Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - Planning Commission - 03/28/2017 SOUTH BURLINGTON PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES 28 MARCH 2017 The South Burlington Planning Commission held a regular meeting on Tuesday, 28 March 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, D. MacDonald, M. Ostby, A. Klugo ALSO PRESENT: P. Conner, Director of Planning & Zoning; C. LaRose, City Planner; S. Hilton, Intern; Sgt. D. Dubie, Police Department; J. Ladd, Human Resources; S. Murray, L. Ravin 1. Directions for emergency evacuation procedures from conference room: Ms. Louisos said this would be discussed under item #5. 2. Agenda: Additions, deletions or changes in order of agenda items: No changes were made to the Agenda. 3. Open to the public for items not related to the agenda: No issues were raised. 4. Planning Commissioner announcements and staff reports: Mr. Riehle: Attended the South Burlington Land Trust annual meeting. An issue regarding dog parks was raised. On the subject of dogs, Mr. Riehle checked out the new Hinesburg Road “dog spa” and found it magnificent and a nice addition to the community. Ms. Louisos: Noted the display of finalists for City Center public art competition. The staff report was deferred to the end of the meeting when Mr. Conner would be present. Ms. Louisos noted he was attending an airport meeting. 5. Overview of City Crisis Plan: Sgt. Dubie noted that he and Ms. Ladd are speaking to all committees regarding the city’s crisis plan. Each city department has a plan, including City Hall (a copy of the plan is posted in the conference room). The plan covers all types of crises (e.g., fire, an active shooter, medical emergency). If it becomes necessary to evacuate the building, people should assemble at the south side of the building. A staff person/Commission chair would be designated to be sure everyone is out. If there is fire at the bottom of the stairs, someone will be able to open the door to provide access to the back stairs. Someone will also be assigned to “sweep” the restrooms to be sure everyone is out. Ms. Ladd noted that people should not stop or congregate in front of the building because that is where emergency vehicles will have to be. Sgt. Dubie also noted that as of today, there is a defibrillator in the building. In the event of an active shooter, the options are 1) run; 2) hide; 3) fight, in that order. Ms. Louisos suggested a Commission discussion when everyone has had a chance to review the crisis plan. 6. Presentation of Dwelling Unit Sizes, Applicability to Land Development Regulations: Ms. LaRose introduced Sean Hilton, an intern in the Planning Department. Mr. Hilton said he is a St. Michael’s College junior who became interested in the city when he participated in the survey done by Professor Bolduc’s class. In looking at residential data, Mr. Hilton noticed that the square footage of condo units steadily increased from 1476 sq. ft. between 1985-95 to 1634 between 1995-2005 to 1789 between 2005-15. The same is true for the square footage of single family homes, which went from 2255 to 2681 to 2754. The largest decade of single family home construction in the city was in the 1950’s and 1960’s, and these are the smallest in size. Mr. Conner noted that the older and smaller homes can be two factors in affordability affordability. Mr. Hilton showed similar data for condominium units. Mr. Conner noted that the data used for this analysis is not available for apartment units because apartment buildings are assessed as a building, not as individual units. Ms. Louisos asked what a “carriage house” actually is. Mr. Conner said traditionally it is a house behind another house; however, today that term is applied to a house with shared ownership of land. Mr. Conner also noted that the trend is for 2/3 of housing being built to be multi-family and 1/3 single family. Historically, the opposite was true. Ms. Ostby said she would like to know the turnover rate in single family homes vs. multi-family homes. Mr. Gagnon noted that such figures would be skewed by the destruction of homes in the Chamberlin area which would not necessarily be qualified as “turnover.” The study is applicable as it can be used for incentivizing different housing types. It also plays a role in the TDR process. A graphic was shown of a sample TDR program indicating sending and receiving areas. Mr. Conner noted that there will be some upcoming discussion regarding TDRs and some decisions for the Commission to make. 7. Planned Unit Development and Master Plan Project, Phase II: Ms. Murray directed attention to the memo and packet sent to members which includes a working outline of proposed by-laws changes. These include 3 types of amendments: a. Housekeeping Amendments (for clarification) b. Recommendations regarding subdivision review, Master Plans (including a process), PUD development, etc. c. Southeast Quadrant (SEQ) Recommendations (possibly looking at how the various types of PUDs could be used in that area) Mr. Riehle asked whether the Cider Mill is considered a PUD. Ms. LaRose said it was built as a PUD (as was almost everything else in the city) because you can’t have more than one building on a lot without a PUD. There were also other waivers. However, it is questionable as to whether it meets the intention of a PUD. It probably wouldn’t be built today under the PUD regulations the city is hoping to have. South Village probably would. Ms. Murray stressed the intention to have standards for each type of PUD. Ms. Ostby asked about the possibility of a local market in a PUD. She also asked about the concept of density impact for non-residential development (e.g., Citizen Cider). Ms. Murray said different PUD types have different focal points such as a small business focus or a transit focus. Ms. Murray said that Mark Kane has been asked to look at current regulations for Form Based Code and for the SEQ and see what can be “borrowed” or consolidated. She added that the hope is to keep the Development Review Board involved, particularly with design standards because they are the ones who will have to work with the regulations. Ms. Murray also stressed the need to keep in mind what is economically viable. Mr. Macdonald asked where master planning fits in with Form Based Code and PUDs. Ms. Murray said Form Based Code is designed to be very inflexible in order to minimize the review process. A PUD is the opposite; it is a “bargaining process.” Mr. Klugo cautioned that when you get too descriptive, you remove the ability to be creative and things get very sterile. Ms. Murray said that’s why they define different types of PUDs and different standards for each. Mr. Klugo then asked when affordable housing is discussed in this context. He noted that there are all kinds of strategies being used around the country, and they are not necessarily tied into zoning. Ms. LaRose said there are many things that can be discussed including incentivizing smaller buildings. Ms. Murray added that you can’t expect developers to bear the full cost of affordable housing on their own. Mr. Klugo said it is really about diversity of housing stock, and that you also have to allow people to “live below their means,” possibly to save money for college, etc. Ms. Murray cited the lack of housing in the city for the ‘middle.” Ms. LaRose suggested members look at the report done by the original Affordable Housing Committee. It is on the city’s website. Mr. Conner said he liked the idea of setting an objective to work with the current Affordable Housing Committee and discuss how to strategically use the city’s investment. Ms. Ostby asked if there are things that a very profitable to developers so they can be successful but still be flexible. Ms. Murray said that conversation should be had with developers. She suggested that members begin to list things that are important and see how they can be used in a negotiated review. 8. Continued Review of Possible Amendments to Land Development Regulations and Official Map: h. Administration and Enforcement in Streamlining Planning Commission, DRB and Advisory Committee authorization, powers and duties and membership to refer to State law: Mr. Conner noted the recent question regarding open meeting law vs. deliberative session. He noted that the City Attorney had confirmed that a deliberative session was allowable, but this led staff to recommend a tidy‐up of these sections, to point directly to the boards’ governing authorizations – the City Charter and State Statutes. Mr. Gagnon asked why the requirement for Planning Commission members to be a South Burlington resident was crossed out. Mr. Conner said that he had proposed this as part of the overall tidy-up and pointing to the City Charter and State Statutes. The City Council could still determine to require residency for members. Mr. Conner emphasized that staff had no position on the matter, it was simply proposed as a tidy-up. Ms. Louisos cited the possibility of having someone on the Commission who owns a lot of land in the city but who lives elsewhere or the possibility of someone who moves out of the city midway through his/her term. Ms. LaRose cited the instance of a person who had served for 40 years on a committee but who had moved to an assisted living residence to be with his wife. In that case, the Council voted to keep him as a member. Mr. Klugo noted that that may be appropriate for certain committees, but felt that for the Commission, understanding the community as a resident was an important qualification. Mr. Gagnon agreed. Members decided to retain the residency requirement. i. Agricultural Use Amendments not related to Agricultural Enterprise: Ms. LaRose noted that this arose from the Sustainable Agriculture / Food Security Report. She explained the city’s limitations in light of state law which prohibits a community from regulating forms of agriculture on a farm site (off site is not protected). This amendment allows a food hub to happen within the state regulations. Products must be local products, and this is not for a full-time market. It is a place to store food. There can still be a special event farmer’s market. Members briefly discussed the issue of butchering on a food hub site and whether the same state law would apply. Mr. Conner noted that butchering is something the City can control under state law. Members asked that staff come back with wording to clarify the butchering issue. Mr. Klugo asked if there is another way (other than the 150% incentive) to incentivize without losing the potential for trees and shrubs. Mr. Gagnon noted this is specifically for a food hub and was agreed upon by the Commission. Mr. Klugo was particularly concerned with a transition between the building and the road. Members then reviewed some of the additions and changes from the discussion at the previous meeting. They liked the bicycle parking graphic and the language to allow bicycle parking to replace up to 25% of required parking. Members also considered Keith Epstein’s memo. Ms. LaRose suggested having Mr. Epstein talk with the Bike/Ped Committee to see if they want to change their numbers. Ms. Ravin noted a letter sent to Mr. Conner and the Commission requested the return of uses eliminated from the IA District zoning. These include: hospice (which is allowed in a PUD), group home (allowed as a conditional use), social services (allowed as a PUD), daycare/childcare facility (allowed as a conditional use), and research facility and/or lab (this already exists at the Forestry Research station and taking it out could make it a non-conforming use). Mr. Conner noted that in the “clean up,” staff took the more conservative view, but they are willing to re‐look at it and will bring back a recommendation. Members then reconsidered the heights of fences in a front yard. The regulation would allow up to 4 feet without DRB review and require anything over that (up to 8 feet) to have DRB review. Mr. Klugo said he wouldn’t allow anything over 8 feet in neighborhoods and fences should have a “see‐through” element. Members questioned whether higher fences could be allowed for a property with a large setback from the road. Mr. Klugo cited lot width as another consideration. Mr. Conner will bring back language in 2 weeks. Mr. Conner then raised the issue of the street connections in T3 (Barrett Street to San Remo Drive). He wondered if a more advantageous solution would be to make the right-of-way 20 feet on each side, which would still put less of a burden on property owners than the present condition. Members agreed. 9. Consider possible approval of Planning Commission report on draft Land Development Regulations and Official Map amendments and possible warning of public hearings on same: Members agreed to postpone this to the next meeting. 10. Minutes of 20 March 2017: Ms. Ostby noted the misspelling of her name. Mr. Gagnon moved to approve the Minutes of 20 March with the above correction. Mr. Riehle seconded. Motion passed 6-0 with Mr. Klugo abstaining. 11. Other Business: Mr. Conner noted he had attended the Airport meeting earlier this evening. Members then toured the evacuation route on their way out of the building. As there was no further business to come before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned by common consent at 10:10 p.m. _________________________________ Published by ClerkBase ©2019 by Clerkbase. No Claim to Original Government Works. 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburl.com TO: South Burlington Planning Commission FROM: Paul Conner, Director of Planning & Zoning SUBJECT: PC Meeting Packet for March 28, 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. Presentation of dwelling unit sizes, applicability to LDRs, Sean Hilton, planning intern (7:25 pm) Our intern from this winter will be giving the Commission an overview of research he’s done into housing unit sizes in South Burlington, and their possible applicability in updates to the Land Development Regulations 6. Planned Unit Development & Master Plan Project, Phase II: Sharon Murray & Mark Kane (7:40 pm) See attached memo & documents 7. Continue review of possible amendments to Land Development Regulations and Official Map (8:25 pm) For this week’s meeting, we’ve included the EXACT SAME memo and documents from this past week’s meeting, so that you can continue your work where you left off. Cathyann has provided some updated language for the bike parking that you had requested (allowing auto parking to be reduced when bike parking is put in. If you’d like to look it over, the updated text is in yellow highlight starting on the next page). We will bring the rest of the revisions that you requested this week to you for your review on Tuesday, as they were minor. 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 (8:50 pm) Staff will bring a draft report for your consideration to the meeting. If the Commission elects to warn a public hearing, possible dates could include April 25th or May 9th. 9. Meeting Minutes –March 20 (8:55 pm) 10. Other Business (9:00 pm) 11. Adjourn (9:02 pm) 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. 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. March 22, 2017 UPDATE: At its meeting on March 22, 2017, the PC asked Staff to include language which would allow for a decrease in required parking in exchange for bicycle parking, as exemplified in the Los Angeles and Portland codes. This is reflected below. 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. 13.01 Off Street Parking and Loading ……….. Notes applicable to Tables 13-1 through 13-6: ……… 6. Bicycle parking may substitute for up to 25% of required parking. For every five required bicycle parking spaces that meet the short or longterm bicycle parking standards, the motor vehicle parking requirement is reduced by one space. Existing parking may be converted to take advantage of this provision 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 10. (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; (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. (vi) Where existing vehicle parking is replaced with bicycle parking in accordance with Section 13.01 note 6, bicycle parking must still meet the standards herein and shall be safely separated from vehicle parking spaces using striping, bollards, islands or other similar measures deemed adequate by the reviewing party. (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. 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 Meeting Memo To: South Burlington Planning Commission From: Sharon Murray, AICP Front Porch Community Planning & Design Date: March 22, 2017 Re: PUD Project, Phase II—LDR Amendments: Draft Outline __________________________________________________________ Attached for your review is an outline of proposed LDR amendments for discussion at our meeting and work session on Tuesday, March 28th. This was developed based on a technical review of the current regulations, related Phase I report recommendations, and recent meetings with staff and the DRB. Our intent is to work with the PC and staff to integrate new PUD provisions into the existing LDRs – and not simply add on a new set of regulations. This more surgical approach is broken into four parts under the attached outline, reflecting proposed areas of work for discussion. Housekeeping Amendments (Modifications, Waivers, Exceptions) Currently under the LDRs, PUDs are used primarily as a tool to waive underlying zoning requirements, as applied to new subdivisions and development. Given the intent of this project – to more specifically define PUDs as types of development, and associated standards for each – the use of PUD as a waiver tool will come with more restrictions (and guidance). This suggests the need to also review other provisions under the LDRs that allow the DRB to grant dimensional modifications or waivers, as recommended in the Phase I Report, given that these may be more heavily relied on in the future, particularly for development that doesn’t trigger or require PUD review. In discussions with staff and the DRB, the LDR sections listed were recommended for further clarification with regard to their application, the review process, and associated standards of review. Height waivers under Section 3.07 were identified as a particular concern—as applied, they effectively eliminate district height requirements and establish new setback requirements. Staff also suggested referencing allowed exceptions, modifications and waivers under each section (by topic) as currently included under the LDRs, rather than consolidating these into a single section. A new section is proposed under Article 14 (Site Plan & Conditional Use Review), which would clarify DRB authority under Chapter 117 (§§ 4414, 4469) to grant variances and waivers, as applied largely to nonconformities and development on existing lots, and also to clarify relevant review processes (variance, site plan, conditional use review). In addition to district height requirements, we also discussed the need to review other underlying zoning district dimensional requirements that clearly don’t fit with established patterns of development, for example as currently waived for lots in existence prior to February 28, 1974, but this falls outside of our current scope of work. Subdivision, Master Plan, Planned Unit Development Amendments This represents the heart of the current project – to clarify the relationship between subdivision, master plan and PUD bylaws, currently are included under Article 15 (Subdivision & Planned Unit Development Review) – and to update or develop associated standards for each. At some point subdivision and PUD provisions were consolidated, given the stated purpose of PUDs to “provide relief from the strict dimensional standards for individual lots in these regulations.” As proposed under the attached, the intent is to: • redraft (and reorganize) Article 15, to redefine and clarify the purpose of subdivision regulations (per §§ 4418, 4463) and master plans (as may be required for larger, phased development), and associated standards of review for each; and to • develop a new “Planned Unit Development” article (XX) that is specific to and more graphically illustrates the standards for different types of planned unit development. The PUD article will reference new statutory requirements relevant to planned unit development (§ 4417), and clearly define the intent, allowed PUD types, how, where and when each may be considered (e.g., triggers, zoning districts), and associated standards of review. This article will also address related requirements (e.g., in relation to the official map, CIP, impact fees) and development incentives – to include existing density bonuses, allowed modifications, and potentially new set of incentives in support of public dedications or desired amenities. Master plan provisions, as currently included under Article 15 – and referenced elsewhere under the LDRs, as master or “regulating” plans, depending on the context – will be reviewed and updated to clarify their intended use, application and associated standards of review, particularly for larger planned or phased developments that involve public-private partnerships for the provision of infrastructure and public facilities. Vesting and development agreement provisions will also be considered in this context. No significant changes to existing DRB subdivision or PUD review processes are proposed, except to incorporate pre-application meetings (with staff, the DRB, the neighborhood) in advance of the formal review process, as part of a more negotiated PUD review. We also propose that related PUD design standards and guidance: • include or incorporate existing design guidance under the LDRs as appropriate (e.g., with regard to street and open/civic space types); that • related design guidance be included in the appendices (or as a separate document, incorporated by reference), as applicable under several sections of the regulations; and that • more technical public works or engineering standards, which may be updated from time to time, instead be incorporated in the LDRs by reference to forego the need for associated bylaw amendments (subject to legal review, as suggested by staff). City Center FBCD and SEQ (the baby in the bathwater?) The third area of consideration under the draft outline is a review of proposed master plan and PUD provisions in relation to master (or regulating) plans as currently referenced under Articles 8 (City Center Form Based Code District) and Article 9 (Southeast Quadrant), and in relation to more extensive SEQ subdistrict design standards. Both of these articles, developed at different times for different purposes, clearly reflect a significant amount of thought and effort. District standards under each reference master and “regulating” plans (from the FBC lexicon) – a detailed master plan that not only guides but regulates subsequent development (potentially amending underlying zoning, similar to a PUD). Associated considerations, for further discussion, include: • Defining “master plan” with regard to its application under the City Center FBC (under Section 8.15, reserved) – as a variation of a master plan as redefined under Article 15, or something completely different, as applied in this context. • Reviewing master and regulating plans as referenced under SEQ provisions, for consistency with new master plan requirements under Article 15. SEQ subdistrict design standards under Article 9 more directly reflect common PUD standards, and established the basis for South Village – one of the best examples of planned, phased development in South Burlington to date. At least three PUD types identified in the Phase I Report could be applied, largely to the same effect, in the SEQ. At minimum it’s recommended that we review SEQ subdistrict standards for incorporation under related PUD standards (e.g., for conservation design, planned agricultural development, and/or traditional neighborhood development). Whether these PUD types could instead substitute for and replace current SEQ standards is a subject for more discussion, with regard to whether this type of regulatory consistency is needed or appropriate. It is suggested, as noted above, that all related design standards under the LDRs be compiled and consolidated into bylaw appendices or a separate design guide. Technical Edits (the details) This last task involves making sure that new provisions under updated regulations are consistently applied as referenced throughout the LDRs – to include updating PUD references under relevant zoning districts, updating references to “modifications” “waivers” “master plans” and PUDs throughout the LDRs, and updating or adding definitions (under Section 2.02) as needed. Lots to consider as we get started! Look forward to seeing you all on Tuesday – LDR AMENDMENTS: WORKING OUTLINE [Discussion Draft 3/28/17] South Burlington PUD Project, Phase II Housekeeping Amendments (Modifications, Waivers, Exceptions) Sections identified for review, clarification (re application, standards, exceptions): 2.02 Definitions (as needed) 3.06 Setbacks and Buffers 3.07 Height of Structures 3.11 Nonconformities 10.03 Scenic Protection Overlay District 13.01 Off-Street Parking and Loading 14.07 Specific Review Standards 15.12 Roadway Standards 17.01 General Provisions (variances, as incorporated by reference) Section to be added: 14.12 Variances, Modifications and Waivers (clarify review processes) Subdivision, Master Plan, Planned Unit Development Amendments 15 Subdivision Review [Redraft] 15.01 Authority and Purpose 15.02 Required Review [Classification, Coordination] 15.03 Lot Line Adjustments 15.04 Subdivision Review Process [Flow Chart, Application Requirements] 15.05 Sketch Plan Review [Pre-application review, meetings] 15.06 Master Plan Review [Phased Development] 15.07 Preliminary Subdivision Review 15.08 Final Subdivision Review 15.09 Plat Recording Requirements 15.10 Filing Requirements [As-Built, Legal, Financial] 15.11 Subdivision Revisions, Amendments 15.12 General Standards 15.13 Resource Protection Standards 15.14 Open Space Standards 15.15 Transportation System Standards 15.16 Facility and Utility Standards *Include related guidance (e.g., housing types, open/civic space types, street types) that may also apply to other forms of subdivision, development in appendices *Include technical standards/specifications in separate publication, for incorporation by reference XX Planned Unit Development [Add, Redraft] XX.01 Authority and Purpose XX.02 Applicability [Floating Zone, Zoning Districts] XX.03 PUD Review [Application Requirements, Review Process, Modifications] XX.03 PUD Types, Classification XX.04 General Standards [Density Calculations, Requirements, Incentives] XX.05 Planned Conservation Development [Illustrated Standards] XX.06 Planned Agricultural Development [“ “] XX.07 Planned Residential Development [“ “] XX.08 Planned Campus/Park Development [“ “] XX.09 Planned Neighborhood, Neighborhood Commercial, Transit-Oriented Development [“ “] XX.10 Planned Infill and Redevelopment [“ “] *Define purpose/intent, application, specific illustrated standards for each type of PUD noted *Include PUD standards by type in summary table(s) *Include related guidance (e.g., housing types, open/civic space types, street types) that may also apply to other forms of subdivision, development in appendices or separate PUD Guide *Include technical standards/specifications in separate publication(s), for incorporation by reference. CCFBC, SEQ Districts Article 8 City Center Form Based Code District 8.15 City Center FBC Master Plan Review and Approval [Add] Article 9 Southeast Quadrant *Reference/substitute subdivision, PUD street types, references to regulating/master plans etc. for current standards, e.g., under: 9.07 Regulating Plans [consider in developing Master Plan, Subdivision, PUD standards] 9.08 NRT, NR, NRN Subdistricts; Specific Standards [consider in developing PUD standards] 9.09 VR Subdistrict; Specific Standards [consider in developing PUD standards] 9.10 VC Subdistrict: Specific Standards [consider in developing PUD standards] 9.11 Supplemental Standards for Arterial and Collector Streets Technical Edits Review/Update Zoning District PUD References *Incorporate allowed/required PUD types by reference – e.g., as currently referenced under: 4.01(F) Residential 1 District 4.02(F) Residential 2 District 4.05(C) Residential 12 District 6.05(A) Industrial and Airport Districts *Add references, by PUD type, under other zoning districts (Articles 4 –7, 10) as appropriate * Update other references to planned unit development, master plans, regulating plans throughout the LDRs * Amend/add definitions as needed (Section 2.02) 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 SOUTH BURLINGTON PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES 20 MARCH 2017 1 The South Burlington Planning Commission held a special meeting on Monday, March 20, 2017, at 12:00 p.m., in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset Street. MEMBERS PRESENT: T. Harrington, T. Riehle, B. Gagnon, M. Ostby, D. MacDonald ALSO PRESENT: P. Conner, Director Planning & Zoning, T. Mckenzie, K. Braverman, C. Snyder, A. Gill 1. Agenda: Additions, deletions or changes in order of agenda items (12:00 pm) No changes made 2. Open to the public for items not related to the agenda (12:01 pm) No public input 3. Consider request for a “minor change” to the Official Map, Mary Street / Market Street, Chris Snyder of Snyder-Braverman (12:02 pm) Discussion began with Mr. Conner introducing the application for a minor change to the official map from Snyder-Braverman. Mr. Conner explained that they requested that the future alignment of Mary Street, from its existing terminus to Market Street, be located entirely on the property they control. The alignment was shown straddling the boundary of their property and that of the adjacent property to the west. Mr. Conner clarified that the Planning & Zoning staff recommended accepting the change. Ms. Harrington inquired about the effect on South of Market Street. Mr. Conner proposed handling that issue at a later date. Commissioners agreed. Ms. Otsby inquired about the land owners to the west approving the change of route. Mr. Mckenzie, property owner of the Synder-Braverman project area, clarified that the issue was brought to them by landowners (Judge Properties) to the west to make change. Ms. Otsby asked about ongoing access to school. Mr. Mckenzie replied that the school will always be given access to the road as long as it remains a school Mr. Mckenzie clarified also that the change in the location of proposed road has affected their plans to develop the land, but decided to proceed. Motion by Mr. Gagnon to approve the minor change on the official map as presented. Motion seconded by Ms. Ostby. Motion passed 5-0. 4. Consider request for a “minor change” to the Official Map, Eldridge Street / Old Farm Road, Andrew Gill, O’Brien Brothers Agency (12:12 pm) Discussion began with Mr. Conner introducing the application for a minor change to the official map from O’Brien Brothers Agency. Mr. Conner stated O’Brien Agency was requesting that the Old Farm Road connection for this planned street be moved north as depicted on their approved Master Plan. At that time, the alignment was shown connecting to Old Farm Road south of the barn. Mr. Conner noted that Planning & Zoning staff support the change. Mr. Gill discussed the potential safety concerns with the current configuration of Old Farm Road in relation to newly planned connection road. Mr. Gill said that the present application to the 2 Development Review Board showed a planned connection, but not yet a physical street connection because of safety issues associated with adding traffic to the Old Farm Road / Kimball Ave intersection under its current configuration. Mr. Gill explained the changes would occur in phases of the future proposed project. Ms. Ostby questioned the connections on other side of Old Farm Road. Mr. Gill clarified that the other properties that may be affected also owned by O’Brien Brothers. Ms. Ostby questioned the effect cuthrough roads would have on residential neighborhoods and the potential problems that may ensue. Mr. Conner noted that is time there is no official connection. Mr. Conner displayed another road that may be established through a more commercial area to ease this concern. Mr. Riehle asked for clarification on where access roads may be. Mr. Conner clarified that one would replace Old Farm Road and the other could be a connection to Tilley Drive. Mr. Riehle then questioned how curb cuts would affect biking since it is an outline for the overall plan. Motion to approve the minor change on the official map as presented, with the additional clarification that the planned street connection would be depicted as connecting all the way to Old Farm Road by Mr. Macdonald. Motion seconded by Mr. Riehle and approved 5-0. 5. Other Business (12:22 pm) No other business 6. Adjourn (12:22 pm) ------------------------------------------ Clerk