Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - Planning Commission - 01/27/2015 SOUTH BURLINGTON PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES 27 JANUARY 2015 The South Burlington Planning Commission held a regular meeting on Tuesday, 27 January 2015, at 7:00 p.m., in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset Street. MEMBERS PRESENT: J. Louisos, Chair; B. Gagnon, T. Riehle, T. Harrington, S. Quest, G. Calcagni ALSO PRESENT: P. Conner, Director of Planning & Zoning; C. LaRose, City Planner; P. Nowak, T. McKenzie, M. Mittag, R. Greco, M. Simoneau, R. Jeffers 1. Agenda: Additions, deletions or changes in order of agenda items: No changes were made to the Agenda. 2. Open to the Public for items not related to the agenda: Ms. Nowak thanked members of the Planning Commission for their service. 3. Planning Commissioner Announcements & Staff Report: Ms. Harrington: Attended the Dumont Park planning session. Ms. Quest: Attended the Energy Committee event. Ms. Louisos: Attended the Garden Street design meeting. It was well written up in The Other Paper with a copy of the most popular design. Mr. Conner: The Underhill property committee will meet on Thursday. The City Council approved the draft budget for FY16. The Commission will be getting different options for Garden Street and Dumont Park. These are also on the website. The City Council approved submittal of funding requests from the Planning Commission to the Regional Planning Commission (RPC). Several departments met with members of the Rotary which will be doing a “City Fest” this summer. This will be the kickoff for the city’s 150th birthday celebration with music, tours, fireworks, etc. 4. Presentation of Policy Concerns/questions related to draft City Center Form Based Code: Mr. McKenzie noted that a group of stakeholders in City Center gets together periodically. In their discussions, they have expressed concerns and confusions with some elements of the Form Based Code. One area that has them bogged down is the street overlay as part of the Form Based Code. Concerns involve easements, etc. The state of the draft itself is concerning. It is hard to know where to look to find anything. They would like to make comments when the draft is easier to read. Specific concerns include: 1. Block length and what constitutes a block 2. What triggers a form based code review of a renovation 3. Is there a level of review that if something doesn’t conform, but everyone agrees it would be a good piece for City Center, to get that considered. Ms. Louisos said she thought there is a study looking at traffic. Mr. Conner said there is a 2-part study. The RPC hired VHB to look at traffic in City Center (including Williston Road, etc.). They are doing an analysis based on the total amount of development and how to avoid getting to a “breaking point.” Phase 2 will be in much more detail (where could an intersection be, etc.) This won’t get started until fall and will take about a year to complete. They will test various scenarios and what their impacts will be. Mr. Riehle asked what stakeholders want in the way of road configuration. Mr. McKenzie said they have no issues with existing roads (Market St., Garden Street, etc.). They question arises with imposing new roads where they now don’t exist and the possibility of having to subdivide property where a road is planned. Ms. Quest asked whether there would have to be a new study because of the Saxon Partners offer. Mr. Conner said the people doing the study are aware of the Saxon situation. The study looks at much more than one property. It looks at such things as Williston Road’s ability to serve and what would have to be done to deal with the number of driveways on that road. Mr. McKenzie said the biggest policy questions they are not clear on is what constitutes a block length. ( Is it a curb cut? Is it the city’s 50‐foot right‐of‐way?) and at what level is it deemed that an existing property has to conform to the form based code (Is it square footage? Which they do not feel is a fair method). Mr. McKenzie added that they are willing to make recommendations, if the Commission will give then 2 to 3 weeks. Ms. Harrington said it is good to see an issue of “unintended consequences.” She noted the Commission hasn’t gotten any formal feedback from the Technical Review Committee, and they need that information to make an informed decision. Mr. Conner noted that some of the issues are more “policy” than “technical.” Ms. Louisos said she didn’t think the Commission ever had the block length discussion. She was under the impression that a block was defined by a fully functioning road. Mr. Mittag said he didn’t think it was appropriate for a committee to rework the code. He felt the form based code committee should be reconvened for that. Mr. Gagnon said that ultimately the Commission finalizes the code and presents it to the City Council. Mr. Conner reviewed options for a “clean copy” of the code to give to Mr. McKenzie and others. He noted that depending on how a block gets measured, or how a non-conformity is handled, things will be written very differently. Mr. Gagnon said the question is how many more rounds of public comment they want to have before sending the code on to the City Council. He felt that at some point they have to move on, but he didn’t know if they were at that point yet. Mr. Conner noted there are grey areas regarding different people’s interpretation of the same language. Ms. Harrington said she is missing the Technical committee’s recommendations. Mr. Conner said they were empowered to review a standard that was thought to be clear. It is now determined not to be clear. The question is whether the Commission want the Technical Committee to tackle that. Ms. LaRose said the first question is what goal is the Commission trying to get to, and what help get there. She noted this discussion started in October and it is now January. That is how things spiral. Ms. Quest asked what they are really talking about. Mr. McKenzie said “new streets across existing properties.” Ms. LaRose noted it is very different when you put something on paper rather than dealing with it in theory. Ms. Louisos said she felt the Commission should answer the block question sooner rather than later. Ms. LaRose said staff considered various “street” types. It was clear that a “street” defined a block. What needs to be clear to property owners is whether they have to build a street or set aside property for a street. She didn’t feel that was clear in existing language. She felt the policy piece is not as clear as they had thought it was. Ms. Louisos felt the Commission had to give the Technical Committee more guidance. Mr. Mittag suggested Mr. McKenzie’s group write something clear that they would like to see and have the Technical committee debate it and say “yes” or “no.” Mr. Riehle felt Mr. McKenzie’s group should bring something to the Commission. Other members agreed. Mr. McKenzie said they need a cleaned up copy to see if there are any things that evoke broader issues. They would like to get this to their consultant to see if there are potential problems. Mr. Conner asked who the Commission wants to have make the first proposal. Mr. Gagnon said have Mr. McKenzie’s group make a proposal so the Commission can consider it and do the best job it can. With regard to the block issue, Mr. Conner said the problem arises when there is a property of less than 10 acres. It’s easy to plot blocks when there are 10 to 100 acres. With smaller lots the questions arise as to where you want streets, do you want more streets, and what about non-conforming lots. Ms. Louisos said she thought there would be a “bullet point” list of where there would be blocks. Now it seems it’s not that easy. Mr. Conner asked if the Commission would want to look at a potential official may to see where roads would be. Mr. Gagnon said he would like something from the stakeholders to look at first. Ms. Louisos felt the issues are intertwined. The code can be very different if streets are not required in some places. Mr. Gagnon said he felt the Commission can define a block in the code. Ms. LaRose said there are properties that would have a very difficult time meeting that if you only define a block length. She added there are some property owners who don’t think they should have streets imposed on them at all. It is not clear if Mr. McKenzie wanted to build a building whether he would have to build out the whole block. Mr. McKenzie asked if a block can be defined by a driveway into a parking structure…or by something that looks like a block and functions as one (instead of a 50‐ foot right-of-way). Ms. LaRose said the question then is who owns that street, and who maintains it. And what does it look like? Ms. Greco said the main thing is what something is going to look like, which is the point of form based code. Mr. Conner noted that there is a plan for a TIF vote, possibly in June. To get something to the City Council in time for that, the Commission has to have something in hand by mid-March. Mr. McKenzie said he will have something to the Commission by the next two meetings. 5. Initial consideration of South Village Request for Zoning Amendment: Mr. Conner noted that there had been earlier discussions regarding the potential for a non-residential element to South Village. Now they are ready to talk about that. Ms. Jeffers said the development is turning out to be what people hoped it would be, including the agriculture piece. She showed a plan of what is there now. She also indicated a piece of land that they would like to see zoned as “Village Commercial.” It had been thought there would be a school there, but the residential community wants some commercial services, places they can walk or bike to. Such an area could also serve adjoining developments. Mr. Conner indicated the areas where there could now be a store. Mr. Riehle said he was very much in favor of such a commercial development where people could walk to buy a quart of milk. But he questioned whether this would open up a similar possibility in places where it might not be so appropriate. Mr. Gagnon said to him it would be a question of whether people who live there would support it and what it would look like. He would want it to fit aesthetically in the neighborhood. Mr. Conner said there can be restrictions on size and also some design criteria imposed. It was noted that South Village has its own aesthetic criteria. Ms. Quest said she spoke to some neighbors who knew nothing about this plan. They had only been told about a possible school or community center. She questioned the traffic impact and also whether a 3-story building would be the end of the view corridor for Spear Street residents. Ms. Calcagni agreed with Mr. Riehle and felt people will look at walkability when they choose a neighborhood in which to live. Mr. Gagnon said he would favor moving this forward to see what people think. Mr. Conner said neighbors could get a letter inviting them to a discussion. He also reminded members that this will eventually be a much larger residential community. Ms. Greco felt a grocery store makes sense, but that a lawyer or dentist would bring traffic into the neighborhood. Ms. Louisos said it would be up to the Commission to define that. Members than considered when to hear the request. Ms. Jeffers said they could have a presentation within 6-8 weeks. Members agreed to table the request to consider their upcoming schedule. Mr. Riehle moved to table the discussion until the Commission schedule is considered. Mr. Gagnon seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Ms. LaRose then reviewed the schedule as predicted through August. She didn’t feel the Commission would get ahead of schedule. She also reviewed public hearings and noted there are property owners who would like to come in and discuss redevelopment on lots that already have development. Mr. Gagnon suggested a presentation from South Village on 24 March which seems to be a “presentation meeting.” 6. Continue Review of Draft Comprehensive Plan: Ms. LaRose gave members a list of where conflicts appear. Some of these are only wordsmithing issues; others involve policy. 7. Other Business: a. Shelburne draft regulation amendments: Mr. Conner said the amendments are minor to South Burlington, though major to Shelburne. No issues were raised. 8. Review Minutes of 13 January 2015: It was noted that the figure of 65 acres should read 5 acres. Mr. Riehle moved to approve the Minutes of 13 January 2015 with the noted amendment. Ms. Calcagni seconded. Motion passed unanimously. As there was no further business to come before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned by common consent at 9:45 p.m. , Clerk Published by ClerkBase ©2019 by Clerkbase. No Claim to Original Government Works. For the best experience, open this PDF portfolio in Acrobat X or Adobe Reader X, or later. Get Adobe Reader Now! 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: Cathyann LaRose, City Planner SUBJECT: Open Space Recommendations for Comprehensive Plan DATE: January 27, 2015 Planning Commission Meeting Staff, at the direction of the Planning Commission, has begun the task of going through the entire compendia of proposed changes to the strategies, goals, and objectives in proposed by the work of the several committees, including the Affordable Housing, Sustainable Agriculture and Open Space Interim Zoning committees, as well as the Energy Committee. The Recreation and Leisure Arts Committee reviewed the work done through the Open Space Committee, providing comments during that time. All committees are of course welcome to continue providing comment, to the draft or to the proposed changes herein. As you may see, some recommendations are to clarify or expand on existing or draft language; others involve varying degrees of policy change. In order to ensure all comments are reviewed at some point, you may notice that there are comments attached that do not relate directly to goals/objectives/strategies. These are included herein just so they stay a part of the process, but are not intended for review at the meeting on the 27th. Staff has also begun to cull through the draft Comprehensive Plan with a goal to reduce the bulk by removing duplications and making assignments of cross-posted priorities to the area most appropriate. That final product will be presented to the Planning Commission as a whole in the coming weeks. Staff will be prepared on the 27th to guide you through the items where there are differences in language between the existing draft and the proposals of the various committees. ChapterSectionProposed by CommitteeGoals Objectives2Objective 4Revise to read, "Support the retention of existing and construction of new affordable and moderate‐income housing, emphasizing both smaller single‐family homes and apartments, to meet demand within the regional housing market, as assessed by annual regional demographics and needs analyses."Objective 5Revise to read, “Build and reinforce diverse, walkable neighborhoods that offer a good quality of life by designing and locating new and renovated housing is designed and located in a context‐sensitive manner that will facilitate development of a high‐density, City Center, mixed‐used transit corridors, and compact residential neighborhoods reinforces diverse, walkable neighborhoods."Strategies 2.2Strategy 4Revise to read, “Provide a range of residential zoning densities throughout the city in accordance with the Land Use chapter of this plan to allow for continued construction of new housing to meet the needs of the region’s changing demographics, including at least some districts that foster high‐density housing and some that foster affordably moderately‐priced single‐family housing." Strategy 5Revise to read, “Implement a variety of tools and programs to foster innovative approaches to increasing the city's supply of affordable and moderateincome housing including, but not limited to, housing affordability through use of tools such as floor area ratio‐based density, refined a housing trust fund, a form‐based code that allows a variety of residential and mixed‐use building types, expanded accessory dwelling unit provisions apartment regulations, transferable of development rights, inclusionary zoning, bonuses and incentives, waivers and expedited review processes, and/or a housing retention ordinance zero lot line lots, or others."Strategy 6Revise to read, “Continue to have an Affordable Housing Committee charged with increasing the availability of safe and affordable housing in the city that Form a housing task force whereby city representatives would work with developers, engineers, site planners, architects, business leaders, utility representatives, housing professionals, bankers, city staff and officials, and residents to facilitate affordable housing and offer recommendations on housing‐related issues to the Planning Commission, Development Review Board and City Council. explore design standards."Strategy 7Revise to read, “Encourage the presence of high‐quality Increase the supply of safe and affordable rental housing by allowing higher‐density, mixed‐use, and mixed‐income development within City Center and transit corridors, considering new locations within or near certain non‐residential uses, allowing the rehabilitation of larger, historically significant structures, and using as buffers allowing multi‐unit housing within transitional zones between residential neighborhoods and commercial/industrial areas land uses."Strategy 8Revise to read, “Support Recognize that affordable, elderly and/or higher‐density housing to be is most suitably located near schools, parks, shopping centers, employment centers, day care facilities, transportation corridors, emergency services, and public transportation."Strategy 9Revise to read, “Strategy 9. Investigate tools to promote the conservation of the housing stockin existing residential neighborhoods, particularly to maintain the supply of relatively modestly affordable and moderately‐priced single‐family homes."Strategy 10 and 11Strategies 10, 11 and 12 could be consolidated into a single strategy:“ Strategy 10. Allow for context‐sensitive infill housing in older residential neighborhoods, particularly in locations that are centrally located to services, public transportation and places of work."“ Strategy 11. Examine and revise residential building height standards to foster renovations, expansions, or new construction that is performed in a contextsensitive manner and to ensure that height restrictions are in concert with other requirements of the Land Development Regulations."AffordableHousing Strategy 12 Revise to read, “Strategy 12. Explore the establishment of form‐based standards or revise existing district standards, including consideration of appropriate building heights and densities based on neighborhood context and location, for residential buildings throughout the city to accommodate compatible infill and expansion of additions to homes in existing neighborhoods, particularlythose that are centrally located near services, transit and workplaces, and neighborhood‐friendly design in development of new compact, walkable neighborhoods."Strategy 13 Strategy 13. Encourage the integration of more mixed‐use and mixed‐income residential and commercial uses development, particularly within City Center and transit corridors where there is ready access to public transportation and services."Strategy 14 Strategy 14. Encourage a variety of housing configurations options to meet the needs of a diverse population through innovative land development regulations that allow for a range of residential building and neighborhood types, including but not limited to cottage housing, clustered housing and infill residential development use of PUD provisions under which lot sizes, frontages and setbacks may be reduced, to meet the needs of a diverse population.Strategy 15 Strategy 15 lacks specificity and is stating a general policy that underlies a number of the strategies. It could be eliminated:underlies a number of the strategies. It could be eliminated:“ Strategy 15. Establish incentives for the maintenance and development of “attainable” housing that has no income restriction but which is within reach of a wide range of the population.Strategy 16 Strategy 16. Use the Chittenden County Burlington‐South Burlington MSA median income and rent figures published by HUD as the baseline for determining affordable housing prices and rents.Strategy 19‐21 Strategies 19, 20, and 21 are related to protecting quality of life in residential neighborhoods and could be consolidated into a single strategy.“ Strategy 19. Create additional landscaping and setback requirements around the perimeter of transitional zones between residential neighborhoods that abut and higher‐density or ‐intensity areas with density, performance and design standards intended to maintain quality of life within neighborhoods, including mitigating impacts such as traffic, noise and light, potentially incompatible land uses such as commercial and industrial.“ Strategy 20. Explore and implement standards for transitions between land uses of different intensities.“ Strategy 21. Consider the impacts of non‐residential uses, such as traffic, noise and light, on existing4Strategy 22‐25 Strategies 22 through 25 could be revised slightly:“ Strategy 22. Require new homes developments to install connections connect to municipal water and sewer systems.“ Strategy 23. Encourage multiple street and/or pedestrian connections to and between residential neighborhoods in order to provide adequateemergency access and traffic distribution, while designing such connections in a manner that discourages additional through, truck, or high‐speedtraffic.“ Strategy 24. Ensure that adequate emergency access is available to all development and devise ways to prevent emergency accesses from beingobstructed to protect public safety.“ Strategy 25. Provide prompt, equitable enforcement of the zoning ordinance land development regulations to maintain the character of existingresidentialneighborhoods.Strategy 26Explore the costs and benefits of Monitor the need for the city to adopting and enforceing local building, plumbing, electrical, and fire and energycodes for rental housing, establish a rental registry program, and continue to enforce the state rental housing code to protect resident's healthand safety and quality of life in the city's neighborhoods. for the protection and safety of the public, employees and property.Strategy 27Seek to provide Include recreation opportunities to be located within one‐quarter mile of housing residential neighborhoods throughout the cityStrategy 28Promote the construction of new homes‐particularly affordable and moderate‐income units‐that are highly energy‐efficient, and upgrades toexisting homes to make them more energy‐efficient, which will reduce residents' overall cost of living and contribute to housing affordabilityAffordableHousing Chapter Section Proposed by CommitteeVision Statement1Vision Statement"South Burlington will strive to have a sustainable qulaity of life comprised of idnifiable, diverse neighborhoods, quality natural environments, strong employment opportuntiies, local food production, and a vibrant sense of community."Goals Goal 3"Conserve its identified important natural areas, open spaces, aquatic resources, air quality, productive farmland and primary agricultural soils agricultural resources, and recreational assets."Goal 8“Support markets for local food andagricultural products and encourage urban agriculture to thrivea diversity of small scale agriculturewithin the city.”Objectives2Objective 26Revise to read, “Proactively plan for open spaces for ecological resources, active and passive recreation land, and productive farmland and primary agricultural soils agricultural resources.”Objective 33Revise to read, “Promote the preservation of existing agricultural resources Conserve productive farmland and primary agricultural soilswithin the city.”Objective 34Revise to read, “Increase the provision of local foodsSupport new farmers and entrepreneurswithin the city who produce food for local consumption.”Objective 35Revise to read, “Increase the presence of dispersed, community‐based agricultural resources Use productive farmland and primary agricultural soils in South Burlington for urban agriculture and local food production.”Add new Add a new objective, “Encourage more value‐added food processors who can strengthen and benefit from the quality of the Vermont brand to locate in South Burlington and bring more quality jobs to the city.”Add new Add a new objective, “Embed urban agriculture and local food production in the city’s downtown, neighborhoods and commercial/industrial areas.”Strategies 2.2Strategy 156Revise to read, “Preserve farmland and agricultural heritage landscapes as significant cultural resources by protecting their scenic and historic character through the use of techniques such as conservation restrictions, transfer of development rights and protective easements.” Strategy 168Revise to read, “Continue to support urban agriculture and local food small‐scale fruit and vegetable production in South Burlington and facilitate local farmers’ ability to sell and process their products within the city encourage small‐scale sales of products where appropriate.”Strategy 169Revise to read, “Continue to make use of the city’s Open Space fund to support the conservation of both wildlife and productive agricultural lands of various sizes in the community.”Strategy 170Revise to read, “Continue to use zoningUse the city’s Land Development Regulationsto foster the continuance of agricultural operationsurban agriculture and local food production in the citywhere appropriate.”Strategy 171 Revise to read, “Explore the active Actively use of city‐owned land for urban agriculture and local food production including community gardens and leasing land to commercial farmers educational and/or commercial agricultural purposes.”Strategy 172Revise to read, “Explore the provision of incentives forEncourage newdevelopment, particularly residential or mixed‐use projects that include homes without private yards, to includecreatecommunity garden space.”SustainableAgriculture Strategy 173Revise  to read, “Study the possibility of greater municipal involvement in the Establish a city‐run program to create and manage creation and management of community gardens and orchardsfarmers’ markets.”Strategy 174 Revise to read, “Study distribution of current community garden resources and community need and set goals for future garden distribution to all sections of the city Distribute community gardens throughout the city so that gardens are within walking or biking distance for all city residents.”Proposed StrategyAdd the following strategy, “Expand the city’s Backyard Chicken Ordinance to regulate the keeping of other small livestock and bees.”Proposed StrategyAdd the following strategy, “Encourage home gardening and use of edible landscaping on residential properties.”Proposed StrategyAdd the following strategy, “Require new homeowners and condominium association rules, and encourage existing associations to revise their rules as needed, to allow common land to be used for food production.”Proposed StrategyAdd the following strategy, “Support programs in city schools that teach food production and preparation.”Proposed StrategyAdd the following strategy, “Revise the city’s Land Development Regulations to allow urban agriculture and food production throughout the city.”44.4 (D)Add the following bullet to the inventory list “FormsofAgriculture.Changingformsofagricultureforthefutureinclude:agroforestry,edibleforest gardens, permaculture design, and rotational grazing.”Add a description of what Common Roots does after their mention in the text “teachesschoolchildrenhowtogrowfoodandpreparefoodandmake healthy food choices.”Add the following to the opening paragraph of the analysis section, “TheStateofVermontinitsFarmtoPlateStrategicPlanhasstated:“Ongoingconservationefforts,especiallyforprimeagriculturalfarmland,areessentialtothefutureviabilityoffarminginthestate…Zoningordinances,townandregionalplans,andstatewideplanninglegislationmustbereviewedandadaptedtoencouragelocalagricultureandfooddistribution.”(p.10)”Reword the last sentence in the bullet about the high cost of land to read, “Landuseplanningtools,includingtheuseofTransferofDevelopmentRights(TDR),revisedLandDevelopmentRegulationsandothercreativeapproachesshouldbeusedtomaximizetheamountofagricultural land in the city that remains in productive use indefinitely.”Reword the community gardening bullet to read, “ExistingcommunitygardenspaceinSouthBurlingtonislimitedandhassignificantwaitinglists.TheexistinggardensarealsobothlocatedintheSoutheastQuadrant.ThemajorityofgardenerslivewithinamileofthegardenslocatedonDorsetStreet,demonstratingtheinterestofresidentsingardeningneartotheirhomes.Atpresent,thereisnomunicipalmechanismforthe creation and management of new gardens in the community.”Add the following to the end of the future trends and needs section, “GovernorShumlinsaysintheFarmtoPlateStrategicPlan(2011):‘Climatechangeandoiladdictionthreatenthelong‐termviabilityofVermont’sfoodsystem.Butbyrelocalizingfoodproductionandboostingon‐farmrenewableenergyproduction,Vermonterscanleadthenationinproactivelyrespondingtothesechallenges.’(p.1)TheStateofVermontinitsFarmtoPlateprogramlistsmanygoalsforfuturefoodsecurityandeconomicprosperitythatwouldapplytoSouthBurlington.‘A.AllVermonterswillhaveaccesstofresh,nutritionallybalancedfoodthattheycanafford.B.AllVermonterswillhaveagreaterunderstandingofhowtoobtain,grow,storeandpreparenutritionalfood.C.Vermontersofallincomelevelswillhavefoodsecurity.D.Foodsystemsneedtobeenhanced,beginningwithlandpreservationandendingwithstrongmarkets.’SouthBurlington,withitsprimeagriculturalsoils,strongbusinessclass, large population base,engthen the ability of the area to continue operations when during power outages that result from severe stormSustainableAgriculture Goals Goal 2Establish a city center, with pedestrian‐oriented design, mixed uses, public buildings and civic spaces, that acts as a focal point of the community;Goal 3Conserve the city’s important natural, cultural and open space resources, including air, surface and ground water quality; wetlands and riparian areas; natural communities and wildlife habitat; agricultural land and primary agricultural soils; grasslands and woodlands; scenic views, vistas, and landscape features; recreational assets; and historic sites and structures;Goal 6Reduce energy consumption and increase community‐based renewable energy production in locations that do not contradict or interfere with the city’s community development, open space and resource conservation objectives;Goal 8Encourage a wide diversity of large and small scale agriculture and food production in suitable locations throughout the city, and support markets for local agricultural and food products.Proposed GoalSustain, reclaim and repurpose open spaces in areas that are undergoing land abandonment, conversion or redevelopment; to include the acquisition of public land for public benefit, consistent with city goals and objectives and available funding sources.   ObjectivesObjective 7Provide quality public and quasi‐public facilities and services, identified through collaborative strategic planning, that meet present‐day needs and are programmed to anticipate needs at least 20 years into the future.Objective 9Provide opportunities and space for city residents of all ages and abilities to participate in life‐long educational, recreational and community service programs for both personal enrichment, and to strengthen neighborhood and community connections.Objective 11Foster a strong quality of life for residents and visitors that includes opportunities for physical activity, outdoor recreation and social interaction.Objective 15Provide a transportation network that is supportive of and integrated into adjacent land uses, and that is designed and constructed to minimize fragmentation of and adverse impacts to identified natural, cultural, scenic and other open space resources.Objective 17Continue to plan for, program and  develop the city’s interconnected network of sidewalks, pedestrian trails and recreation paths.  Strive to develop and maintain one mile of public recreation path per one thousand population.EnergyProposed ObjectivePromote distributed residential and community‐supported renewable energy development, including municipal facilities and net‐metered planned unit development, in locations that avoid or minimize impacts to identified open space resources.Proposed ObjectiveMinimize the adverse impacts of utility and commercial (merchant) energy facility development – including transmission corridors, substations and new or expanded solar farms – on established residential neighborhoods, and on open space resources and functions identified for conservation on or in the vicinity of the land to be developed.Objective 23Protect and improve natural watershed, stream, lakeshore and wetland systems and processes, specifically for stormwater treatment, riparian and aquatic habitat, and floodplain and river corridor protection.Proposed ObjectiveIncorporate natural drainage and multi‐functional open space areas in site planning and subdivision design that accommodate on‐site storage, infiltration and treatment of stormwater.Proposed ObjectiveInclude mapped river corridors (fluvial erosion hazard and riparian areas) within designated open space areas intended for hazard mitigation, resource conservation and compatible forms of passive outdoor recreation.  Community Facilities and ServicesTransportationWater Resources and Stormwater ManagementWater Supply and Wastewater TreatmentOpen Space  Objective 25Develop and maintain wastewater system infrastructure to support concentrated development within areas designated for development, including the City Center, and to avoid line extensions and development within designated open space areas, including primary and secondary resource conservation areas.Objective 26Proactively plan for a network of interconnected open spaces to conserve and accommodate ecological resources, active and passive recreation land, civic spaces, scenic views and vistas and forest and agricultural resources.  Objective 27Conserve, restore and enhance biological diversity within the city, through careful site planning and development that is designed to avoid adverse impacts to critical wildlife resources, and that incorporates significant natural areas, communities and wildlife habitats as conserved open space.Objective 28Conserve, reestablish and maintain contiguous open space areas, including adjoining habitat blocks, riparian and other wildlife corridors, in a manner that promotes and reinforces habitat connectivity. Proposed ObjectiveRestrict and limit [prohibit] new subdivision and development within primary resource conservation areas, to include hazardous and environmentally sensitive areas identified, mapped and regulated by the city.  Minimize the adverse impacts of new subdivision and development, including resource fragmentation and encroachment, within secondary resource conservation areas, to include those resources of state or local significance as indicated on available resource maps, identified in available inventories and studies, and confirmed through site investigation. Objective 30Protect important vistas and viewsheds, as viewed from public vantage points (public roads, paths, land); and designated landscapes, sites and structures of historic and cultural significance.Recreation Resources Objective 31Provide for the varied recreational needs and interests of its citizens by providing areas and facilities for passive recreation, active sports, cultural and educational programs, and civic gatherings. Proposed ObjectiveProvide public access to natural areas within the city’s more urban and suburban neighborhoods, for passive outdoor recreation and education.  Objective 32Strive to maintain 20‐25 acres per thousand population of passive and active recreational open space, to include 7.5 acres of developed park and recreational facilities per thousand population.Objective 33.Promote the preservation of existing agricultural resources within the city.Objective 34.Increase the provision of local foods within the city.Objective 35.Increase the presence of dispersed, community‐based agricultural resources in South Burlington.Proposed ObjectiveContinue to identify, map and evaluate existing and planned open space areas, to include primary and secondary resource conservation areas, farm and forest land, scenic views and vistas, park and recreation lands, and civic spaces for consideration in development review, incorporation in site planning and subdivision design, and for purposes of public acquisition and long‐term stewardship. Proposed ObjectiveProvide for and manage open space areas by type and function, based on existing site conditions, location, size (area) and extent, adopted standards and guidelines, and intended use.  Designated open space areas must be consistent with the district (zone) in which they are located and physically and functionally suitable for their intended use.Objective 78. Develop long‐term management and stewardship plans for all city‐owned properties, including public parks and natural areas.  Analyze and facilitate access to public open spaces where appropriate. Historic and Cultural ResourcesAgricultural ResourcesFuture Land Use – General Ecological ResourcesGreen InfrastructureOpen Space Objective 79. Protect a diverse, interconnected network of open spaces, both public and private, and land uses and development patterns that support or are compatible with such open spaces.Objective 38.Create a cohesive, diverse, dynamic and people‐oriented City Center with a strong identity and “sense of place” that incorporates harmonious design, an appropriate mix of residential and non‐residential uses, and public amenities that complement adjoining neighborhoods.Objective 39.Improve street, recreation and pedestrian path interconnectivity and ‘walkability” throughout the Central District and new City Center.Objective 40.Establish vibrant streetscapes, civic spaces, public art and public facilities in the Central District and City Center.Objective 41.Reserve and establish open space areas for public enjoyment, natural resource conservation and stormwater management, to include a greenway along Potash Brook.Objective 42.Complete master planning for the City Center to create opportunities for low impact stormwater management that incorporates sustainable design and green infrastructure (e.g., tree cover, bioretention areas, rain gardens, constructed wetlands, porous pavers, green roofs), and for energy‐efficient, centralized or shared heating and cooling systems.Objective 43.Provide public streetscapes, thoroughfares, intersections and crossings that safely and comfortably accommodate vehicles and people of all ages and abilities – including pedestrians, seniors, children, bicyclists, and joggers.Objective 48.Promote the interconnectivity and integration of schools and school facilities open to the public with surrounding neighborhoods, to include safe routes for children and neighborhood residents to walk and bicycle to school.Northwest QuadrantObjective 49.Maintain existing affordable and diverse residential neighborhoods, and access to neighborhood parks and other amenities through the provision of safe, pedestrian‐ and bicycle‐friendly routes and crossings.Objective 50.Increase the availability and accessibility of public parkland, including the development of a new neighborhood or community park to serve local neighborhoods in this quadrant. Objective 51.Foster gradual transitions between residential neighborhoods of different scales and densities, and between residential neighborhoods and mixed use corridors in and adjacent to the Quadrant.Objective 52.Allow for infill development, including parks and civic spaces, that serves and supports the character of existing neighborhoods; with a focus on the replacement of small single‐family affordable homes that are being lost under the Burlington International Airport’s “Property Acquisition Plan” in association with its adopted Noise Compatibility Program.Objective 54.Create transitions from the Burlington International Airport, to include the development of parks, streetscapes or other civic spaces in areas identified for redevelopment that serve or buffer nearby neighborhoods; establish a community vision for the future of this area.Objective 55.Continue to support the voluntary sale and relocation of eligible noise‐affected homes and households, and other context‐sensitive noise mitigation measures in neighborhoods adjacent to the Burlington International Airport.Objective 56.Ensure continued compatibility of university and college campus land uses with existing development and conservation patterns.Objective 57.Measure and improve all parameters of water quality in the Potash and Centennial Brooks.Northeast QuadrantObjective 59.Provide a balanced mix of recreation, resource conservation, and business park opportunities in the south end of the Quadrant, to include the conservation open space resources, including riparian corridors along the tributaries of Muddy Brook and Potash Brook.Objective 60.Conserve existing agricultural lands in this quadrant, including farmland near the Winooski River.Central District (City Center)Open Space Objective 64. Encourage well planned, clustered, compact and infill business park development that integrates contiguous open space areas, to be sustainably managed for their intended functions and use, in business park design. Objective 65.Promote the effective transition from rural residential and agricultural land uses along Old Farm Road to more dense housing and mixed uses in highly serviced areas along Kennedy Drive and Kimball Ave. Such transition should incorporate interconnected greenways and forested open space.Southwest QuadrantObjective 68.Increase visual and physical access to public parks and other city‐owned land in this quadrant.   Objective 70.Promote safe, pedestrian‐friendly access to services through recreation path connections and safe roadway crossings. Objective 73. Improve and expand public access to Lake Champlain.Objective 74.Support ongoing agricultural use of the University of Vermont’s Horticultural Farm and its other agricultural properties.Southeast Quadrant Objective 77. Give priority to the conservation of contiguous and interconnected open space areas within this quadrant outside of those areas [districts, zones] specifically designated for development, to include “Ecological Resources” and “Priority Conservation Parcels” identified in the SEQ Concept Plan and related studies, and other open space resources identified from available maps and studies or through site investigation.Objective 80.Provide an interconnected system of functional open space areas that can be used for environmental restoration, compatible outdoor recreation and public education.Objective 81. Maintain opportunities for traditional and emerging forms of urban and infill agriculture that complement and help sustain a growing city, and maintain the productivity of South Burlington’s remaining agricultural land.Objective 83. Preserve visual access to scenic views and vistas from public lands and rights‐of‐way, including views of the Green Mountains, the Adirondack Mountains and Lake Champlain.Objective 84. Encourage development patterns that create walkable neighborhoods, civic spaces, a range of housing choices, and a unique sense of place.Objective 85. Create a village center and green for the SEQ along Dorset Street south of Old Cross Road, that are connected to the recreation path system.Objective 88. Enhance Dorset Street as the SEQ’s “main street” with traffic calming techniques, streetscape improvements, safe, interconnected pedestrian pathways and crossings, and a roadway profile suited to its intended local traffic function.Strategies Proposed StrategyComplete and adopt integrated streetscape, civic and green space and stormwater management plans for the City Center area. Proposed Strategy Develop a centrally located, well‐designed public green or square on the north side of Market Street to serve as the focus of the new City Center.  Include local residents, businesses and property owners in its design – e.g., through a professionally facilitated design charrette process – to ensure that it meets community needs for civic and recreation space, and environmental objectives for the provision of tree cover, landscaped green space andstormwatermanagement.Strategy 183. Implement studies to plan for and design a civic complex consisting of a new City Hall, library, state offices, recreation center senior center and/or a post office (i.e., retail portion only), to border the main public green or square on Market Street.Proposed StrategyPreserve Dumont Park within [adjacent to?] the City Center as a forested natural area that enhances and ecologically supports City Center development, and provides public green space for passive recreational use, to include a linking,  interconnected public path or trail work.Central District (City Center)Open Space Proposed StrategyDesignate a protected greenway along the length of Tributary 3 of Potash Brook through the City Center of sufficient area and width to restore, protect and enhance water quality, stream channel and wetland functions, and adjoining riparian areas; to manage and treat additional urban runoff; and to accommodate compatible recreational use of the stream corridor, including a planned public boardwalk. Proposed StrategyWork with property owners and developers to implement stream channel, stream flow and wetland restoration plans for Tributary 3 of Potash Brook, as required for stormwater management and mitigation to improve water quality and meet total maximum daily loads (TMDLs) for the brook. Strategy 185. Regularly update the City’s Official Map to include the most up‐to‐date plans for streets, parks, recreation paths, other civic spaces and utility infrastructure [currently Strategy 201], including public paths, greenways and civic spaces planned for public acquisition and development within the City Center.  Pursue public acquisition of mapped facilities through public dedication, and as available funding allows.Strategy 186. In addition to the use of public funds and TIF District revenues, explore public‐private partnerships to provide necessary public amenities within the City Center District – e.g. to include green and civic space, sidewalks, trees, outdoor furniture and lighting, parking and public transit facilities.Strategy 188. [Delete, incorporated above.]Strategy 190. Explore such means as transfer of development rights, density bonus program, and parking trust fund to aid in implementing the City Center plan. [Note:  This is consistent with the Sustainable Ag Committee’s recommendation to expand the current TDR program outside of the SEQ.]Strategy 192.  [Delete, incorporated above.]Strategy 199.  [Delete, incorporated above.]Strategy 201.  [Delete, incorporated above.]Open Space ChapterSection Proposed by CommitteeVision StatementSouth Burlington shall strive to have a sustainable quality of life comprised of identifiable and diverse neighborhoods,quality natural environments, abundant local food production, strong employment opportunities, acommitment to thereduced use of non‐renewable energy sources,theefficient use of clean renewable energy suppliesand a vibrant sense ofcommunity.Goals Chap 2Proposed GoalStrengthen the community's capacity protect public safety and health resiliently in the face of storms and other emergency events that disrupt the normal functioning of our community's infrastructure. Cite as examples the 1998 ice storm event and Hurricane Irene.1Be affordable, with energy efficient housing for people of all incomes, lifestyles, and stages of life;4Develop a safe and efficient transportation system that supports pedestrian, bicycle, and transit options while accommodating the fuel efficient automobile;6 Reduce energy consumption and increase renewable energy production city‐wide;7Support a diverse,  vibrant and energy efficient economy built on quality jobs, employment centers and a supportive educational and research system;ObjectivesChap 23Foster the creation and retention of a an energy‐efficient housing stock that is balanced in size and target income level, is representative of the needs of households of central  Chittenden County, and maintains an efficient use of land for use by future generations.4Support existing and new affordable housing, emphasizing smaller single family Homes {is this feasible? Aren’t multifamily homes more affordable and potentially more energy efficienct?},  total life‐cycle costs, and access to transit to meet demand within the regional housing market, as assessed by annual regional demographics and needs analyses.5New and renovated housing is designed and built to be as energy efficient as possible  and located in a context‐sensitive manner that reinforces diverse, walkable and bicycle friendly neighborhoods.13Provide a transportation network that maximizes efficiency and safety for all types of users (pedestrians, cyclists, transit automobiles, trucks, transit, automobiles, rail, and air).17 Identify and promote the completion of the city’s sidewalk and recreation Shared Use path network.See Note 1 below18 Reduce the proportion  number of trips taken by single‐occupancy vehicles in the City.20Achieve a reduction of 20% in carbon dioxide‐equivalent emissions from 2009 levels by 2020 through an increase  in renewable energy production and reductions in energy use in the following sectors: transportation, commercial/industrial, residential, municipal/school.Proposed Objective Consider energy impacts in every municipal decision made.Grey InfrastructureSocial InfrastructureEnergy Committee 22Provide ongoing energy efficient maintenance of the city’s stormwater infrastructure and increase capacity to regain and maintain natural runoff patterns.24 Maintain an energy efficient water supply and wastewater distribution system of measurable quality.25Maintain a wastewater system that reflects the land use goals of the Comprehensive Plan, and minimizes water usage, and incorporates wastewater energy‐generation where appropriate.29Minimize solid waste disposal through proactively managing the solid waste stream in an energy‐efficient manner. [[[Ideally, this addition would eventually help eliminate multiple garbage truck companies circling multiple neighborhoods]]]Chap 3.3Proposed Objective‐ 38Encourage site planning and development that allows buildings to take best advantage of solar photo‐voltaic and hot water systems and passive solar gain to minimize the need for energy from other sources.63Maintain a safe and fluid transportation network and seek opportunities for transit use to employment areas using CCTA best practice configurations.70Promote safe, pedestrian and bicycle friendly access to services through recreation path connections and safe roadway crossings.Strategies Chap 26Form a housing task force whereby city representatives would work with developers, engineers, site planners, architects, business leaders, utility representatives, housing professionals,  bankers and residents to facilitate development of energy efficient affordable housing and explore design standards.7Encourage the presence of high‐quality and   energy efficient  rental housing by considering new locations within or near certain non‐residential uses, allowing the rehabilitation of larger, historically significant structures, and using as buffers between residential neighborhoods and commercial land uses.Proposed StrategyDevelop standards (perhaps a stretch code) to ensure that all new housing is energy efficient and develop programs to promote and assist in weatherizing all existing housing.Proposed Strategy[[[Add strategy here or elsewhere, e.g., under Recreation Resources]]]:      Create a boat‐launch access area for non‐motorized, carry‐in, watercraft to encourage clean‐energy recreation and community, while reducing the driving emissions needed for citizens to access the lake..56Seek transportation improvements that provide equal access for all income levels and abilities, reasonable costs, and considers the orderly and continued economic growth, existing and proposed land use, the fixed supply of land, the increasing cost of energy, and other goals of this plan.67Work with neighboring communities on cooperative strategies for managing the impacts of travel to and from South Burlington including park and rides and capture lots along with appropriate public transit serving them.78 Revise the city’s Land Development Regulations to foster transit , cycling and pedestrian site design.Grey InfrastructureBlue InfrastructureGreen InfrastructureSocial InfrastructureEnergy Committee 79Work with local landowners and public officials to implement car‐ and van‐pooling parking lots throughout the city in order to foster ride sharing and transit park‐and‐rides.Proposed Strategy Create, publicize, and enforce a policy eliminating the idling of occupied and unoccupied vehicles.Proposed Strategy Follow CCTA best‐practice recommendations when locating bus stops at employment sites.Proposed Strategy Upgrade all traffic signals and streetlighting to energy efficient and low maintenance LED lighting83 EC Comment: Proposed delete to move to Transportation85Begin Work with electric utilities and other partners to establish the electric transmission, distribution, andconnection charging infrastructure to support increased use of electric vehicles at home, work, park‐and‐ride locations, and downtown parking. [EC Comment: This should be in Transportation]86 EC Comment: Proposed delete to move to Transportation87Develop regulations, incentives and programs  for existing and new buildings to meet orexceed state energy building codes, or meet Energy Star, Passive House or other high performance building energy code (stretch code). Energy Star, Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) standards.Proposed Strategy Develop regulations that require all new buildings in the city to be solar ready.91Continue energy upgrades (weatherization and mechanical systems) of school and city buildings for all items that will payback within 10 years; new buildings should be built to at least LEED Silver standards. Exceed existing state energy standards (perhaps a stretch code).92 EC Comment: Should this be in the appropriate Infrastructure section?93Maintain the minimum levels of efficient street lighting needed for pedestrian and vehicular safety and security. EC Comment: This should be in Transportation100 EC Comment: Should this be in Sustainable Ag?Proposed Strategy Work with other city government entities to create a comprehensive, integrated city energy policy.Proposed StrategyAdopt and enforce a stretch energy building code‐‐once it becomes available‐‐to better serve the long‐term interests of citizens.111Pursue tools to make use of low‐impact development and energy efficient stormwater retention facilities in development to allow for the infiltration of clean water into the city’s aquifers.112Undertake a comprehensive inventory of storm drainage (both public and private) and  maintain a plan for construction of energy efficient treatment systems and replacement of aging infrastructure.116Partner with private property owners to construct and maintain energy efficient stormwater treatment facilities for existing impervious area.119Maintain an updated capital budget and program and implement funding mechanisms that reflect full costs of maintenance, operating costs (including energy) and replacement of the city’s water supply and wastewater infrastructure with energy efficient systems126 [spelling edits]Blue InfrastructureGreen InfrastructureEnergy Committee 128Retain existing trees and vegetation, and/or supplement with new plantings along drainageways and property lines, and around building clusters as land is subdivided and developed, taking care that tree plantings will not shade current or future residential and commercial solar electric  or hot water collectors.129Encourage and require diverse tree planting in areas of new development as well as in established  areas, taking care that tree plantings will not shade current or future residential and commercial solar electric  or hot water collectors.Chap 3.4193Refine Land Development Regulation standards to conserve existing residential areas and encourage new, mixed use energy efficient residential development.195Assess and adopt incentives or requirements for the development of diverse, and  and energy efficient affordable housing types.C‐ Land Use Planning AreasProposed New SectionSuggesting a New Section to be added:Supplying Energy Sustainably and Reliably.  The development of the City Center require energy to heat and light building and to power transportation systems.  This new development also offers the opportunity to define land use and transportation patterns and design new structures that minimize energy supply costs and strength the resiliency of the energy supply systems for this important center of community activity.  The enactment of Act 89 by the State legistature stengthens the statewide Energy Code that governs new construction and major renovations of existing buildings.  The statute offers the City the opportunity to  offering the opportunity adopt a “stretch code” that would require construction quality that will reduce energy costs for building owners for many years in the future.   The creation of a Tax Increment Finance District for the City Center area can support the development of efficient integrated energy supply systems that reduce energy costs  and strengthen the ability of the area to continue operations when during power outages that result from severe storms and other emergency events. Building design and site planning under consideration offers the opportunity to provide for on‐site solar energy supply that fits with the development of a City Center integrated energy supply system.D‐ Special Multi‐District IssuesGeneral CommentsMissing from the plan is the issue of finding appropriate site for locally sited solar generation.  The Claire Farm project opened our eyes to the need to identify appropriate sites (defined by generic characteristics) for solar installations that may deliver electricty to South Burlington from sites within the city.  This seems like a high priority energy issue that applies to several of these planning Districts.  I suggest that  identifying this issue in this section would be a good way to communicate this without indicating the outcome of a process for specifying siting criteria not yet underway.A second issue we may want to introduce in this Multi‐District Issue section is the goal of strengthening the contribution that the Energy Code makes to building energy performance (read energy efficiency)  by pursuing two paths (1) improving Energy Code compliance and (2) introducing the Stretch Energy Code authorized by the new state Act 89.   Chapter 3.2 Future Land UseEnergy Committee pCommunity Assessment4.1B‐ HousingProposed BulletNew affordable housing should be very energy efficient (perhaps req’d to meet a stretch code) to minimize long term operating costs due to rising long term energy costs.4.2D‐ EnergyProposed ChangesStaff note: numerous. See document for piece in its entirety. Begins P.138 in doc from EC. No objectives.strategies here. 4.4A‐ Staff note: numerous. See document for piece in its entirety. Begins P.138 in doc from EC. No objectives.strategies here. General Notes1Note: The term “Recreation Path” is used extensively through this document but the term no longer reflects how important these paths have become for uses other than recreation. As the network of paths continues to expand so will their use for everyday transportation, particularly by bicycle. We recommend the term be replaced throughout the document by a more apt and widely accepted term “Shared Use Path”.In progress. There are additional comments from the EC review that have not been fully incorporated. However, all strategies/objectives/goals are incorporated herein. Energy Committee Town of Shelburne, Vermont CHARTERED 1763 P.O. BOX 88 5420 SHELBURNE ROAD SHELBURNE, VT 05482 Clerk/Treasurer Town Manager Zoning & Planning Assessor Recreation FAX Number (802) 985-5116 (802) 985-5110 (802) 985-5118 (802) 985-5115 (802) 985-9551 (802) 985-9550 INVITATION TO COMMENT ON ZONING AMENDMENTS TO: DISTRIBUTION LIST FR: SHELBURNE PLANNING COMMISSION VIA DEAN PIERCE, DIR OF PLANNING RE: ZONING BYLAW AMENDMENT DA: JANUARY 12, 2015 On Thursday, February 12, 2015, the Shelburne Planning Commission will hold a public hearing on a proposed amendment of Shelburne’s Zoning Bylaw. The extent of the proposed changes is detailed in the attached memorandum. The hearing will begin at 7:00 p.m. and take place in the Shelburne Municipal Complex Meeting Room. Those who plan to speak at the hearing are encouraged to also submit a written version of their comments. It is not necessary to appear at the hearing to offer comments. Written comments should be submitted to Dean Pierce, AICP, Director of Planning and Zoning, 5420 Shelburne Road, PO Box 88, Shelburne, VT 05482. Electronic submissions are encouraged. Please direct email to dpierce@shelburnevt.org. MEMORANDUM TO: RECIPENTS FR: DEAN PIERCE, ON BEHALF OF PLANNING COMMISSION RE: HEARING ON PROPOSAL TO MODIFY WETLAND REFERENCE CONTAINED IN DEFINITION OF “DEVELOPABLE LAND” DA: JANUARY 12, 2015 At its January 8 meeting, the Planning Commission discussed possible bylaw modifications regarding wetlands—and in particular, the reference to wetlands included in the definition of Developable Land. The Commission reached consensus on simplifying the definition by removing references to the National Wetlands Inventory and to “the most recent regional wetlands inventory" and adding reference to Vermont Significant Wetlands Inventory. The Planning Commission voted to warn a formal Public Hearing on the proposed changes and to conduct that hearing on Thursday, February 12, 2015. Staff was also directed to distribute the draft and zoning change report as required by statute. PROPOSED MODIFICATIONS The text of the language to be the subject of the hearing is presented below. Language to be added to the bylaw is shown in color with underscore. (The entire parking section of the regulations is attached.) 2110.33 Developable Land – Land that is suitable for development and which is not characterized by any of the following: a. Slopes of 15 percent or more. b. Wetlands classified as class 2 or higher in the National Wetlands Inventory or the most recent regional Vermont Significant wWetlands iInventory. c. Flood Plain identified in the most recent National Flood Insurance Program Maps. Undevelopable land shall not be considered when computing the maximum allowable dwelling units for any development. Planning Commission Reporting Form for Municipal Bylaw Amendments (reference to wetlands included in definition of “Developable Land”) Approved by the Planning Commission on January 8, 2015 This report is in accordance with 24 V.S.A. §4441(c) which states: “When considering an amendment to a bylaw, the planning commission shall prepare and approve a written report on the proposal. A single report may be prepared so as to satisfy the requirements of this subsection concerning bylaw amendments and subsection 4384(c) of this title concerning plan amendments.…. The report shall provide (:) (A) brief explanation of the proposed bylaw, amendment, or repeal and ….include a statement of purpose as required for notice under §4444 of this title, (A)nd shall include findings regarding how the proposal: 1. Conforms with or furthers the goals and policies contained in the municipal plan, including the effect of the proposal on the availability of safe and affordable housing: 2. Is compatible with the proposed future land uses and densities of the municipal plan: 3. Carries out, as applicable, any specific proposals for any planned community facilities.” Brief explanation of the proposed bylaw amendment. The Planning Commission proposal would modify the regulations by: • Removing references to the “National Wetlands Inventory” and “the most recent regional wetlands inventory" and • Adding a reference to the “Vermont Significant Wetlands Inventory” Purpose The Planning Commission has developed the proposal in response to staff request. In the opinion of staff, the current definition does not reflect the current state regulatory system affecting wetlands and may be confusing. This situation could have undesirable implications for the development review process. The proposal addresses these questions in a manner the Commission believes is effective and efficient and serves the needs of the community (the ambiguous language would be removed). The proposal also responds to Comprehensive Plan policies that promote conservation of resources such as wetlands. Planning Commission Reporting Form for Page 2 Municipal Bylaw Amendments regarding reference to wetlands contained in Definition of Developable Land, January 2015 Findings regarding how the proposal conforms with or furthers the goals and policies contained in the municipal plan Under state law, the Zoning Regulations must be “in conformance with” the Plan. To be “in conformance with” the Plan, the bylaw must: make progress toward attaining, or at least not interfere with, the goals and policies contained in the Plan; provide for proposed future land uses, densities, and intensities of development contained in the Plan; and carry out any specific proposals for community facilities, or other proposed actions contained in the Plan. The Planning Commission finds that the proposal conforms with or furthers the goals and policies contained in the municipal plan. Such policies include but are not necessarily limited to the following: GOAL: TO PRESERVE AND MAINTAIN THE AGRICULTURAL, ECONOMIC, ENVIRONMENTAL, RECREATIONAL, AND AESTHETIC BENEFITS PROVIDED BY SHELBURNE’S RURAL LANDS WHILE AT THE SAME TIME BALANCING THE TOWN’S NEED FOR GROWTH AND SUCCESSFUL INTEGRATION OF THE TOWN INTO THE LARGER REGIONAL COMMUNITY. The area defined as the Rural Area, i.e. the area outside of the Growth Area, is shown on the Rural Area with Sub-Areas Map (Map 4). The maps of scenic and natural resources (See in particular Maps 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, and 16 in Volume 2 of this Plan) demonstrate that the Rural Area contains a diverse mix of farm land, forest land, open land, wildlife habitat, wetlands, and ponds. OBJECTIVES: 2. Identify and exclude from development locations that present significant constraints or hazards to sound development, including wet or unstable soils, flood hazard areas, and steep slopes. Undevelopable land area, such as wetlands, steep slopes, floodplains shall not be counted in determining density. 4. Where development does occur in the Rural Area, encourage a clustered pattern that preserves the rural character, conserves open land for uses such as agriculture and passive recreation, and is sensitive to the land form and other natural features. RECOMMENDED ACTIONS: 1. Revise the Zoning Regulations to implement the above goal and objectives. Such revisions shall include: • On ongoing basis, consider the need to revise zoning district boundaries and descriptions, and update maps, as appropriate. Planning Commission Reporting Form for Page 3 Municipal Bylaw Amendments regarding reference to wetlands contained in Definition of Developable Land, January 2015 GOAL: TO IDENTIFY, MANAGE, AND CONSERVE SHELBURNE’S NATURAL AND SCENIC RESOURCES SO THAT THEY MAY BE APPROPRIATELY USED AND ENJOYED NOW AND IN THE FUTURE. OBJECTIVES: 1. Ensure that important scenic and natural resources are correctly inventoried and identified. The maps included in Volume 2 of this Plan (including the Agricultural Potential of Soils Map (Map 5), LaPlatte River Greenway Map (Map 7), Wildlife Habitat and Associated Areas Map (Map 9), Natural Heritage Sites and Biological Natural Areas Map (Map 10), Public and Conserved Lands Map (Map 11), Surface Waters and Watercourses Map (Map 12), Wetlands and Hydric Soils Map (Map 13), and Significant Views Map (Map 16)) Fluvial Erosion Hazards Map (Map 30)should be comprehensive and up to date. RECOMMENDED ACTIONS: The following actions are recommended for achieving the above goal and objectives. 8. Amend the Town’s Zoning Ordinance to more effectively achieve the Goal and Objectives of this section. Specifically, the amendments shall address at least the following (where appropriate, similar changes shall be made to the Subdivision Regulations): a. Make clear that features identified in the Agricultural Potential of Soils Map (Map 5), LaPlatte River Greenway Map (Map 7), Wildlife Habitat and Associated Areas Map (Map 9), Natural Heritage Sites and Biological Natural Areas Map (Map 10), Public and Conserved Lands Map (Map 11), Surface Waters and Watercourses Map (Map 12), Wetlands and Hydric Soils Map (Map 13), Significant Views Map (Map 16), Archeologically Sensitive Areas Map (Map 14), Historic Resources Map (Map 15), Flood Hazard Areas Map (Map 17), and Steep Slopes Map (Map 18) (all contained in Volume 2 of this Plan) are generally treated as site constraints during the design and approval process. Impacts on such features should be avoided whenever it is possible to do so (while also maintaining a coherent and viable project design). Planning Commissioners believe that the proposal would: • Maintain the values provided by Rural Lands while at the same time accommodating a reasonable level of growth, by using as a standard for wetland boundaries (at least for density calculation purposes) the widely recognized Vermont Significant Wetland Inventory; • Respond to Plan Goals, Objectives, and Recommended Actions regarding inventories and mapping, by recognizing a single preferred source of information and setting the stage for updating of important Comprehensive Plan Maps; and Planning Commission Reporting Form for Page 4 Municipal Bylaw Amendments regarding reference to wetlands contained in Definition of Developable Land, January 2015 • Simplify but not weaken the development review process, by removing a potential ambiguity. The Commission notes that the discussion of Natural Resources as they pertain to development density is separate from the discussion of Natural Resources as they pertain to as site constraints. The Commission continues to support the policy that impacts on such features should be avoided whenever it is possible to do so. Commissioners also recognize the potential for the proposal to promote other Comprehensive Plan goals and objectives. Findings regarding how the proposal is compatible with the proposed future land uses and densities of the municipal plan Except in the Rural Zoning district, the default development densities authorized by the Zoning bylaws are not affected by the proposal. And within the Rural district, the proposed amendments would modify the allowable land development only some parcels.1 In the view of the Planning Commission, the overall pattern of development would change relatively little under the revised definition.2 Further, the districting scheme embodied in the Zoning bylaw map would continue to reflect the boundaries of the Composite Future Land Map contained in the Comprehensive Plan (Map 5) as it does currently. Thus, the Planning Commission finds that the zoning amendment proposal that is the subject of this report would be compatible with the Comprehensive Plan. Findings regarding how the proposal carries out, as applicable, any specific proposals for any planned community facilities. The proposed amendment does not directly carry out specific proposals for any planned community facilities. In addition, the proposed amendment does not conflict with any specific proposals for planned community facilities. [end] 1 Currently, three different categories of wetland boundaries potentially apply to a parcel when calculating development potential in the Rural District. The Comprehensive Plan’s Wetlands and Hydric Soils Map illustrates two of these three categories. The third category cited in the definition is the National Wetland Inventory. 2 The proposal under consideration would simplify the Zoning regulations by making reference to the updated version of one of those two categories (the Vermont Significant Wetlands Inventory, which is the basis for Class II Wetlands under the Vermont Wetland Rules). In so doing, some areas potentially considered as wetlands for density purposes in the past would no longer be considered in the calculation of density. However, the practical impact of the proposed change is likely to be far more limited than the total acreage of excluded wetlands. That is because it is believed property owners would likely submit any applications for development of those lands by citing the least restrictive wetland category. And it is unclear whether given current wording the more restrictive category could be mandated. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Dean Pierce, hereby certify that this memorandum and enclosure were sent to the following people, via email, on January 12, 2015: Department of Housing and Community Affairs via Annina Seyler National Life Building, 6th Floor Drawer 20 Montpelier, VT 05620 South Burlington Planning Commission via Paul Conner, City Planner South Burlington, Vermont 05403 Williston Planning Commission via Ken Beliveau, Town Planner Williston, Vermont 05495 St. George Planning Commission via Planning Commission Chair Scott Baker St. George, VT 05495 Hinesburg Planning Commission via Alex Weinhagen, Town Planner Hinesburg, VT 05461 Charlotte Planning Commission via Jeannine McCrumb, Town Planner Charlotte, Vermont 05445 Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission, via Charles Baker, Executive Director / Regina Mahoney, Senior Planner Winooski, Vermont 05404 \ x \ ______________________ Date: __January 12, 2015______________ Dean Pierce NOTICE SHELBURNE PLANNING COMMISSION Pursuant to 24 V.S.A., Section 4444, Shelburne’s Planning Commission will hold a public hearing on February 12, 2015, at 7:00 p.m., in Town Center Meeting Room 1, to consider amendments to the Zoning Bylaw. Purpose: Amendments would modify references to wetlands contained within definition of Developable Land. Geographic Area affected: Area affected is the Town of Shelburne. List of sections affected: Article Section Article XIX General Regulations (2110.33) Place where full text may be examined: The full text will be available for review in the Shelburne Planning and Zoning Office during regular business hours and via email (contact the Planning and Zoning office). Publication date: January 12, 2015 SOUTH BURLINGTON PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUITES 13 JANUARY 2015 1 The South Burlington Planning Commission held a regular meeting on Tuesday, 13 January 2015, at 7:00 p.m., in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset St. Members Present: J. Louisos,.Chair; S. Quest, G. Calcagni, B. Gagnon, T. Harrington, B. Benton Also Present: P. Conner, Director of Planning & Zoning; C. LaRose, City Planner; S. Dopp, R. Greco 1. Agenda Review: No changes were made to the Agenda. 2. Comments & Questions from the Audience, not related to Agenda items: Ms. Greco directed attention to 2 recent articles in Seven Days and The Burlington Free Press regarding energy efficiency. 3. Planning Commissioner announcements and staff report: Ms. Louisos: Noted receipt of a letter sent by landowners to the Form Based Codes sub-committee regarding block standards and where to put new roads. She felt it might be good to have them come in and talk with us at the next meeting. Mr. Conner: The City Council did the first round of interviews for the Chamberlin Neighborhood-Airport Committee. The Regional Planning Commission is the major funder for the consultants for this committee who include specific Airport experience and experience with neighborhoods near airports. Public outreach in the next 3 weeks includes: 15 January - Options for Garden Street 22 January - Options for Dumont Park 29 January - Input on the Underwood property 24 January - Public information regarding the Georgetown prize He has attended two of the School Master Planning/Visioning meetings. The group is taking in lots of information, especially with regard to future school needs. The city is interviewing for an administrative assistant whose time is divided among several departments. SOUTH BURLINGTON PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUITES 13 JANUARY 2015 2 The City Council approved the FY16 budget last night. It will go to the voters in March. Mr. Conner directed attention to new photos of city views being displayed on the stairwell. 4. Review and consider approval of draft Sustainable Agriculture Subcommittee citizen’s letter: Ms. Quest said the letter will be sent to landlords with more than 65 acres asking about having something growing off their land. Ms. Louisos said she would sign the letter on behalf of the Planning Commission. Ms. Benton moved to approve the letter. Mr. Gagnon seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 5. Review Draft Amendments to Land Development Regulations: A. Review draft revised cul-de-sac and street-end turnaround standards: Mr. Conner said the revised standards relate in part to stormwater standards. The policy remains the same, but they have codified smaller cul-de-sacs and will now allow hammerheads. Public Works is supportive of both changes. The changes also accommodate the design of fire trucks. Ms. Louisos noted the problem that occurs if people park illegally on the cul-de-sacs and hammerheads. Mr. Gagnon suggested a “no parking” sign at the neck of each, so people know there is no parking before they enter. Mr. Conner noted that compared with the existing standard, the square footage of paving goes from 9500 sq. ft. to 2500 sq. ft. Members were OK with the amendment. Mr. Conner said it will be put in with this round of amendments going to the City Council. B. Discuss outline of steps to complete current round of draft amendments: Mr. Conner said staff will let property owners know they are invited to the next meeting to discuss the concerns expressed in their letter. He added that the Commission may want to bring in some resources and people with specific expertise. There has been feedback regarding two specific standards: non-conformities and distances between doorways (there may be a way to meet with same intent in a different way. SOUTH BURLINGTON PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUITES 13 JANUARY 2015 3 Mr. Conner noted the goal is to vote on the TIF District/Master Planning (regarding schools) in June. Mr. Conner felt it would be good to get the standards sewn up before then. 6.Review and Consider approval of CCRPC Unified Planning Work Program Projects for FY 2016: The two current projects relate to the Williston Road transportation network (Phase 2), including closing of curb cuts, parallel road, etc. and getting ahead of issues with the UVM Medical Center. Mr. Conner noted there is a 20% match requirement. The city is asking the Regional Planning Commission to consider the Williston Road project as being of “regional significance,” which would require no match. For the UVM Medical Center project, the city will ask UVM to be the source of the 20% match. Ms. Quest moved to approve the CCRPC Unified Planning Work Program Projects for F2016 as discussed. Ms. Calcagni seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Mr. Conner noted this will go to the City Council next week. 7. Begin review of draft Comprehensive Plan: A. Discuss results of recent demographic report: Mr. Conner noted that last week Dr. Jerry McKibben made a 2-hour presentation regarding demographics and the significant trends going on in the city. These will affect land use, transportation needs, etc. Mr. Conner showed an “age cohort” chart and reviewed its significant drivers as follows: A. a significantly large population in the 25-29 and 45-60 year old range and a significantly small population in the 0-4 year old age range. The percentage of households with children in 2010 was 25%, which is very low. B. The total persons per household averages 2.19, which is down from the 2.44 in the year 2000 census. This means there are fewer people living in the same households. With the addition of 500 new households, the population gets very flat. It appears that people are not “downsizing” until their 70's. The school population will be relatively stable for a few years, then it will decline. SOUTH BURLINGTON PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUITES 13 JANUARY 2015 4 One third of the city’s households are single person households, which is a very high figure. In 2010, the median age in South Burlington was 40.6; the projection for 2025 is 44.4. Mr. Conner said the question becomes what, as a community, do we want to shift to nudge the trend in the area we want it to go. He enumerated three things that might answer that question: A. Assure affordable housing B. More attractive than other communities C. Have a school system. Ms. LaRose said they are beginning to see the development community address some of these trends. She noted some developments have equal-size bedrooms, appropriate for multiple adults living in a unit. B. Discuss Open Space Elements of Draft Comprehensive Plan: Ms. LaRose showed the final report of the Interim Zoning Open Space Committee with proposed changes to the by-laws. The intent is to go back to the Comprehensive Plan and figure out where there are issues (i.e., contradictions, overlapping, etc.). Staff would like to bring the Planning Commission a list of all areas where there will be language issues, including “competing ‘goods’”. There is also a need to deal with repetitiveness. Mr. Conner noted there may be multiple sets of edits for the same goal. Ms. LaRose suggested the Planning Commission look at all the recommendations (i.e, from SusAg, Affordable Housing, Energy, Open Space groups) for each goal and choose the wording. Mr. Conner noted that staff is working to whittle down strategies to eliminate duplication. They are also trying to be less wordy to make it more usable, more readable. He suggested the possibility of a section in which they list the things that are already being done and want to continue doing. Mr. Conner reminded members that the plan needs to be adopted by 9 March 2016 when the current plan expires. The target is to have it to the public by mid-summer. Ms. LaRose noted the Vermont Legislature is considering going to a 10-year, instead of 5-year cycle for Comprehensive Plan updates. SOUTH BURLINGTON PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUITES 13 JANUARY 2015 5 8. Other Business: A. Colchester draft regulation amendments: Mr. Conner said staff did not see any glaring issues. B. Upcoming meeting schedule: The next Commission meeting will be 2 weeks from tonight, 27 January. 9. Minutes of 16 December 2014: Mr. Gagnon moved to approve the Minutes of 16 December 2014 as written. Ms. Harrington seconded. Motion passed unanimously. As there was no further business to come before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned by common consent at 9:00 p.m. _____________________________ Clerk