The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMinutes - Planning Commission - 03/22/2017 SOUTH BURLINGTON PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES 22 MARCH 2017 The South Burlington Planning Commission held a special meeting on Tuesday, 22 March 2017, at 7:00 p.m., in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset Street. MEMBERS PRESENT: J. Louisos, Chair; T. Riehle, B. Gagnon, D. Macdonald, M. Ostby ALSO PRESENT: P. Conner, Director of Planning & Zoning; C. LaRose, City Planner, D. Burke, T. McKenzie, J. & S. Jewett, L. Ravin 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: Thanked members for the good work on Monday and for coming to this special meeting. She noted that on 6 March, she had attended an Affordable Housing Committee meeting which focused on the “housing replacement” amendments. They are still working on a draft. Mr. Conner noted he met with that Committee last night and they relayed that Ms. Louisos had asked them to provide the Commission with a memo on how the amendments comply with the city’s Comprehensive Plan. Ms. Ostby: Has notes/ideas from a discussion with Keith Epstein. She will summarize and send these to members. Mr. Conner said they can be added to an agenda as a “member item” if the Commission would like. Mr. Riehle: Distributed copies of an article on the “fate of malls.” Mr. Conner: The City Council approved both Planning Commission recommendations made on Monday. At 5 p.m. next Tuesday, the Airport will host the 3rd Airport Sound Committee meeting. Item #8 on the agenda will be continued to the next meeting. 4. Overview of City Crisis Plan: Members agreed to postpone this item to the next meeting. 5. (previously #9 ) Minutes of 28 February 2017: Mr. Riehle moved to approve the Minutes of 28 February as written. Mr. Gagnon seconded. Motion passed 5-0. 6. (previously #10) Other Business: Mr. Conner noted that at next week’s meeting the department’s intern will present a report on housing unit size evolution. Consultants Sharon Murray and Mark Kane will continue their Phase 2 PUD work. 7. (previously #6) Overview of proposed schedule of LDR/Official Map Amendments: Ms. Louisos noted this is the first of 2 groups of amendments. The second group is not quite ready. Mr. Conner noted the second group will include Shelburne Road standards. Ms. LaRose added that staff is planning to meet with larger property owners and architects who have been on city committees. Mr. Conner said there will also be Form Based Code minor changes (“stumbling blocks,” refinements, etc. such as location of accessory structures). Commissioners were in agreement with the approach. 8. (previously #5) Continued review of form Based Code T3 street type designation and Form Based Code/Official Map connection from Barrett Street to San Remo Drive and Dumont Park to Garden Street: Mr. Conner reviewed the history and then noted that staff had prepared a 2‐part proposed solution based on the Commission’s direction earlier this year. First, there could be an adjustment to the official map to indicate it is a path from Barrett St. to San Remo Drive (Mr. Conner showed this on an overhead photo and indicated the property line). Staff is recommending a 20-foot path connection going all on the southern property. Secondly, a footnote would be added indicating a dead end. The property owner would have to build a road to the abutting end, but not have to connect through to San Remo Drive. Ms. Ostby asked if there is a way that the road they are building could have a cut in it to accommodate a future road from Healthy Living. Mr. Gagnon said the city hasn’t indicated a desire to have a road there, and it would have to go through a full hearing process at the time a road is proposed. Mr. Riehle said he wouldn’t be concerned about getting into that area as there are other accesses. Mr. Burke noted the city would have to buy that parcel and tear down an existing building. He added that the neighbors don’t want a road there, and he agrees. He had no problem providing a pedestrian easement on both ends. Mr. Gagnon asked what kind of housing is being proposed. Mr. Burke said carriage units, multi-housing possibly. Nothing is firm yet. Mr. Conner showed a proposed rec path location and questioned whether this should be shown on the official map. There is a concern with showing an exact location. Staff supports showing the concept, but because of wetland issues, not showing the exact location. Mr. Gagnon noted that the official map is usually for roads, and showing a path could open up a whole new problem. Members agreed to indicate the concept on the city map but not to show an exact location. 9. (previously #7): Review Possible Amendments to the Land Development Regulations and Official Map: a. End of trip bicycle and pedestrian facilities: Ms. LaRose said gave members information from 3 other communities and noted that staff’s ideas are very close to what those communities are doing. Mr. Gagnon liked the Portland language. Mr. Conner said that could be an option. Mr. Riehle raised the possibility of bike parking substituting for some car parking. Ms. LaRose said language on that will be provided the next time. Staff is also working on making installing bike racks an easier process. b. Planned Rights of Way on Williston Road, Garden Street, Market Street: Mr. Conner said staff will be checking on a potential error. He also asked to scratch Garden Street from the amendment as this is not quite ready. Williston Road will go from a 90-foot right-of-way to 100 feet. Mr. Gagnon asked if future entities will be told they can’t put things in that 10‐foot space so a developed space would not have to be taken in the future. Mr. Conner said they will, and they have been doing this for a long time. He cited the need to get that amendment in quickly. Mr. Riehle asked the rationale for having 100 feet north of Swift St. on Dorset Street and keeping the 60 feet to the south. Mr. Conner said it goes back a long time to the ‘rural area” concept. Mr. Riehle asked if 80 feet is sufficient on Hinesburg Road. Mr. Conner said that he believe it was for its future purposes. Ms. Louisos noted that a traditional Vermont road right-of-way is just 49 feet, and so 80 feet is well over this amount. c. Affordable housing in SEQ-NRN and reference corrections: Mr. Conner reviewed the history and noted that someone had observed that there was no bonus for affordable housing in the SEQ-NRN. The Commission had asked to include it. He showed the area where this will apply. Ms. Ostby wondered if this will result in multi-family housing, not single family homes. Mr. Conner said that there has been discussion about providing incentives for single family homes. Ms. Ostby said that single family residents are more “permanent” and take more interest in the community. Mr. Conner noted receipt of an e-mail from Bruce MacDonald, a former Planning Commissioner, who said that before interim zoning came in, they had been working on a cottage housing proposal that got shelved. He was willing to bring it back again. Members said they would like to hear from him. Mr. Riehle was concerned with the possibility of “carriage housing” throughout the SEQ. Mr. Conner noted that many properties are “under‐developing.” Mr. Gagnon said people are going either for density or “mansions.” Mr. Conner said that builders are building smaller homes, and the price point builders have to hit is more than people are willing to pay for a small house. d. Street Connection and cul de sac standard clarifications: Mr. Conner noted an issue raised by the DRB regarding street connections and showed an example from Sadie Lane. Ms. Louisos cited the importance of having connections. The primary change here would be clarifying the relationship between the maximum 200-foot length of a dead-end road in the southeast quadrant and the requirement for street connections to be made to adjacent properties. Mr. Jewett suggested prohibiting cul de sacs and just requiring T intersections. There might be very restrictive conditions under which a cul de sac could be allowed. Mr. Conner said the question is whether to limit the road to 200 feet or to require it to go to the property line where there is a potential connection, not just a “lollypop.” The aim is to give the DRB criteria for determining whether an adjacent property is potentially developable. Mr. Conner also noted previous confusion with the language “contribute to the cost.” There was no indication of how much was to be contributed. Language now indicates the contribution is to be the full cost. Mr. Jewett suggested removing the word “contribute” and just say “pay for it.” Mr. Jewett also noted that 20‐40 properties are partially or totally in the NRP, and they have been “orphaned” by not being included. He suggested adding “SEQ‐ NRP” to the language. He said that even though a property is not developed, they might want a road to go across it at some point in time. He added that you can’t pretend those properties don’t exist; otherwise, the DRB has no guidance if one of those properties come to them. Ms. LaRose said she didn’t think there was language that would prohibit connections to NRP properties. Ms. Louisos asked how many roads would be built in the NRP. Mr. Jewett said he and his wife own property in the NRP. Ms. LaRose noted there are very few standards as to what is acceptable for NRP development. She questioned whether that is intentional. Mr. Riehle suggested looking at that another time. e. Clarification of uses permitted in the Municipal, Parks & Recreation, R-7 Neighborhood Commercial, and Institutional-Agricultural Districts: Mr. Conner explained the issue. The plan is to remove the language and just put information in the Table. The policy won’t change in any way. Ms. Ravin questioned what “support facility” means. Mr. Conner directed attention to the definition provided. Ms. Ravin asked if an educational facility is allowed in the district as part of a PUD. Mr. Conner said it and indicated where in the Table. Ms. Ravin noted the Table refers a reader back to the text. Mr. Conner said that reference will be eliminated. Ms. Ravin noted that a “facility” may not be a building. Mr. Conner said staff will look at that. Mr. Conner noted there are similar issues in other districts. Regarding Parks/Recreation, he noted that a child care facility is located. The recommendation is to indicate that it is a child care facility operated by the City. f. Allowance for Front Porches in the R-4 district: Mr. Conner stressed that this allows an open porch with the intent of promoting interaction with the street. Commissioners expressed support. g. Fence Heights in Residential Districts, SEQ & CCFBC: Mr. Conner said a front yard fence can’t be taller than 4 feet (fences behind and to the side of a house can be taller). Ms. Ostby questioned a fence to drown out road noise. Mr. Conner suggested allowing a taller fence if it got placed at least 50 feet back from the road. Members suggested allowing taller front yard fences with DRB approval and criteria compatible with the character of the neighborhood. Members agreed to continue discussion of amendments at the next meeting due to the late hour. As there was no further business to come before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned by common consent at 10:05 p.m. Minutes Approved by the Planning Commission April 11, 2017 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 TO: South Burlington Planning Commission FROM: Paul Conner, Director of Planning & Zoning SUBJECT: PC Meeting Packet for March 22, 2017 1. Agenda: Additions, deletions or changes in order of agenda items (7:00 pm) 2. Open to the public for items not related to the agenda (7:02 pm) 3. Planning Commissioner announcements and staff report (7:07 pm) 4. Overview of City Crisis Plan, SGT. Dubie, South Burlington Police Dept. and Janice Ladd, HR Director (7:15 pm) Sgt Dubie and Janice Ladd are meeting with all committees in the City to provide an overview of the crisis plan, answer questions, discuss emergency procedures. 5. Continue review of Form Based Code T3 street type designation and FBC / Official Map connection from Barrett Street to San Remo Drive and Dumont Park to Garden Street (7:30 pm) See attached memo 6. Overview of proposed schedule of Land Development Regulation / Official Map amendments (8:15 pm) See attached memo 7. Review possible amendments to the Land Development Regulations and Official Map: (8:20 pm) See attached memo 8. Consider possible approval of Planning Commission report on draft Land Development Regulation and Official Map amendments and possible warning of public hearings on same (8:45 pm) This item is here in the event that the PC is ready to warn a public hearing on the amendments above. Staff is preparing a draft “Planning Commission report” and will provide it to you in advance of the meeting. Commissions should also feel free not to wan a public hearing at this time if you have questions, comments, or changes to make to the drafts in this packet. 9. Meeting Minutes – February 28, 2017, March 20 (8:55 pm) 10. Other Business (9:00 pm) 11. Adjourn (9:02 pm) SOUTH BURLINGTON PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES 28 FEBRUARY 2017 1 The South Burlington Planning Commission held a regular meeting on Tuesday, 28 February 2017, 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, M. Ostby, A. Klugo ALSO PRESENT: P. Conner, Director of Planning & Zoning; C. LaRose, City Planner; K. Dorn, City Manager; S. Murray, M. Kane, J. Leas, K. Epstein 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: Mr. Leas introduced himself as a candidate for the City Council. He said he was happy to know there is a Plan and Planning Commission and urged the Commission to put people first and keep the heavy economic interests “in their place.” 3. Planning Commissioner announcements and staff reports: Ms. Harrington reminded people to vote next Tuesday. Mr. Riehle attended a meeting related to Tilley Drive traffic and other issues. There will be more future meetings. Ms. Harrington, who also attended, said there was a lot of interest in a “park and ride.” Mr. Riehle also noted that Exit 13 was brought up again, and he had explained the concern with a cloverleaf with no place for bikers and pedestrians. He said he would like to see something in writing that if the interchange is built there would be priority given to bikers and pedestrians. Mr. Conner: noted he had attended the meeting with the FAA. Written questions were accepted. He didn’t feel too much new was relayed. If a hos community wants to apply for funds for programs, there is a May 1st deadline each year. The FAA Administrator said he would be happy to attend a future meeting, and he is being invited to a City Council meeting. The large conference is being remodeled to include windows. The Affordable Housing Committee is working through the housing replacement amendment. The Commission should see it in 4-6 weeks. Ms. Louisos noted she had suggested that the Committee have some public vetting before they come to the Commission. 4. Initial Discussion of possible street name changes: Williston Road, Shelburne Road, Hinesburg Road: 2 Mr. Dorn stressed that this is just a discussion item. He noted that last summer, the City worked with a consultant regarding “branding.” The consultants conducted a survey of the public (over 500 respondents). 55% felt South Burlington doesn’t have an “identity,” and 65% felt that was important. Following this, talk began to center on “complete communities” and to identify city shortcomings. South Burlington has a great school system, but it has no “downtown.” There is also no fully developed schedule of community events and less than great signage. Mr. Dorn noted that City Center is now moving forward. One thing that occurred to staff is that the city’s 4 most significant roads are named for other communities (Shelburne, Hinesburg, Williston and Dorset). This made sense a century ago when the roads were directing people to those communities and South Burlington was a “pass through” community. However, South Burlington is now its own community, not just a place to go through to get somewhere else. Mr. Dorn proposed that the Planning Commission begin a dialog regarding those 4 street names. He drew attention to a handout and noted that one suggestion is to name the roads for the 4 quadrants of the city (Gateway, Center, Ridgeline, Lakeshore). This could also help to build local identity. Mr. Gagnon noted the number of people who would have to change addresses on accounts, stationery, etc. Mr. Dorn suggested the name changes could be set out 3 or 4 years to give people time to address that concern and to plan ahead. Mr. Conner noted that name changes are not unprecedented and cited the change of the Town of Sherburne to Killington in the 1990s. Mr. Dorn noted the city is doing more signage and is planning more events this summer to bring people together. Ms. Ostby suggested possibly linking a name change to something major going on the particular road. Mr. Gagnon noted the Williston Road studies begin done to enhance/change that road. Mr. Conner said there will be a presentation to the Commission on that study in late March. Mr. Dorn concluded his presentation by noting that 30% of those polled said they would change the name of South Burlington as part of the identity issue. Agenda items were re-arranged until both consultants had arrived. 5. (formerly #8) Other Business: 3 a. De Minimus Certificate of Public Good application pursuant to 30 V.S.A. 248a for Verizon Wireless: co-location of wireless telecommunications equipment on existing utility poles, Williston Road and Ethan Allen Drive. b. De Minimus Certificate of Public Good application pursuant to 30 V.S.A. 248a for Verizon Wireless: co-location of wireless telecommunications equipment on existing utility poles, 333 Shelburne Road. No issues were raised on these items. c. Meeting Schedule: Members agreed not to make up the earlier February meeting at this time. The next meeting of the Commission will be on 14 March. Ms. Louisos noted she will not be able to attend that meeting. 6. (formerly #7) Minutes of 24 January 2017: Ms. Ostby asked to add to the discussion of replacement housing her concern that a single family home is replaced with a single family home rather than a unit in a multi-family project. Ms. Harrington moved to approve the Minutes of 24 January 2017 with the above addition. Mr. Riehle seconded. Motion passed 5-0 with Mr. Klugo abstaining. 7. (formerly #6) Review possible amendments to the Land Development Regulations: End of Trip Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Updates: Ms. LaRose introduced language provided by the Bike/Ped Committee. She noted they had spent considerable time on this. The language provides definitions for short and long-term bicycle parking and defines what it is and where it can be. Ms. LaRose noted the current language merely requires a bike rack but doesn’t say what size or how many, which means you can get the same amount of bike storage at a small CPA office as you do at UMall. The proposed regulations would address that and would also include standards for residential and non-residential buildings. Ms. LaRose stressed that no solution is perfect. The Bike/Ped Committee considered 3 options for determining criteria for bike/bed facilities: Option A: tied into to vehicle parking Option B: based on square footage (a problem being a large warehouse that may have only a few employees) Option C: tied in to use The Committee preferred Option C and suggested a “curve” for large buildings. 4 Mr. Gagnon suggested using trip generation rates or building population. Ms. LaRose said the problem is that an office building today could be a day care tomorrow. She thought the Committee might consider using trip generation rates. Ms. Louisos suggested looking at the list of traffic generators and seeing if anything “pops out.” Ms. LaRose noted there are regulations in Burlington and Williston, and the Committee used those as a starting point. Williston’s regulations are based on parking. Mr. Klugo suggested looking at communities South Burlington aspires to be like. Ms. Harrington asked about a building with multi-uses. Mr. Conner said they would add up the usage of each use category. They wouldn’t go by individual tenants. Ms. LaRose said they are trying to reduce the stress on someone moving into a new space, having to wait months to get the DRB’s approval for a small change in a bike rack. Mr. Klugo suggested that upper levels of parking garages could be re-used for bike storage when cars are not used as much. Ms. Ostby noted that in Los Angeles you can swap out parking spaces for bike parking spaces. Mr. Conner said that would be possible. Ms. LaRose noted that in office buildings, some outdoor parking spaces could be moved indoors for bicycles. Ms. LaRose noted these regulations would not apply to City Center at this stage. That will require more study. Mr. Epstein later suggested contacting the League of American Bicyclists for ideas. 8. (formerly #5) Planned Unit Development and Master Plan Project, Phase II: Ms. Murray briefly reviewed Phase I of the Project and advised that the report is on-line. She noted that the recommendations of Phase I focused on PUDs as both a form of development and a process. The existing regulations don’t focus as much on the form. The report also identifies 9 types of PUDs and focuses on the Traditional Neighborhood form. In Phase II, they will develop more of these PUD types based on Commission interest. Members were shown graphics for each of the PUD types. Mr. Kane explained the elements of each drawing. Ms. LaRose suggested viewing everything as a “recipe card” where each type has the same ingredients but is defined by how much of each ingredient it has. Mr. Klugo noted that the drawings reveal that the major roads in the city are east-west which the houses are north-south facing, which is why the city struggles so much with solar. 5 Ms. Murray then briefly reviewed the recommendations from Phase I including discretionary DRB review (use of waivers, focus on PUD as a design, clarify discretionary authority), considered Regulatory Relief (waiver provisions needing more standards, use of PUD provisions to waive or modify LDR requirements), redefining PUD as design (vs. use as a waiver tool) to allow desired forms of development (vs. regulatory relief), clarification of the purpose, use and standards for Master Plans. Ms. Murray said the focus in phase II will be on PUDs: a. Redefining PUDs as a design tool b. Defining types of PUDs c. Developing standards d. Establishing mandates, incentives e. Establishing process, standards for negotiated review The question of “vesting rights” will also be addressed (where/when in an application the applicant is guaranteed that the rules in effect at the time are the rules that will hold throughout). It was noted that there are potential tie-ins to new state legislation regarding “transportation districts.” Under this legislation, a developer who triggers something will have to build it,, but that developer can be reimbursed from funds collected from previous developers. Ms. Murray said they will also be looking at the City Center Form Based Code and a possible master plan concept. They will consider allowing modifications/adjustments, requiring master plans or regulatory plans for major development, and PUD-related “community types. Ms. Murray proposed monthly work sessions with the Commission as well as community forums throughout the year. In March, they are proposing reviewing LDRs and identifying with the DRB any “housekeeping” amendments. They would also develop a working outline of proposed by-law amendments. From April to September, they will prepare draft by-law amendments and graphics. The final draft would be completed by December. As there was no further business to come before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned by common consent at 9:15 p.m. ______________________________Clerk 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburl.com TO: South Burlington Planning Commission FROM: Paul Conner, Director of Planning & Zoning SUBJECT: Proposed schedule for LDR / Official Map amendments DATE: March 14, 2017 Planning Commission meeting As you can see from this week’s packet and recent meetings, there’s a pretty large set of amendments to the Land Development Regulations & Official Map making its way through. In consultation with Jessica, staff has proposed that the FULL set of spring 2017 Land Development Regulations be broken into two parts (or modules). Staff believes that this will help to assure that amendments go through in a timely way and that the Commission has sufficient time to review and consider ALL material. The two parts would be as follows: Module 1 (includes all items on this meeting’s agenda): a. End-of-trip bicycle & pedestrian facilities b. Planned Rights of Way – Williston Road, Garden Street, Market Street c. Affordable housing in SEQ NRN and reference corrections d. Street connection & cul-de-sac standard clarifications e. Clarification of uses permitted in the Municipal, Parks & Recreation, R7-Neighborhood Commercial, and Institutional-Agricultural districts f. Allowance for front porches in the R4 District g. Fence heights in residential districts, SEQ, and CC FBC h. Administration & Enforcement – streamline Planning Commission, Development Review Board, and Advisory Committee authorization, powers & duties, and membership to refer to State Law i. Agricultural Use Amendments not related to Agricultural Enterprise j. Technical corrections Module 2 (includes all of the other amendments that the Commission has been reviewing this winter): a. Shelburne Road basic form standards b. Housing Replacement standards (from the affordable housing committee) c. Garage door / front façade standards d. Form Based Code district minor changes e. Agricultural Enterprise Use (if applicable) Schedules: (as related to these items only) • March 14 – review of Module 1 • March 28 – warn public hearing for Module 1April 11 – review Module 2 • April 25 – public hearing on Module 1; possible vote on Module 1; review Module 2 • May 9 – review Module 2; • May 23 – warn public hearing on Module 2 • June 27 – public hearing Module 2, possible vote 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburl.com TO: South Burlington Planning Commission FROM: Paul Conner, Director of Planning & Zoning SUBJECT: Gardner Request: FBC T3 and Official Map modification for Barrett Street – San Remo Drive connection; area path recommendations DATE: March 14, 2017 Planning Commission meeting Earlier this winter, property owner Brad Gardner presented a request for changes to the Official Map and City Center Form Based Code to allow for modified street connection on his property. The property is located immediately east of Dumont Park and is accessed off Barrett Street. The current Official Map shows a planned connection between this property and San Remo Drive, at the southern edge of this property. The City Center Form Based Code also requires that all new streets connect at both ends to an existing, planned, or proposed street. At the Commission’s January meeting, staff was asked to prepare modifications to the two documents to establish the required connection as a recreation path rather than a vehicular street, and to allow for the roadway from Barrett Street to terminate on the property. Based on this, staff proposes the following modifications to the Land Development Regulations and Official Map: 1. On the Official Map & City Center FBC Block & Street standards maps, create a new symbol for “path” (as defined in Section 11.07 of the LDRs, Street Types). 2. Redesignate the connection from San Remo Drive towards Barrett Street as a “path”. 3. On the San Remo Drive portion of this connection, show the path as being located entirely on the southern property rather than split across two parcels. A path is 20’ in width and therefore actually reduces the requirement on this property owner. Staff recommends it be placed entirely on this side as it’s a much larger property and because splitting a recreation path across two properties would result in a significantly longer period of time until both properties are redeveloped and the connection is possible. 4. Mark planned roadway from Barrett Street on the Gardner property up to its northern end, and label as a Neighborhood Street Narrow. 5. Affix a footnote to the Gardner property planned roadway indicating that it is planned to be a dead-end road. 6. Add a planned path connection from Barrett Street up to Garden Street, through Dumont Park, as shown on the Dumont Park plans. Summary As discussed in January, the circumstances leading to this proposed are somewhat unique. While the City’s Comprehensive Plan strongly emphasizes connectivity of streets, staff supports a case-by-case assessment. Staff recommends that this subject be addressed as part of the Planning Commission’s Report its draft amendments. 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 Cathyann LaRose, AICP, City Planner SUBJECT: Summary of current round of LDR amendments DATE: March 14, 2017 Planning Commission meeting As noted at the PC’s last meeting, staff has been working on a hearty set of draft amendments to the Land Development Regulations. Below are each of the amendments, with a description and summary of each, followed by the actual text as would be included in the Land Development Regulations. As always, red strikethroughs show text to be deleted, while red underlined text shows text to be added. For ease of reading, below is a table of contents for the draft amendments: 1. End-of-trip bicycle & pedestrian facilities ...................................................................................................... 1 2. Planned Rights of Way – Williston Road, Garden Street, Market Street ........................................................ 4 3. Affordable housing in the SEQ ....................................................................................................................... 5 4. Street connections & cul-de-sacs ................................................................................................................... 5 5. Clarification of uses permitted in the Institutional-Agricultural district, Municipal District, Recreation & Parks District, and Residential 7-Neighborhood Commercial District ..................................................................... 8 6. Allowance for front porches in the R4 District ............................................................................................. 12 7. Fence heights in residential districts, SEQ, and CC FBC ................................................................................ 12 8. Administration & enforcement.................................................................................................................... 13 9. Agricultural Amendments not related to Ag Enterprise ............................................................................... 16 10. Form Based Code Primary and Secondary Street and Block Standards applicability ................................ 17 11. Technical corrections, formatting and typos ........................................................................................... 17 1. End-of-trip bicycle & pedestrian facilities Brief summary & Functional Change: would replace existing requirement for “a bicycle rack” at each non-residential and multi-family residential building with tiered requirements short-term bicycle parking spaces (ie, bike rack spaces), number of secure bicycle parking spaces (ie, indoor or enclosed), and showers. Also sets standards for the secure design of bike racks. Draft 2 Status: Discussed in September 2016 by Planning Commission, following up on prior request (with examples) from a resident. The Commission endorsed and asked the Bicycle & Pedestrian Committee (BPC) to prepare draft language. BPC voted to submit the enclosed recommendations to the Commission on February 8, 2017. PC reviewed draft language on February 28, 2017. Changes were since made to include language re: transfer of short term bike parking to be performed as long term bike parking, include signage requirements for bike parking which may not be visibly accessible, and to allow for an increased reduction in vehicle parking spaces in lieu of bike parking. Where: Chapter 2, Definitions; Chapter 13.14 Supplemental Regulations (possibility for relocation in future updates); Appendix G. 2.02 Definitions … Long Term Bicycle Storage. Also called protected bicycle storage. Bicycle parking spaces intended for employees, tenants, and their visitors and intended to provide a high degree of security and protection from the weather when a bicycle is unattended for a period of time in excess of four hours. Short Term Bicycle Parking. Also called bicycle parking. Bicycle parking spaces to accommodate customers, patients, employees, clients, and those biking to those locations to do business. 13.14 [reserved] Bicycle Parking and Storage A. Purpose. These standards for short and long term storage of bicycles are intended to recognize and promote cycling as a viable means of transportation and recreation for residents, consumers, visitors, and employees. B. Short Term Bicycle Parking (1) Applicability. These standards would apply to any application which meets the threshold for site plan review under Section 14.03 of the LDRs, and also within the City Center Form Based Codes District. (2) Standards for bicycle parking spaces (bps). (a) The minimum number of bicycle parking spaces shall be dependent on Table XX. (b) Bicycle parking shall utilize the ‘Inverted U’ style or as shown as acceptable in Appendix G. (c) If an applicant wishes to install something different, it shall meet the following specifications: (i) Allow secure locking of the frame and wheel; (ii) Support a bicycle frame at two points of contact; (iii) Meet the intent of the examples provided in Appendix G. (d) Location & Serviceability. Each bps shall be: (i) Securely anchored to the ground and on a paved surface of at least 2x6 feet; (ii) Spaced to allow easy access to each bicycle and spaced at least 24 inches from obstructions, including bike racks, walls, doors, posts, columns or landscaping; (iii) Easily accessible from the street or multi-use path and protected from motor vehicles; Draft 3 (iv) Visible to passers-by and well-lit to promote usage and enhance security; especially in retrofitted areas, or where good visibility is not achievable, an applicant may be required to install directional signage. (v) Located at principle entrances where practicable. (e) Bicycle parking serving buildings with multiple entrances shall be dispersed so that all principal entrances are served. (f) For office building use, up to 50% of short term bicycle parking requirements may be met by supplementing the (indoor) long term bicycle parking requirements with the required short term bicycle parking spaces. C. Long Term Bicycle Storage (1) Applicability. These standards would apply to: (a) New construction of mixed use or commercial buildings and residential buildings exceeding 3 units per building; (b) Structural alterations involving the replacement, relocation, removal, or other similar changes to more than 50% of all load bearing walls shall require compliance with all standards for long term bicycle storage. (c) Additions to buildings of more than 5,000 square feet shall require compliance proportional with the building addition. (2) Standards (a) For Residential Buildings (i) Secure Storage in bicycle locker, bicycle storage room or private enclosure outside of the private residence that protects entire bicycle, including components and accessories against theft and weather. (ii) Garages which are private to each unit may count towards parking requirements. (b) For Non-Residential Buildings (i) Secure storage in bicycle locker, bicycle storage room or enclosure that protects entire bicycle, including components and accessories against theft and weather; (ii) Includes lockable clothes locker, minimum 12” wide, 18” deep, 36” high. Lockers do not need to be in same place as bicycle storage; (iii) Private offices with adequate dedicated space may account for up to 50% of the required indoor parking areas and lockers; (iv) Shower and changing facilities dependent on the number of bicycles required to be stored and as shown in Table 13-10. Table 10. Bicycle Parking Requirements Type of Activity Short Term Bike Parking Long Term Bike Storage Residential buildings with more than 3 units 1 for every 10 units; minimum 41 1 for every unit Warehousing, contractor, and light industry 1 per 20k SF; minimum 2 2 per tenant Retail, restaurant, office, and all other 1 per 5k SF; minimum 4 50% of required short term bike parking spaces. Educational 1 space for each 20 students of planned capacity. For new buildings only, one space for each 20 employees. Draft 4 1 May request waiver from minimum per building for buildings with less than 6 units if Development Review Board finds the need is adequately met for visitors. Table 11. Long Term parking – shower and changing room facility requirements Number of protected long term bicycle parking spaces Changing facility Unisex Showers Clothes Lockers 1-3 none none 1 4 - 9 12 12 3 For every 10 12 12 40% of LTB parking 2 if unisex units available to any gender; otherwise provide one per gender 2. Planned Rights of Way – Williston Road, Garden Street, Market Street Brief summary: revises the planned width of the three streets listed above based on the work of the Williston Road Network Study and Garden Street design plans. Functional change: Would require a slightly larger accommodation of future streets along Williston Road (100’ instead of 90’, Garden Street (specifies 76.5’), and Market Street (90’). This is important because whereas in the past on Williston Road, a planned 90’ Right-of-Way was also accompanied by a 50’ setback FROM the Right-of-Way, under the Form Based Code, the setback was eliminated and replaced with a “Build-to-Line,” meaning that buildings may be right up against the Planned Right-of-Way. Therefore, it’s important that we right-size the Rights-of-Way for the future. Status: Draft language for review for first time at this meeting. Draft language in LDR text. Where: Section 3.06, Table 3-1. Table 3-1 Existing and Planned Street Rights-of-Way Street Existing Street ROW (feet) Minimum Planned Street ROW (feet) Airport Drive 66 80 Airport Parkway 66 66 Allen Road 66 66 Dorset Street, north of Swift 66 100 Dorset Street, south of Swift 66 66 Garden Street 60 76.5 Hinesburg Road 66 80 Kennedy Drive 100 100 Kimball Avenue 100 100 Market Street 80 80 Patchen Road 66 66 Shelburne Road 100 100 Shunpike Road, east of Kimball Avenue 80 80 Spear Street 66 66 Swift Street 50 66 Williston Road, east of the Hinesburg Road-Patchen Road 66 90 Draft 5 intersection Williston Road, from the Hinesburg- Patchen Road intersection west 66 90 100 3. Affordable housing in the SEQ Brief Summary: Adds the SEQ-Neighborhood Residential North subdistrict to the list of zoning districts where a density bonus is allowed for affordability. Clarifies that affordable units approved through density bonus do not require TDRs. Functional change: Allows for a density bonus in the small SEQ-NRN district. No functional change in the TDR clarification as this has been past practice. Status: Concept of SEQ-NRN presented to Commission in the summer of 2016. First presentation of TDR clarification in this packet. All language in draft LDRs. Where: 9.05(C) 9.05 Residential Density … C. Affordable Housing Density Increase. (1) Affordable housing bonuses pursuant to Section 13.14 18.02 are allowed in the SEQ-NR, SEQ-NRN, SEQ-NRT, SEQ-VR, and SEQ-VC sub-districts. If affordable housing, as defined in Article 2 and regulated in Article 18 13 of these Regulations, is proposed as part of a development application, the Development Review Board may grant a density increase in any of the eligible SEQ sub-districts according to the requirements of Section 13.14 18.02. (2) Calculation of the allowed density increase (i.e. 25% or 50% per Section 13.14 18.02) shall be based on the maximum allowable overall density of the project as a whole, including non- contiguous sending parcels where applicable. If a development plan is approved by the Development Review Board meeting, the applicable average density may be increased on the development parcel sufficient to accommodate the affordable housing units. (3) In addition, tThe Development Review Board may allow a residential structures in SEQ-VR and SEQ-VC to have two additional dwelling units per structure, up to a maximum of eight (8) dwelling units per structure, if one or more of the units in the structure is an affordable unit. This provision shall not be interpreted to allow an increase in the total allowable number of units for the project as a whole. (3)(4) When an affordable housing density increase is granted in accordance with this Section and Section 18.02, the designated affordable dwelling units shall not constitute units for the purposes of calculation of Transferable Development Rights. 4. Street connections & cul-de-sacs Brief summary: This amendment would clarify the following: • The relationship between two related standards in the SEQ: (1) that dead end streets shall not exceed 200’ in length, and (2) that street connections must be made to adjacent properties where the DRB finds it likely that such a connection would link to a future road / development; Draft 6 • Establish criteria for the DRB to determine whether a road connection is likely; • Establish criteria by which the DRB can determine that a right-of-way or phased connection is appropriate; and, • Affirm that where a connection is required, the applicant must build the connection or pay the full amount of such connection. Functional change: Clarity to DRB when these items come into contact with one another. Amendment would state that a street must connect where reasonably likely, and that any dead-end street NOT intended to connect to an adjacent property shall not exceed 200’ in length. Status: Item requested by the DRB. PC discussed issue briefly in fall of 2016 when relayed by a resident following a DRB meeting. First draft ready for review. Where: 9.08(A)(2), 9.09(A)(1), 9.10(A)(2), 15.12(D)(4) 9.08 SEQ-NRT, SEQ-NR, and SEQ-NRN Sub-Districts; Specific Standards A. Street, block and lot pattern. … (2) Interconnection of Streets (a) Average spacing between intersections shall be 300 to 500 feet. (b) Dead end streets (e.g. cul de sac) that are not constructed to an adjacent parcel for a future connection are strongly discouraged. Such Ddead end streets shall not exceed 200 feet in length. (c) Street stubs are required at the end of dead end streets to allow for future street connections and/or bicycle and pedestrian connections to open space and future housing on adjoining parcels per section 15.12(D)(4). (3) Street Connection to Adjoining Parcels. Street stubs are required to be built to the property line and connected to adjacent parcels per section 15.12(D)(4) of these Regulations. Posting signs with a notice of intent to construct future streets is strongly encouraged. (4 3) Lot ratios. Lots shall maintain a minimum lot width to depth ratio of 1:2, with a ratio of 1:2.5 to 1:5 recommended. 9.09 SEQ-VR Sub-District; Specific Standards A. Street, Block and Lot Pattern (1) Interconnection of Streets (a) Average spacing between intersections shall be 300 to 500 feet. (b) Dead end streets (e.g. cul de sac) that are not constructed to an adjacent parcel for a future connection are strongly discouraged. Such Ddead end streets shall not exceed 200 feet in length. (c) Street stubs are required at the end of dead end streets to allow for future street connections and/or bicycle and pedestrian connections to open space and future housing on adjoining parcels per section 15.12(D)(4). (3) Street Connection to Adjoining Parcels. Street stubs are required to be built to the property line and connected to adjacent parcels per section 15.12(D)(4) of these Regulations. Posting signs with a notice of intent to construct future streets is strongly encouraged. Draft 7 (4 3) Lot ratios. Lots shall maintain a minimum lot width to depth ratio of 1:2, with a ratio of 1:2.5 to 1:5 recommended. 9.10 SEQ-VC Sub-District; Specific Regulations A. Street, block and lot pattern. (2) Interconnection of Streets (a) Average intersection spacing shall be 200 to 300 feet. (b) Dead end streets (e.g. cul de sacs) that are not constructed to an adjacent parcel for a future connection are strongly discouraged. Such D dead end streets shall not exceed 200 feet in length. (c) Street stubs are required at dead end streets to allow for future street connections and/or bicycle and pedestrian connections to open space and future housing on adjoining parcels per Section 15.12(D)(4). (3) Street Connection to Adjoining Parcels. Street stubs are required to be built to the property line per Section 15.12(D)(4) of these Regulations to allow connection to adjacent parcels. Posting signs with a notice of intent to construct future streets is strongly encouraged. (4 3) Lot ratios. Lots for new residential structures shall incorporate a minimum lot width to lot depth ratio of 1:2, with a ratio of 1:2.5 to 1:5 recommended. 15.12 Standards for Roadways, Parking and Circulation … D. Criteria for Public and Private Roadways. … (4) Connections to adjacent parcels. (a) If the DRB finds that a roadway or recreation path extension or connection to an adjacent property may or could occur in the future, whether through City action or development of an adjacent parcel, the DRB shall require the applicant to construct the connector roadway to the property line or contribute to the full cost of completing the roadway connection. (b) In determining whether a connection may or could occur to an adjacent property, and the placement of such connection, the DRB may consider: (i) The existence of planned roadways or recreation paths in the City’s Comprehensive Plan, Official Map, or these Regulations; (ii) The zoning of the adjacent property and whether additional development or development density is allowable; (iii) The context of the proposed development’s setting in relation to the adjacent property; (iv) The presence of physical obstacles to such a connection, such as wetlands, water bodies, or steep slopes; (v) The presence of legal restrictions to development or use on the adjacent property; and/or; (vi) Any other information it deems necessary to make its determination. (c) If the DRB finds that a connection may or could occur to an adjacent property, but that the distance to such connection exceeds the length of the roadway or recreation being Draft 8 proposed for development, the DRB may accept a dedication of a right-of-way to the adjacent property and/or impose a condition that any future development on the property require construction of the roadway or recreation path. (ad) In any such application, the DRB shall require sSufficient right-of-way shall be to be dedicated to accommodate two (2) lanes of vehicle travel, City utilities, and a ten-foot wide grade-separated recreation path. (d) Any such roadway or recreation path shall include one or more signs indicating the intent to construct future connections to the street or recreation path. (5) Nothing in this section shall be construed to limit the authority of the DRB to grant waivers of public roadway standards subject to the provisions of §15.12(D)(4). 5. Clarification of uses permitted in the Institutional-Agricultural district, Municipal District, Recreation & Parks District, and Residential 7-Neighborhood Commercial District Brief summary: would eliminate a duplication of permitted uses in these three zoning districts. Currently, the list of permitted / conditional uses in these three zoning districts are listed both in Article 7 (in text form) and in the Table of Uses. For all other districts, the text description of uses was eliminated many years ago. This amendment would remove the duplication and make clarifications where the duplicated uses were in conflict with one another. Functional change: Eliminates the lists of uses in Article 7, corrects the table of uses. Status: First presented to the Commission in the summer of 2016, except for R7-NC. Complete and in the draft text. Where: Sections 4.06, 7.01, 7.02, 7.03, Appendix C 4.06 RESIDENTIAL 7 WITH NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL DISTRICT - R7-NC … C. Permitted and Conditional Uses. Those uses indicated in Table C-1, Table of Uses, and accessory uses to those uses. (1) Residential as principal permitted uses as per Residential 7 District regulations and accessory dwelling units as conditional uses. (2) Office (3) Medical office (4) Retail, not including shopping centers or general merchandise stores (5) Gasoline filling station with consumer convenience center (6) Personal service establishment (7) Retail food establishment, not to exceed 5,000 square feet in gross floor area (8) Accessory uses customary to the uses listed above 7.01 Institutional and Agricultural District I-A … C. Uses. In the Institutional and Agricultural District, principal permitted uses and conditional uses shall be those shown in Table C-1, Table of Uses. C. Permitted Uses. The following uses are permitted in the Institutional-Agricultural District. (1) Agriculture, forestry and horticultural uses (ALL) Draft 9 (2) Retail sale of agricultural, forest or horticultural products produced on site. Such use shall be subject to site plan review in accordance with Article 14 of these Regulations. (ALL) (3) Keeping of livestock (ALL) (4) Single-family dwelling related to agriculture, forestry or horticultural use (ALL) (5) Additional dwelling units for farm employees, subject to site plan review in accordance with Article 14 of these Regulations. (ALL) (6) Park (ALL) (7) Recreation path, subject to site plan review in accordance with Article 14 of these Regulations. (ALL) (8) Hospice (ALL) (9) Educational facility with customary educational support facilities, reviewed as a Planned Unit Development in accordance with Article 15 of these Regulations, and including without limitation the following uses in conjunction with a principal educational facility use: (a) Cultural facility (ALL) (b) Group quarters (ALL) (c) Office (ALL) (d) Medical office (ALL) (e) Place of worship (ALL) (f) Recreation facility, indoor (NORTH ONLY) (g) Recreation facility, outdoor (NORTH ONLY) (h) Research facility or laboratory (ALL) (i) Photocopy and printing shop with accessory retail sales (NORTH ONLY) (j) Personal service. Use is limited to 5,000 SF GFA per tenant with a maximum of 15,000 SF GFA total footprint for the building. Tenants shall have separate entrances from one another and no direct passageways from one to another. (NORTH ONLY) (k) Short-order restaurant, within a principal permitted structure (NORTH ONLY) (l) Retail sales. Use is limited to 5,000 SF GFA per tenant with a maximum of 15,000 SF GFA total footprint for the building. Tenants shall have separate entrances from one another and no direct passageways from one to another. (NORTH ONLY) (m) Social services (NORTH ONLY) (n) Accessory uses to the uses listed above in the applicable district (i.e. North only or all) D. Conditional Uses. The following uses are allowed in the Institutional-Agricultural District as conditional uses subject to approval by the Development Review Board as a Planned Unit Development in accordance with the provisions of this Section 7.01 and Table C-2, Dimensional Standards. (1) Accessory residential dwelling units (2) Day care facility (3) Municipal building (4) Parking facility (NORTH ONLY) (5) Public utility substation and transmission lines (6) Group home (7) Cemetery (8) Accessory uses to the uses listed above in the applicable district (i.e. North only or all) D E. Area, Density and Dimensional Requirements. In the Institutional-Agricultural District, all requirements of this Section 7.01 and Table C-2, Dimensional Standards shall apply. E F. Additional Standards. All applications within this District shall be subject to the following additional standards: (1) For properties in the Institutional-Agricultural district west of Spear Street and north of Quarry Hill Road, an undeveloped area shall be maintained for a minimum of sixty-five (65) Draft 10 feet between the boundary of any adjacent residential zoning district and any new non- residential structure. The DRB may require landscaping or other suitable screening in accordance with the provisions of Section 3.06 of these Regulations to ensure adequate buffering between new non-residential structures and adjacent residential districts. (2) For all other properties in the Institutional-Agricultural district, an undeveloped area shall be maintained for a minimum of one hundred (100) feet between the boundary of any adjacent residential zoning district. The yard shall be kept free of buildings, structures, parking lots and facilities, and access drives other than those required to cross through the required yard. The DRB may require landscaping or other suitable screening in accordance with the provisions of Section 3.06 of these Regulations to ensure adequate buffering between new non-residential structures and adjacent residential districts. (3) Educational facilities and educational support facilities in the Commercial 1 district shall be subject to the dimensional standards and requirements of the Institutional-Agricultural North district. (4) Educational Support Facility. Uses listed as allowable within the Table of Uses as Educational Support Facility shall be designed and intended function as a complement to the intended educational use of the property. Such uses shall be secondary to the principal educational use of the property and shall be intended to principally serve students, faculty, and staff of the educational use. 7.02 Park and Recreation District PR … C. Uses. In the Parks and Recreation District, principal permitted uses and conditional uses shall be those shown in Table C-1, Table of Uses. C. Permitted Uses. The following uses are permitted in the Park and Recreation District. (1) Agriculture, forestry and horticultural uses (2) Retail sale of agricultural, forest or horticultural products produced on site. Such use shall be subject to site plan review in accordance with Article 14 of these Regulations. (3) Keeping of livestock (4) Park (5) Single-family dwelling related to agriculture, forestry or horticultural use (6) Additional dwelling units for farm employees, subject to site plan review in accordance with Article 14 of these Regulations. (7) Recreation path (8) Indoor recreation facility (9) Outdoor recreation facility (10) Not-for-profit organization whose primary purpose is the provision of educational or research services related to agriculture, horticulture, forestry, natural resource preservation, arts or recreation. D. Conditional Uses. The following uses are allowed in the Park and Recreation District as conditional uses subject to approval by the Development Review Board as a Planned Unit Development in accordance with the provisions of this Section 7.02 and Table C-1, Table of Uses. (1) Public utility substation and transmission lines (2) Day care center (3) Accessory residential dwelling units D E. Area, Density and Dimensional Requirements. In the Park and Recreation District, all requirements of this Section 7.02 and Table C-2, Dimensional Standards shall apply. Draft 11 E F. Additional Standards. All applications within this District shall be subject to the following additional standardsIn reviewing any Permitted or Conditional Use proposed under this Section shall meet the following standards in addition to those in Article 14 of these Regulations: (1) The proposed use will provide an affirmative public benefit to the City and its citizens. (2) The proposed use will be compatible with and protect the ability to preserve public recreational use and planned open spaces and natural areas on the project site. (3) The proposed use will include areas that may be used or accessed by the general public. 7.03 Municipal District MU … C. Uses. In the Municipal District, principal permitted uses and conditional uses shall be those shown in Table C-1, Table of Uses. C. Permitted Uses. The following uses are permitted in the Municipal District: (1) Agriculture, forestry and horticultural uses (2) Retail sale of agricultural, forest or horticultural products produced on site. Such use shall be subject to site plan review in accordance with Article 14 of these Regulations. (3) Keeping of livestock (4) Single-family dwelling related to agriculture, forestry or horticultural use (5) Additional dwellings for farm employees, subject to site plan review in accordance with Article 14 of these Regulations. (6) Community center (7) Public educational facility (8) Recreation path (9) Municipal building (10) Private providers of public services (11) Recreation facility, indoor (12) Recreation facility, outdoor (13) Offices incidental and subordinate to a permitted use listed above D. Conditional Uses. The following uses are allowed in the Municipal District as conditional uses subject to approval by the Development Review Board in accordance with the provisions of this Section 7.03 and Table C-1, Table of Uses. (1) Day care centers (2) Public utility substation and transmission lines (3) Waste handling and transfer facilities (4) Commercial or public parking facility D E. Area, Density and Dimensional Requirements. In the Municipal District, all requirements of this Section 7.03 and Table C-2, Dimensional Standards shall apply. E F. Additional Standards. All applications within this District shall be subject to the following additional standards In reviewing any Permitted or Conditional Use proposed under this Section shall meet the following standards in addition to those in Article 14 of these Regulations: (1) The proposed use will provide an affirmative public benefit to the City and its citizens. (2) The proposed use will be compatible with and protect the ability to preserve public recreational use and planned open spaces and natural areas on the project site. Appendix C: Table of Uses – SEE CHANGES AT THE END OF THIS MEMO. Draft 12 6. Allowance for front porches in the R4 District Brief summary: Per the Chamberlin Committee final report, would allow open air front porches to be built up to 18’ feet from the front lot line (the setback for buildings is 30’). Any such porch would need to be open on three sides at a height of 40’ and above. Functional change: Creates a reduced setback for porches open on three sides and clarifies that a porch within the front yard setback cannot be enclosed (except in the case of buildings built prior to 1974, which have a special exception). Status: Drafted, based on recommendations of Chamberlin Final Report. Presented to Planning Commission as a concept in summer of 2016. Where: Section 2.02 (definitions for Porch, Open Porch, and Enclosed Porch), and Section 3.06(K). 2.02 Specific Definitions … Porch: a covered but unenclosed projection from the main wall of a building. Porch, open: A porch, open on three sides. Railings or walls on the sides shall not exceed 40 inches in height from the porch floor. Porch, enclosed: A porch, enclosed one two or more sides by glass, plastic, netting, wire, walls, or similar temporary or permanent materials at a height above 40 inches from the porch floor. 3.06 Setbacks and Buffers … K. Front Setback for Front Porches in the R4 District In the R4 District, an open porch, not exceeding the width of the building face to which the porch is attached, shall have a front setback of 18’ feet. Access steps not greater than 5’ in with may project an additional 5’ into the setback, but in no case shall an open porch or access stairs be less than 5’ from the front lot line. An enclosed porch shall be considered part of the principal building and subject to standard front setbacks. 7. Fence heights in residential districts, SEQ, and CC FBC Brief summary: Per the Chamberlin Committee final report, would limit the height of fences in front yards to 4 feet in height in the City’s residential districts. The Committee had recommended this as a way to foster pedestrian-friendly neighborhoods. Functional change: Limits the height of fences in front yards (in front, and on corner lots, the street side) to 4 feet in the R1, R1-LV, R1-LR, R2, R4, R7, R7-NC, SEQ Districts, and FBC districts. Status: Drafted, based on recommendations of Chamberlin Final Report. Presented to Planning Commission as a concept in summer of 2016. Where: Section 13.17(4)(a) 13.17 Fences … B. Specific Requirements. All fences are subject to the following provisions: … (4) Heights: Draft 13 (a) In all residential districts, the Southeast Quadrant, and City Center Form Based Code District, no fence shall exceed four (4) feet in height along or parallel to the front lot line. On a corner lot, no fence shall exceed four (4) feet in height along or parallel to any portion of the front lot line in front of the building line. (b) A fence over four (4) feet in height shall require a zoning permit from the Administrative Officer. (c) (5) A fence over eight (8) feet in height shall require approval by the Development Review Board as a conditional use subject to the provisions of Article 14, Conditional Use Review. (d) (6) A fence over eight (8) feet in height shall be considered a structure subject to normal setback requirements for the zoning district, unless otherwise approved by the Development Review Board as a conditional use subject to the provisions of Article 14, Conditional Use Review. (e)(7) In the Queen City Park, R1-Lakeview, and Lakeshore Neighborhood Districts, a fence over four (4) feet in height shall require a zoning permit from the Administrative Officer and shall be subject to the following supplemental requirements: (i a) No such fence shall exceed six (6) feet in height; and, (iib) The fence shall have a maximum opacity of 50% on all sides. (5 8) No fence shall be erected in such a manner as to inhibit or divert the natural drainage flow or cause the blockage or damming of surface water. (6 9) No fence shall be erected that may create a fire hazard or other dangerous condition or that may result in obstruction to fire fighting. (7 10) Fences shall be maintained in a safe and substantial condition. (8 11) No fence shall be located or constructed on a terrace or wall that will have an overall height of more than that permitted, unless otherwise approved by the Development Review Board as a conditional use subject to the provisions of Article 14, Conditional Use Review. (9 12) Notwithstanding any other provisions within these Regulations, applications under this Section 13.17 assigned to the Development Review Board shall be reviewed by the Board in all Zoning Districts and the City Center FBC District. 8. Administration & enforcement Brief summary: Eliminates language in the establishment of the Planning Commission, Development Review Board, and Design Review Committee that duplicates State Law, or is more appropriately City Council policy. Also names the Design Review Committee enactment to “advisory committees” to be consistent with State Statutes and current operations in South Burlington where other committees, such as the Bike Ped Committee and Recreation & Parks Committee, have a role in development review. This amendments was precipitated from a question that arose at the DRB where language in our LDRs read slightly differently from State Statues as it pertains to Open Meetings. Functional change: Simplifies language and eliminates text. Status: Drafted; staff to present to Commission for the first time at this meeting. Where: Sections 17.07, 17.08, 17.10 Draft 14 17.07 Planning Commission A. Authorization. The City of South Burlington Planning Commission is established via the City Charter, 24 V.S.A. App §13-701City Council shall appoint a Planning Commission. B. Members and Terms of Office. Membership and Terms of Office for the Planning Commission are set forth in the City Charter, 24 V.S.A. App §13-701. All members shall be appointed by the City Council. All members may be compensated and reimbursed by the City of South Burlington for necessary and reasonable expenses. All members of the Planning Commission shall be residents of the City of South Burlington. Any member may be removed at any time by a unanimous vote of the City Council. If a member relocates to another municipality before his or her term of office expires, such member shall be replaced. D. Powers, Duties, and Procedural Rules. The Planning Commission shall elect its chair, vice-chairman and a clerk. and shall exercise all powers and duties as provided for in the City Charter, 24 V.S.A. App. § 13-702. The Planning Commission shall keep a record of its resolutions, transactions, and findings of fact, which shall be maintained as a public record of the municipality. The Planning Commission shall adopt by majority vote of those members present and voting such rules as it deems necessary and appropriate for the performance of its functions. E. Powers and Duties. The planning commission shall exercise all powers and duties as provided for in the City Charter, 24 V.S.A. App. § 13-702. 17.08 Development Review Board A. Authorization. The City of South Burlington Development Review Board is established by the City Council via resolution in accordance with shall appoint a Development Review Board24 V.S.A. §4460. B. Members. Board membership is set forth in 24 V.S.A. §4460 and as adopted by City Council resolution. The development review board shall have not fewer than five (5) nor more than nine (9) voting members. All members shall be appointed by the City Council. All members may be compensated and reimbursed by the City of South Burlington for necessary and reasonable expenses. The City Council may appoint alternates to the members to serve in situations when one or more members of the board are disqualified or are otherwise unable to serve. Vacancies shall be filled by the City Council for the unexpired terms and upon the expiration of such terms. Each member of the Development Review Board may be removed for cause by the City Council upon written charges and after public hearing. C. Term of Office [reserved]. Four Board members shall have terms of four years and three board members shall have terms of three years. D. Procedural Rules. The Development Review Board shall elect its own officers, and adopt rules of procedure, and operate pursuant to subject to Vermont Municipal Planning and Development Act Title 24, Part 2, Chapter 117, V.S.A. Section 4462 §4461. Meetings shall be held two times each month or at the call of the chairman and at such times as the board may determine. All meetings of the board shall be open to the public. The board shall keep minutes of its proceedings, showing the vote of each member upon each question, or, if absent or failing to vote, indicating this. The board shall keep records of its examinations and other official actions, all of which shall be immediately filed in the City Clerk's office as a public record. For the conduct Draft 15 of any hearing and the taking of any action, a quorum shall not be less than a majority of the members of the board, and any action thereof shall be taken by the concurrence of a majority of the board. 17.0910 Advisory Committees Design Review Committee A. Authorization. The City of South Burlington City Council may appoint one of more advisory committees in accordance with 24 V.S.A. §4433. a Design Review Committee to advise the Development Review Board and the Planning Commission. B. Membership and terms of office. Advisory committee membership and terms of office are set forth in 24 V.S.A. §4433 and as adopted by City Council resolution. Any Design Review Committee shall have not fewer than five (5) voting members. All members shall be appointed by the City Council. All members may be compensated and reimbursed by the City of South Burlington for necessary and reasonable expenses. All members of a design review committee shall be residents of the City of South Burlington. The City Council may appoint alternates to the members to serve in situations when one or more members of the board are disqualified or are otherwise unable to serve. C. Term of Office. The term of each member shall be three (3) years, except that the terms of the members first appointed shall be so staggered that no more than two shall be reappointed or replaced during any future calendar year. Any appointment to fill a vacancy shall be for the unexpired term and shall be made as soon as practicable. If a member relocates to another municipality before his or her term of office expires, such member shall be replaced by the City Council. Each member of a Design Review Committee may be removed for cause upon written charges and after public hearing held before the City Council. In such a case, a majority of voting members of the City Council shall be required to remove a committee member. D. Powers, Duties, and Procedural Rules. Advisory committees shall elect its own officers, adopt rules of procedure, and operate pursuant to 24 V.S.A. §4461 and §4464(d). A Design Review Committee shall elect its own officers and adopt rules of procedure, subject to Vermont Municipal Planning and Development Act Title 24, Part 2, Chapter 117, Section 4462. Meetings shall be held no less than once a month or at the call of the chairman and at such times as the committee may determine. All meetings of the committee shall be open to the public. The committee shall keep minutes of its proceedings, showing the vote of each member upon each question, or, if absent or failing to vote, indicating this. The committee shall keep records of its examinations and other official actions, all of which shall be immediately filed in the City Clerk's office as a public record. For the taking of any action, a quorum shall not be less than a majority of the members of the committee, and any action thereof shall be taken by the concurrence of a majority of the committee. E. Powers and Duties. (1) General. A design review committee is authorized to administer design review regulations as contained in these regulations. The committee may examine or cause to be examined any property, maps, books, or records bearing upon the matters concerned in a design review proceeding. 17.101 Amendments to Regulations and Maps [reserved] 17.121 Violations [reserved] Draft 16 17.132 Penalties [reserved] 17.143 Appeals An interested party may appeal any decision or act of the Administrative Officer to the Development Review Board within fifteen (15) days of the date of the decision or act in accordance with 24 V.S.A. §4465. 9. Agricultural Amendments not related to Ag Enterprise Brief summary: Predominantly related to food hub regulations and related definitions. Rooted in Sustainable Agriculture 2013 report and recommended by Sustainable Agriculture sub-committee of Planning Commission. Reviewed early draft Summer 2016 with minor changes directed. Functional change: Changes to definitions; new additions and allowed use for food hub. Status: Draft language enclosed for review. Staff recommends as ready for public hearing. Where: Chapter 2 (Definitions); Chapter 13.27 (new); Table 13-3; Section 2.02 Definitions Agriculture (Farming). shall include any of the following land use activities conducted in accordance with state-defined accepted agricultural practices and/or best management practices.: the cultivation or other use of land for growing food, fiber, Christmas trees, maple sap, or horticultural and orchard crops; or the raising, feeding, or management of livestock, poultry, fish, or bees; or the operation of greenhouses; or the production of maple syrup; or the on-site storage, preparation and sale of agricultural products principally produced on the farm; or the on-site storage, preparation, production, and sale of fuel or power from agricultural products or wastes principally produced on the farm; or the raising, feeding, or management of four or more equines owned or boarded by the farmer, including training, showing, and providing instruction and lessons in riding, training, and the management of equines. Food hub. A facility that serves as the central location for the aggregation, storage, processing, distribution, and/or marketing of local and source-identified food. TABLE 13-3: PARKING REQUIREMENTS, AGRICUTURAL USES Use Spaces Required Notes Horticulture & forestry with on-premise sales 1 per employee plus 2 per 1,000 SF GFA Horticulture & forestry, no on-premise sales 1 per employee Keeping of livestock on 10 acres or more 1 per employee Single-family dwelling related to agriculture 2 per DU Additional dwelling for farm employees 1 per bedroom TABLE 13-4: PARKING REQUIREMENTS, PUBLIC AND QUASI-PUBLIC USES Use Spaces Required Notes Place of worship 0.5 per seat Community center 0.33 per maximum permitted occupancy Cultural facility 0.33 per maximum permitted occupancy Draft 17 Use (continued) Parking Space Requirement Notes Educational facility: elementary and secondary schools 1 per classroom and other rooms used by students, staff or faculty, plus 0.25 per student of driving age Educational facility: college, university, or professional school 1 per classroom and other rooms used by students, staff or faculty, plus 0.50 per student Food Hub 1 per employee plus 2 per 1,000 SF GFA Personal instruction facility 2 per employee Municipal facility 3 per 1,000 SF GFA Educational support facilities 2 per 1,000 SF GFA [staff note: parking table cut off in memo only for brevity] 13.27 Food Hubs A. General requirements. A food hub is mostly closely aligned with a farm stand with respect to types of products available. The principal function of a food hub shall be to provide local farmers and food producers predictable and coordinated access to individuals, retailers, and institutions. This is encouraged to be a distribution point for shares in Community Supported Agriculture (CSAs). (1) A Food Hub is explicitly not a “Retail Sales” use. A food hub is not intended for consumers to shop through a wide variety of goods, especially those which are processed or not grown locally, throughout most of the day, week, and year. (2) In addition to the definition found in these Regulations, a food hub may also constitute an organization responsible for the roles listed herein, and may include technical assistance to local farmers in conjunction with its duties as a central location. B. Specific standards (1) Processing activities at the food hub location shall be limited to non-mechanized packaging, provided it is subordinate to the distribution activities. (2) Storage is permissible for terms of less than 30 days. (3) Butchering or killing of livestock shall not be permitted on-site. (4) A food hub may be host to- with no greater frequency than once per week- a farmer’s market without additional municipal review or permitting. (5) Edible landscaping is strongly encouraged; the value of edible landscaping used at Food Hub sites shall be counted towards the minimum landscaping budget as 150% of every dollar planted. C. Permitting (1) Facilities under 5,000 GFA may be reviewed under Section 14.09, Administrative Review. (2) Facilities larger than 5,000 GFA shall require DRB Site Plan review in accordance with Chapter 14 of these Regulations. Appendix C: Table of Uses – SEE CHANGES AT THE END OF THIS MEMO. 10. Form Based Code Primary and Secondary Street and Block Standards applicability See attached memo. 11. Technical corrections, formatting and typos Draft 18 • Conditional Use Procedural clarification. Section 14.10 (D) describes two processes depending on the type of application. Minor wording changes to more clearly state when each process is to be followed. 14.10 Conditional Use Review: General Provisions and Standards D. Review and Approval Procedure. A use designated as a conditional use in any district may be permitted by the Development Review Board, after public notice and public hearing, according to the following procedures: (1) Any conditional use shall be either: (a) is subject to site plan review, except as provided for in Section 14.03(B), and shall be therefore reviewed under the requirements of Article 14, Site Plan and Conditional Use Review; or, (b) is subject to planned unit development review and shall be therefore reviewed under the requirements of Article 15, Planned Unit Development. • Listing of SEQ-NRN District. Adds the SEQ-Neighborhood Residential North District to the list of zoning districts in the LDRs. 3.01 Establishment of Districts and Description of Certain Districts A. Establishment of Districts. (1) Residential Districts R1 Residential 1 District R1-PRD Residential 1 with Planned Residential Development District R1-Lakeshore Residential 1- Lakeshore District R2 Residential 2 District R4 Residential 4 District R7 Residential 7 District R12 Residential 12 District LN Lakeshore Neighborhood District QCP Queen City Park District SEQ-NRP Southeast Quadrant-Natural Resource Protection District SEQ-NRT Southeast Quadrant-Neighborhood Residential Transition District SEQ-NR Southeast Quadrant-Neighborhood Residential District SEQ-NRN Southeast Quadrant Neighborhood Residential North District SEQ-VR Southeast Quadrant-Village Residential District • Parking in front of buildings in R7-NC. Removes a statement that “parking shall be placed to the side or rear of the structure if possible.” This language is no longer needed as the City’s Site Plan standards related to parking were revised several years ago and are more clear than this language. 4.06 RESIDENTIAL 7 WITH NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL DISTRICT - R7-NC … E. Additional Standards. … (3) Access, parking, and internal circulation: Draft 19 Single-family 12,000 SF (1.2)15%** 30% 20 10 30 15 25 28 2 3 1 4 Two-family 24,000 SF (1.2)15% 30% 20 10 30 15 25 28 2 3 1 4 All other uses 40,000 SF (1.2)15% 30% 20 20 30 15 25 28 2 3 1 4 SEQ-NRP, NRT, NRN* and NR * See Article 9 for additional dimensional standards in the SEQ-NRN subdistrict. Where a conflicts exists, the more restrive shall apply. (a) Parking requirements may be modified, depending in the extent of shared parking, the presence of sidewalks or recreation paths, and residences lying within walking distance (defined as no further than one-fourth of mile for purposes of this zoning district). Any requirements for shared access and/or parking must be secured by permanent legal agreements acceptable to the City Attorney. (b) Parking shall be placed to the side or rear of the structures if possible. (c b) Parking areas shall be designed for efficient internal circulation and the minimum number of curb cuts onto the public roadway. (d c) Access improvements and curb cut consolidation may be required. (e d) Where existing residential dwellings are converted to nonresidential use, the residential appearance of the structure shall be retained. • Location Descriptions of C1-AUTO and C1-AIR districts. Removes the description of the location of these two districts. Other districts do not have such descriptions; they simply use the map. 5.02 COMMERCIAL 1 WITH AUTOMOBILE SALES DISTRICT (C1-AUTO) … C. [RESERVED] Location. This area is generally bounded to the south by Holmes Road, to the west by the western boundaries of 1185 - 1325 Shelburne Road and Fayette Road, to the north by the northern boundary of the South Burlington Cemetery Property west of Shelburne Road and the northern boundary of 1030 Shelburne Road east of Shelburne Road, and to the east by the R4 District boundary north of Baldwin Avenue and the centerline of Shelburne Road south of Baldwin Avenue. After the adoption of these land development regulations, new C1- AUTO districts shall be permitted only upon action of the Planning Commission and City Council and where the existing zoning is Commercial 1 (C1). 5.03 COMMERCIAL 1 DISTRICT WITH AIRPORT USES C1-AIR … C. [RESERVED] Location. After the adoption of these Regulations, new C1-AIR districts shall be permitted only upon action of the Planning Commission and City Council and only where the pre-existing zoning is Commercial 1 (C1), or where the new district is adjacent to the Burlington International Airport or to an existing Airport District or Airport Industrial District. • SEQ-NRN dimensions. Adds the SEQ-NRN subdistrict to the table of Dimensions (with same standards as SEQ-NR, and with a note to refer back to Article 9 TABLE C-2 DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS APPLICABLE IN ALL DISTRICTS • Dimensional standards, C1-LR, AR, SW districts. Consolidates “retail” and “other non-residential uses”’ dimensional standards. They are identical, and so redundant. Draft 20 Appendix C Table of Dimensions • Density in C1-Auto district. In the Table of Uses, the density in this zoning district is listed as “12 or 15” units per acre. In the text of the LDRs, it’s listed as 15 units per acre. To clarify this confusion, the table is corrected to simply read “15” units per acre. Appendix C Table of Dimensions • Typographic correction in approval process. There is a missing word in the process for receipt of an extension to a development review approval. 17.04 Expiration of Permits and Approvals … B. Expiration of Approvals. (a) The Development Review Board or Administrative Officer has approved a request for extension of the approval. The Board or Administrative Officer may approve one (1) extension to an applicant if reapplication takes place before the approval has expired and if the Board determines that conditions are essentially unchanged from the time of the original approval. In granting such an extension, the Board or Administrative Officer may specify a period of time of up to one (1) year for the extension. Buildings only Buildings, parking and all other impervious surfaces Front(s)Side yard(s)Rear Accessory Principal (flat)Principal (pitched)Stories Facing Street Stories Below Roofline Roofline Stories [see section 3.07(B)] Total Stories Maximum site coverage: Maximum Building HeightStandard setbacks (feet):District Land Use Minimum lot size (max. residential density in dwelling units per acre) Single-family 6,000 SF (12)30% 40% 30 10 30 15 25 28 2 3 1 4 Two-family 8,000 SF (12)30% 40% 30 10 30 15 25 28 2 3 1 4Multi-family 3,500 SF/unit (12)40% 70% 30 10 30 15 35 40 Retail (principal permitted use, max. 5,000 SF GFA) 20,000 SF 40%70%30 10 30 15 35 40 Other n Non- residential uses 20,000 SF 40% 70% 30 10 30 15 35 40 C1-LR Single-family 6,000 SF (12)30% 40% 30 10 30 15 25 28 2 3 1 4Two-family 8,000 SF (12)30% 40% 30 10 30 15 25 28 2 3 1 4 Multi-family 3,500 SF/unit (12)40% 70% 30 10 30 15 35 40 Retail (principal permitted use, max. 5,000 SF GFA) 20,000 SF 40%70%30 10 30 15 35 40 Other n Non- residential uses 20,000 SF 40% 70% 30 10 30 15 35 40 AR Single-family 6,000 SF (7)30% 40% 30 10 30 15 25 28 2 3 1 4 Two-family 10,000 SF (7)30% 40% 30 10 30 15 25 28 2 3 1 4 Multi-family 6,000 SF/unit (7)30% 40% 30 10 30 15 35 40 Retail (principal permitted use, max. 5,000 SF GFA) 20,000 SF 40%70%30 10 30 15 35 40 Other n Non-residential uses 20,000 SF 40% 70% 30 10 30 15 35 40 SW Buildings only Buildings, parking and all other impervious surfaces Front(s)Side yard(s)Rear Accessory Principal (flat)Principal (pitched)Stories Facing Street Stories Below Roofline Roofline Stories [see section 3.07(B)] Total Stories Maximum site coverage: Maximum Building HeightStandard setbacks (feet):District Land Use Minimum lot size (max. residential density in dwelling units per acre) C1-Auto Multi-family 3,500 SF/unit (12 or 15) 40% 70% 30 15 30 15 35 40 All other uses 40,000 SF 40% 70% 30 15 30 15 35 40Draft APPENDIX C USES and DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS C-Residential/Institutional 1 South Burlington Land Development Regulations Effective June 27, 2016 RESIDENTIAL & INSTITUTIONAL DISTRICTS IA(1)PR MU R1 R2 R4 R7 R7- NC(2) R12 LN QCP SEQ- NRP SEQ- NRT SEQ-NR SEQ-VR SEQ- VC(2) Residential Uses Single-family dwelling P P P P PUD PUD P P P P P P P Two-family dwelling PUD P P P PUD PUD P P P P P P Multi-family dwelling PUD PUD P PUD PUD PUD C PUD P P Accessory residential units Group home or Residential Care Home P P P P PUD PUD P P P P P P P Agricultural Uses Agricultural uses consistent with State- defined "Farming" activity Horticulture & forestry with on-premise sales Horticulture & forestry, no on-premise sales Keeping of livestock on 10 acres or more P P P P P P P P P Single-family dwelling related to agriculture P P P P P P P P P P P P P Additional dwellings for farm employees P P P P P P P P P P P P P Public & Quasi-Public Uses Cemeteries Community center PUD P P P C P P P Congregate care, assisted living, or continuum of care facility C-TO C C C Cultural facility PUD (11) Educational facility PUD P C C C Educational support facilities PUD Funeral homes, mortuaries, and crematoriums C C Group quarters PUD (11) Hospice P P Municipal facility C C P Parks Personal instruction facility P P (6) Place of worship PUD (11)P P P P P P P P P P Recreation paths Institutional Residential Southeast Quadrant Please See Section 3.10 for Regulations Conditional in all districts Permitted in all districts Permitted in all districts Permitted in all districts; 3 acre minimum lot size in all districts. Permitted in all districts Exempt from local regulation in all districts 21Draft APPENDIX C USES and DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS C-Residential/Institutional 2 South Burlington Land Development Regulations Effective June 27, 2016 RESIDENTIAL & INSTITUTIONAL DISTRICTS IA(1)PR MU R1 R2 R4 R7 R7- NC(2) R12 LN QCP SEQ- NRP SEQ- NRT SEQ-NR SEQ-VR SEQ- VC(2) Institutional Residential Southeast Quadrant Social services C-TO C Commercial Uses Adult use Auto & motorcycle service and repair, accessory use, no fueling pumps C Bed and breakfast, min. 1 acre lot C C C C C C C C(3) Family child care home, registered or licensed P P P P P P P P P P P P P Child care facility, licensed non-residential C P P P (4)P Commercial greenhouse C-ACC Commercial or public parking facility PUD (11)C Food Hub P(7)P(6)P(6)P(6)P(7)P(7)P(6)P(6)P(6)P(6)P(7) Financial institution P Golf course C C C Office, general PUD (11)C (10)PUD-TO P PUD-TO C Office, medical PUD (11)PUD-TO P PUD-TO C Personal or business service, principal use N-PUD (7) (11) P P (6) Pet Grooming P Photocopy & printing shops with accessory retail N-PUD (11) Private providers of public services, including vehicle storage and maintenance P Recreation facility, indoor N-PUD (11)C P C P C C C P (6) Recreation facility, outdoor N-PUD (11)C P C P C C Research facility or laboratory N-PUD (11) Restaurant, short order N-PUD (11)C Restaurant, standard N-PUD (11)C C Retail sales N-PUD (7) (11) P (7)C (6) Seasonal Mobile Food Unit P Service station C Waste transfer stations C 22Draft APPENDIX C USES and DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS C-Non-Residential 3 South Burlington Land Development Regulations Effective June 27, 2016 City Center FBC District NON-RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS C1 R12 C1 R15 C1- AUTO C1-AIR C1-LR AR SW IO C2 IC AIR AIR-IND Residential Uses Single-family dwelling PUD P P P Two-family dwelling PUD P P Multi-family dwelling PUD PUD PUD PUD PUD PUD PUD Accessory residential units Group home or Residential Care Home PUD P P P Agricultural Uses Horticulture & forestry with on-premise sales Horticulture & forestry, no on-premise sales Keeping of livestock on 10 acres or more Single-family dwelling related to agriculture P P Additional dwellings for farm employees P P Public & Quasi-Public Uses Cemeteries Community center P P PUD P Congregate care, assisted living, or continuum of care facility C C C C C Cultural facility Educational facility PUD PUD C C C Educational support facilities PUD(5)PUD(5) Food Hub P(7)P(6)P(6)P(6)P(6)P(6)P(6)P(7)P(7)P(7) Funeral homes, mortuaries, and crematoriums C C C C C C C C C C Hospice P P P P P P Municipal facility P P P C C Parks Personal instruction facility P P P P P P P P P P P Place of worship P P P P P P P P P-ACC AirportCommercial 1 Other Commercial Heavy Commercial- Industrial Exempt from local regulation in all districts Permitted in all districts Please see Section 3.10 for regulations Conditional in all districts 23Draft APPENDIX C USES and DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS C-Non-Residential 4 South Burlington Land Development Regulations Effective June 27, 2016 City Center FBC District NON-RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS C1 R12 C1 R15 C1- AUTO C1-AIR C1-LR AR SW IO C2 IC AIR AIR-IND AirportCommercial 1 Other Commercial Heavy Commercial- Industrial Recreation paths Skilled nursing facility C C C C C C Social services C C C C C C C Commercial & Industrial Uses Adult use Agriculture & construction equipment sales, service & rental P P Airport Uses P P Animal shelter C C P Artist production studio P P P P P Auto & motorcycle sales P P P Auto & motorcycle service & repair P P P Auto rental, with private accessory car wash & fueling P P P P P Bed & breakfast C C Cannabis dispensary (dispensing only)P P P P P P P-TO Cannabis dispensary (cultivation only)P P Car wash P Child care facility, licensed non-residential P P P P P P P P P P Commercial greenhouse PUD P P Commercial kennel, veterinary hospital and pet day care C C P P P P Commercial or public parking facility C C C C C C C C C Contractor or building trade facility P P P P Distribution and related storage, with >15% of GFA in office or other principal permitted use by same tenant C P P P Drive-through bank PUD PUD PUD PUD PUD See Article 8Permitted in all districts 24Draft APPENDIX C USES and DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS C-Non-Residential 5 South Burlington Land Development Regulations Effective June 27, 2016 City Center FBC District NON-RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS C1 R12 C1 R15 C1- AUTO C1-AIR C1-LR AR SW IO C2 IC AIR AIR-IND AirportCommercial 1 Other Commercial Heavy Commercial- Industrial Equipment service, repair & rental P P Family child care home, registered or licensed P P P P Financial institution P P P P P ACC P P Flight instruction P P P Hotel PUD PUD PUD C C C C Hotel, extended stay PUD PUD C C C C Indoor theater P P Indoor vehicle storage, maximum 10,000 square feet P-ACC Junk yard Light manufacturing PUD PUD P P P P Lumber and contractor’s yard P P P Manufacturing & assembly from previously prepared materials & components P P P P P PUD P P P P Mobile home, RV and boat sales, repair & service P P Motor freight terminal C P Office, general P P P P P P P PUD P P P Office, medical P P P P P P P PUD-TO P P-TO Personal or business service P P P P P(7)P P P (7)P P Pet grooming P P P P P P P P P Photocopy & printing shops, with accessory retail P P P P P P P P-ACC P P Printing & binding production facilities C P P P P Private providers of public services, including vehicle storage and maintenance P P P P Processing and storage P P P P P P Radio & television studio P P P C P P P 25Draft APPENDIX C USES and DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS C-Non-Residential 6 South Burlington Land Development Regulations Effective June 27, 2016 City Center FBC District NON-RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS C1 R12 C1 R15 C1- AUTO C1-AIR C1-LR AR SW IO C2 IC AIR AIR-IND AirportCommercial 1 Other Commercial Heavy Commercial- Industrial Recreation facility, indoor P P P P P P P P-ACC P P Recreation facility, outdoor C C C C C C C C C Research facility or laboratory P P P P P P P P P P P Restaurant, short order P P P P P P-ACC P-ACC P-ACC P P-ACC P-ACC Restaurant, standard P P P P P P P P P-ACC Retail sales P (8)P P P(8)P (7)P (7)P (7)P (7) P (9)P (8)P-ACC Retail warehouse outlet P P Sale, rental & repair of aircraft & related parts P P Seasonal Mobile Food Unit P P P P P P P P P Self-storage P ACC, P- Non-TO Service station C C Shopping center C C Taverns, night clubs & private clubs P P P P P P P P Transportation services P P Warehousing & distribution C C P P Wholesale establishments C C P P P Key and Notes to the Table above: (1) For all IA District Uses please refer to Section 7.01, Institutional and Agricultural District. "N" refers to the Institutional-Agricultural North sub-district. (2) R7 and SEQ-VC as classified as non-residential zoning districts, but are included in this table for purposes of efficiency (3) No minimum lot size for bed & breakfast in the SEQ-VC district PUD = Allowable within a Planned Unit Development ACC = Allowable as an accessory use TO = Allowable only in the Transit Overlay District (4) Permitted within a structure existing and approved for use as an 'educational facility' as of July 1, 2013. The structure existings as of July 1, 2013, may be expanded, P = Permitted Non-TO = Allowable only outside of the Transit Overlay District C = Conditional Use 26Draft APPENDIX C USES and DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS C-Non-Residential 7 South Burlington Land Development Regulations Effective June 27, 2016 City Center FBC District NON-RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS C1 R12 C1 R15 C1- AUTO C1-AIR C1-LR AR SW IO C2 IC AIR AIR-IND AirportCommercial 1 Other Commercial Heavy Commercial- Industrial (5) Educational support facilities in C1 are subject to the dimensional standards of the IA-North District. See Article 7. (11) Use is allowed only as an Educational Support Facility. See Section 7.01(E) (7) Use is limited to 5,000 SF GFA per tenant with a maximum 15,000 SF GFA total footprint for the building. Tenants shall have separate entries from one another and no direct passageways from one to another. (8) Use is limited to 15,000 SF GFA per tenant with a maximum 25,000 SF GFA total footprint for the building. Tenants shall have separate entries from one another and no direct passageways from one to another. (9) Use is limited to 30,000 SF GFA per tenant with a maximum 30,000 SF GFA total footprint for the building. Tenants shall have separate entries from one another and no direct passageways from one to another. (6) Use is limited to 3,000 SF GFA per tenant with a maximum 9,000 SF GFA total footprint for the building. Tenants shall have separate entries from one another and no direct passageways from one to another. (10) Use is restricted to not-for-profit organization whose primary purpose is the provision of educational or research services related to agriculture, horticulture, forestry, natural resource preservation, arts or recreation 27Draft Appendix G Bicycle Parking Examples Acceptable Not Acceptable Graphics used with permission. Credit: Association of Pedestrian and Bicycle Professionals, Essentials of Bike Parking, 2015 28Draft