Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Minutes - Planning Commission - 06/14/2016
SOUTH BURLINGTON PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES 14 JUNE 2016 The South Burlington Planning Commission held a regular meeting on Tuesday, 14 June 2016, at 7:00 p.m., in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset Street. MEMBERS PRESENT: J. Louisos, Chair; T. Harrington, T. Riehle, S. Quest, D. MacDonald ALSO PRESENT: P. Conner, Director of Planning & Zoning; J. Kochman, B. Milizia 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: No issues were raised. 3. Planning Commissioner announcements and staff reports: Ms. Louisos: Last week, the City Council held a public hearing on amendments to the LDRs. There was only one public comment. The Council passed the amendments unanimously. Mr. Riehle: Attended the City Council meeting at the theater on San Remo Drive where a presentation was made about the possibility of a theater in City Center. Mr. Conner noted the theater people had met with staff prior to the Council meeting regarding the role of arts in the community. In addition to presentations, they do programming for children and workshops regarding various aspects of the arts. Ms. Kochman noted that Library concerts are packed, and this would add another dimension to City Center. Ms. Quest: Attended one day of the UVM food summit. Mr. Conner: Several types of training have been held in past weeks including airport re-use plans (presented by a Virginia community), incident command systems related to emergency situations (e.g., storms, floods, etc.), and Form Based Code training to 45 landowners, developers, engineers, architects, etc.. The Planning Dept. has a summer intern, Jake, from Green Mountain College. He is doing some work on scenic views, road standards, and parking standards. A contract is being finalized with Donna Leban for lighting standards. Another contract is being finalized with Landworks to do park signage (way- finding). Ms. Harrington: Attended the Regional Planning Commission meeting with Ms. Quest and Ms. Louisos. 4. Chamberlin Committee Update: Ms. Harrington reported on presentations made at Thursday’s public meeting for the Chamberlin/Airport Neighborhood. Presentations focused on possible neighborhood improvements, short term (bike lanes, neighborhood welcome signs, etc.), middle term (a protected crossing where the rec path comes out at Williston Road, White Street sidewalk, lighting, etc.) and long-term (reconstruction of Airport Drive, a multi-use trail system). One thing that may come to the Planning Commission is a possible zoning change to allow for front porches in the neighborhood. Mr. Macdonald asked what is projected for the land where houses have come down. Ms. Harrington said this land is still zoned R-4 but is not eligible for residential use. The Airport is working on ideas in their re-use plan. Mr. Conner said some options are open space and a reconstructed roadway. The Airport had thought of a 4-lane road, but the City has said 2 lanes would be enough. There is also a question of future land acquisition by the Airport. Ms. Harrington noted there will be a CNAPC meeting this Thursday evening. She added that the “noise sub‐committee” is recommending a standing committee to continue to discuss neighborhood issues. Mr. Conner said there could be 2 committees, a noise-related committee for South Burlington only, and a committee to address broader noise issues which would be comprised of members from various municipalities. Mr. Conner said there will probably be a vote on that report at the Thursday meeting. Mr. Conner also noted there is a possibility of a request to limit the height of fences in the front yard to 4 feet rather than the current 8. 5. Preview of Next Round of Amendments: Mr. Conner possible amendments that will be brought to the Commission for consideration, including: a. PUDs b. Scenic views c. Agricultural things d. Updating rights of way for city streets, including bike lanes, street trees, etc. e. Basic form standards for high intensity uses not in the Form Based Code areas (e.g., Shelburne Road). Mr. Conner suggested the 50-foot setback could be replaced with something closer to the road. He also suggested basic window standards, and a door facing the street. Mr. MacDonald mentioned K-Mart Plaza which needs attention. f. Southeast Quadrant Residential North District on the Wheeler property (the 6 acres being transferred) regarding possibly allowing more density for providing affordable housing. Mr. Conner noted this is the only district in the city which does not specifically allow a density bonus for affordable housing. g. Addressing first floor windows in the T‐4 area of City Center and whether there can be something with a more residential look…possibly different standards on different streets h. Housekeeping items including a description of each zoning district, combining three sets of street standards, Underwood property zoning change to Park District, possible accessory buildings in the Form Based Code district 6. Brief Update on Scenic View Analysis and Standards: Mr. Conner said they have moved forward on two fronts: a. The summer intern is looking at ways to do outreach on views that aren’t top priority. There will be a presentation at the next meeting. b. Staff has been communicating with a firm that has expertise in this field for a proposal to do a formal analysis for one or two locations of the city’s choice and develop new standards for that. Mr. Conner noted that staff has worked with the Hill Farm people who are aware that this work is going on. 7. Other Business: a. Calendar update: Next scheduled meeting dates are: 6/28, 7/12, 7/26, 8/9 (state primary day), 8/23. Members noted dates they would not be able to attend. Mr. Conner said he would send out an email to members regarding dates. b. Essex Junction Village Code Amendments: Mr. Conner noted that updates include definitions for agricultural PUDs. 8. Minutes of 24 May 2016: Mr. Riehle moved to approve the Minutes of 24 May as written. Ms. Quest seconded. Motion passed unanimously. As there was no further business to come before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned by common consent at 8:15 p.m. 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, AICP, Director of Planning & Zoning SUBJECT: Outline of elements for next round of Land Development Regulation Amendments Over the past several months, Commissioners have outlined a series of priority items for updates to the Land Development Regulations, along with commitments to refining previous work on the Form Based Code and to performing “housekeeping” as needed. At this meeting, staff would like to provide an outline of potential elements of the next round (or two) of LDR amendments and gather feedback from the PC on these. An initial (incomplete) list of potential items for discussion: - Planned Unit Developments, as recently discussed with Sharon Murray - specifically Traditional Neighborhood Developments, to be followed by Transit Oriented Development tools - Scenic View standards for the first 1-2 identified view corridors in the community - Value added agriculture, including Citizen Cider request and others - Updating the Planned Rights of Way for certain key streets (Williston Road, Market Street, etc.) based on transportation plans for these areas - Consider basic form standards for high-intensity commercial areas outside of the FBC District - Discuss affordable housing density bonus in the SEQ-NRN district - Discuss multi-family residential-style form standards in the FBC T4 Districts - LDR housekeeping: - clarification of use categories in the Institutional-Agricultural, Municipal, and Park & Recreation Districts - Update zoning district for the Underwood property - Accessory structures in the FBC - others To: Chair of Planning Commission Essex Williston South Burlington Charles Baker, Executive Director, CCRPC Department of Housing and Community Affairs From: Robin Pierce, Community Development Director Date: May 27, 2016 Re: Village of Essex Junction Land Development Code – Proposed Updates Pursuant to Title 24 VSA, Chapter 117, the Village of Essex Junction Planning Commission will hold a public hearing on Thursday, June 16, 2016 at 6 P.M. at the municipal building at 2 Lincoln Street for the purpose of considering amendments of the Village of Essex Junction Land Development Code. 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 section §4444 of this title, Statement of Purpose: Summarized below are the amendments to the Land Development Code in accordance with the scope of work and issues that have emerged during the process. As required by the Vermont State Statutes the Planning Commission must prepare a report on the proposed bylaw amendments that addresses how the amendments further the implementation of the comprehensive plan and are consistent with the land uses and densities outlined in the future land section of the comprehensive plan. A draft of the Planning Commission report is attached. Additional information can be obtained by contacting Robin Pierce, Community Development Director at the Essex Junction Village Office by calling 802-878-6950, or by email to Robin@essexjunction.org. LDC Amendments Chapter 1: a. Added language clarifying the Land Development Code “represents the minimum required standards for development and land use in Essex Junction,” and that “It is the intent of the Village to meet or exceed these standards.” b. Removed incorrect reference to Chapter 13. Sound regulations are covered in Chapter 7. Following references to Chapter 12 or 13 as including sound regulations have been removed and updated to Section 718.B. c. Added language identifying the timeframe for readopting the Land Development Code Chapter 2: a. Added new definitions for the following terms; Agriculture PUD, Commercial PUD, Dark Sky Compliant, Dead-end Street, Double Frontage Lot, Electronic Message Board, Freight Rail Distribution Center, Massage Therapy, New Unit, Public Street, Vehicle Sales, and Zero Lot Line. b. Revised language of the following definitions; Infiltration, Planned Unit Development. c. Removed definition of Planned Residential Development. Planned Residential Developments have been repealed from state statute, and therefore any reference in following chapters has been removed. Chapter 3: a. As the Capital Review Committee is now responsible for preparing and reviewing the Capital Budget, this duty has been removed from Section 302: Planning Commission. b. All references to the Planning Department have been updated to Community Development Department. Chapter 4: a. Clarified that “any building permit may be subject to additional state or federal permits,” in addition to approval from the Village. b. Clarified that demolition or alteration of a structure requires approval. c. Updated the term “noise” to “sound”. All references in following chapters have been updated. Chapter 5: a. Updated reference to Vermont’s Open Meeting Law (1 V.S.A. §§ 310-314). b. Removed district-specific PUD subsections of Section 512. These references have been re-located in the appropriate specific district sections of Chapter 6 in order to make the Land Development Code more user-friendly. c. Clarified approval procedures for Master Plans. d. Added language detailing examples of “good urban design techniques.” e. Added language clarifying that a change of use requires a new Certificate of Occupancy. f. Added general review standards, specific review standards, and waivers for Planned Unit Developments to section 511.B. Districts allowed Planned Unit Developments in Chapter 6 now reference Section 511. g. Updated language regarding stormwater permits in Section 513.G. Chapter 6: a. Removed language for general review standards, specific review standards, and waivers for Planned Unit Developments. As this was repeated verbatim in all disctricts, the review standards have been moved to section 511.B. b. Added district-specific PUD language to the appropriate districts. Section 620 Use Chart: a. Added “C” for Construction Services Establishment in the TOD District. b. Added new use Freight Rail Distribution Center, and added “X” for the LI District. c. Added new use Massage Therapy. d. Added “X” for Home Office in the VC District. e. Removed “X” for Retail Sales w/ Drive-Through in the VC District. f. Added “X” for Transit Park and Ride in the PE District. Chapter 7: a. Added off-street parking requirements for parallel parking. b. Added language regulating the parking of recreational vehicles on public property. c. Added language to the general lighting standards with the intention of discouraging light pollution. d. Village Engineer updated technical lighting standards to LED lamps as opposed to previously required metal halide or mercury vapor lamps. e. Added language stating that “new and redevelopment projects shall install utilities underground.” f. Added Section 714.Q which contains exemptions for municipal departments. g. Adjusted landscape budgetary requirements based on the size of the project. h. Added Landscape Plan to Section 719, consisting of a preliminary site plan and a final landscaping plan. i. Added graphics with examples of screening and perimeter landscaping for parking areas. j. Added a list of publications to be used as resources for selecting plant material. k. Removed Section 722: Conversion of Public Schools. Chapter 8: a. Removed Section 803: Termination of Non-Conforming or Non-Complying Status due to removal of language previously allowing a non-complying structure to be declared conforming with a conditional use approval. Chapter 9: a. Added street design language to “encourage improved connectivity in the Village Center District and strike an appropriate balance between all modes of transit.” b. Revised utility line language stating “above-ground utility equipment shall not be located within the visibility triangles and shall be hidden from view in the public Right-of-way.” Chapter 14: a. Removed language allowing a homeowners association to be considered as one user for private water lines. Other Revisions: a. Added new guidance documents: 1. Community Development Department Public Participation Guide 2. Flowchart depicting The Development Review Process in the Village b. Added a more detailed map of the Village Center District b. Public Works Detail Drawings updated. c. Appendix A: Public Works Specifications updated. VILLAGE OF ESSEX JUNCTION PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 16, 2016 AGENDA 6:30 P.M. I. Audience for Visitors II. Additions or Amendments to Agenda III. Minutes Regular Meeting – May 19, 2016 IV. Land Development Code Amendments Chapter 1: Purpose, Application and Severability Chapter 2: Definitions Chapter 3: Decision Making and Administrative Bodies Chapter 4: Regulation of Land Use Activities Chapter 5: Development Review Procedures Chapter 6: Zoning Districts Regulations Section 620: Use Table Section 703.K: Parking and Loading Section 704.B: Lighting Section 714.Q: Sign Standards Section 719.E: Landscaping Section 722: Conversion of Public Schools Section 803: Termination of Non-Conforming/Non-Complying Status Section 906: Streets Section 913: Utility Lines Section 1416: Private Water Lines Chapter 17: Appeals Appendix A: Public Works Specifications Public Works Detail Drawings Updated Added New Documents 1. Community Development Public Participation Guide 2. Flowchart Depicting Development Review Process V. Other Planning Commission Items VI. Adjournment This meeting will be held at the Essex Junction municipal building at 2 Lincoln St., Essex Jct., VT. Reasonable accommodations will be provided upon request to the Village, 878-6950, to assure that Village meetings are accessible to all individuals regardless of disability. SOUTH BURLINGTON PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES 24 MAY 2016 1 The South Burlington Planning Commission held a regular meeting on Tuesday, 24 May 2016, at 7:00 p.m., in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset Street. MEMBERS PRESENT: J. Louisos, Chair; T. Harrington, T. Riehle, B. Gagnon, S. Quest, D. Macdonald ALSO PRESENT: P. Conner, Director of Planning & Zoning; C. LaRose, City Planner; S. Murray, Consultant; B. Milizia, S. Dopp 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: No issues were raised. 3. Planning Commissioner announcements and staff reports: Mr. Macdonald – Attended the SBBA meeting at which Jeff Shulman of UVM gave a presentation that included in proposed new arena. They want to determine a location by fall. Ms. Louisos – Attended the Resilient Vermont Conference at Norwich, the main focus of which was flooding and how affected communities have recovered. There were also strategies discussed that can be applied to other kinds of emergencies/disasters. Ms. Quest, who attended the second day of the event, said that day focused on 20-30 year resilience. Ms. Harrington – There will be a Planning Summit next Tuesday at The Regional Planning Commission on West Canal St. in Winooski. Mr. Conner - Tomorrow, staff will host training for architects, engineers, etc., on the new Form Based Code. 32 people have signed up. The Council will hold a public hearing on the proposed draft amendments to the LDRs. The will be expecting a presentation. In June, all departments will participate in emergency situation training. The next CNAPC meeting will be on Thursday, 6:30 p.m. The last public forum sponsored by CNAPC will be on 7 June at Chamberlin School. 2 Ms. LaRose – The Wheeler Conservation Easement Committee will hold a public feedback session on 16 June, 7 p.m. The Open Space Enhancement Task Force will be meeting in the next few weeks. Maggie Leugers is the lead staff person. 4. Discuss Initial Concept for Agricultural Enterprise Regulations: Ms. Louisos said this is a follow-up to the presentation of Citizen Cider. She directed attention to staff notes on this. Ms. Quest felt the language would have to be very tight. She said “we want Citizen Cider, but we don’t want a whole lot of other things.” Ms. Harrington agreed and said he concerns were noise, traffic and disruption of the NRP District. Mr. Gagnon said his concern is not to limit it but to be sure it’s well managed and “community friendly.” He cited issues of water and sewer, solar power, etc., to be considered. Mr. Riehle asked if they could expand from 50,000 to 100,000 sq. ft. Mr. Gagnon cited Vt. Teddy Bear and Ben & Jerry’s who have expanded when they became successful. He felt there should be some potential for such expansion. Mr. MacDonald said if there is a master plan, that could include potential for expansion. He would like to see a vision for the rest of the property. Mr. Conner showed the property location on the map and identified various zoning districts and the boundaries of the Larkin-owned property, including the 3 phases of the Cider Mill development. Ms. Louisos asked if there could be a requirement to add to the NRP in other areas to compensate for this development. Mr. Conner questioned why this property is in the NRP. He felt it was because of the apple orchard, which is why Citizen Cider wants to locate there. Mr. Gagnon asked if they could say that activity in that area has to be related to agriculture. Ms. LaRose asked the Commission to consider whether they would want this use to be permitted anywhere else in the city. Mr. Gagnon felt there are other places that are appropriate. Mr. Riehle felt the allure of this property was unique, with the existing orchard. Ms. Harrington felt it would be OK elsewhere in the city with guidelines. Ms. Louisos suggested that the agriculture portion of the development be in the NRP, but the building and other development be in a part of the property that is zoned for development. She also favored requiring additional NRP land in exchange for use of this land. Mr. Gagnon liked that idea as well. 3 Ms. LaRose noted the Commission can limit a use (e.g., gas stations) and there is a tool to allow just about anything the Commission wants. She also cautioned that very specific language can create more problems than it fixes. Mr. Gagnon felt that moving the concept forward in some fashion was a good idea. He also felt that seeing value in allowing an integrated use elsewhere in the city was important.. Mr. MacDonald liked the idea but wanted to limit the building size. Staff will come back with some specific ideas at a future meeting. 5. Update and discussion of Scenic View Analysis and Standards: Mr. Conner noted staff has made some progress in this area. On Green Up Day, residents gave input on their favorite views. He distributed the results of this survey. Staff has also reached out to firms that do professional view analysis and are gathering input on important views. He showed a map that indicates how frequently photos are taken at specific sites. Members suggested using the website of Front Porch Forum to ask people to indicate their favorite view. Mr. Conner noted that there has also been communication with a possible summer intern regarding the possibility of working on this project. Mr. Riehle asked if there are tools to deal with a view corridor for property about to be developed. Mr. Conner said staff is working on that and there are also talks with property owners. 6. Continued Work Session on PUD Tools: Ms. Murray distributed maps of parcels in the city greater than 10 acres (87 parcels) and parcels greater than 30 acres (35 parcels). Ms. Murray said their idea is to limit TND development to areas within the Transit Overlay District. She showed areas on the map that would be good for TNDs. The feeling is that TNDs would not be appropriate in the Southeast Quadrant, and that planned agriculture is better suited for that area. Ms. Murray then indicated design considerations for a TND, including: a. Minimum acreage (30-40 acres) b. Development site limitations c. Minimum development density 4 d. Layout (more dense at the focal point, possible use of a modified grid pattern) e. Walkability f. Use types g. Building standards h. Street types i. Housing types j. Civic/open space types k. Integrated stormwater management l. Integrated energy siting m. LDR parking standards n. LDR landscaping, lighting standards Mr. Conner said he can see this developing into a “checklist.” He then asked if there is a way to incentivize single family/higher density development instead of going to more multi-family housing. Ms. Murray said they could require a mix and can work that into the percentages. You can establish a lot size, and for a larger home require combining lots. Mr. Riehle said he has an issue with a strict grid system. He preferred more winding streets as they are more interesting. Ms. Murray noted that for walkability, a grid is more functional Ms. Louisos asked if these standards would work for 10-acre parcels. Mr. Conner felt the tool is better for larger parcels. Ms. Murray said there can be different versions of a TND based on size. Ms. LaRose said the problem they are seeing is with people using up all the acreage for 9 units in order to skirt the Act 250 process. Ms. Murray said they could require clustering around a green. Ms. Murray said they hope to draft something in the next few weeks and are working on having some time beyond the grant deadline. 7. Chamberlin Committee Update: Members agreed to postpone this discussion until the next meeting. 8. Other business: a. Notice of Colchester Planning Commission on Draft Amendments to Zoning Regulations: Mr. Conner said it would be good for staff to connect with them as they are doing some things regarding the waterfront. b. Notice of certification amendment application, South Burlington Landfill: 5 No issues were raised. c. Presentation to City Council on Amendments to LDRs: Ms. Louisos and Mr. Gagnon will attend the City Council meeting. Mr. Conner said it would be good to explain why the amendments have been suggested as the Council seemed to want to know that. 9. Minutes of 10 May 2016: Mr. Riehle moved to approve the Minutes of 10 May 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 9:40 p.m. ___________________________________ Clerk