HomeMy WebLinkAboutDraft Minutes - Planning Commission - 10/22/2024
PAGE 1
DRAFT MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION
22 OCTOBER 2024
The South Burlington Planning Commission held a regular meeting on Tuesday,
22 October 2024, at 7:00 p.m., in the Auditorium, City Hall, 180 Market Street, and
via Zoom remote technology.
MEMBERS PRESENT: D. Macdonald, Acting Chair; M. Mittag, P. Engels, D. Leban,
C. Laurence
ALSO PRESENT: P. Conner, Director of Planning and Zoning; K. Peterson, City
Planner; R. Doyle; T. Barritt
1. Instructions on exiting the building in case of an emergency:
Mr. MacDonald provided instructions on emergency exit from the building.
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 report:
Mr. Mittag: The City Council has approved the Conservation Easement for
Wheeler Nature Park.
Mr. Conner: The City is making headway on permit software.
Construction has begun on the addition to the Double Tree Hotel.
There will be a sky bridge to the existing building.
PLANNING COMMISSION 22 October 2024 PAGE 2
5. LDR Amendments LDR-24-01 through LDR-24-10:
Ms. Peterson noted that the City Council made some changes which will require
“tweaking” of the reports.
Mr. Mittag moved to approve the updated reports for LDR amendments LDR-24-06
where changes were made to amendments and to find that other amendments did
not require a change to the report. Mr. Engels seconded. Motion passed 5-0.
Mr. Conner noted that the second City Council public hearing on the amendments
and possible Council action will take place at the Council’s 4 November meeting.
6. Equity in Outreach Presentation:
Ms. Peterson reviewed the history of the project and noted that the City hired
Civic Brand as a consultant for the project. She noted this is not a finished “tool
kit,” and the hope is to have that in November. The intent is to use this tool kit in
the early stages of new projects (e.g., the Parks Master Plan).
The projects goals are:
a. To achieve equity in City government
b. To reframe the City’s approach to outreach
c. To build a predictable, transparent system
d. To reach people that traditional outreach methods often fail to reach
e. To incorporate a feedback loop into the outreach process (i.e., to
communicate back to the people most impacted).
This project is a small piece that will be built on I the future and will never really
end. The project involved input from a City Manager-appointed advisory group, a
public survey, focus groups, interviews, pop-up events and staff input.
The 4 pillars of the proposed tool kit are:
1. Principles (guidelines/best practices)
2. Engagement (types)
3. Community (partners)
4. Checklists, templates & other resources
PLANNING COMMISSION 22 October 2024 PAGE 3
Mr. Conner said the aim is to look at feedback from the point of view of a
perspective, and you may not need 50 people to identify a perspective. There are
entire viewpoints in the community that the City is not hearing from.
Engagement can relate to unique life stages (e.g., seniors, youth, etc.), unique
barriers (i.e., language), unique motivations (e.g., personal fulfillment, practical
and strategic, civil, moral and ethical values). Even though you can’t tailor
outreach to all combinations of engagement types, you can remove barriers by
something like a public survey. The focus of the tool kit is to meet people where
they are.
Ms. Leban said it is hard to solicit feedback without real life exemptions. Ms.
Peterson said the aim is to reach people at the inception of a project about the
concepts. It would not be too technical. Mr. Laurence noted that a lot of people
don’t even know that a planning process exists. Ms. Peterson said the hope is
that if people hear it a number of times, they will come to understand. That is part
of the education process.
Ms. Peterson stressed that this will not change the decision-making power from
the responsible bodies. Decision making is not transferred to the public.
Ms. Peterson then reviewed the “engagement spectrum”:
a. Inform (provide information to the public that traditional methods don’t
reach)
b., c., and d. Consult, Involve, Collaborate (encourage people to provide
feedback)
e. Shared Decision-Making (having the public share in making final
recommendations).
Best practices would involve:
a. Clearly defining the goals of a project, engagement types, those most
impacted, required level of engagement from each type/community/and
City at large
b. Making engagement accessible, providing mutual engagement
channels, using culturally relevant and accessible communication,
hosting engagement opportunities, offering flexible participation
options, and creating safe and inclusive spaces
PLANNING COMMISSION 22 October 2024 PAGE 4
c. Closing the loop by providing project progress and going back to a
specific group for more feedback.
Ms. Leban suggested taking 3 or 4 different topics and seeing how this framework
would work with those topics. As an example, she noted that different people will
have different opinions regarding building heights.
Mr. Engels noted that there are in all communities “opinion leaders,” those that
other people look to. He said you don’t want to limit them as they are the voice
for a lot of people. Mr. Conner said the purpose is to build up community leaders
so they know how to access City government. Mr. Engels suggested asking
community leaders how they got involved. Mr. Engels also felt that the goal
should be decision making as that is what democracy is. Mr. Macdonald caution
of mob rule.
5. Project Charges:
Mr. Macdonald said he was pleased to see something like this. It has the
opportunity of making what the Commission is working on more accessible to the
public. He hoped that if the Commission has done its work up front, it will make
them more focused and get things done quicker.
Project #1: Supporting Uses in Primarily Commercial Areas:
Project Description: Examine the primarily commercial districts including Mixed I-
C and I-OS to evaluate what uses should be allowed there to support the primarily
commercial nature, and how to balance City economic goals, housing goals, and
transportation goals in those areas.
Mr. Mittag said he would add what housing could be in a commercial area,
specify where it could be within a zone, and define that it would be in a limited
part of the zone. Ms. Leban said you can’t define where housing will go without
knowing the specific property.
Members were OK with the language as written.
Ms. Peterson recommended the project time be extended slightly to allow for
thorough review and hearings.
PLANNING COMMISSION 22 October 2024 PAGE 5
Ms. Leban moved to approve the language as written with a tweak to the time-
line. Mr. Engels seconded. Motion passed 5-0.
Project #2: Commercial Uses Citywide and Uses Allowed in Medium Scale
Districts:
Mr. Macdonald was concerned with the scale of use, noting that a 500,000 sq. ft.
building could be a high impact regardless of the type of use. He noted that a
charcoal manufacturing use could create smoke and noise, regardless of the size
of the use. Ms. Peterson said this would be included in the review.
Ms. Peterson recommended a minor change in the title and introduction to be
clear that this was a review of commercial use categories throughout the city, as
well as a review of allowed uses in the Medium Scale Neighborhood and similar
areas, and to include the same timeline change as in Project #1.
Mr. Mittag asked whom they could ask to be engaged in defining the project. Mr.
Macdonald suggested SBBA or the Economic Development Committee.
Mr. Engles moved to approve with the amended wording and time-frame. Ms.
Leban seconded. Motion passed 5-0
7. Meeting Minutes of 30 July 2024:
On p. 4, paragraph 2, members agreed to delete the second sentence because it
was spoken incorrectly.
Mr. Mittag moved to approve the Minutes of 30 July 2024 as amended. Ms. Leban
seconded. Motion passed 5-0.
8. Other Business:
No other business was presented.
As there was no further business to come before the Commission, the meeting
was adjourned by common consent at 8:40 p.m.
___________________________________
Clerk