HomeMy WebLinkAboutDraft Minutes - Open Space IZ Committee - 06/19/2019 - Public ForumIZ Open Space Public Forum of Wednesday, June 19, 2019
Commi ee Members present: Vince Bolduc, Meaghan Emery, Amanda Holland, Duncan Murdoch, Allan Strong, TamiZylka. Members of the public: Andrew Chaulk, Rob Chi enden, Sandy Dooley, Nancy Hell, Corie Pierce, Helen Riehle, andKaren Ryder. Also present: Paul Conner.
Allan Strong opened the public forum. He explained the background of interim zoning, the Commi ee’s charge, and theoverall tasks within the interim zoning process. The charge includes the priori za on for conserva on of exis ng openspaces, forest blocks, and working landscapes in South Burlington in the sustenance of our natural ecosystems, scenicviewsheds, and river corridors. He also presented the planning documents the Commi ee has had at its disposal.
With regard to the Commi ee’s methodology, Mr. Strong explained that we have been looking at five criteria: water,wildlife, forests, aesthe cs, and agriculture. He also explained the online maps and map overlays the Commi ee has beenusing to evaluate the different parcels regarding these criteria.
Mr. Strong then showed the public five different parcels within Technology Park in order to provide an example of therange of our findings. Riparian connec vity (a buffer along a stream corridor); wetlands; forest blocks; high prioritywildlife road crossings; prime agricultural soils. By looking at all of these layers of data, the Commi ee can see parcelsthat consistently score higher. He also covered other considera ons, such as large-scale connec vity and communityvalues: passive recrea on, formal recrea on, proximity to other facili es, proximity to a popula on area it could service,historical/archaeological resources, and accessibility.
Mr. Strong then opened the conversa on up to the public for input. Rob Chi enden asked how the City wouldcompensate property owners for land they deem op mal for conserva on or community use as open space. Mr. Strongexplained that this ques on was outside of the Commi ee’s charge but offered some sugges ons that the City Councilmight consider. Mr. Chi enden expressed his fear that his property with a 30-year mortgage might lose its value due toany forthcoming zoning changes. Developers have warned him that they would hesitate to develop his property due toInterim Zoning. Andrew Chaulk, a member of the TDR Commi ee, explained that the use of TDRs is to protect alandowner’s investment in a parcel of land.
Sandy Dooley asked whether conserva on goals necessarily follow parcel lines. Paul Conner explained that our LDRsprotect par al parcels, and Mr. Strong explained that the Commi ee looked at parcels as whole parcels. He also explainedthat commi ee members’ comments refer to the por on of the parcel iden fied as sensi ve. Ms. Dooley asked whatnumber of parcels the Commi ee was considering. Mr. Strong responded that the number of parcels -- greater than 4acres and less than 10% impervious surface (used as a threshold) -- was around 180. Ms. Dooley also asked whether theCommi ee was looking at Airport land, and Mr. Strong said that we are looking at it and that the Commi ee will have todetermine whether or not to ul mately include it. Ms. Dooley asked whether the Commi ee looked at compa bility ofdevelopment. Mr. Strong responded that we were looking at land for conserva on with an eye to other land features thatmight affect its development poten al, such as slope.
Vince Bolduc explained that the Commi ee is essen ally doing an inventory and argued that it would help poten allandowners and developers by allowing them to see the City’s priori es for their land in a transparent way. That way,landowners could know be er what they wish to do with their land: sell it, develop it, or something else. Mr. Chi endenasked whether Mr. Bolduc has land that is developable. Mr. Bolduc replied yes and acknowledged that this process couldaffect his property values. He shared that, as a landowner, he would be concerned to see something on a map that hedidn’t know when he had bought the property, but that zoning changes are not a decision that the Open SpaceCommi ee would make. The City Council’s public process, the development review process, and the appeals process givelandowners the opportunity to argue for their interests.
Mr. Chi enden asked whether a nice view is enough to determine the aesthe cs of a parcel that should be conserved. Mr.Strong explained that the Commi ee has used an exis ng map that specifies viewsheds. Meaghan Emery also explainedthe DRB process and the role of DRB board members to follow the law and established rules. Amanda Holland shared thehandout that gives instruc ons for how individual parcels can be evaluated for the different criteria, in case members ofthe public wish to see how their parcel scores.
Mr. Conner explained that any conserva on interest leads to a discussion with the landowner(s) in ques on and thatlandowners some mes approach the City to ask if there would be interest in the public use of their land.
Mr. Chi enden also expressed concerns over legal suits that discourage developers from developing next to a par cularlandowner’s parcel. Ms. Emery expressed confidence in the Council, the DRB, and the Planning Commission and statedthat city government does not operate that way.
Mr. Chaulk asked about wildlife linkages. Ms. Emery explained that it had to do with road infrastructure, and Mr. Strongsaid that we will confirm that we are talking about the same data layer. Mr. Chaulk then asked about farmlands, and Mr.Strong explained that the Commi ee looked at prime agricultural soil. Mr. Chaulk noted that primary ag has grada onsand encouraged the Commi ee to look at it, and Mr. Strong asked for the source.
Ms. Dooley asked about the scoring for the Tier 3 criteria. Ms. Holland stated that this s ll needs to be finalized. Mr.Strong said that the point values for Tier 3 will be decided a er the Commi ee has completed their work on theinventory. Ms. Dooley also asked the rela on of Tier 3 to Tier 2, and Mr. Strong responded that prior input hasencouraged the Commi ee to look at other Community values in addi on conserva on criteria.
Ms. Emery asked for general feedback regarding the framework: is it clear? has anything been overlooked? Mr. Chaulkresponded that the framework is clear, and Ms. Dooley responded that the goal of producing an inventory is very helpfulto the public. Others noted the need to focus on percentages of parcels mee ng conserva on standards. Mr. Bolduc alsosaid that our report would include caveats and the Commi ee’s limita ons.
Ms. Dooley then asked whether the Commi ee had looked at connec vity. Mr. Strong referred to the City’sComprehensive Plan, and the map indica ng areas according to our zoning regula ons. He also stated that Commi eemembers have used a Google map to determine possible areas important for connec vity, independent of regula ons. Tothat point, Mr. Strong announced that Jens Hilke was arriving for the Commi ee’s regular mee ng at 7pm in order to walkthe Commi ee through these criteria, as kinks con nue to be worked out. Mr. Strong suggested that watersheds may bea good way to determine connec vity. Nancy Hell said that Jens Hilke’s last presenta on in January was very helpful inthis regard.
Ms. Dooley asked about the high priority wildlife road crossings along the Interstate, and Mr. Strong talked about how ourinfrastructure designers have been using culverts in order to allow for crossings. Duncan Murdoch stated that Vermont isa leader in the na on on this point.
Mr. Strong asked for other comments. Mr. Chi enden asked whether or not there were upcoming mee ngs, and Ms.Emery cited the mee ng on Saturday (on the same topics) as well as upcoming public forums in July that would cover theCommi ee’s dra findings.
Ms. Dooley asked how the Commi ee was conceiving of those findings. Mr. Strong responded that the Commi ee wouldlook for parcels that could be combined and that the Commi ee would come up with a final list represen ng 10-15% ofthe parcels. Ms. Emery added that the Commi ee has been talking about a “top ten.”
Ms. Dooley asked whether distribu on in the city would be considered. Mr. Strong noted that Potash Brook in the northand Centennial Brook also in the northern quadrant of the city are highly rated.
Mr. Bolduc noted that this inventory will allow the City to plan and iden fy the level of investment required. Mr.Chi enden also said that a top ten list would allow landowners to be able to approach the city.
The Public Forum adjourned shortly before 7pm.