Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - Planning Commission - 05/28/2019South Burlington Planning Commission 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 (802) 846-4106 www.sburl.com Meeting Tuesday, May 28, 2019 7:00 pm South Burlington Municipal Offices, 575 Dorset Street AGENDA: 1. Directions on emergency evacuation procedures from conference room (7:00 pm) 2. Agenda: Additions, deletions or changes in order of agenda items (7:02 pm) 3. Possible executive session to discuss real estate transactions. (7:03 pm) 4. Open to the public for items not related to the agenda (7:20 pm) 5. Planning Commissioner announcements and staff report (7:25 pm) 6. Presentation on conceptual design phase A to convert an existing stormwater pond to a gravel wetland, Kennedy Drive adjacent to Hawthorne Circle, Emmalee Cherington, South Burlington Stormwater Division (7:30 pm) 7. Report from Committee Liaisons: (7:45 pm) a. Transferable Development Rights IZ Committee, Michael Mittag (7:45 pm) b. Open Space IZ Committee, Bernie Gagnon (7:50 pm) c. Affordable Housing Committee, Monica Ostby (7:55 pm) 8. Planned Unit Development / Subdivision / Master Plan (8:00 pm) a. Consolidation of underlying zoning districts/ clarification of existing ones (8:00 pm) b. River Corridors, Shorelands and Groundwater Source Protection Areas (8:30 pm) c. Initial review of Conservation PUD detailed outline (8:50 pm) 9. Provide feedback to City Council on possible initiation of acquisition of property pursuant to 24 V.S.A. 4421(5) – Official Map (8:55 pm) 10. Staff report on workload requirements of potential energy planning LDR amendments (9:10 pm) 11. Meeting Minutes (9:15 pm) 12. Other business (9:16 pm) 13. Adjourn (9:17 pm) Respectfully submitted, Paul Conner, AICP Director of Planning & Zoning South Burlington Planning Commission Meeting Participation Guidelines 1. The Planning Commission Chair presents these guidelines for the public attending Planning Commission meetings to insure that everyone has a chance to speak and that meetings proceed smoothly. 2. Initial discussion on an agenda item will generally be conducted by the Commission. As this is our opportunity to engage with the subject, we would like to hear from all commissioners first. After the Commission has discussed an item, the Chair will ask for public comment. Please raise your hand to be recognized to speak and the Chair will try to call on each participant in sequence. 3. Once recognized by the Chair, please identify yourself to the Commission. 4. If the Commission suggests time limits, please respect them. Time limits will be used when they can aid in making sure everyone is heard and sufficient time is available for Commission to conduct business items. 5. Side conversations between audience members should be kept to an absolute minimum. The hallway outside the Community Room is available should people wish to chat more fully. 6. Please address the Chair. Please do not address other audience members or staff or presenters and please do not interrupt others when they are speaking. 7. Make every effort not to repeat the points made by others. 8. The Chair will make reasonable efforts to allow everyone who is interested in participating to speak once before speakers address the Commission for a second time. 9. The Planning Commission desires to be as open and informal as possible within the construct that the Planning Commission meeting is an opportunity for commissioners to discuss, debate and decide upon policy matters. Regular Planning Commission meetings are not “town meetings”. A warned public hearing is a fuller opportunity to explore an issue, provide input and sway public opinion on the matter. 10. Comments may be submitted before, during or after the meeting to the Planning and Zoning Department. All written comments will be circulation to the Planning Commission and kept as part of the City Planner's official records of meetings. Comments must include your first and last name and a contact (e-mail, phone, address) to be included in the record. 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 Cathyann LaRose, City Planner SUBJECT: PC Staff Memo DATE: May 14, 2019 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 (7:02 pm) 3. Possible executive session to discuss real estate transactions. (7:03 pm) The Planning Commission will have the opportunity to enter an executive session to discuss real estate transactions. 4. Open to the public for items not related to the agenda (7:20 pm) 5. Planning Commissioner announcements and staff report (7:25 pm) Golf Course & Nowland Farm Road streetlights: Following up from last meeting’s report about Dorset Street streetlights having been swapped out for LEDs, we’re thrilled to report that the same is now taking place along Nowland Farm Road and the Golf Course neighborhoods. Airport Noise Exposure Maps to be released 5/29: The updated NEMs, to include the pending F-35 aircraft and its planned operations, will be released at a public meeting on Wednesday, May 29th, from 5-7 pm at the Airport. All are welcome and encouraged to attend. Champlain Valley Conservation Partnership: The City Council authorized the Council chair to enter into this partnership. The partnership is planned to start as a 5-municipality coordination on conservation and land stewardship. Census Tract & Block Group Boundary updates: In preparation for the 2020 Census, the Regional Planning Commissions were given the opportunity to re-organize the boundaries of Census Tracts and Block Groups (within specified guidelines). The CCRPC in turn reached out to interested municipalities to collaborate. We worked closely with the CCRPC to re-orient our Census tracks to align with the City’s primary planning areas. In doing so, we’re excited that future data gathered at this level will help to tell the story of the different elements of our community and track change more effectively. These proposals are being submitted this week to the Census Bureau and we’ll know later if they were approved. SB Fire Department wins national award: From Chief Terry Francis: “I am pleased to announce that the men and women of South Burlington Fire/EMS and Special Operations have received a prestigious National Award! Currently we are the only announced recipients in the State of Vermont. Today I received the following notification from Ashley Eagan, Director of Mission: Lifeline of the American Heart Association: ‘Congratulations! We are excited to inform you that City of South Burlington Fire Department has achieved a Silver Mission: Lifeline® EMS Recognition Award! The American Heart Association recognizes that prehospital personnel are the first providers of care to patients suffering from a STEMI heart attack and are an integral part of the STEMI system of care impacting the overall care and outcome of the patient. This achievement illustrates a commitment to providing guidelines- based care while meeting high standards of performance.’ The overarching goals of Mission: Lifeline is to reduce the mortality and morbidity for these patients while improving overall quality of care and patient outcomes.” 6. Presentation on conceptual design phase A to convert an existing stormwater pond to a gravel wetland, Kennedy Drive adjacent to Hawthorne Circle, Emmalee Cherington, South Burlington Stormwater Division (7:30 pm) The City’s stormwater division is in the early stages of designing a gravel wetland to replace an existing pond on Kennedy Drive, located adjacent to the Treetop Development on Hawthorne Circle. This public meeting will be to present the Phase A conceptual design. 7. Report from Committee Liaisons: (7:45 pm) a. Transferable Development Rights IZ Committee, Michael Mittag (7:45 pm) b. Open Space IZ Committee, Bernie Gagnon (7:50 pm) c. Affordable Housing Committee, Monica Ostby (7:55 pm) 8. Planned Unit Development / Subdivision / Master Plan (8:00 pm) a. Consolidation of underlying zoning districts/ clarification of existing ones (8:00 pm) b. River Corridors, Shorelands and Groundwater Source Protection Areas (8:30 pm) c. Initial review of Conservation PUD detailed outline (8:50 pm) Staff will share a new draft outline on Conservation PUD development, which includes a significant amount of detail related to applicability, land use allocations, design criteria, allowed uses and forms. This is the first of several PUD outlines that are expected in the next several weeks. The intention at this meeting will be to briefly review the structure of the outline. It is not yet ripe for full review of each of the details; this will likely be ready for the first meeting in June. 9. Provide feedback to City Council on possible initiation of acquisition of property pursuant to 24 V.S.A. 4421(5) – Official Map (8:55 pm) See enclosed materials. 10. Staff report on workload requirements of potential energy planning LDR amendments (9:10 pm) Staff will provide an oral update at the meeting. 11. Meeting Minutes (9:15 pm) See enclosed draft minutes of May 14th. 12. Other business (9:16 pm) 13. Adjourn (9:17 pm) South Burlington TAP TA18(7)- Kennedy Drive Pond 7 City of South Burlington Public Works Stormwater Division Stormwater Superintendent-Tom DiPietro Assistant Stormwater Superintendent-Emmalee Cherington What is Stormwater? •Rainwater that occurs during a storm or snowmelt that doesn’t soak in the ground. •Surface runoff which eventually makes its way to local streams. •Stormwater can cause erosion and impact the habitat that aquatic biota and fish need to live and reproduce. Stormwater Impaired Streams •Five different stormwater impaired watersheds can be found in South Burlington. •Approximately 61% of the land area in South Burlington is in a stormwater impaired watershed. Potash Brook TMDL •Potash Brook is impaired due to uncontrolled stormwater runoff. •VT DEC developed a Stormwater Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL). •Flow Target: –Flow reduction during the 1-year storm : 16.5% •Number of BMPs Identified to meet target: 107 •Implementation Deadline: 2032 Kennedy Dr. Pond 7 Existing System •Located on the west side of Kennedy Drive between Hawthorne Circle and Potash Brook. •Stormwater runoff from Kennedy Dr. road surface flows into a closed collection system to the existing detention pond. Kennedy Dr. Pond 7 Existing System •The pond outlets to a Class II wetland draining to Potash Brook. •Treats an approximate 3.51- acre portion of Kennedy Drive south of Williston Road and along the intersection of Kennedy Drive and Kimball Ave Kennedy Dr. Pond 7 Proposal •Rerouting of approximately 18.35 acres of largely impervious area (Williston Rd., Airport Dr. as well as surrounding commercial areas) •Currently, this area discharges primarily untreated stormwater runoff directly into Potash Brook behind the Key Bank property •Pollutant removal •Mitigate peak flow rates •Reduce runoff volume •Provide aesthetic and wildlife benefits Proposed Gravel Wetland Proposed Gravel Wetland Permit Requirements VT Individual Wetland Permit •9,860 SF Permanent Buffer Impact •200 SF Permanent Wetland Impact •Requires a wetland planting along the buffer side of the berm to act as a delineation between the system and the actual wetland. Proposed Gravel Wetland Permit Requirements Archeological •Requires a Phase IB Archeological Investigation •14 Systematically placed shovel test pits (STPs) •4 Confirmation STPs •20-inch square shovel tests •20-inch deep (max 36-inch depth) Proposed Gravel Wetland https://stormwater.wef.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/gravelwetland1118071.jpg Proposed Gravel Wetland •Pretreatment-Swirl Separator –Provide 10% Treatment •Cell 1 –Provide 45% Treatment •Cell 2 –Provide 45% Treatment •Outlet Structure –Designed to slow the release Proposed Gravel Wetland •Streams, rivers, and lakes are vital components of our community and environment. •Stormwater treatment practices help to protect these important assets. •This will help restore Potash Brook to health and lead the way to cleaner water. Conclusion 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, Director of Planning & Zoning Cathyann LaRose, City Planner SUBJECT: Proposed Zoning District consolidation for PUD project DATE: May 28, 2019 Planning Commission meeting The Commission has held a handful of discussions regarding re-organization of zoning districts for the purposes of the Planned Unit Development project. The key elements of these district re-organizations / consolidations are the following: • Relative Density of Development • Permitted Uses Density of development is important in establishing which PUD types should be allowed in which zoning distrcts in the City, and for establishing minimum densities through PUDs. The Planning Commission previously determined that for the Traditional Neighborhood type, that the minimum net density would be the greater of either 4 units per acre or what the district allows. And for Neighborhood commercial type, it would be the greater of either 8 units per acre or what the district allows. For permitted uses, we are envisioning that the PUD types may unlock some additional permitted uses that are requisite to the PUD type, but principally want to assure that that strongly mixed use PUD types are permitted in mixed use districts, etc. Based on the above, staff has attempted to pare the zoning district re-organization / consolidation down. Below are staff’s recommendations, using the PC’s prior discussions as the foundation, and organized by key topic area. Zonings where Maximum Density can currently be increased by PUD: The following districts set a certain density limit (1 or 2 units per acre) and then allow for the density to increase to 4,5, or 7 units per acre when a PUD of over 5 acres in size is proposed. Staff recommends that for these districts, the labelling be “flipped”, to better represent to residents and property owners what can take place on the property. Staff also requests that the Commission affirm that these densities represent future city policy. 2 One important note: when a PUD type is selected, that PUD type will dictate the amount of open space to be set aside, at a minimum. With the Conservation PUD, for example, it would be possible to allow both *higher density* and *lower density* projects, so long as the conservation metrics and building types are met. Staff asks that the Commission keep this in mind as it considers the appropriate overall density. It may also be possible to link these districts with the TDR recommendations. It’s a little bit premature to discuss this as the joint policy of IZ Committees meeting is forthcoming, but we’d recommend it be kept in mind. • Residential 1-Lakeshore Current Max Density: 1 unit per acre development & subdivision Current Max Density with PUD: 7 units per acre with PUD over 5 acres Proposal: Make R7 PUD – 1 unit per acre without PUD or TDR, 7 with PUD. The Commission should also discuss whether 7 is the correct underlying density • Residential 1-PRD: Current Max Density: 1 unit per acre development & subdivision; Current Max Density with PUD: 4 units per acre with PUD over 5 acres Proposal: Make into R4 PUD – 1 unit per acre without PUD or TDR, 4 units per acre with PUD • Residential 1-Lakeview: Current Max Density: 1 unit per acre development & subdivision; Current Max Density with PUD: 3 units per acre with PUD over 5 acres Proposal: Combine into Lakeshore neighborhood, make 4 units per acre Consideration: combining the districts in this manner would be a slight upzoning for the R1- Lakeshore neighborhood. It is a very small district – just 4 parcels. One of those parcels is undeveloped and exceeds 5 acres, and so this would in concept allow for greater amount of development on that parcel if a current limitation of access (the area is served by a single roadway and exceeds the maximum for units without a second roadway). • Residential 2: Current Max Density: 2 units per acre development & subdivision; Current Max Density with PUD: 4 units per acre with PUD over 5 acres Proposal: Make into R4 PUD – 1 or 2 units per acre without PUD or TDR, 4 units per acre with Consideration: is it more important to keep this distinct from the R1-PRD or to consolidate and simplify districts Establish Neighborhood Commercial Districts from existing nodes. The districts below were discussed on April 9th. The Commission’s direction was to make these various areas along Kennedy Drive into neighborhood nodes districts. • Residential 7 along Kennedy Drive 3 Currently these are commercial properties in the R7 District. The list of permitted commercial uses in R7 is narrow – only general office and medical office. Moving this to a neighborhood commercial district would open up additional opportunities. Proposal: Make into a neighborhood commercial district • Commercial 2 at Kennedy / Dorset This is a zoning district covering a single parcel in this area. Proposal: similar to above, make into a neighborhood commercial district. • Residential 7-NC This is a mixed use commercial / residential district Proposal: Keep essentially as is, but relabel to a Neighborhood commercial District Establish Transition Districts The Planning Commission has discussed several areas where there is a significant transition from high intensity commercial / mixed development to more lower-density residential districts. These includes areas along Allen Road, Swift Street, Kimball Ave and the Hill farm south of the interstate. • Commercial 1 Limited Retail This district, at the intersection of Kimball Ave and Kennedy Dr, was discussed by the Commission on April 9th. The Commission wished to see a transition district be established here, allowing for a mix of uses and densities that reflect a commercial-to-residential transition but not necessarily a neighborhood node. The current residential density is 12 units per acre. Proposal: Create a new Transition District that reflects the above with a mix of uses and density in the neighborhood of 7-8 units per acre. • Industrial Open Space on west side of Hinesburg Road south of I-89 The 2016 Comprehensive Plan changed the designation of this area from planned industrial /open space use to a mix of conservation, residential, and light industry / business park. Proposal: place this land into the new Transition District, at likely 7-8 units per acre, and then apply the appropriate PUD type for properties over the acreage threshold. • Allen Road District This district, along Allen Road, is a mixed industrial, commercial, and residential district. Current Max Density is 12 units per acre, but there are no residential uses in the district at the moment. The nearby densities are 2 and 7 units per acre, so the 12 appears to be somewhat of a mismatch. Proposal: turn into a Transition District. If the Commission wished to return to a higher density, it potential could through a PUD type or TDRs. • Swift Street District This district, along Swift Street, is a mixed commercial and residential district. Current Max Density is 7 units per acre. Proposal: turn into a Transition District, to simplify for all users. 4 Consideration: The Swift Street element of this zoning re-classification and consolidation is not strictly needed for the PUD project, it’s more of an effort to simplify the regulations. Should the Commission prefer not to take this up at this time, that would be ok too. Consideration 2: There are 3 additional properties east of the Swift Street District that are currently zoned R4. Two have homes, a third home was demolished. Should this area remain R4 or become part of the Swift Street / Transition District? Reduce redundancy • Commercial 1-Auto This district, with some recent changes allowing residential uses (and resulting, interestingly, in some of the recently approved infill housing development along Shelburne Road) is effectively the same as the C1-R15 district now, except that auto dealerships are permitted. Proposal: Combine with C1-R15, make special limit on auto sales to allow only where existing as of 2019 Consideration: strictly speaking, this change is not entirely necessary for the PUD project as the permitted uses and densities are essentially the same. Should the Commission wish to not pursue this item, that would be ok. • Commercial 1-Residential 15 This mixed use district allow 12 units per acre Proposal: staff recommends it be combined with C1-R15 District. Add Park Districts: Three sites – two in the R2 District along Allen Road, and one in the C1-R12 district near Mayfair Park, are City Park properties. Proposal: change the parcels to Park District to match others in the City. Still to be determined: • Commercial 2 This mixed residential & industrial district, largely located along Shelburne Road from GE Healthcare south, allows for most industrial uses and up to 7 units per acre of residential. The Commission has discussed the possibility of increasing the density along this major transportation route, and the TDR committee has explored whether this could be a receiving district. Staff also notes that this is one of a handful of places where certain industrial users are permitted. Recommendation: consider when the TDR Committee brings it recommendations. • Mixed Industrial / Commercial and Industrial/Open Space Districts These commercial / industrial districts have many common elements and within them have a wide range of development patterns. The needs of large-scale employers is a subject the Planning Commission has not delved deeply into. 5 Recommendation: Examine alongside Campus-style PUD types; possible solution may be to establish a higher acreage threshold for the Campus PUD and then apply to both districts. • Institutional / Agriculture District This district, largely consisting of land owned by the University of Vermont (but not representing all of their holdings) is an agricultural campus district. The Commission has not spent a lot of time on this subject as of yet. Recommendations: Await the joint meeting of the Interim Zoning Commissions to see what recommendations may exist. Eventually, the Commission may wish to differential amongst different areas in this district and possibly even combine isolated pieces of other districts, such as R4, that are under different ownership. Legend for the page below: Orange: Proposed R7 PUD Yellow: Proposed R4 PUD Blue: Proposed Transition Purple: Proposed C1-R15 (also includes area outlined in purple, awaiting F-35 maps before making recommendation) Blue: Proposed Transition District Red: Proposed Neighborhood Commercial Green: Proposed Park (City owned) 6 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburl.com MEMORANDUM TO: South Burlington Planning Commission FROM: Cathyann LaRose, AICP, City Planner Paul Conner, AICP, Director of Planning & Zoning SUBJECT: River Corridors, Shorelands, Groundwater Source Protection Areas DATE: May 28, 2019 Planning Commission meeting Over the past few meetings, the Commission has worked through standards on a series of specific natural resources, namely steep and very steep slopes, wetlands & wetland buffers, stream buffers, surface water protection areas, wildlife habitat, and agricultural resources. Three1 remaining natural resources had elements remaining to be addressed at the policy level (in addition to those assigned to the Chair’s working group at the last meeting). They are discussed below: River Corridor Standards The Commission at its April 9th meeting initiated a review of possible River Corridor standards. As discussed at the meeting, the primary goal of river corridor standards relate to hazards and stream flow protection and are not strictly oriented towards natural resources. Nonetheless, the subject areas overlap. At that meeting, the Commission requested that staff and the CCRPC follow-up on a few key questions of the draft standards. The questions, and related responses, are below: 1. What is the total scope of existing structures located within the mapped River Corridors for South Burlington? The CCRPC prepared a series of maps showing all structures affected by the mapped River Corridors. They include portions of 17 single family homes and 3 non-residential buildings. See the enclosed series of maps. These buildings are concentrated into four areas: Country Club Estates on the north side of the Airport, the Intersection of Farrell Street and Swift Street, the end of Central Ave in Queen City Park, and one home off Van Sicklen Road. See the enclosed map set for the exact locations of each. 2. Does the City have the ability to modify the boundaries of the River Corridor mapping, as a matter policy, and exclude certain existing development? In communicating the with the Department of Environmental Conservation, if the City does not enact regulations covering the entire geography of the mapped River Corridors, the City will not be able to to be able to obtain the higher Emergency Relief and Assistance Fund match contribution from the State in the event of a Federal Disaster declaration. This was among the initial purposes of the City developing River Corridor standards and therefore staff would recommend not altering the boundaries of the district. 1 We also note that scenic views are a fourth element that are related to these resources. This remains a work product to be developed. 2 3. What are the City’s options for regulating lands that are located within River Corridors? In a nutshell, the City has four options regarding how to regulate future development within the River Corridors. Option 4 represents the full draft as presented to the Planning Commission on April 9th; options 3-1 represent progressively more restrictive requirements, all of which would meet the minimums and then go beyond those minimums. A. Allow NO new buildings or structures or expansions of existing buildings/structures in the mapped River Corridors except those listed as exempt under Section D(III)(A)? B. Allow only those structures & expansions that are exempt in the model River Corridors bylaw under Section D(III)(C)? (specifically, that allows for accessory structures of up to 500 s.f., attached decks or patios of up to 200 s.f. and located at least 100 ft from the top of bank, restoration projects) C. Allow projects permitted under Option B, plus buildings/expansions that meet the shadowing / infill between buildings standard in section D(IV)(B) (additions in between buildings in in the “shadow” of other buildings) D. Allow projects permitted under Option C, plus projects that meet the performance standards in section D(IV)(C) (other improvements that do not meet the above but can demonstrate through performance criteria that they will not affect the future channel.) Upon review of the actual buildings / lots that are located in South Burlington’s River Corridors, staff recommends that the Commission focus on options A, B, and possibly C. Staff further recommends that the Commission examine the relatively boundaries of the 100-year Flood Plains, the River Corridors, and the existing structures. The City’s floodplain standards place a high bar on any new development within the mapped areas. In the image below (Country Club Estates), the purple line is the River Corridor boundary and the yellow is the 100-year floodplain: 3 Shoreland Protection Standards The City currently administers protection standards for lands within 150 feet of the Lake. Beginning in July 1, 2014, the Vermont Legislature passed the Shoreland Protection Act, the first of its kind in the state, to regulate activities within 250 feet of water bodies over 10 acres, with the stated purpose of allowing “reasonable development along the shorelands of lakes and ponds while protecting aquatic habitat, water quality, and maintaining the natural stability of shorelines.”. Please see attached chart to understand how these two regulatory mechanisms compare, as well as to see options for Planning Commission action. Groundwater Source Protection Areas (Queen City Park Area). The City does not currently have any standards for regulation or protection of groundwater source protection areas. There is only one such area within the lands of South Burlington. It is Source water protection areas are identified by the State of Vermont and are referenced in The South Burlington Fire District #1 (Queen City Park) is a Public Community Water System. Their Source Protection Plan (attached) identifies “potential sources of contamination” (PSOC) within the source protection area. From Emily of the CCRPC: • Champlain Water District has indicated that their greatest concern regarding contamination is from stormwater runoff, and they consider the city’s regulation of surface water buffers and stormwater management requirements to be adequate protection for Zone 2 surface water source protection areas. Zone 1 areas are mostly in Lake Champlain, with only a small sliver of Red Rocks park. They do not have any concerns about their Zone 1 area. • The fire district sends letters to customers reminding them that the following are contaminants. When I spoke to the system operator, he said that these contaminants remain a concern, but that there have not been major issues with contamination recently. • Pesticides • Automobile fluids (gasoline, engine oil, transmission oil, brake fluid, antifreeze) • Heating oil • Household chemicals and solvents such as paints, stains, paint thinner, oven cleaner, etc. • All of the above substances are toxic and many are carcinogens. • They can potentially contaminate our water supply if they are applied or spilled on ground not covered by asphalt, concrete, or plastic. The letter asks the following of landowners: • What you can do: • Please do not use pesticides on your property. 4 • Please examine the ground beneath parked vehicles and heating oil storage tanks and lines frequently for any potential leaks. • Please keep any toxic household solvents and chemicals contained and disposed of properly at the Chittenden Solid Waste District Hazardous Waste Depot- better yet, find a safer alternative product. • Please contact the operator for advice about safe pest control and household chemicals and we will try to help. • Also, please contact the operator or anyone on the Prudential committee if a leak of any oil or solvent is detected or suspected either on your own property or any property within the SPA. The language in 12.08 (5/8 draft) is based on Underhill’s zoning regulations. They’re served by the Jericho Underhill Water System, and a quick look at the maps shown that there isn’t any development in their Zone 1 SPA. As Cathyann and I discussed on the phone this afternoon, there is a good chance that the language here (which I wrote intending for PC discussion) is overly restrictive for an area where the Zone 1 SPA already has some dense development – a better option might be for the standards written under Zone 2 SPAs to apply for Zone 1 and 2. 5/8 Draft, for reference. See Emily’s recommendation above. Development Standards. All development must be designed to protect the quality of public water supplies. (1) Zone 1 Water Source Protection Areas: Development is prohibited within the Zone 1 groundwater source protection area, except for activities, structures and uses that directly relate to the water system. (2) Zone 2 Water Source Protection Areas: All development must avoid contamination to Zone 2 groundwater source protection areas. All development within designated source protection areas, except for agriculture, forestry and uses that are specifically prohibited under Article 12.08 (E)(1)(iv), will be subject to conditional use review by the Development Review Board under Article 14.10, to include findings that: a. The proposed development is consistent with the Source Protection Plan as most recently adopted and approved by the state, does not include a prohibited activity or use under Subsection B, and does not present a threat to the public water supply. b. There will be no on‐site discharge of hazardous materials from floor drains; all floor drains will drain into holding tanks. c. All drainage ways and sediment traps will be regularly maintained in full working order by the owner. d. Site clearing and disturbance, and on‐site paving, roofing, and other impervious surfaces that increase surface runoff and limit water infiltration and recharge, are minimized. All runoff from impervious surfaces will be diverted to areas covered with vegetation for surface infiltration. e. The storage and application of fertilizers, pesticides, herbicides and other chemicals will comply with all state and federal regulations and best management practices. f. Above ground storage tanks for oil, gasoline or other petroleum products will be placed in a building or other impervious containment area to prevent spills and leaks from reaching groundwater g. The use of sodium chloride for ice control will be minimized. Commented [A1]: FYI: This would affect 8 residential properties in the Queen City Park area. 5 (3) The following uses and activities are specifically prohibited within Zone 1 [and Zone 2?] source protection areas: a. Operations, including home based businesses, which manufacture, use, process, store or dispose of hazardous materials or wastes in amounts that could threaten public water supplies, including but not limited to metal plating, chemical manufacturing, wood preserving, photographic processing, motor vehicle service, auto body repair, furniture stripping, and dry- cleaning materials. b. Solid and hazardous waste landfills, storage and transfer facilities, dumps, and salvage yards. c. Outdoor storage of salt, de‐icing materials, snow dumps, pesticides or herbicides. d. The storage or spreading of sludge from wastewater treatment facilities. e. Cemeteries. f. The storage of unregistered vehicles, unless stored in an enclosed structure and parked on an impervious surface or drained of all fluids. g. Installation of floor drains or sumps that discharge directly to the ground. h. Underground storage tanks, and above ground storage tanks that lack an adequate impervious containment area. Commission options: 1. Continue not to regulate groundwater SPAs. 2. Use language above, as drafted. 3. Choose some standards for protection of the zone 1 area, the land most immediately adjacent to the public water supply. Make clear what activities are permitted or restricted (new construction, including decks and sheds; paving of surfaces). 4. Recognize that contaminants are the greatest threat to drinking water sources and that the City is unlikely to see major development with the SPAs. Pursue separate ordinance related to use/prohibition of contaminants at a later date. Make no changes to the LDRs, except maybe consider allowances for paving of driveways and parking lots where they might not otherwise be permitted due to coverage restrictions. Recommendation: Given our understanding of drinking water sources and the threats thereto, staff recommends option 4. ARTICLE 1 PURPOSE and TITLE South Burlington Land Development Regulations (CCRPC suggested edits, re: River Corridor) 1 PURPOSE and TITLE 1.01 Purpose and Compliance 1.02 Title 1.03 Separability 1.04 Effective Date of Implementation 1.01 Purpose and Compliance The purpose of these Land Development Regulations is to implement the Comprehensive Plan of the City of South Burlington; to promote the health, safety, and general welfare of the community; to secure safety from fire, panic, and dangers; to provide adequate light and air; to facilitate the adequate provision of transportation, water, sewage, schools, parks, and other public requirements, under and pursuant to the Vermont Planning and Development Act, as amended. 1.02 Title These provisions shall be known and may be cited as the South Burlington Land Development Regulations. 1.03 Separability Should any section, sub-section, paragraph, sentence, clause, provision, or phrase of these land development regulations be declared by any court of competent jurisdiction to be unconstitutional or invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of any other portion of these land development regulations, except the section in question. 1.04 Effective Date and Implementation These regulations shall become effective twenty-one (21) days after the date of adoption by the City Council. On the date these regulations become effective, they will replace in its entirety the comprehensive revision of the City of South Burlington Land Development Regulations effective May 12, 2003 and as amended through July 16, 2018through Month Day, 2019. draft ARTICLE 2 DEFINITIONS South Burlington Land Development Regulations (CCRPC suggested edits, re: River Corridor) 2 DEFINITIONS 2.01 Rules of Construction, Intent and Usage 2.02 Specific Definitions 2.03 Definitions for Flood Hazard Purposes 2.01 Rules of Construction, Intent and Usage A. In the construction of these regulations, the following provisions and rules shall be applied, except when the context clearly requires otherwise: (1) The "City" is the City of South Burlington, Vermont. (2) Words used in the present tense shall include the future and words used in the future tense shall include the present. (3) Words in the singular number shall include the plural and words in the plural number shall include the singular number. (4) The words "shall" and "must" are mandatory and not optional or merely directory. (5) The words "may" and "should" are permissive. (6) The word "person" includes an individual, firm, association, corporation, partnership, trust, company or other organization, governmental body or agency, and any other legal entity. (7) The word "lot" includes the words parcel, plot, tract of land, or piece of land. (8) The words "used" or "occupied" include the words intended, designed or arranged to be used or occupied, employed for, constructed for, altered for, converted for, rented for, leased for, maintained for, utilized for, or occupied for. (9) The word "includes" shall not limit a term to the specified examples, but is intended to extend its meaning to all other instances or circumstances of like kind or character. (10) The terms “such as” and “for example” shall be considered as introducing typical or illustrative, rather than an entirely exclusive or inclusive designation of, permitted or prohibited uses, activities, conditions, establishments or structures. (11) A "building" or "structure" includes any part thereof. “Building” shall have the same meaning as “structure.” (12) The word "built" includes "erected," "constructed," "reconstructed," "altered," "enlarged," or "moved." (13) The word "premises" shall include land and buildings thereon. (14) The masculine gender shall include the feminine and neuter, and vice versa. (15) The words "adjacent" and "next to" shall have the same meaning as "abut." (16) The words "original" and “existing” mean the conditions existing on the effective date of these regulations. (17) Abbreviations. “SF” shall mean “square feet”, “GFA” shall mean “gross floor area”, “GLA” shall mean “gross leasable area”, “DU” shall mean dwelling unit, and “ROW” shall mean “right-of- way” draft ARTICLE 2 DEFINITIONS South Burlington Land Development Regulations (CCRPC suggested edits, re: River Corridor) B. Unless the context clearly indicates the contrary, where a regulation involves two or more items, conditions, provisions, or events connected by the conjunction "and," "or," or "either...or," the conjunction shall be interpreted as follows: (1) "And" indicates that all the connected items, conditions, provisions, or events shall apply. (2) "Or" indicates that the connected items, conditions, provisions, or events may apply singly or in any combination. (3) "Either...or" indicates that the connected item, conditions, provisions, or events shall apply singly but not in combination. C. References made to officials and official bodies shall mean officials and official bodies of the City of South Burlington, unless the natural construction of the wording indicates otherwise. D. The word "regulation," "these regulations," "these land development regulations," "this ordinance," or “this bylaw” means the "City of South Burlington Land Development Regulations." E. Any word or phrase which is defined in this section, or elsewhere in these regulations, shall have the meaning as so defined whenever the word or phrase is used in these regulations, unless such definition is expressly limited in its meaning or scope. F. Any word or phrase that is not defined in this section, or elsewhere in these regulations, shall have its plain and commonly accepted meaning. G. Definitions contained in Title 24 of the Vermont Statutes Annotated, Chapter 117 shall be applicable throughout these regulations. 2.02 Specific Definitions Abandonment. The relinquishment of property, or a cessation of the use conducted on the property for a period of six (6) months within a twelve (12) month period, by the owner, tenant, or lessee, for reasons other than an act of God or access impeded by government action. ……………….. ………………. ……………………. ………………………. Zoning permit. A document signed by the Administrative Officer, as required in these Regulations, as a condition precedent to the commencement of a use or the erection, construction, reconstruction, restoration, alteration, conversion, or installation of a structure or building, which acknowledges that such use, structure, or building complies with the provisions of the Regulations or authorized variance. 2.03 Definitions for Flood Hazard and River Corridor Purposes Abbreviations The following abbreviations shall be the shortened form of the word or phrase indicated, the definitions of which may also be included below: Ac. ........ acre/acreage AMP .... Appropriate Municipal Panel AO……………… Administrative Officer draft ARTICLE 2 DEFINITIONS South Burlington Land Development Regulations (CCRPC suggested edits, re: River Corridor) ANR ..... Vermont Agency of Natural Resources BFE ...... Base flood elevation CFR ....... Code of Federal Regulations DRB ...... Development Review Board FEMA ... Federal Emergency Management Agency FIRM .... Flood Insurance Rate Map FHA ...... Flood Hazard Area FHBM .. Flood Hazard Boundary Map FHO ...... Flood Hazard Overlay District Ft. ........ Feet/foot LOMA .. Letter of Map Amendment LOMC ... Letter of Map Change LOMR ... Letter of Map Revision NA ....... Not applicable NAI ....... No adverse impact NFIP ..... National Flood Insurance Program RAPs ..... Required Agricultural Practices RCO ...... River Corridor Overlay District SF .......... Square feet VSA ....... Vermont Statutes Annotated VT ......... Vermont ZBA........ Zoning Board of Adjustment The following definitions shall apply to all lands within the Floodplain and River Corridor Overlay District. Accessory dwelling. An efficiency or one-bedroom apartment that is clearly subordinate to a single-family dwelling, and has facilities and provisions for independent living, including sleeping, food preparation, and sanitation. See 24 V.S.A. § 4412(1)(E) for more information. Accessory structure. A structure which is: 1) detached from and clearly incidental and subordinate to the principal use or structure on a lot, 2) located on the same lot as the principal structure or use, 3) clearly and customarily related to the principal structure or use, and 4) only used for vehicle parking, storage, or primarily building access. Examples include, garages, garden and tool sheds, and playhouses, but do not include “accessory dwellings.” Area of special flood hazard. Synonymous in meaning with the term “special flood hazard area” for the purposes of this bylaw. Associated transportation and utility networks. Those transportation and utility networks connected to a bridge, culvert, or utility for the purpose of crossing a river or stream and do not include transportation or utility networks within the river corridor that merely run parallel to a river or stream1. 1 These do not include state transportation networks or power generation and transmission utility networks subject to the Public Utility Commission jurisdiction, as those are exempt from municipal regulation and are regulated under the State Flood Hazard Area & River Corridor Rule; http://dec.vermont.gov/sites/dec/files/documents/wsmd-fha-and-rc-rule-adopted-2014-10-24.pdf draft ARTICLE 2 DEFINITIONS South Burlington Land Development Regulations (CCRPC suggested edits, re: River Corridor) Base Flood. The flood having a one percent chance of being equaled or exceeded in any given year (commonly referred to as the “100-year flood”). Base Flood Elevation (BFE). The elevation of the water surface elevation resulting from a flood that has a 1 percent chance of equaling or exceeding that level in any given year. On the Flood Insurance Rate Map the elevation is usually in feet, in relation to the National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929, the North American Vertical Datum of 1988, or other datum referenced in the Flood Insurance Study report, or the average depth of the base flood, usually in feet, above the ground surface. Basement. Any area of a building having its floor elevation below ground level on all sides, including crawlspaces. Channel. An area that contains continuously or periodic flowing water that is confined by banks and a streambed. Common Plan of Development. Where a structure will be refurbished or constructed over a period of time under one approved plan or permit, but in separate stages, phases, or in combination with other construction activities. Such work might be planned unit by unit and may take place at different times, on different schedules. Compensatory storage. A volume not previously used for flood storage and which shall be incrementally equal to the theoretical volume of flood water at each elevation, up to and including the base flood elevation, which would be displaced by the proposed project. Such compensatory volume shall have an unrestricted hydraulic connection to the same waterway or water body. Further, with respect to waterways, such compensatory volume shall be provided within the same reach of the river, stream, or creek. Construction trailer. A vehicle which is: (1) built on a single chassis; (2) 500 square feet or less when measured at the largest horizontal projection; (3) designed to be self-propelled or permanently towable; and (4) designed for use as a temporary office facility used to support management of a construction project, and not as a permanent structure. Critical facilities. Facilities that are vital to public health and safety Includinges police stations, fire and rescue facilities, hospitals, and public and private schools, shelters, nursing homes, and buildings associated with water supply and waste treatment facilities. Designated center. A downtown, village center, new town center, growth center, or neighborhood development area designated pursuant to 24 V.S.A. Chapter 76A. Development. Any human-made change to improved or unimproved real estate, including but not limited to buildings or other structures, mining, dredging, filling, grading, paving, excavation or drilling operations, or storage of equipment or materials. Encroachment. Activities or construction including fill, substantial improvements, and other development that may cause an increase in flood levels. Equilibrium condition. The width, depth, meander pattern, and longitudinal slope of a stream channel that occurs when water flow, sediment, and woody debris are transported by the stream in such a manner that it Commented [RM1]: Note to PC – currently your critical facility definition does not include “water and wastewater facilities” DEC is suggesting the language here, but this should be thought through carefully. From Rebecca Pfeiffer at DEC: “In our model, we do have the higher standard that specifically addresses new critical facilities being located in the 0.2% chance floodplain (500-year floodplain) as a way to steer critical facilities away from floodplain areas. The communities do not have to adopt this standard that keeps critical facilities from the 500-year floodplain, but we do recommend they consider it. The intent, though, is not to keep the non-building elements of the water supply/wastewater treatment facilities/stormwater treatment out of the 500-year floodplain, but the actual buildings themselves.” CCRPC have not looked at the associated Floodplain Regulations in light of this definition. We can if the PC wants to make this change. Commented [DA2]: DEC also notes that “A community may opt to expand the definition to include other structures as essential to the health and welfare of the population and that are especially important during and after a disaster. For example, the type and location of a business may raise its status to a critical facility, such as a grocery store or gas station.” Commented [DA3]: Note this definition is required by the National Flood Insurance Program and differs from “land development” defined in 24 V.S.A. Chapter 117. draft ARTICLE 2 DEFINITIONS South Burlington Land Development Regulations (CCRPC suggested edits, re: River Corridor) generally maintains dimensions, pattern, and slope without unnaturally aggrading or degrading the channel bed elevation. Fill. Any placed material that changes the natural grade, redirects the movement of flood water, or diminishes the flood storage capacity at the site. Temporary storage of materials for less than 180 days is not considered fill. Flood. (a) a general and temporary condition of partial or complete inundation of normally dry land areas from: the overflow of inland or tidal waters; the unusual and rapid accumulation or runoff of surface waters from any source; and mudslides which are proximately caused by flooding and are akin to a river of liquid and flowing mud on the surfaces of normally dry land areas, as when earth is carried by a current of water and deposited along the path of the current; (b) the collapse or subsidence of land along the shore of a lake or other body of water as a result of erosion or undermining caused by waves or currents of water exceeding anticipated cyclical levels or suddenly caused by an unusually high water level in a natural body of water, accompanied by a severe storm, or by an unanticipated force of nature, such as flash flood or abnormal tidal surge, or by some similarly unusual and unforeseeable event which results in flooding. Flood fringe. The portion of the flood hazard area that is outside of the floodway but still inundated by the base flood (the flood having a one percent chance of being equaled or exceeded in any given year). Flood hazard. Those hazards related to damage from flood- related inundation or erosion. Flood hazard area. Shall have the same meaning as “area of special flood hazard” under 44 C.F.R. § 59.1. “Area of special flood hazard” is synonymous with the term “special flood hazard area.” Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM). An official map of a community, on which the Federal Insurance Administrator has delineated both the special flood hazard areas and the risk premium zones applicable to the community. In some communities the hazard boundaries are available in paper, pdf, or Geographic Information System formats as a Digital Flood Insurance Rate Map (DFIRM). Flood Insurance Study. An examination, evaluation and determination of flood hazards and, if appropriate, the corresponding water surface elevations or an examination, evaluation and determination of mudslide (i.e., mudflow) and /or flood related erosion hazards. Floodplain or flood-prone area. Any land area susceptible to being inundated by water from any source (see definition of “flood”). draft ARTICLE 2 DEFINITIONS South Burlington Land Development Regulations (CCRPC suggested edits, re: River Corridor) Flood proofing. Any combination of structural and non-structural additions, changes, or adjustments to structures which reduce or eliminate flood damage to real estate or improved real property, water and sanitary facilities, structures and their contents. Floodway. The channel of a river or other watercourse and the adjacent land areas that must be reserved in order to discharge the base flood without cumulatively increasing the water surface elevation more than one foot at any point. Please note that Special Flood Hazard Areas and floodways may be shown on a separate map panels. Floodway, Regulatory in the City of South Burlington. The channel of a river or other watercourse and the adjacent land areas that must be reserved in order to discharge the base flood without cumulatively increasing the water surface elevation more than one foot at any point. Fluvial erosion. The erosion or scouring of riverbeds and banks during high flow conditions of a river. Fluvial erosion is most likely to occur within the river corridor. Functionally dependent use. A use which cannot perform its intended purpose unless it is located or carried out in close proximity to water. Grading. The movement or replacement of topsoil or other material originating on the site and within the hazard area. Grading results in minor or no changes in topographic elevations. If new material is brought from outside the hazard area and such new material is not offset with an equal or greater removal of material from the portion of the site within the hazard area, the new material shall be considered “fill” and shall not be considered grading. Historic Structure. Any structure that is: (a) listed individually in the National Register of Historic Places (a listing maintained by the Department of the Interior) or preliminarily determined by the Secretary of the Interior as meeting the requirements for individual listing on the National Register; (b) certified or preliminarily determined by the Secretary of the Interior as contributing to the historical significance of a registered historic district or a district preliminarily determined by the Secretary to qualify as a registered historic district; (c) individually listed on a state inventory of historic places in states with historic preservation programs which have been approved by the Secretary of the Interior; or (d) individually listed on a local inventory of historic places in communities with historic preservation programs that have been certified either: (i) by an approved state program as determined by the Secretary of the Interior or (ii) directly by the Secretary of the Interior in states without approved programs. Infill development. A construction, installation, modification, renovation, or rehabilitation of land, interests in land, buildings, structures, facilities, or other development in an area that was not previously developed but is surrounded by existing development. Letter of Map Change (LOMC). A letter issued by FEMA officially removing a structure or lot from the flood hazard area based on information provided by a certified engineer or surveyor. This is used where structures or lots are located above the base flood elevation and have been inadvertently included in the mapped special flood hazard area. A LOMC can include a Letter of Map Amendment (LOMA), Letter of Map Revision (LOMR), Letter of Map Revision based on Fill (LOMR-F), or a Letter of Map Revision for a Floodway (LOMR-FW). draft ARTICLE 2 DEFINITIONS South Burlington Land Development Regulations (CCRPC suggested edits, re: River Corridor) Lowest floor. The lowest floor of the lowest enclosed area, including basement., except an An unfinished or flood resistant enclosure, usable solely for parking of vehicles, building access or storage in an area other than a basement area is not considered a building’s lowest floor provided that such enclosure is not built so as to render the structure in violation of the applicable non-elevation design requirements of 44 CFR 60.3. Manufactured home (or Mobile home). A structure, transportable in one or more sections, which is built on a permanent chassis and is designed for use with or without a permanent foundation when attached to the required utilities. The term “manufactured home” does not include a “recreational vehicle”. National Flood Insurance Program. The National Flood Insurance Program under 42 U.S.C. chapter 50 and implementing federal regulations in 44 C.F.R. parts 59 and 60. The National Flood Insurance Program aims to reduce the impact of flooding on private and public structures. It does so by providing affordable insurance to property owners in communities that adopt and enforce floodplain management regulations. These efforts help mitigate the effects of flooding on new and improved structures. Natural and beneficial floodplain functions. The functions associated with the natural or relatively undisturbed floodplain that includes moderating flooding, retaining flood waters, and reducing erosion, sedimentation and flood related damage. Ancillary beneficial functions include support of ecosystem services such as wildlife habitat, water quality, and recharge of ground water. New construction. Structures for which the start of construction commenced on or after the effective date of the floodplain management regulation and/or the River Corridor regulations adopted by the community and includes any subsequent improvements to such structures. Nonconforming structure. A structure or part thereof that does not conform to the present Regulations but was in conformance with all applicable laws, ordinances and regulations prior to the enactment of the present bylaws, including a structure improperly authorized as a result of error by the administrative officer. Structures that were in violation of the regulations in effect at the time of their creation, and remain so, remain violations and are not nonconforming structures. Nonconforming use. A use of land that does not conform to the present bylaws but did conform to all applicable laws, ordinances, and regulations prior to the enactment of the present bylaws, including a use improperly authorized as a result of error by the administrative officer. Non-residential. This includes businesses, churches, schools, nursing homes, pool houses, clubhouses, recreational buildings, government buildings, mercantile structures, industrial structures, and warehouses. Public water access. A public access to a water of the State and, except for toilet facilities, shall not include structures as defined in this bylaw. Recreational vehicle. A vehicle which is: (a) Built on a single chassis; (b) 400 square feet or less when measured at the largest horizontal projection; (c) Designed to be self-propelled or permanently towable by a light duty truck; and (d) Designed primarily not for use as a permanent dwelling but as a temporary living quarters for recreational, camping, travel, or seasonal use. Redevelopment. The construction, installation, modification, renovation, or rehabilitation of land, interests in land, buildings, structures, facilities, or other development in a previously developed area. The term includes substantial improvements and repairs to substantially damaged buildings. draft ARTICLE 2 DEFINITIONS South Burlington Land Development Regulations (CCRPC suggested edits, re: River Corridor) Replacement structure. A new building placed in the same footprint as the pre-existing building and does not include a change in use. River. The full length and width, including the bed and banks, of any watercourse, including rivers, streams, creeks, brooks, and branches which experience perennial flow. “River” does not mean constructed drainageways, including water bars, swales, and roadside ditches. River corridor. The land area adjacent to a river that is required to accommodate the dimensions, slope, planform, and buffer of the naturally stable channel and that is necessary for the natural maintenance or natural restoration of a dynamic equilibrium condition and for minimization of fluvial erosion hazards, as delineated by the Vermont Agency of Natural Resources in accordance with river corridor protection procedures. (10 V.S.A. § 1422). Special Flood Hazard Area. The floodplain within a community subject to a 1 percent or greater chance of flooding in any given year. For purposes of these regulations, the term “area of special flood hazard” is synonymous in meaning with the phrase “special flood hazard area”. This area is usually labeled Zone A, AO, AH, AE, or A1-30 in the most current flood insurance studies and on the maps published by the Federal Emergency Management Agency. Maps of this area are available for viewing in the municipal office or online from the FEMA Map Service Center: msc.fema.gov. Base flood elevations have not been determined in Zone A where the flood risk has been mapped by approximate methods. Base flood elevations are shown at selected intervals on maps of Special Flood Hazard Areas that are determined by detailed methods. Please note, where floodways have been determined they may be shown on separate map panels from the Flood Insurance Rate Maps. Start of construction. For purposes of floodplain management, determines the effective map or bylaw that regulated development in the Special Flood Hazard Area. The “start of construction” includes substantial improvement, and means the date the zoning permit was issued provided the actual start of construction, repair, reconstruction, rehabilitation, addition placement, or other improvement was within 180 days of the permit date. The actual start means either the first placement of permanent construction of a structure on a site, such as the pouring of slab or footings, the installation of piles, the construction of columns, or any work beyond the stage of excavation; or the placement of a manufactured home on a foundation. Permanent construction does not include land preparation, such as clearing, grading and filling; nor does it include the installation of streets and/or walkways; nor does it include excavation for a basement, footing, piers, or foundations or the erection of temporary forms; nor does it include the installation on the property of accessory buildings, such as garages or sheds not occupied as dwelling units or not part of the main structure. draft ARTICLE 2 DEFINITIONS South Burlington Land Development Regulations (CCRPC suggested edits, re: River Corridor) For a substantial improvement, the actual start of construction means the first alteration of any wall, ceiling, floor, or other structural part of a building, regardless whether that alteration affects the external dimensions of the building. Storage. The aggregation of materials, items, or objects whether natural or human-made; that is kept as a stockpile, collection, or inventory; where individual materials from the stockpile, collection or inventory may change, but where the general footprint of the stored materials continues to be used for the same purpose; whether set upon the land or within a container, structure, or facility; and that would not otherwise be in compliance with these development standards. Structure. For regulatory purposes under this bylaw, a walled and roofed building, as well as a manufactured home, and any related built systems, including gas or liquid storage tanks. Substantial damage. Damage of any origin sustained by a structure whereby the cost of restoring the structure to its before-damaged conditions would equal or exceed 50 percent of the market value of the structure before the damage occurred. Substantial improvement. Any repair, reconstruction, rehabilitation, addition, or other improvement of a structure after the date of adoption of this bylaw, the cost of which, over three years, or over the period of a common plan of development, cumulatively equals or exceeds 50 percent of the market value of the structure before the “start of construction” of the improvement. This term includes structures which have incurred “substantial damage”, regardless of the actual repair work performed. The term does not, however, include either: (a) Any project for improvement of a structure to correct existing violations of state or local health, sanitary, or safety code specifications which have been previously identified by the local code enforcement official and which are the minimum necessary to assure safe living conditions or (b) Any alteration of an “historic structure”, provided that the alteration will not preclude the structure’s continued designation as an “historic structure”. Top of bank. The point along a streambank where an abrupt change in slope is evident, and where the stream is generally able to overflow the banks and enter the adjacent floodplain during flows at or exceeding the average annual high water stage. Top of slope. A break in slopes adjacent to steep-banked streams that have little or no floodplain; or a break in slope where the side slopes adjacent to an incised, or deeply cut, channel meet floodplains that have been abandoned or are undergoing abandonment. draft ARTICLE 2 DEFINITIONS South Burlington Land Development Regulations (CCRPC suggested edits, re: River Corridor) Violation. The failure of a structure or other development to be fully compliant with this bylaw. A structure or other development without the elevation certificate, other certifications, or other evidence of compliance required in 44 CFR 60.3 is presumed to be in violation until such time as that documentation is provided. Watercourse. Any perennial stream and shall not include ditches or other constructed channels primarily associated with land drainage or water conveyance through or around private or public infrastructure. Wet-floodproofing. Permanent or contingent measures applied to a structure that prevent or provide resistance to damage from flooding by allowing water to enter the structure in accordance with Technical Bulletin 7 published by FEMA. https://www.fema.gov/media-library/assets/documents/3503 draft ARTICLE 3 GENERAL PROVISIONS South Burlington Land Development Regulations (CCRPC suggested edits, re: River Corridor) 3 GENERAL PROVISIONS 3.01 Establishment of Districts and Description of Certain Districts 3.02 Official Maps and Other Maps 3.03 District Boundaries 3.04 Applicability of Regulations 3.05 Lots 3.06 Setbacks and Buffers 3.07 Height of Structures 3.08 Temporary Structures and Uses 3.09 Multiple Structures and Uses 3.10 Accessory Structures and Uses 3.11 Nonconformities 3.12 Alteration of Existing Grade 3.13 General Performance and Maintenance Standards 3.14 Reasonable Accommodation to Ensure Equal Access to Housing 3.15 Residential and Commercial Building Energy Standards 3.01 Establishment of Districts and Description of Certain Districts A. Establishment of Districts. For the purpose of these regulations, the City of South Burlington is hereby divided into the districts shown on the Official Zoning Map. This zoning code also contains provisions for overlay districts and a floating district. (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 (2) Commercial Districts C1 Commercial 1 District (also designated “C1-R12” or “C1-R15”) C1-AUTO Commercial 1 with Automobile Sales District C1-AIR Commercial 1 with Airport-Related Uses District C1-LR Commercial 1 with Limited Retail District C2 Commercial 2 District SW Swift Street District draft ARTICLE 3 GENERAL PROVISIONS South Burlington Land Development Regulations (CCRPC suggested edits, re: River Corridor) AR Allen Road District R7-NC Residential 7-Neighborhood Commercial District SEQ-VC Southeast Quadrant-Village Commercial District (3) Industrial and Airport Districts IC Mixed Industrial and Commercial District AIR Airport District AIR-I Airport Industrial District I-O Industrial and Open Space District (4) Other Districts IA Institutional and Agricultural District (includes IA North and IA-South) PR Park and Recreation District MU Municipal District (5) Overlay Districts. The following overlay districts are shown on the Overlay Districts Map: FP Floodplain Overlay District IHO Interstate Highway Overlay District TO Traffic Overlay District SVP Scenic View Protection Overlay District BBW Bartlett Brook Watershed Protection Overlay District PBW Potash Brook Watershed Protection Overlay District (reserved) RCO River Corridor Overlay District (6) City Center Form Based Codes District T-1 Transect Zone 1 T-3 Transect Zone 3-City Center T-3+ Transect Zone 3 Plus- City Center T-4 Transect Zone 4 Urban Multi-Use T-5 Transect Zone 5 City Center B. Description of Certain Districts. (1) Floodplain Overlay District. The boundaries of the Floodplain Overlay District shall include those areas that are identified as areas of special flood hazard (Zones A, AE, A1-30, and 0.2%) in and on the most current flood insurance studies and maps published by the Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency, National Flood Insurance Program, as provided by the Secretary of the Agency of Natural Resources pursuant to 10 V.S.A. Chapter 32 § 753, which are hereby adopted by reference and declared to be part of these regulations. The location of the boundary shall be determined by the Administrative Officer (AO). If the applicant disagrees with the determination made by the AO, a Letter of Map Amendment from FEMA shall constitute proof.) (a) Floodplain Overlay (Zones A, AE, and A1-30) Subdistrict. The boundaries of the Floodplain Overlay (Zones A, AE, and A1-30) Subdistrict shall include those areas of special flood hazard designated in and on the above referenced studies and maps as Zones A, AE, or A1-30. draft ARTICLE 3 GENERAL PROVISIONS South Burlington Land Development Regulations (CCRPC suggested edits, re: River Corridor) (b) Floodplain Overlay (Zone 0.2%) Subdistrict. The boundaries of the Floodplain Overlay (Zone 0.2%) Subdistrict shall include those areas of special flood hazard designated in and on the above referenced studies and maps as Zone 0.2%. (2) Traffic Overlay District. (a) The boundaries of high-volume roadway segments and the balance of restricted roadway segments within the Traffic Overlay District shall include the entire right-of-way of all delineated roadway segments. Cross-streets are not included. (b) The boundaries of major intersections within the Traffic Overlay District shall include all approaches to the intersection. Any dimensional approach as shown on the Traffic Overlay Zone Map shall be measured from the point of intersection of the street centerlines at the major intersection. The first fifty (50) feet of un-dimensioned minor cross-streets shall be included within the boundaries of the major intersection. (3) Park and Recreation District. The boundaries of the Park and Recreation District shall include all City owned or leased parkland and all lands owned by the Winooski Valley Park District; also, all future land granted to or purchased by the City for use as public parkland shall be included in the Park and Recreation District at the time of the grant or purchase. (4) Airport Approach Cone. The boundaries of the Airport Approach Cone, as shown on the Official Zoning Map, include all approaches to the runways at the Burlington International Airport. Angles and widths of the approach cones are more specifically defined in the 1991 Airport Master Plan Update Burlington International Airport, or most recent update. (5) River Corridor Overlay District. The boundaries of the River Corridor Overlay District shall include those areas mapped as Statewide River Corridors in the City of South Burlington, Vermont, as published by the Agency of Natural Resources (ANR) including refinements to that data based on field-based assessments which are hereby adopted by reference. On perennial streams with a watershed size greater than half a square mile for which River Corridors are not mapped, the standards in G. (3) Development Standards of Section 10.07 River Corridor Overlay District shall apply to the area measured as 50 feet from the top of the stream bank or slope. 3.02 Official Maps and Other Maps A. Official Zoning Map. The Official Zoning Map describes the different and separate districts of the City of South Burlington set forth in Section 3.01. The Official Zoning Map is filed in the office of the City Clerk and is incorporated herein by reference. B. Overlay Districts Map. The Overlay Districts Map describes the different and separate overlay districts of the City of South Burlington set forth in Section 3.01. The Overlay Districts Map is filed in the office of the City Clerk and is incorporated herein by reference. C. Southeast Quadrant Official Zoning Map. The Southeast Quadrant Official Zoning Map describes the sub-districts pertaining to the Southeast Quadrant District as set forth in Article 9 of these Regulations and is incorporated into the Official Zoning Map draft ARTICLE 3 GENERAL PROVISIONS South Burlington Land Development Regulations (CCRPC suggested edits, re: River Corridor) D. Wetlands Map. The Wetlands Map identifies wetland areas throughout the City that are subject to the restrictions set forth in Article 12 of these regulations. The Wetlands Map is filed in the office of the City Clerk and is incorporated herein by reference. E. Scenic View Protection Overlay Districts. The maps identifying overlay districts wherein special standards apply are filed in the office of the City Clerk and are incorporated herein by reference. F. Open Space Plan Areas Map. [reserved] G. Official Map. The Official Map of the City of South Burlington is adopted pursuant to subsection 3 of section 4401, Title 24 VSA Chapter 117, as amended, filed in the office of the City Clerk, and incorporated herein by reference. ………………………… ………………………… …………………………….. ………………….. draft ARTICLE 10 OVERLAY DISTRICTS South Burlington Land Development Regulations (CCRPC suggested edits, re: River Corridor) 10 OVERLAY DISTRICTS FP, TR, SVP, IHO, TO, UDO, RCO 10.01 Flood Plain Overlay District 10.02 Traffic Overlay District 10.03 Scenic View Protection Overlay District 10.04 Interstate Highway Overlay District 10.05 Transit Overlay District 10.06 Urban Design Overlay District 10.07 River Corridor Overlay District …………………………….. ………………………………. …………………………….. 10.07 River Corridor Overlay District (RCO) A. Purpose. It is the purpose of the River Corridor Overlay District to: (1) Establish protection of the river corridor to provide rivers and streams with the lateral space necessary to maintain or reestablish floodplain access and minimize erosion hazards through natural, physical processes; (2) Allow for wise use of property within river corridors that minimizes potential damage to existing structures and development from flood-related erosion; (3) Discourage encroachments in undeveloped river corridors; and (4) Reasonably promote and encourage infill and redevelopment of designated centers that are within river corridors. B. Authority. In accordance with 24 V.S.A. Chapter 117, §4424, and §4414, there is hereby established a bylaw for areas at risk of erosion damage in the City of South Burlington Vermont. These regulations shall apply to development in all areas in the City of South Burlington identified as within the River Corridor Overlay District designated in Section 3.01(B). C. Comprehensive Plan. These regulations hereby implement the relevant portions of the City of South Burlington's adopted Comprehensive Plan and are in accord with the policies set forth therein. D. Warning of Disclaimer of Liability. This bylaw does not imply that land outside of the areas covered by this overlay district will be free from erosion damages. This regulation shall not create liability on the part of the City of South Burlington, or any municipal official or employee thereof, for any erosion damages that result from reliance on this regulation, or any administrative decision lawfully made hereunder. E. Precedence of Bylaw. The provisions of this River Corridor Overlay District shall not in any way impair or remove the necessity of compliance with any other local, state, or federal laws or regulations. Where this regulation imposes a greater restriction the provisions here shall take precedence. F. RCO District General Provisions draft ARTICLE 10 OVERLAY DISTRICTS South Burlington Land Development Regulations (CCRPC suggested edits, re: River Corridor) (1) Establishment of RCO District The RCO is an overlay district. All other requirements of the underlying district or another overlay district such as the Flood Hazard Overlay District, shall apply in addition to the provisions herein, unless it is otherwise so indicated. If there is a conflict with another such district, the stricter provision shall apply. (2) RCO District Boundaries (a) Section 10.07 shall apply to the Statewide River Corridors in the City of South Burlington, Vermont, as published by the Agency of Natural Resources (ANR) including refinements to that data based on field-based assessments which are hereby adopted by reference. (b) On perennial streams with a watershed size greater than half a square mile for which River Corridors are not mapped1, the standards in G (3) below shall apply to the area measured as 50 feet from the top of the stream bank or slope, whichever is applicable based on a field determination. (c) Requests to update a river corridor map shall be in accordance with the procedure laid out in the ANR Flood Hazard Area and River Corridor Protection Procedure2. (1)(3) Jurisdictional Determination and Interpretation The information presented on any maps, or contained in any studies, adopted by reference, is presumed accurate. If uncertainty exists with respect to the boundaries of the RCO the location of the boundary on the property shall be determined by the Administrative Officer (AO). If the applicant disagrees with the determination made by the AO or the river corridor as mapped, the applicant has the option to either: 1. Hire a licensed land surveyor or registered professional engineer to stake out the RCO boundary on the property; or 2. Request a letter of determination from ANR which shall constitute proof of the location of the river corridor boundary.3 When ANR receives a request for a letter of determination, ANR evaluates the site and existing data to see if a change to the river corridor delineation is justified, necessitating a river corridor map update4. An ANR letter of determination will either confirm the existing river corridor delineation or will result in an update to the river corridor delineation for the area in question. If a map update is justified, an updated map will be provided with the letter of determination. 1 A GIS map layer is available from DEC Rivers Program indicating the small stream segments that a require a 50-foot setback. 2 http://dec.vermont.gov/sites/dec/files/documents/DEC_FHARCP_Procedure.pdf 3 In support of a letter of determination request, applicants must provide a description of the physical characteristics that bring the river corridor delineation into question (e.g. the presence of bedrock or other features that may confine lateral river channel adjustment. 4 River Corridor map updates are further explained in the Flood Hazard Area & River Corridor Protection Procedure: http://dec.vermont.gov/sites/dec/files/documents/DEC_FHARCP_Procedure.pdf draft ARTICLE 10 OVERLAY DISTRICTS South Burlington Land Development Regulations (CCRPC suggested edits, re: River Corridor) G. Development Review in River Corridors (1) Permits. A permit is required from the Administrative Officer for all development, as defined in Section 2.03 (Floodplain and River Corridor Definitions), in the River Corridor Overlay District. Development that requires conditional use approval or a variance from the DRB under this bylaw must have such approvals prior to the issuance of a permit by the AO. Any development that is also subject to municipal jurisdiction in the designated flood hazard areas shall meet the criteria in Section 10.01 Flood Plain Overlay District. (a) All permits shall require that a permittee have all other necessary permits from state and federal agencies before work may begin. (2) Exempted Activities The following activities do not require a permit under this section of the bylaw: (a) The removal of a building or other improvement in whole or in part, so long as the ground elevations under and adjacent to the removed structure remain unchanged. (b) Any changes, maintenance, repairs, or renovations to a structure that will not result in a change to the footprint of the structure or a change in use. (c) Maintenance of existing sidewalks, roads, parking areas, or stormwater drainage; this does not include expansions. (d) Maintenance of existing bridges, culverts, and channel stabilization activities; this does not include expansions. (e) Construction or repair of stream crossing structures (bridges and culverts), associated transportation and utility networks5, dams, dry hydrants, and other functionally dependent uses that must be placed in or over rivers and streams that are not located in a flood hazard area and that have coverage under a Stream Alteration Permit, if required, under 10 V.S.A. Chapter 41 and the rules adopted thereunder. (f) Activities exempt from municipal regulation and requiring a permit under the State’s “Vermont Flood Hazard Area and River Corridor Rule” (Environmental Protection Rule, Chapter 29) 6: a. State-owned and operated institutions and facilities. b. Forestry operations or silvicultural (forestry) activities conducted in accordance with the Vermont Department of Forests and Parks Acceptable Management Practices for Maintaining Water Quality on Logging Jobs in Vermont or other accepted silvicultural practices, as defined by the Commissioner of Forests, Parks and Recreation. c. Agricultural activities conducted in accordance with the Vermont Agency of Agriculture, Food and Market’s Required Agricultural Practices (RAPs). Prior to the construction of farm structures, the farmer shall notify the AO in writing of the proposed activity. The notice shall contain a sketch of the proposed structure including setbacks. d. Public utility power generating plants and transmission facilities regulated under 30 V.S.A. § 248. e. Telecommunications facilities regulated under 30 V.S.A. § 248a. (g) Planting projects which do not include any construction or grading activities in accordance with 24 V.S.A. § 4424(c). 5 New transportation or utility development that runs parallel to the river is not exempt and shall meet the Development Standards in sub section G. (4) below. 6 State-owned and -operated institutions and facilities, Forestry, Required Agricultural Practices, and Public Utility Commission jurisdictional facilities located in a Flood Hazard Area or River Corridor are regulated under the State Flood Hazard Area & River Corridor Rule, 10 V.S.A. § 754. draft ARTICLE 10 OVERLAY DISTRICTS South Burlington Land Development Regulations (CCRPC suggested edits, re: River Corridor) (h) Subdivision of land that does not involve or authorize development. (3) Submission requirements. In addition to all information required for permitted and conditional uses, the application shall include: (a) Site Plan. A site plan that depicts the proposed development, all water bodies, all (Hazard Overlay District boundaries, the shortest horizontal distance from the proposed development to the top of bank (and/or top of slope, if applicable) of any river, any existing and proposed drainage, any proposed fill, pre- and post-development grades, and the elevation of the proposed lowest floor as referenced to the same vertical datum as the elevation on the current Flood Insurance Rate Maps; (b) Project Review Sheet. A Vermont Agency of Natural Resources Project Review Sheet. The Project Review Sheet shall identify all State and Federal agencies from which permit approval is required for the proposal and shall be filed as a required attachment to the municipal permit application. The identified permits, or letters indicating that such permits are not required, shall be submitted to the Administrative Officer and attached to the permit before work can begin. (c) Supplemental Application Requirements. i. Information clearly demonstrating how the proposed development meets the infill or shadowing requirements in subsection G. (4) Development Standards below; or ii. A narrative and supporting technical information from a qualified consultant that demonstrates how the proposal meets the River Corridor Performance Standard in subsection G. (4) Development Standards below; or iii. Evidence of an approved major or minor map update issued by ANR in accordance with the process outlined in the DEC Flood Hazard Area & River Corridor Protection Procedure, finding the proposed development is not located within the river corridor. Please note that ANR may require the applicant to provide technical data from a qualified consultant to justify a map update. (a)(d) Waivers. Upon written request from the applicant, the DRB may waive specific application requirements when the data or information is not needed to comply with Article 10.07 of this bylaw. (4) Development Standards The criteria below are the minimum standards for development in the RCO District. Where more than one district is involved, the most restrictive standard shall take precedence. (a) Development within designated centers shall be allowed within the river corridor if the applicant can demonstrate that the proposed development will not be any closer to the river than pre-existing adjacent development. (b) Development outside of designated centers shall meet the following criteria: draft ARTICLE 10 OVERLAY DISTRICTS South Burlington Land Development Regulations (CCRPC suggested edits, re: River Corridor) i. In-Fill Between Existing Development: Development must be located no closer to the channel than the adjacent existing primary structures, within a gap that is no more than 300 feet (see Figure 1), or ii. Down River Shadow: An addition to an existing habitable structure, or an accessory structure that is adjacent to an existing structure, shall be located in the shadow area directly behind and further from the channel than the existing structure, or within 50 feet to the downstream side and no closer to the top of bank or slope, as applicable. Below-ground utilities may also be placed within the same shadow dimensions of an existing below-ground system (see Figure 2). Figure 1: In-fill Development Standard draft ARTICLE 10 OVERLAY DISTRICTS South Burlington Land Development Regulations (CCRPC suggested edits, re: River Corridor) (c) River Corridor Performance Standard i. Proposals that do not meet the infill or shadowing criteria in Development Standards (4)(a)&(b) above must demonstrate and the DRB must find that the proposed development will: a. not be placed on land with a history of fluvial erosion damage or be imminently threatened by fluvial erosion; b. not cause the river reach to depart from or further depart from the channel width, depth, meander pattern, and slope associated with natural stream processes and equilibrium conditions; and c. not result in an immediate need or anticipated future need for stream channelization solely as a result of the proposed development, that would increase flood elevations and velocities or alter the sediment regime triggering channel adjustments and erosion in adjacent and downstream locations. ii. Proposals that meet the infill or shadowing criteria in (3) i. above are presumed to meet the River Corridor Performance Standard. However, The DRB has the option to require an applicant to demonstrate that a proposal meets the River Corridor Performance Standard if there is a concern that the proposed development is at particular risk from fluvial erosion or may increase fluvial erosion, based on location or past flood damage. iii. The DRB may request or consider additional information to determine if the proposal meets the River Corridor Performance Standard, including: a. a description of why the shadowing and infill criteria in (3) i. above cannot be met; b. data and analysis from a consultant qualified in the evaluation of river dynamics and erosion hazards; c. Comments provided by the DEC Regional Floodplain Manager on whether the proposal meets the River Corridor Performance Standard. (d) Referrals Figure 2: Shadow Area Development Standard Commented [DA1]: Note to PC: As written, we are recommending that the City allow some flexibility and infill so long as the standards are met. Depending on community settlement patterns and development plans if the PC wants to flat out prohibit anything in the RC overlay than this entire section can be much simpler. draft ARTICLE 10 OVERLAY DISTRICTS South Burlington Land Development Regulations (CCRPC suggested edits, re: River Corridor) 1. Upon receipt of a complete application for new construction or a substantial improvement, the AO shall submit a copy of the application and supporting information to the State National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) Coordinator at the Vermont Agency of Natural Resources, in accordance with 24 V.S.A. § 4424. A permit may be issued only following receipt of comments from the Agency, or the expiration of 30 days from the date the application was mailed to the Agency, whichever is sooner. The AO and DRB shall consider all comments from ANR. 2. Any application for a proposed conditional use or a request for a variance from these regulations shall be referred to the DRB in accordance with 24 V.S.A. § 4460. 3. If the applicant is seeking a permit for the alteration or relocation of a watercourse, copies of the application shall also be submitted to the adjacent communities, the River Management Engineer at the Vermont Agency of Natural Resources, and the Army Corps of Engineers. Copies of such notice shall be provided to the State National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) Coordinator at the Vermont Agency of Natural Resources, Department of Environmental Conservation. A permit may be issued only following receipt of comments from the Vermont Agency of Natural Resources, or the expiration of 30 days from the date the application was mailed to the Vermont Agency of Natural Resources, whichever is sooner. (e) Prohibited Development in the RCO District The following are prohibited in the RCO District 1. New structures, fill, development, and accessory dwellings7 that do not meet the standards in subsection G. (4) Development Standards 2. Any other development that is not exempt, permitted, or listed as a conditional use which would cause or contribute to fluvial erosion hazards. (f) Administrative Review; Permitted Development The following development activities in the RCO District meeting the Development Standards in subsection (4) above require an administrative review from the AO and may receive a permit from the AO without review by the DRB: 1. Small accessory structures not larger than 500 square feet. 2. Improvements to existing utilities that are along an existing right of way and serve a building. 3. Replacement on-site septic systems. 4. An attached deck or patio to an existing structure that is 200 square feet or less and is located no less than 100 feet from the top of bank (or top of slope, if applicable).8 5. River or floodplain restoration projects that do not involve fill, structures, utilities, or other improvements, and which have written confirmation from the ANR Regional Floodplain Manager that the project is designed to meet or exceed the applicable standards in this bylaw.9 (k) Permit Conditions 7 Depending on community settlement patterns, and to ease bylaw administration, some communities may consider simply prohibiting new structures within the river corridor (as opposed to allowing infill and redevelopment). 8 An attached deck or patio does not include enclosed or three-season porches. 9 Applicants should be made aware that any restoration project involving work within the stream channel may require a Stream Alteration Permit under 10 V.S.A. Chapter 41 and the rules adopted thereunder. Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.13", No bullets or numbering Formatted: Font: 11 pt Commented [RM2]: This footnote is describing an option that the PC needs to decide on, it should not be left as a footnote. I’d call it out here for PC discussion, and indicate that, as written, we are recommending that they allow some flexibility and infill so long as the standards are met. If the PC wants to flat out prohibit anything in the RC overlay than this entire section can be much simpler. Formatted: Font: +Body (Calibri), 11 pt Formatted: Font: +Body (Calibri), 11 pt Formatted: Font: 11 pt Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.13", No bullets ornumbering Formatted: Font: 11 pt Commented [DA3]: Added per latest recommendation of DEC. Formatted: Highlight Formatted: Highlight Formatted: List Paragraph, Justified, Indent:Left: 0.75", Numbered + Level: 1 +Numbering Style: 1, 2, 3, … + Start at: 1 + Alignment: Left + Aligned at: 1" + Indent at: 1.25", Tab stops: Not at 0.75" Formatted: Font: Not Bolddraft ARTICLE 10 OVERLAY DISTRICTS South Burlington Land Development Regulations (CCRPC suggested edits, re: River Corridor) Permits for public water accesses and unimproved paths that provide access to the water for the general public and promote the public trust uses of the water shall include a condition prohibiting the permittee from actively managing the section of river to solely protect the public water access from lateral river channel adjustment. draft ! ! ! ! ! ! ! e911 Point in Wrong Location? 110 3 108 114 110 5 7BIRCHLN CENTRAL AVEPINE PL CEDAR CT 0 120 24060Feet ¯ !Structure all or partially in River Corridor River Corridor - 2018 Draft VT_Data__E911_Road_Centerlines !333 VAN SICKLEN RD COBBLESTONECIR0 120 24060Feet ¯ !Structure all or partially in River Corridor River Corridor - 2018 Draft ! ! SWIFT STFARRELLST20 7 Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community 0 120 24060Feet ¯ !Structure all or partially in River Corridor River Corridor - 2018 Draft ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !COUNTRYCLUB D R DAIRYLN 620 580 602 548 566 636 518 654 502 486 534 0 120 24060Feet ¯ !Structure all or partially in River Corridor River Corridor - 2018 Draft Column1 State Shorelands Act Adopted SB LDRs Column2 Approx 20 pages of regulation. https://dec.vermont.gov/sites/dec/files/wsm /lakes/docs/Shoreland/lp_ShorelandHandb ook.pdf Chapter 12 Regulated Distance Lands within 250 feet of all water bodies of 10 acres or more; TWO zones: 0-100 feet and 100-250 feet All lands within 150 feet of high water elevation of Lake Champlain (102 ft above mean sea level) Accounts for slope?Provisions given for lands with a slope of less than 20% No; horizontal distance only. Does require erosion control plan for construction. Vegetation Requirements Uses vegetation point and grid density system; trees can only be removed if minimum plot points are retained See 12.01 C(2): Clearing of trees not damaged or diseasedrequires DRB approval; grass and seeding requirements. Pre-existing Development Existing development in the first 100 feet cannot be expanded closer to the lake Expansion review relies on Section 3.11 of SB LDRs, noncomplying structures; new uses and encroachments are limited under 12.01C(4) Application Mechanism 2 tiers if not exempt: 1) Registration; 2)Shoreland Permit Conditional use application for expansion of pre-existing structures, including detached accessory structures Exemptions (no permit required)Reconstruction of existing impervious areas without changing the existing footprint No exemptions if within the 150 foot seback. Changing one type of impervious surface for another Creation of a footpath up to 6 feet in width Tree removal in compliance with vegetation protection standards or of dead or unsafe Wastewater system installation or repair Options 1) Town may apply to be permitted to administer "functionally equivalent" shoreland standards (ex, Colchester) 2) Town may keep adopted regulations; property owners subject to shorelands oversight would seek dual permitting. 3) Eliminate local regulations in favor of state administration of shoreland properties. Recommendation While option 1 allows property owners to streamline the permitting process, it does require the City to demonstrate functional equivalency and seek delegation authority. This would require no changes. This option would provide for some additional stated exemptions. Some of these exemptions, however, are granted during the Conditional use approval by the DRB. The Planning Commission may wish to discuss. Pro: less work for landowner and DRB. Shoreland Regulations 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, Director of Planning & Zoning SUBJECT: Provide feedback to City Council on possible initiation of acquisition of property pursuant to 24 V.S.A. 4421(5) – Official Map DATE: May 28, 2019 Planning Commission meeting At your last meeting, there had been a request from Tim McKenzie of South Burlington City Center LLC for a proposed amendment to the City’s Official Map in the City Center Area. The request was to remove two segments of roadway currently indicated on the City Center portion of the Official Map, between San Remo Drive and Market Street. In the place where these road segments were to take place, the property owner has received an Army Corp and State Wetlands Permit that allows for a combination of stormwater improvements and wetland conservation. Following that meeting, the property owner elected to follow the procedures laid out in 24 VSA 4421 for accommodation of planned pubic facilities depicted on an Official Map. That procedure, in brief, requires an applicant for development to accommodate the planned facilities in their plans. If an applicant elects not to accommodate those planned facilities, the reviewing entity is required to deny the application, triggering a 120- day period during which the City Council may initiate proceedings to acquire the land or an interest in the land for the planned public facility depicted on the Official Map. If the Council elects not to initial proceedings to acquire the land, then the application goes back to the reviewing entity for consideration without regard to that component of the Official Map. On May 20, the Administrative Officer denied Miscellaneous application #MS-19-02 for a stormwater facility and gravel wetland pursuant to 24 VSA 4421. The City Council, that same day, began consideration of whether to initiate proceedings to acquire the land for the planned streets described above. The Council, as their first action, is seeking Planning Commission feedback on the request. Enclosed with this staff memo are three maps: • Existing Official Map for City Center (adopted 2016) • Concept Plan prepared by property owner for the Army Corps and VT Wetlands division, showing approved impacts, protected wetland areas, and allowed crossings and overall impacted areas for development, and submitted for the application #MS-19-02. 2 • Wetland Impacts prepared by property owner for the Army Corps and VT Wetlands division, showing approved impacts, protected wetland areas, and allowed crossings. • Conceptual roadways for northern portion of City Center (2018 draft). This conceptual roadway system was prepared as part of the Williston Road Network Study and presented to the Planning Commission in 2018. Detailed review of this concept map and possible resulting amendments to the Official Map are on the Planning Commission’s work plan. Staff is NOT recommending that possible changes presented in this concept map be included at this time. Staff recommendations Commissioners are invited and requested to discuss the subject and consider what recommendations it would like to make to the Council. SOUTH BURLINGTON PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES 14 MAY 2019 1 The South Burlington Planning Commission held a regular meeting on Tuesday, 14 May 2019, at 7:00 p.m., in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset Street. MEMBERS PRESENT: J. Louisos, Chair; B. Gagnon, T. Riehle, M. Ostby, M. Mittag, A. Klugo, D. Macdonald ALSO PRESENT: P. Conner, Director of Planning and Zoning; C. LaRose, Planner; T. Chittenden, A. Chalnick, K. Epstein, D. Kerwin 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: Agenda item #5 was postponed to a future meeting. 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 UVM has been doing its spring spraying and is still using Roundup. Mr. Conner’s staff report was submitted in written form and includes the swapping out of Dorset St. lights to LEDs, digitization of DRB files, a regional roundtable and workshop on Inclusionary Zoning, the upcoming Committee Leadership meeting (30 May), and Zoning administrator permits recently issued. 5. Review and consider possible amendments to City Center portion of the Official Map This item was postponed to a future meeting 6. Review and discuss proposed approach for advancing and completing natural resources standards: Ms. Ostby said she had been under the impression that resolving the primary and secondary resources was vital to the PUDs. Ms. LaRose said in a meeting between staff and the consultants Ms. Murray had thoughts of what will be needed for the PUD project. She doesn’t see the delineation of the “buckets” as being as critical as she it might previously have been, based on the Commission’s discussions. 2 Ms. Louisos provided an overview of a proposal for completing the natural resources work. She enumerated a series of goals prepared on her memo to the Commission. She noted that it was important to take this step to assure that the standards being developed and the data being used meet the intent of the Commission. In discussing the goals, Mr. Mittag cited the importance of adding climate change. Mr. Klugo encouraged members to consider the goals in the Comprehensive Plan and to test their positions against those goals. He stressed that the tighter the land gets, the more expensive it gets and the harder it will get to meet the Comprehensive Plan goals. Mr. Mittag suggested that references to the Comprehensive Plan include where in the Plan the reference is found. Members then considered specific elements of the natural resources standards as follows: Water Source Protection Areas: The goal of this section is to protect drinking water which is managed by CWD. Ms. Louisos noted that CWD has said that the current stream buffer standards meet their water source protection plan. Mr. Conner noted that on the Natural Resources Map, there are some wider buffers that are water source protection areas shown as Zone 2. Mr. Riehle expressed concern with protection for private wells. Ms. Louisos explained the regulations regarding the placement of sewer lines near wells, etc. Mr. Klugo cited a description of work done in Wisconsin which ends with the statement that good planning for residential development is the most important thing for protecting water. Mr. Conner noted that the only area of Zone 1 protection was at the western end of Red Rocks park, and suggested that rather be in the regulations, there could be a city policy for this area. Members concurred with removing surface water source protection zones 1 & 2 from the draft standards. Mr. Conner said they still need to hear from Emily (CCRPC) what Queen City Park would want to protect their ground water system. Farm Parcels 10 Acres or Greater: Ms. Louisos said that areas that are not suitable for agriculture could be eliminated. Mr. Gagnon asked how these criteria relate to Act 250 criteria. He felt that if something is covered adequately by Act 250, those are the criteria that should be used here. Mr. Conner explained the parameters of Act 250 involvement in a development. 3 Two maps were then considered, one indicating all the agricultural soil and the second what has not been built on to date. Ms. LaRose noted that the second map presumes that if there is a building on a lot, the whole lot is covered, which is not usually the case. Mr. Conner added that much of the land that is not built on usually falls into another category as well (e.g., wetland, steep slopes, etc.). Mr. Mittag ask to which Comprehensive Plan goal this would be linked. Mr. Klugo said it should meet the test of each of the Comp Plan goals. This is how Act 250 works. Significant Wildlife Habitat: Mr. Conner said it might make sense to look at some kind of district which meets the goals and then say what is allowed to happen in that district. He cited the JM Golf decision and noted how hard it is to delineate specifically. Mr. Gagnon suggested this could be covered under another district (e.g., streams/buffers). Mr. Klugo noted that this is a secondary conservation area and is intended to have some development on it at some time. Mr. Mittag said that could be changed to a primary area. Ms. Ostby questioned whether “minimizing development” is clear enough. Mr. Klugo said it is tough to tighten up language without establishing expectations. Mr. Conner stressed that everything is ‘habitat’ for something. There have to be specific guidelines. He noted that rivers, buffers to rivers and forest areas were the 3 areas that Jens outlined and suggested the Commission might want to start with those. He also noted that some things are hard to define, even for biologists. Mr. Klugo cited the difference between the “good enough” approach and the “perfect approach.” Mr. Macdonald suggested a sub-group come back with proposed language. Ms. Ostby felt a forest needs to be considered as one block even if there is a road going through it as animals can cross that road. Commissioners recapped the discussion and the proposed approach put forward by Ms. Louisos and Mr. Gagnon. Ms. Louisos will convene a group to work on these items, including professionals, Mr. Gagnon and Allan Strong. Members agreed. 7. Opportunity for Planning Commission to update recommendation to the City Council re: Interim Zoning Application #IZ-19-01: Ms. Louisos explained that this has returned to the Commission from the City Council because no specific action had been taken. The Council was confused by this and needed a clear recommendation. She noted that the Commission sphere of responding should deal with whether the application goes against what the Commission is working on. 4 Mr. Riehle said he saw no reason to delay the application. Ms. Ostby felt there could be all kinds of recommendations from the IZ committees. Mr. KIugo said the development pattern has been established on this side of the road, and the Commission’s PUD project is for areas of 4 acres or more and this is only 2 acres. He was OK supporting the application. Mr. Mittag moved to allow the application to proceed. Mr. Klugo seconded. The motion passed 6-1 with Ms. Ostby voting against. 8. Presentation and Discussion on possible requirement for solar generation for new buildings: Mr. Epstein and Mr. Chalnick of the Energy Committee reported that the news on climate change is getting worse and the need to reduce greenhouse gases is more critical. They also noted that South Burlington is committed to doing this. Mr. Mittag said he read that South Burlington has more solar capacity than any other Vermont community. Mr. Chalnick then explained why they are supporting Solar PV. He noted that Green Mountain Power energy is pretty clean. The state is anticipating more and more electric power to address climate change and would need at least 500 MW of solar PV power by 2025. He also noted that California mandates solar PV for new residences. Watertown, Mass. Requires solar PV in commercial buildings. Mr. Chalnick then showed a diagram of how solar works. The plan they are proposing would require each new single family home to be required to install a solar PV system that is estimated to generate in its first year of operation at least 1500 kw hours per home or a number of kw hours equal to half the home’s square footage. Mr. Chalnick noted that South Burlington has already adopted the stretch energy code which requires all new homes to be solar ready. Mr. Gagnon cited the differences weather-wise between California and Vermont and asked if what is possible in California is possible here. Mr. Chalnick explained why this can be possible. He then outlined the specifics of what would be required as follows: a. A system that will generate 2500 kw hours b. Abut 6-7 solar panels depending on the type of panel, orientation, etc. c. If paid up front, typically $5000-$6000 after federal tax credits The system would generate savings of about $15,000 over its 30-year useful life and would provide just less than half of the electricity needs of the average 2000 sq. ft. home. 5 Mr. Klugo asked how you get past the dollar investment. He noted that people no longer spend 30 years in their homes. Mr. Chittenden noted there is PACE financing available in which the city owns the note and then charges the current homeowner. Mr. Chalnick also noted that prices are starting to come down. Mr. Chalnick then noted a few instances where exceptions would be allowed: a. Roofs that are unavoidably shaded b. Other unique site-specific conditions c. Projects that include a community shared solar system that meets the solar PV requirements Mr. Chalnick then reviewed some Green Mountain Power solar facts including how homeowners are paid for the solar energy they produce and also how incentives are provided to customers who install battery storage systems. (Ms. Louisos left the meeting at this point) Mr. Conner noted that solar capacity doesn’t have to be on a roof; it can be on a carport. Mr. Klugo felt they are “watering down” the potential by going to only 50%. He suggested going for the maximum right out of the gate. Mr. Chalnick said the hope is that people would do this voluntarily. Mr. Gagnon raised the question of when the Commission would tackle this. He noted there is a lot to do with Interim Zoning and recommended this be done when IZ is completed. Ms. Ostby suggested it might be part of the PUD regulations. Mr. Klugo was concerned with pushing other matters off the Commission’s ‘plate.’ Mr. Conner said staff would be happy to look at the scope involved in this including whether the amount is right, whether what is in the draft is feasible, and how the development community would respond (he suggested a presentation to them). Mr. Macdonald suggested running this by the Economic Development Committee. 9. Report from Committee Liaisons: a. TDR Committee: Mr. Mittag said they are close to a final draft report and hope to be there next week. The City Attorney is working on fixing the TDRs, and they will have a draft from her before they finish their work b. Open Space: Mr. Gagnon said they are still working through evaluation criteria. The picked 5 properties and had everyone review them with the criteria. In general, “the cream rose to the top.” They will do some more testing and then some public outreach. 6 c. Form Based Code: Mr. Klugo said staff bought together a package of items/concerns brought to the committee, and they are working through them. It is a slow process. They hope to bring something to the Commission in a month. Mr. Conner noted the next round of amendments (June/July) will include Form Based Code concerns in addition to parking standards, TDR cleanup, etc. Ms. Ostby asked if the Commission is on track with PUD work. Mr. Conner said it is. The next meeting will be largely concerned with subdivision criteria. 10. Meeting Minutes of 23 April 2019: Mr. Mittag moved to approve the Minutes of 23 April as written. Mr. Macdonald seconded. Motion passed 6-0. 11. Other Business: a. Village of Essex Junction Draft Comprehensive Plan: Planning Commission Public Hearing, Thursday, May 23, 6 p.m., 2 Lincoln St., Essex Junction b. Town of Shelburne Draft amendments to Zoning Bylaw: Planning Commission Public Hearing, Thursday May 23, 7 p.m., 5420 Shelburne Road, Shelburne c. City of Burlington Draft Amendments to Comprehensive Development Ordinance, Planning Commission Public Hearing, Tuesday, May 28, 6:45 p.m., 149 Church St. d. 45-day pre-application notice for a proposed 150 kw solar array application to the Public Utilities Commission by Bullrock Solar, 650 Spear St. e. 45-day pre-application notice for a proposed 80 kw solar array application to the Public Utilities Commission by Bullrock Solar, 705 Spear St. Mr. Conner noted these items were informational and required no action. As there was no further business to come before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned by common consent at 9:30 p.m. ___________________________________ Clerk