshouldencourage,throughits zoningandsubdivisionregulationsandcapital investmentpolicies,futuredevelopmentandredevelopmenttooccurinaccordancewith thegenerallandusepatterndepictedo nMap6,FutureLandUse."page29 "TheCityshouldexploreandencourage,through whatevermeansavailable,mixeduse developmentandredevelopmentinitsexistingcommercialcorridors(i.e.,WillistonRoad andShelburneRoad).TheCityshouldreview itszoningregulationsandconsiderincreasing residentialdensitiesorprovidingotherincentivestoencouragemoremixed residential/commercialdevelopment."p.30 "ContinuerefiningtheCentralDistrictZoningOrdinance topromotetheplansgoalsand objectives."p53 "Evaluatestandardsinthe LandDevelopmentRegulationsregarding theprovisionofopen spacesandbufferareasintheSEQinnew neighborhoods,andensurethattheseprovisions areconsistentwiththeSEQConceptPlan andleadtothecreationofusable,attractive conservedspaces."p.78 "TheCityshouldencouragethroughits zoningandsubdivisionregulationsdevelopment patternsthatpreserveopenspaceareasof sufficientsizeinordertomaintainimportant wildlifepopulations.Individuallotdesignshouldfit inwithadjacentandnearbylots,to provideclustersandcorridorsofwoodedorfield vegetation,leftinanaturalstatesufficient insizetonaturallymaintainpresentwildlifepopulations."p.97 Fortransportationandlanduseprojects,how willtheprojectbenefitthefollowing: Thesafe,effective operationofthetransportationsystem? RefinementsoftheRegulationstoensurethattools suchastheStreetTypologiesare workingeffectivelywillensureeffectiveuse andmanagementofthetransportationsystem. Regionaland/orlocaleconomicdevelopment? RefinementsoftheRegulationstoensure thatthebuildingenvelopestandards,review requirements,andadministrativeelementsofthe Codeareoperatingeffectivewillsupport straightforwardreviewofdevelopmentprojects. Multimodaltraveloptions,connections,and/orreduce traveldelaysforpeopleand goods? Seeaboveunder“safe,effectiveoperationofthetransportationsystem” Increasethelivabilityoflocalcommunities? Seeaboveunder“economicdevelopment” Complementotherlocal/regionalactivitiesorinitiatives? ThisprojectiscloselyalignedwiththeTransportation andLandUseactionsdescribedfrom SouthBurlingtonpostadoptionLDRadjustments 4 theECOSPlan Forotherplanningprojects,pleasedescribehow theprojectbenefitsthelocalcommunity.N/A Howdoesthisprojecthelptoachievegreater equity?Howaredisparitiesfordisadvantaged communitiesimprovedthroughthisproject? Thisprojectwillidentifyproblemswithstandards and/orprocessesthatcouldincludepublic involvementand/orequity. Howdoestheprojectdemonstrateacosteffe ctivesolutiontoapotentialorrecognizedproblem? AddressingidentifiedproblemsintheLandD evelopmentRegulationsafterininitialoperational periodwillhelptoassurethatanyproblemsare quicklyandeffectivelyaddressedbeforethey resultinprojectdelays,legalappeals,unanticipatedconsequences,etc. Howwillthisprojectbeimplementedwhenplanningiscomplete? Theprojectwillbeimplementedthroughadoption ofamendmentstotheCity’sLand DevelopmentRegulations. 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburl.com MEMORANDUM TO: South Burlington Planning Commission FROM: Paul Conner, Director of Planning & Zoning Cathyann LaRose, City Planner SUBJECT: Draft Application Review Process under Form Based Code DATE: January 14, 2013 Planning Commission meeting Staff has worked with Paul Dreher of Dreher Designs, Department Heads, and Legal Counsel to refine the draft process for review of development applications proposed for the City Center Form Based Code. Below please find an annotated (within the footnotes) series of steps built on the draft “administrative site plan review” section of the Code (Section 18.4). Potential Development Review Steps: 1. Optional Pre-application meeting – applicant & staff 2. Determination: DRB review is required if any of the following apply: a. Proposed subdivision of land1 b. Proposed new public street or extension of existing public street2 c. Specific waiver requested by applicant that is permitted within the Regulation (eg: wetland impact, stream buffer impact, other site feature waiver) d. The application exceeds certain thresholds (To be determined, if City wishes wishes to have such a threshold) 3. DRB hearing and review (if required) is only for the criteria that led to a DRB review. a. Subdivision & New Streets: Review existing land features, natural resource criteria for lot creation, overall traffic effect, proposal open space lots, and proposed Street types. • Standards for review based on minimizing impacts on natural resources, connection or lots & streets to the existing and planned street network 1 24 VSA 4464 requires a public hearing for subdivisions 2 Under Vermont Law, a public roadway creates a subdivision; new public roads, therefore, require a public hearing under 24 VSA 4464. 2 b. Waivers requested by applicant: must show all information needed to determine whether to grant. (eg, for wetlands impact, would need wetland evaluation and property site plan to determine whether appropriate circumstances exist to grant). • Standards for review would be existing standards for Nat Resources, need to be developed for any window / BES waivers c. Threshold: full review of project (if applicable) 4. Administrative Review (applies to applications that are fully administrative or the non- DRB portion of applications that go before the DRB) a. Application materials submitted b. Administrative Officer determines application is complete (begins 30 day review period3) a. A complete application shall include any determinations from the FD or DPW of compliance with the regulations4 c. Public notification of application (for discussion)5 d. Administrative Officer issues decision based on compliance with regulations 5. Zoning Permit application a. All applicants who have received approval (Administrative or DRB) for may apply for a zoning permit for construction following expiry of the appeal period. (This is the same as under the current regulations) 6. Certificate of Occupancy a. Following completion of construction for all multi-family or non-residential development involving exterior modifications may apply for a Certificate of Occupancy (This is the same as under the current regulations). 3 24 VSA 4448 states that the Administrative Officer is required to “act” (ie, to issue a decision or refer an application to the DRB) on a complete application within 30 days. 4 In many communities, approvals from the Fire Department and Public Works Department are separate permits. In South Burlington, they have long been combined with DRB & Administrative reviews to simplify the process. Staff recommends this continue, and also recommends that a “complete” application include “sign-off” from these departments. 5 The Form Based Codes Committee recommends a mailing of notice of administrative applications and 15-day comment period. Staff and Legal Counsel are examining how and whether this can be accommodated within the 30- day period the Administrative Officer has to “act” on an application. 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburl.com MEMORANDUM TO: South Burlington Planning Commission FROM: Paul Conner, Director of Planning & Zoning Cathyann LaRose, City Planner SUBJECT: Cope of City-Wide Regulations / Code DATE: January 14, 2013 Planning Commission meeting Staff is working with Paul Dreher of Dreher Designs to amend the original contract for the overhaul of the City’s Land Development Regulations. The original agreement expired in December 2013. As part of refining the work remaining to be done, staff is working to clarify pieces of the Regulations that Paul Dreher would not be responsible for updating as part of this project. This will help to ensure clarity among all parties. These “exclusions” could include topic based standards and/or some geographic areas of the city as described in the agenda. Staff is seeking feedback and recommendations from the Planning Commission on topics / areas to exclude. a. Topic-based items. In working on the City Center portion of the Code, staff and Dreher Designs were able to identify several sections of the current LDRs that are either recently updated or which serve as a “plug-in” to the Code and function independently. These could include, at a minimum: • Article 10, Overlay Districts • Article 11, Design Review Overlay District • Article 12, Surface Water Protection Standards, except to the extent that the existing and proposed standards within that Article are sewed together with the remainder of the Regulations • Performance Bonds • Article 15, Construction and Erosion Control Standards • Performance Standards • Traffic impact (and fee) analysis. Commissioners are encouraged to share any concerns about items on this list, or to recommend additional topic-based items to be excluded from the contract. 2 b. Geographic parts of the city. Staff encourages the Commission to discuss potential areas of the City that could / should be excluded from the Dreher Design contract at this time. As you know, the contract budget is limited and there is no funding for the project budgeted for Fiscal Year 2015 (starting in July 2014). It is important to note that a decision to exclude certain portions of the city does not necessarily mean that there is no commitment to undertake a project in that area; it may simply be a planned or future project. As a framework for the discussion, Commissioners could consider parts of the city that fall into categories such as: • Areas where a separate planning project is underway or funded that will focus specifically on that part of the city; • Areas where the future policy for these remains unresolved to the point that they would warrant a separate, focused planning effort of their own; • Areas where current regulations are generally working well The Chamberlin Neighborhood is an example of the part of the city that would fall into the first category (and the second, if funding had not yet been secured). Staff recommends this as one area to exclude entirely from the Dreher Design contract. In addition, there may be parts of the City where a full overhaul of the Regulations is not warranted (or ripe) at this time, but where supplemental tools and/or “tweaks” could be appropriate. An example of this might be the implementation of tools such as the “Agricultural PUD” or “Hamlet PUD” concepts that Paul Dreher has put forward. A tool such as this could be adopted in an area where the remainder of the regulations stay intact. Staff will be prepared to provide support, feedback, and suggestions to the Commission on this subject at the meeting.