HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - Open Space IZ Committee - 04/02/2019South Burlington Open Space Interim Zoning Commi ee April 2, 2019
The Open Space IZ Commi ee held a regular mee ng on Tuesday, April 2, 2019, at 7:00 pm, in the upstairs ConferenceRoom, City Hall, 575 Dorset Street .
Members present: Vince Bolduc, Meaghan Emery, Bernie Gagnon, Amanda Holland, Sophie Mazowita, Duncan Murdoch,Allan Strong, Sam Swanson. Also present: Dan Albrecht, Sandy Dooley, Jennifer Kochman, Michael Mi ag. Absentmembers: Alyson Chalnick, Be y Milizia, Tami Zylka.
1. Direc ons on emergency evacua on procedures from conference room:
Allan called the mee ng to order and provided instruc ons on emergency evacua on of the building.
2. Addi ons, dele ons or changes in order of agenda items:
No changes were made.
3. Comments from the public not related to the agenda:
Sandy Dooley (as an individual and not represen ng the Affordable Housing Commi ee) asked whether copies of theConserva on Priority Framework are publicly available and suggested that the Framework in dra form be distributedto the public. Jennifer presented herself as the chair of the Recrea on and Parks Commi ee and member of the 2012Open Space Commi ee. Dan asked for a recap of the IZ Open Space Commi ee’s work.
4. Tes ng the framework using the CCRPC map and Biofinder:
Allan gave an overview of the process followed in order to arrive at the Conserva on Priori za on Framework, firstgiving a en on to Tier 2, which treats natural resources individually. He then explained that Tier 1 was seen as a wayto provide a broad strategic guidelines for conserva on. Tier 3 explains other community values, which have not yetbeen assigned point scales. Jennifer noted the importance of conserva on among the pillars of Recrea on and Parksand also the cri cal need for playing fields. Sam explained how as a member of the Energy Commi ee he came topeace with the Framework, since social uses (such as solar panels) would not ideally be on a site rich in naturalresources. Meaghan explained that these needs are foremost in her mind as a City Councilor and that Tier 3 wasdesigned and commi ee members selected in order to highlight other poten al uses of available parcels. Duncanencouraged Jennifer to have her commi ee iden fy prime parcels for ac ve recrea on. Dan remarked on thechallenges of Tier 1, which avoids the ques on of social equity; smaller parcels may be er serve middle-classneighborhoods. Allan asked how to include this issue into the conserva on context. Meaghan explained therecrea onal and economic value of larger residen al parcels for all residents. Sandy raised the economic value ofmul -unit housing in terms of property taxes. Dan ques oned the inclusion of aesthe cs in Tier 2, which, Allanpointed out, is included in the Commi ee’s charge.
Allan then invited members to present their parcels, moving around the room to review the different parcels basedon Tier 1 criteria. The results of this preliminary tes ng exercise: Meaghan’s parcel: 0. Sam’s parcel: 50. Duncan’sparcel: 50. Sophie’s parcel: 0. Amanda’s parcel: 0. Vince’s parcel: 0. Bernie’s parcel: 0. Allan’s parcel: 50.
5/6. Discussion of alignment between scoring criteria and available spa al data; and Opera onalizing Tier 1 and Tier 3criteria:
Members noted the difficulty of assessing the second criterion and par cularly the third criterion on connec vity forTier 1. Bernie recommended that we ghten up the third criterion and perhaps tweak the second criterion. Meaghanrecommended that we look at neighboring parcels as well as determining what uses can “cohabit,” such as wildlife(plant and animal) habitats and ac ve recrea on/solar panels/dog park. Sam recommended priori zing watershedintegrity and looked to environmental experts for direc on. Duncan said that there is s ll work to be done in order toiden fy which animal species are using different lands. Allan suggested that the third criterion of connec vity couldbe moved to Tier 2 criteria, and include wildlife crossings, wildlife linkages, proximity to other conserved parcels, andriparian connec vity; Meaghan and Vince saw merit in that change. Dan recommended that the lakeshore besubjected to a separate category of assessment criteria, and Amanda raised the importance of preven ng shorelineerosion, for instance. A discussion regarding regula ons and setback buffers ensued, and members decided toexclude them from our discussion of the parcels. Amanda suggested assigning points to each of the three criteria inTier 1, and Bernie agreed. Meaghan, on the other hand, noted the value of having a Tier that could dis nguish topparcels to be protected for their natural resources and spoke to the value of a scale of 0 or 50 for Tier 1. Allanresponded to Sam’s concern that by moving criterion 3 to Tier 2, we would be undervaluing connec vity, explainingthat criterion 2 in Tier 1 would provide a broad value that gets at the core priority of connec vity, withoutdisqualifying forest blocks, shorelines, etc., concerns that members had raised. Vince also encouraged us to considerneighboring lands over city limits. He also ques oned whether the first criterion of a minimum of 4 acres is necessarygiven our current workplan with only parcels of 4 acres or more iden fied. Members also recommended includingnotes that explain the ranking.
Bernie suggested that members come back next me and review their parcels using Tier 2 and Tier 3 criteria beforefinalizing the Tier 1 criteria. Allan will also assign addi onal parcels for members to assess in order test our criteriamore thoroughly.
Sandy ques oned the focus on parcels as opposed to areas within parcels. Allan explained the Planning Commission’sregulatory work on PUDs that is addressing this type of parcel.
Amanda also suggested giving direc on to staff to prepare maps iden fying parcels smaller than 4 acres.
7/8. Finalizing the priori za on scheme; and Plan for ranking all parcels:
Carried over into next mee ng un l we have tested our criteria more.
9. Discussion: Next steps for engaging SB residents in open space conserva on priori es
Carried over into next mee ng un l we have tested our criteria more.
10. Review and approval of Mee ng Minutes of March 20, 2019:
Meaghan moved to approve the minutes, Sam seconded. They were approved 8-0.
7. Adjourn:
The mee ng adjourned shortly a er 9pm. The next mee ng is on Wednesday, April 17 at 7pm, in City Hall.