Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - Planning Commission - 09/12/2017 SOUTH BURLINGTON PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES 13 JUNE 2017 The South Burlington Planning Commission held a regular meeting on Tuesday, 12 September 2017, at 7:00 p.m., in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset Street. MEMBERS PRESENT: J. Louisos, Chair; B. Gagnon, A. Klugo, T. Riehle, D. Macdonald, M. Ostby ALSO PRESENT: P. Conner, Director of Planning and Zoning; C. LaRose, City Planner; B. Bouchard, J. Weith, T. Harrington, L. Ravin 1. Directions on emergency evacuation procedures from conference room: Ms. Louisos provided directions on emergency evacuation procedures. 2. Agenda: Additions, deletions or changes in order of agenda items: Ms. Louisos asked to add to Other Business a mini-follow-up regarding UVM properties. 3. Open to the public for items not related to the Agenda: No issues were raised. 4. Planning Commissioner announcements and staff report: Ms. Ostby noted that in conversations with Sandra Dooley and the Affordable Housing Committee they have discussed issues with the way “congregate housing” is defined in the LDRs. In driving around the city, Ms. Dooley had pointed out the Country Park development which is very large and yet counts as zero density. They were even allowed to add more density. Ms. Ostby said Ms. Dooley has offered to redo a definition of congregate housing. Ms. Ostby also noted a piece of land near the end of Duval Street which is members of the Committee felt could be considered as a Habitat for Humanity development. Mr. Conner noted that piece of land was purchased with Federal Land and Water Conservation Funds, and so are potential obstacles for development as it was purchased with federal money to be used for parkland. It is also in the 65 dbl noise zone. Mr. Riehle said he met with Ted Palmer who oversees many units of low‐income housing, and they talked about a “sense of place.” He added that it seems that low‐income and affordable housing is on a “low rung.” He cited the area behind Shaw’s off Shelburne Road where there is no real sense of place. Mr. Conner: The City Council has approved the moving of the Library to UMall on a temporary basis. The Council also signed a purchase/lease agreement for land on Market Street adjacent to the senior housing building for a potential site for a new City Hall and Community Library. Attended the Northern New England Chapter of the American Planning Association meeting in Manchester, NH, and hosted a session on “downtown development” with a focus on restaurants. The owner of Due in Brattleboro said restaurants have become the driver of downtown traffic as retail is not doing this anymore. To address this concern, he had suggested a subsidy to get retail back. 5. Initial discussion on request to allow medical offices in the Industrial-Open Space district outside of the Transit Overlay District: Mr. Bouchard asked the Commission to consider this use. He understood that the city had taken criticism regarding medical uses on Tilley Drive. He also noted there are other private medical uses outside of the Transit Overlay District (e.g. Eye Laser). He felt that private medical uses differ from “medical centers.” Mr. Macdonald asked why there are currently some medical offices outside the Transit Overlay District. Mr. Conner said they predate that district. He also explained how bus routes are considered and determined. Mr. Gagnon suggested that a solution may involve a privately-run system of smaller, van-like buses and asked about a requirement for businesses to fund. Mr. Conner noted that from his part work, drivers are the biggest single cost‐driver. He said that there would have to be an assurance that this isn’t a one‐year commitment which then disappears and leaves people with no options. Mr. Conner noted that this part of the city has been moving toward high quality office uses. There is a staff concern that there will not be space left for manufacturing uses and other “balancing” uses. Mr. Riehle felt that the people who put the Comprehensive Plan together spent a lot of time deciding on those uses. He said he was leaning toward saying “no” to this request. Mr. Gagnon asked if certain types of medical uses can be defined, specifically those for people who traditionally do or don’t need transit (e.g., orthopedic). Mr. Klugo asked if there has been consideration as to whether the city wants medical uses there. If so, what would the density look like. Ms. Ostby observed that north of 189 seems like a completely different area than south of it. Mr. Klugo said that Tilley Drive has a lot of underutilized property. Ms. Louisos said the area under discussion seems very different to her than the Tilley Drive area. It is not on the bus route. She noted that she was on the Planning Commission when the Transit Overlay District was created, and there had been public complaints regarding medical offices that were not accessible. Mr. Conner identified the area under consideration on the map. He pointed out the residential area south of it as well. Mr. Gagnon also noted that the Commission established a work plan, and this was not part of that plan. He felt that if the Commission takes the up in a serious way, it would have to “bump” something else. Mr. Klugo also noted the citizen Cider experience which took up considerable time and didn’t come to pass. Mr. Conner suggested that if the Commission wants to explore this, he suggested they spend time looking at impacts and also the options to bring transit to the area. He felt this would be a very involved discussion. Ms. Ravin, former chair of the Natural Resources Committee, noted that Committee reviewed proposals when Tilley Drive development was being considered. She said they didn’t know these would be medical uses. They did note that every parcel was completely covered, with no open space. They were told by developers that they “thought” they needed all the parking, even though it was more than required. They also discussed a sidewalk to the main road for people using transit. At that time, people treated the Natural Resources Commission’s concerns as “naïve” and “annoying.” Staff said they couldn’t even talk about transit because they were a natural resources board and not a transit board. Then, as soon as medical offices went it there, there were transit issues, and there were no sidewalks in the original plans. Ms. Ravin said that land use and transportation are linked. You can’t have medical care if you can’t get there. She also noted that a lot of medical offices that used to be on Dorset Street, where there is public transit, moved to Tilley Drive where there was no transit. Mr. Riehle then moved to consider adding to the request for medical offices in the Industrial-Open Space District outside the Transit Overlay District to the work plan and to have staff bring information to the next meeting to enable the Commission to make that decision. Mr. Klugo seconded. In the vote that followed, the motion was defeated 2-4 with Ms. Louisos, Ms. Ostby and Messrs. MacDonald and Riehle voting against. 6. Review of Draft Urban Design Overlay District Standards: Mr. Conner said staff was asked to follow‐up for the section from Shaw’s north. People from Burlington felt that what they are seeing there is in scale with what is appropriate for a busy road that is an entry point to both communities. Mr. Conner also noted that there has been an Act 250 decision regarding the Larkin development on Shelburne Road. He has not yet had a chance to review that decision. Ms. LaRose noted there was concern from developers about counting such things as elevator shafts as “height.” Elevator shafts will not be counted. Regarding landscaping, Ms. LaRose said they have addressed the question of “buffer landscaping” using up all the landscaping budget. The regulations will now require on‐site landscaping in addition to “buffer landscaping.” If a building is to be 50 feet back from the right-of-way, there will have to be some landscaping up front. Members then considered the area where McDonalds is located and questioned whether that one-story building should drive what goes in around it. Mr. Klugo said that is not his intention. Ms. Ostby said she opposes anything 5 stories high on the west side of Shelburne as it would block sunsets, etc. from the east side. Mr. Gagnon said that would depend on the nodes. He felt there are some intersections where that would be OK. Ms. Ostby said it isn’t only seeing the Lake, it’s the open sky. Mr. Klugo said if the nodes are a quarter of a mile apart, the 5 story buildings would be that far apart. That was the intent. It is also a way to get people to slow down and to have more pedestrian involvement. Mr. Riehle said they have to visualize where there is no view anyway. Ms. Ostby cited a resident on a first floor who can now see sunsets and the mountains. Mr. Klugo said you have to consider the total experience and not just an individual owner. Mr. Conner noted that Shelburne Rd. is a primary area for jobs, etc., because it has sewer, transit and other necessities to support employment. There are points on that road that have been under-utilized. Ms. LaRose said staff will continue to work on this. 7. Review Recommendations from Williston Road Network Study: Mr. Conner noted the map that resulted from David Saladino’s presentation. The feeling is that the road network will work even if Marcotte School remains for many years. Developers were asked what makes for a good development block. There was a lot of support for transit but also concern with converting parking into a roadway (Mr. Conner showed that location). Mr. Conner said that in Form Based Code, there are primary and secondary streets. With a primary street, 80% of the street needs to have buildings on it; with a secondary street, that figure is 50%. The consultant has suggested adding 2 more tiers: a third tier (Mr. Conner showed the location) with a formalized curb on both sides with no requirement for buildings, and a fourth tier just for interconnections between buildings. Mr. Conner noted that a lot of property owners did not to “just throw in” a median on Williston Road. They were supportive of traffic lights to create a safe place for left turns and then working on closing some curb cuts. Mr. Klugo cited the need for trees on Williston Road. Mr. Conner showed the location of a secondary connection road which property owners support. As a next step, staff would like to share this with the South Burlington Business Association. Then they can take the information and draft amendments to the code. The goal is to use the finished product to amend the official city map. 8. Possible warning of public hearing and approval of draft report on amendment to allow Radio/TV studios in the Industrial-Open Space district: Ms. Ostby asked about apparatus behind the buildings. Mr. Conner said that is already addressed in the regulations. Mr. Gagnon moved to warn allowing Radio/TV Studio Use in the Industrial-Open Space district for public hearing on 10 October 2017, 7 p.m. Mr. MacDonald seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Mr. Gagnon then moved to accept the draft Report from staff. Mr. Klugo seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 9. Commission feedback on FY 2019-28 City Capital Improvement Plan: Mr. Conner explained how impact fees are used and where in the process they are used. Mr. Riehle asked about the soccer field at South Village. Mr. Conner said the Recreation Department is thrilled with that. He explained the arrangement with South Village and that the number of units now triggers design and construction of the field. Mr. Riehle noted the improvement at the Van Sicklen intersection and asked whether sidewalks are included. Mr. Conner said now is the time to start adding such things. Mr. Riehle said a lot of people are walking there, and that neighborhood is disconnected from the rest of the city. He felt a sidewalk should be included in any work on the intersection. Ms. Ostby asked about redoing the Swift/Spear intersection. Mr. Conner said design will be done is this fiscal year with construction in 2020. Ms. Ostby noted that the sewer line ends at 1331 Spear St. She thought that while construction is going on, the city could consider extending that line. Mr. Conner said Spear Street reconstruction is not due until 2023, but he would talk with Public Works about that. Mr. Conner noted that he met with the Bike/Ped Committee recently regarding the number of budgets involved. They have also been asked to maintain a “human resources” budget addressing how to project future needs. This all determines how bike/ped projects get done: components are funds to construct and staffing to oversee design and construction. Mr. Riehle felt that impact fees should be reconsidered. Mr. Conner noted that there is the ability to vary fees (e.g., for affordable housing). 10. Minutes of 22 August 2017: Mr. Gagnon moved to approve the Minutes of 22 August as written. Mr. MacDonald seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 11. Other Business: a. Velco 45-day pre-application notice Queen City Park (South Burlington) and East Avenue (Burlington) substation modification: Mr. Conner explained the work being done. In South Burlington the work will address safety standards by expanding the fencing to keep squirrels out. There will be a public meeting in Burlington on 19 October on both projects. Abutters have been notified. b. UVM Land update: Ms. Louisos noted that the Commission was copied on a Land Trust proposal to UVM. VUM is now evaluating proposals. Staff made no recommendations but suggested it be looked at in connection with other UVM land and surrounding zoning. As there was no further business to come before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned by common consent at 9:32 p.m. Minutes approved by the Planning Commission October 24, 2017 Monica Ostby, Clerk Published by ClerkBase ©2019 by Clerkbase. No Claim to Original Government Works. 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburl.com TO: South Burlington Planning Commission FROM: Paul Conner, Director of Planning & Zoning SUBJECT: PC Staff Memo DATE: September 12, 2017 Planning Commission meeting 1. Directions on emergency evacuation procedures from conference room (7:00 pm) 2. Agenda: Additions, deletions or changes in order of agenda items (7:01 pm) 3. Open to the public for items not related to the agenda (7:02 pm) 4. Planning Commissioner announcements and staff report (7:10 pm) 5. Initial discussion – request to allow medical offices in the Industrial-Open Space District outside of the Transit Overlay District, Bob Bouchard, Pizzagalli Properties (7:15 pm) Please see the attached request and staff memo. 6. Review of draft Urban Design Overlay District Standards - Shelburne Road, Williston Road (7:30 pm) The Commission at its last meeting provided feedback to staff regarding heights of buildings. Enclosed with your packet is a more complete draft of the text to see the Standards in context. 7. Review of recommendations from Williston Road Network Study (8:00 pm) Last month, the Commission hosted a presentation & discussion of the Williston Road Network Study results. Among the recommendations were some possible revisions to the planned streets in the City Center FBC area, and importantly, potential changes to how buildings in the FBC relate to planned streets of various tiers. The full report from the 8/8 PC meeting includes a more detailed discussion of each of the street tiers. Staff will present these at the meeting and host a Commission discussion of these at the meeting. Enclosed with the packet is the map showing these tiers. 8. Possible warning of public hearing and approval of draft report on amendment to allow Radio / TV Studio in the Industrial-Open Space District (8:35 pm) See the enclosed draft amendment and PC report, per the PC’s request to take action on this item by this meeting. Staff recommends the public hearing be warned for Tuesday, October 10th at 7 pm. 9. Commission feedback on FY 2019-28 City Capital Improvement Program (8:40 pm) At the last PC meeting, Commissioners asked to keep this item on the agenda for this meeting in the event that there was feedback to be provided to staff in their development of the first draft of the 2018 CIP. 10. Meeting Minutes (8:55 pm) 11. Other Business (8:57 pm) a. Velco 45-Day pre-application notice – Queen City Park (South Burlington) & East Ave (Burlington) substation modifications 12. Adjourn (9:01 pm) Respectfully submitted, Paul Conner, AICP, Director of Planning & Zoning 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: Initial Zoning Amendment Request to allow medical offices in the I/O district, Bob Bouchard, Pizzagalli Properties DATE: September 12, 2017 Planning Commission meeting Enclosed with your packet is a request from Bob Bouchard of Pizzagalli Properties for the Commission to consider allowing medical offices throughout the Industrial & Open Space District. Currently, Medical Offices are allowed ONLY in parts of the I/O District that are ALSO within the City’s Transit Overlay District. In other words, Medical Offices are permitted on the north side of the Interstate (including on Tilley Drive) but are Prohibited on the south side. This is an initial zoning change request only; the Commission is invited to have a brief discussion and to determine whether to give the request further consideration within its annual work plan. A brief background: The Transit Overlay District was put into place in 2011. It was written to assure that certain land uses, namely medical offices, congregate housing, social services, and cannabis dispensaries, would only be allowed in areas served by CCTA fixed route bus services. These particular uses have more residents or clients who are dependent on public transit than others. In the 2000s, when Tilley Drive was built out, it was initially expected by all parties to house general offices. In the subsequent years, however, it became host to UVM Medical Center outpatient facilities and private practitioners who wished to locate nearby. This area was not served by transit at the time and the Interfaith Action Coalition brought a great deal of attention to the problem of having no transit service to these medical facilities. The “fix” has been to have a special shuttle, requested 24-hours in advance, that provides access to those who make the request. The City participates in a working group that meets twice annually alongside CCTA (not Green Mountain Transit), the Regional Planning Commission, SSTA, the UMV Medical Center, and the Interfaith Action Coalition to monitor and try to improve the services of this shuttle. It’s an imperfect solution but has been better than no service. As part of its review of this whole situation, the Planning Commission elected to put the Transit Overlay District into place, so that future medical offices would be located near fixed-route transit service. Should the fixed route service areas change, the overlay district boundaries could also be modified. Staff notes that there are a handful of medical office facilities currently operating south of I-89. These were approved prior to the enactment of the Transit Overlay District and so are grandfathered in. Next steps & evaluation Staff encourages the Commission to review the request by Mr. Bouchard at this time as to whether it will take up the issue in its current and established work plan. If the Commission decides to take up the subject in the current work plan, staff urges you to proceed with caution and due consideration for the purpose of the overlay district. The fixed route transit services do not extend south of I-89 at this time and staff is not aware of any plans for this to change. Staff is happy to elaborate on this history as well as to discuss other aspects of this request should the Commission elect to take it up, but again, staff urges caution. South Burlington Planning Commission Urban Overlay District Text for discussion September 12, 2017 Article 10 Overlay Districts 10.06 Urban Design Overlay District A. Purpose. It is the purpose of the Urban Design Overlay District to recognize the impact of simple design principles and to reflect a design aesthetic that fosters accessibility and creates civic pride in the City’s most traveled areas and gateways, while furthering the stated goals of the City’s Comprehensive Plan. B. Comprehensive Plan. This section implements the community desires established in the City’s Comprehensive Plan. Specifically, the Plan desires that new development will occur in subject corridors. The corridors subject to the Urban Design Overlay District are encouraged within the Plan to use public transportation services, inspire pedestrian movement, and foster effective transitions to adjacent residential areas. More specifically yet, the Plan advocates for the creation of one or more nodes of concentrated development and public activity in these areas. C. Applicability. This section shall be implemented in accordance with the geography(ies) shown on the Overlay Districts Map contained in these Regulations. (1) New construction. (2) Substantial Rehabilitation (a) Authority to Continue. Nonconforming structures may be continued provided conditions in this Section are met. (b) Repair and Alterations. Repair and alterations may be performed on any nonconforming structure, provided they comply with the Code and with the following: (a) When the total area of alterations to the primary building façade, or to the building façade that is parallel to and oriented to the street, exceeds 35% of the total areas of such building façade, the alterations shall comply with the Building Standards described in the BES applicable to the Transect Zone (excluding build-to-zone and story requirements). For the purposes of this subsection, window and window casing replacement, painting, adding or removal of siding, and other similar changes shall not be considered alterations. For multi-tenant buildings, the standard shall apply separately for each tenant area where that tenant gross floor area exceeds 10,000 square feet. (b) Structural alterations involving the replacement, relocation, removal, or other similar changes to more than 50% of all load bearing wall / pillar elements of a building shall require compliance with all standards within these Regulations. (3) Nodes. These regulations recognize that some areas of a corridor serve or will serve as important connections, gateways, or areas of activity. As such, a more urban form is desired and, where noted, required and permitted. Site design and buildings within designated nodes shall provide a welcoming and safe street presence for all users. Nodes are listed as ‘primary’ and ‘secondary’, and are mapped and regulated accordingly. South Burlington Planning Commission Urban Overlay District Text for discussion September 12, 2017 D. Standards. Except where noted herein, the underlying dimensional standards, use, and other standards of the Zoning District shall still apply. (1) Entries. Subject properties must have at least one entry facing the primary road in the corridor. Any such entry shall: (a) Be an operable entrance, as defined in these Regulations. (b) Serve, architecturally, as a principal entry. This does not preclude additional principal entry doors; (c) Shall have a direct, separated walkway of at least 8 feet in width to the primary road. This may meander for design purposes, but must serve as a pedestrian-oriented access. (2) Glazing (a) First stories shall have a minimum of 40% glazing across the width of the building; a minimum of 75% of this shall be transparent. (b) In non-residential uses, first story glazing shall have a minimum height of 7 vertical feet. (c) For residential uses, first story glazing shall have a minimum height of 5 vertical feet. (d) Glazing associated with operable doors may count towards this requirement provided they are at minimum 75% transparent. (3) Dimensional Standards Height Setback Designated Primary Node Minimum 2 stories; Maximum 5 stories. Minimum 10 feet Designated Secondary Node Appearance of two stories at minimum. Buildings less than 6k sf gfa may be one story. Maximum 4 stories Minimum 10 feet All other properties Maximum 3 stories Minimum 20 feet For all properties, Floor-to-Floor Height First story 20' Max.; upper Stories 14' Max (a) No building shall be more than 2 stories taller than an adjacent building on the same side of the street within 100 feet. (b) No building shall be more than 1 story taller than shortest R4 building on adjacent property. Increases by 1 story for each 75’ of separation, up to allowable maximum. (c) Stories of buildings within the Urban Design Overlay District are defined as per Section 8.06(F) of these Regulations. (d) Section 8.06(G) of these regulations shall apply to rooftop elements of buildings within the Urban Design Overlay District. South Burlington Planning Commission Urban Overlay District Text for discussion September 12, 2017 (4) Landscaping Projects within the Urban Design Overlay District shall meet minimum landscaping requirements as per Section 13.06 of these Regulations. Projects are also subject to the following supplemental standards: (a) Landscaping which is required elsewhere in these Regulations to serve as a buffer between properties shall not count towards the minimum landscaping budget. (b) For buildings which are set back 50 feet or more from the front property line, at least 50% of the required landscaping shall be installed between the front building line and the front property line. £¤7 PinnacleDrLAURELHILLDR EXTDisclaimer:The accuracy of information presented is determined by its sources. Errors and omissions may exist. Questions of on-the-ground location can be resolved by site inspections and/or surveys by registered surveyor. This map is not sufficient for delineation of features on-the-ground. This map identifies the presence of features, and may indicate relationships between features, but is not a replacement for surveyed information or engineering studies. 0 900 1,800 2,700450Feet Legend Ü Map Prepared July 21, 2017FOR DISCUSSION ONLY Primary Node Secondary Node Urban Design Overlay District £¤2 Disclaimer:The accuracy of information presented is determined by its sources. Errors and omissions may exist. Questions of on-the-ground location can be resolved by site inspections and/or surveys by registered surveyor. This map is not sufficient for delineation of features on-the-ground. This map identifies the presence of features, and may indicate relationships between features, but is not a replacement for surveyed information or engineering studies. 0 360 720 1,080180Feet Legend Ü Map Prepared July 21, 2017FOR DISCUSSION ONLY Primary Node Secondary Node Urban Design Overlay DistrictWilliston Road Williston Road Corridor Plan –Short-Term Recommendations •Primary Street •Regional & local connectivity •Buildings shall front on street •Secondary Street •Local connectivity •Street frontage should be predominantly buildings •Tertiary Street •Access to destinations •Curbed & landscaped •Intended Cross-Lot Connection •Suggested alignments to maintain connectivity •Specific configuration flexible APPENDIX C USES and DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS C-Non-Residential 1 South Burlington Land Development Regulations 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 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 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 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 Permitted in all districts Conditional in all districts APPENDIX C USES and DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS C-Non-Residential 2 South Burlington Land Development Regulations 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 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 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 See Article 8 APPENDIX C USES and DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS C-Non-Residential 3 South Burlington Land Development Regulations 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 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 P 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 APPENDIX C USES and DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS C-Non-Residential 4 South Burlington Land Development Regulations 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 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: P = Permitted C = Conditional Use Non-TO = Allowable only outside of the Transit Overlay District (1) "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 (5) Educational support facilities in C1 are subject to the dimensional standards of the IA-North District. See Article 7. (12) Allowable only as a municipally-operated facility. (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 (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, PUD = Allowable within a Planned Unit Development ACC = Allowable as an accessory use TO = Allowable only in the Transit Overlay District 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburl.com South Burlington Planning Commission Proposed Land Development Regulations Amendment & Adoption Report Planning Commission Public Hearing ___________, 2017 In accordance with 24 V.S.A. §4441, the South Burlington Planning Commission has prepared the following report regarding the proposed amendments and adoption of the City’s Land Development Regulations. Outline of the Proposed Overall Amendments The South Burlington Planning Commission will hold a public hearing on Tuesday, _____________, 2017, at 7:00 pm, in the City Hall Conference Room, 575 Dorset Street, South Burlington, VT to consider the following amendments to the South Burlington Land Development Regulations: A. Add Radio and Television Studio as a Permitted Use in the Industrial & Open Space District Brief Description and Findings Concerning the Proposed Amendments The proposed amendments have been considered by the Planning Commission for their consistency with the text, goals, and objectives of the City of South Burlington’s Comprehensive Plan, adopted February 2, 2016. For each of the amendments, the Commission has addressed the following as enumerated under 24 VSA 4441(c): “…The report shall provide a brief explanation of the proposed bylaw, amendment, or repeal and shall include a statement of purpose as required for notice under section 4444 of this title, and shall include findings regarding how the proposal: (1) Conforms with or furthers the goals and policies contained in the municipal plan, including the effect of the proposal on the availability of safe and affordable housing. (2) Is compatible with the proposed future land uses and densities of the municipal plan. (3) Carries out, as applicable, any specific proposals for any planned community facilities.” A. Add Radio and Television Studio as a Permitted Use in the Industrial & Open Space District Brief explanation of the proposed bylaw 2 The proposed amendment would allow for radio and television studios to be located in the Industrial & Open Space District. Currently the use is allowed In the C1-R12, C1-R15, C1-Auto, Allen Road, Swift Street, Commercial 2, and Mixed Commercial-Industrial Districts. (1) Conforms with or furthers the goals and policies contained in the municipal plan, including the effect of the proposal on the availability of safe and affordable housing (2) Is compatible with the proposed future land uses and densities of the municipal plan. The proposed amendments are located within the “Northeast Quadrant” and “Southeast Quadrant” Planning Areas and the “Medium to Higher Intensity, Principally Non-Residential” Future Land Use District. Future Land Use for the Northeast Quadrant is described in part, as follows: “Future Land Use. The pattern of land use and development in the Northeast Quadrant has focused on businesses which require larger properties, can be compatible with the operations of an airport, and/or which may not be easily compatible with residential areas. Future use of land in developed areas should continue to focus on employers and ancillary services. It should also continue to emphasize uses that are less critical within the core of the City…” Comprehensive Plan p. 3-22 Future Land Use for the Southeast Quadrant is described in part, as follows: “Non-Residential Land Uses in the SEQ. While predominantly residential, the SEQ district also includes many non-residential land uses. These are found chiefly in the Industrial- Open Space (IO) Zoning District at the northeastern edge of the SEQ, but are also found at the Chittenden Cider Mill on Dorset Street, but throughout the district is a scattering of churches, schools, recreation areas, and home-based businesses. “Industrial-Open Space District. The Industrial-Open Space zoning district was intended originally to provide land for high-quality, large-lot industries and offices whose buildings and operations are consistent with a location in an environmentally healthy and visually sensitive area adjacent to residential neighborhoods. Recently, there have been significant concerns about the suitability of this district for uses such as warehousing that generate significant truck traffic.” Comprehensive Plan, p. 3-33. The Future Land Use District, further, is described as follows: “Medium to Higher Intensity, Principally Non-Residential. Intended to foster high quality jobs, these lands provide for medium to large scale industrial, educational, mechanical and office park environments, among other related uses. Their aesthetics should reflect quality design and promote South Burlington as a welcoming place to work and do business. Residential uses are largely discouraged. Land coverage provides for sufficient green infrastructure, and respect primary natural resources, with slightly relaxed controls for wider roadways, increased parking, and lot coverages. Multimodal transport services these areas. Development here should be respectful of lower intensity uses where they abut.” Comprehensive Plan p. 3-6. 3 The proposed change is consistent with the above descriptions. The proposed amendments will not affect the provision of safe and affordable housing. (3) Carries out, as applicable, any specific proposals for any planned community facilities. The proposed amendment would not have a direct impact on any planned community facilities. The City does plan to have additional roadways & bicycle/pedestrian facilities in the area. Safe access from properties by pedestrian to these planned facilities is maintained through requirements for direct, separated pedestrian links from buildings to the street. SOUTH BURLINGTON PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES 22 AUGUST 2017 1 The South Burlington Planning Commission held a regular meeting on Tuesday, 22 August 2017, at 7:00 p.m., in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset Street. MEMBERS PRESENT: B. Gagnon, Acting Chair; T. Riehle, D. Macdonald, A. Klugo ALSO PRESENT: P. Conner, Director of Planning & Zoning; B. Bouchard, T. Harrington, J. Weith 1. Directions on emergency evacuation procedure from conference room: The Chair provided directions on emergency evacuation in the event of an emergency. 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. Conner: An appeal has been filed of the administrative approval for the first new building in the Form Based Code area of City Center. The hearing is set for Thursday evening if a settlement can’t be reached before then. Construction has begun for a window in the upstairs conference room. 5. Review of Draft Urban Design Overlay Standards: Mr. Conner reviewed the history and noted that the Commission had wanted to see taller buildings at appropriate intersections which would have prominence over the in-between buildings. He showed a map with those intersections indicated. There would be three designations of “nodes” as follows: a. Primary Node: minimum of 2, maximum of 5 stories with a 10-foot setback b. Secondary Node: minimum of at least the appearance of 2 stories, maximum of 4 with a 10-foot setback c. All others: maximum of 3 stories with a 20-foot setback. Mr. Conner then identified the intersections on Shelburne Road where these standards would apply, as follows: 2 a. Proctor Avenue – secondary b. Farrell Street – primary c. Hannaford Drive/Laurel Hill – primary d. Fayette Road – primary (likely to be signalized in the future) e. Holmes Road/IDX Drive– primary f. Other end of IDX Drive/Harbor Bay Road – secondary g. Allen Road – secondary On Williston Road: a. Airport Road – secondary b. Kennedy Drive/Airport Parkway – primary Members felt this was a good starting point and addressed the Commission’s conversation. Mr. Conner said the next step will be to plug in the “particulars” such as doors, windows, heights, parking, etc. 6. Initial discussion of possible amendments to parking standards: Mr. Conner showed a short video related to parking issues, particularly how much usable space is dedicated to parking. He also noted that in South Burlington more space is dedicated to parking than to a building. There is, however, a provision in the LDRs which allows the DRB to waive up to 25% of required parking. Mr. Gagnon said he would favor incentives for less parking (e.g., more bike racks would allow for fewer car spaces). Mr. Klugo said that would incentivize the developer but not the public. He felt the Commission is requiring things that they are not sure will happen (e.g., showers) without empirical data. He cited incongruities in the city of Burlington. He felt the responsibility should be on the person building the building who won’t build more or less than they need. Mr. Gagnon said he liked the idea of having no minimums for parking. The question then raised was: what if a building has no parking and the public uses the neighboring building’s parking? Mr. Conner noted that some retailers want more parking than they need so there is always the appearance of available parking. Mr. Klugo noted that CVS has a store in Harvard Square with no parking. Mr. Macdonald asked if there has been any feedback from the development community regarding less required parking. Mr. Conner said they have been “cautiously supportive.” There is some concern with overflow to adjacent properties and a concern that minimums become maximums. 3 Mr. Klugo asked about the desired goal and noted there has to be a tie-in to the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Conner said there are relevant sections in the Comprehensive Plan, one which promotes economic development in certain areas and one which encourages a shift away from single person occupied cars. Members favored looking into the possibility of no parking minimums with a possible maximum and asked staff to explore these with the development and business community. 7. Introduction to concept to realign/consolidate zoning districts: Mr. Conner said this concept related to the PUD study being done. He noted that the most logical way to connect PUDs is through the zoning. Questions have been raised as to whether there would always be the appropriate zoning. Another issue is that South Burlington has the most overlay zoning districts in the state, with some being virtually parallel. Staff is suggesting a few possible zoning changes as follows: a. Mixed IC District where there are 2 land use patterns happening in the same district: small businesses (Earl’s, Pete’s RV, and those on Gregory Drive) and the large businesses on Kimball Avenue/Technology Park and those in Meadowland. The suggestion is to join the Kimball Ave/Tech Park/Meadowland into one zoning district. Members liked this idea. b. Belter Farm, which the zoning does not represent what is actually happening since much of the area is flood plain. Mr. Conner suggested “flood plain” could be an overlay, in case it ever changes. Members felt this was a “no brainer.” c. Several areas with very small zoning districts: Shelburne Road near Kmart/Farrell Street area (zoned R-15), areas near UMall and Kinney’s on Williston Road (zoned R- 12). Mr. Conner said it would make sense to have these areas all zoned the same. Members agreed. d. C-1 Air District, which does not allow housing and is targeted to aviation uses. The vision had been that it would attract Airport-related businesses, but this has not happened. The feeling is it would make sense to combine this with the regular C-1 District. Mr. Gagnon stressed the need to grandfather current uses. Mr. Conner explained how grandfathering works. e. Swift Street (from behind Denney’s) to Klinger’s and Allen Road from Shelburne Road to just before the 2 Larkin buildings where more residential density is allowed 4 even though there is no housing there. Both were intended as transitional districts and could be called Transitional. Members were OK with this. f. Kimball Ave/Kennedy Dr/Old Farm Rd: currently zoned Light Commercial/Residential; and Kennedy Drive/Route 116: currently zoned residential and small scale commercial. Both are intended to serve a local area and could be combined into one area. g. Commercial-2 at the end of Shelburne Road and the commercial building next to City Hall, which could be combined into the municipal district (both are very tiny districts) h. Districts along the Lake: Lakeshore Neighborhood and the R-1 Lakeview Zone behind it with only 4 properties. These could be combined into Lakeshore. Members felt all the proposals make sense. 8. Staff Update on Housing Replacement Standards Amendments: Mr. Conner reviewed the history. A question had been raised regarding certification of affordability. The suggestion was to add language such as: “Chittenden Housing Trust or Cathedral Square Housing or an entity approved by the city.” Staff recommends: “…a bona fide qualified non-profit organization specializing in affordable housing selected and approved by the City of South Burlington.” Members indicated that they preferred a qualifications-based standard to the naming of specific organizations. The question of how to deal with congregate housing was also raised. Mr. Conner explained that under the regulations, housing that has some level of care is not considered housing. The Affordable Housing Committee felt that for an assisted living use, the replacement standards should not apply, but they should apply to a use with just a “few services.” Regarding homes near the Airport whose owners choose not to sell would not be included in the replacement requirements. 9. Review Time-Line for Upcoming Rounds of Amendments to the LDRs: Mr. Conner said the next amendments to be considered relate to housing, those related to Shelburne Road would be heard in September. Minor Form Based Code amendments will be on the next agenda. The re-arrangement of zoning districts would be considered in October or November. 5 Mr. Conner suggested that the radio/TV stations amendments and housing amendments could be warned together. Members were OK with this. Mr. Weith noted the timing challenge for the radio/TV station client and said that anything beyond a 12 September warning would be difficult. 10. Possible Warning of Public hearing and Approval of Draft Report on Amendment to Allow Radio/TV Studio in the I-Open Space District: Mr. Weith asked that if the housing amendments aren’t ready for 12 September that the Radio/TV studio amendment be warned for that night. 11. Commission Feedback on FY2019-28 City Capital Improvement Plan: Mr. Conner reviewed the history and noted that all departments and committees are proposing feedback this month. 12. Other Business: a. Snyder-Braverman Development Company, LLC, Individual Wetland Permit: Mr. Conner reviewed the history. There will likely be one modification (Mr. Conner showed this on the map) to eliminate a road in favor of a pedestrian connection. b. Mr. Bouchard referred to a letter written by Pizzagalli regarding possibly allowing medical use in the I-O district outside of the transit district. He said they understand the Commission’s position of trying to keep medical offices out of areas where there is no public transit. He asked the Commission just to consider it. Mr. Conner showed the Transit Overlay District on the map and noted it was in response to what happened on Tilley Drive. It was noted that people are having a difficult time getting transportation to medical offices where public transit is not available. People on very limited incomes often have to take cabs to and from medical appointments. 13. Minutes of 8 August 2017 Mr. Riehle moved to approve the Minutes of 8 August 2017 as written. Mr. Macdonald seconded. Motion passed unanimously. As there was no further business to come before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned by common consent at 8:55 p.m. ______________________________Clerk 6