HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - City Council - 08/19/2019AGENDA
SOUTH BURLINGTON CITY COUNCIL South Burlington City Hall 575 Dorset Street SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT
Regular Session 6:30 P.M. Monday, August 19, 2019 1.Pledge of Allegiance. (6:30 – 6:31 PM)
2.Instructions on exiting building in case of emergency. Kevin Dorn (6:31 – 6:32 PM)
3.Agenda Review: Additions, deletions or changes in order of agenda items. (6:32 – 6:33 PM)
4.Comments and questions from the public not related to the agenda. (6:33 – 6:43 PM)
5.Announcements and City Manager’s Report. (6:43 – 6:53 PM)
6.Reports from Councilors’ Committee assignments (6:53 – 6:58 PM)
7.Consent Agenda: (6:58 – 7:00 PM)
A. *** Consider and Sign Disbursements
B. *** Consider and possibly approve minutes for August 1, 2019 joint meeting with the PlanningCommission, August 5, 2019 regular meeting and August 9, 2019 special meeting
C.*** Acceptance of the Pinnacle at Spear Stormwater System and Associated Easements
8.Update on City/School Collaboration (7:00 – 7:10 PM)
9.*** Consider and possibly approve a Grant Agreement Resolution related to the Vermont CommunityDevelopment Program and the Champlain Housing Trust Garden Street Housing Limited Partnership
–Kevin Dorn (7:10 – 7:15 PM)
10.*** Consider and possibly approve a Resolution Authorizing Use of City Infrastructure – AndrewBolduc (7:15 – 7:25 PM)
11.*** Public hearing and possible action on amendments or repeal of City ordinances (7:30 – 7:45) –
Andrew Bolduc (7:25 – 7:35 PM)
A.Motor Vehicle and Traffic Ordinance – This ordinance is warned to repeal the SouthBurlington Motor Vehicle and Traffic Regulation Ordinance, first adopted in 1958, and toadopt a new ordinance that regulates the operation and use of motor vehicles other thanparking in a form that provides the Council flexibility to establish and amend by resolution the
locations of one-way streets, yield signs, etc.
B.Parking Ordinance – Along with the repeal of the 1958 Motor Vehicle and Traffic RegulationOrdinance, this proposed ordinance creates a stand-alone parking ordinance that will providefor general parking prohibitions in the City and an administrative appeal process
12.*** Receive and consider request from SunCap Property Group in Technology Park for the City torelinquish the irrevocable offer of dedication for a planned dead-end roadway, and to request an
impact fee credit for the “in-kind” contribution of intersection improvements at Kimball Ave/Community Dr/Gregory Dr. – Paul Conner (7:35 – 7:55 PM)
13.*** Receive proposed amendments to Land Development Regulations #LDR-19-01 – LDR-19-05 fromPlanning Commission; consider warning public hearing on same – Paul Conner. (7:55 – 8:15 PM)
14.Consider and possibly approve recommendation for Banking Services – Kevin Dorn (8:15 – 8:25 PM)
15.*** Council discussion and possible action regarding a funding request for the South BurlingtonMaster Naturalist program. (8:25 – 8:45 PM) Councilor Emery
16.*** Consider convening as the South Burlington Liquor Control Commission to approve the following:
(8:45 – 8:50 PM)
Mimmo’s Pizzeria & Restaurant - First Class Restaurant/Bar License
17.Other Business (8:50 – 8:55 PM)
18. Adjourn (8:55 PM)
Respectfully Submitted:
Kevin Dorn
Kevin Dorn, City Manager
*** Attachments Included
Issues raised by Councilors or the public that have not been on a prior meeting agenda:
1.Cost of development/cost of open space.
Issues that have been discussed by the Council where further action is pending:
1.Street light policy.2.Airport noise survey.3.Evaluate water billing and rate structure.
South Burlington City Council Meeting Participation Guidelines
City Council meetings are the only time we have to discuss and decide on City matters. We want to be as open and informal as possible; but Council meetings are not town meetings. In an effort to conduct orderly and efficient meetings, we kindly request your cooperation and compliance with the following guidelines.
1.Please be respectful of each other (Council members, staff, and the public).
2.Please raise your hand to be recognized by the Chair. Once recognized please state your name and address.
3.Please address the Chair and not other members of the public, staff, or presenters.
4.Please abide by any time limits that have been set. Time limits will be used to insure everyone is heard and there is sufficienttime for the Council to conduct all the business on the agenda.
5.The Chair will make a reasonable effort to allow everyone to speak once before speakers address the Council a second time.
6.The Chair may ask that discussion be limited to the Councilors once the public input has been heard.
7.Please do not interrupt when others are speaking.
8.Please do not repeat the points made by others, except to briefly say whether you agree or disagree with others views.
9.Please use the outside hallway for side conversations. It is difficult to hear speaker remarks when there are otherconversations occurring.
South Burlington Water Dept. Accounts Payable Check Register Date: 08/20/19
Date Check No. Paid To Memo Amount Paid
8/20/2019 3606 Continental Utility Solutions, Inc.2,800.00
Date Voucher Number Reference Voucher Total Amount Paid8/8/2019 VI-14891 U24982 2,800.00 2,800.00
8/20/2019 3607 Champlain Water District 50,022.01
Date Voucher Number Reference Voucher Total Amount Paid7/31/2019 VI-14879 SBWD-352 50,022.01 50,022.01
8/20/2019 3608 Champlain Water District 132,780.15
Date Voucher Number Reference Voucher Total Amount Paid
7/31/2019 VI-14877 SBWD-345 311.06 311.06 7/31/2019 VI-14878 JULY 132,469.09 132,469.09
8/20/2019 3609 E.J. Prescott, Inc.698.05
Date Voucher Number Reference Voucher Total Amount Paid7/25/2019 VI-14880 545.16 545.16 7/25/2019 VI-14881 5576007 65.28 65.28 7/25/2019 VI-14882 5576001 23.19 23.19 7/31/2019 VI-14890 5579370 64.42 64.42
8/20/2019 3610 Endyne, Inc.69.00
Date Voucher Number Reference Voucher Total Amount Paid8/5/2019 VI-14884 305788 47.00 47.00 8/2/2019 VI-14885 305643 22.00 22.00
8/20/2019 3611 F.W. Webb Company 1,774.21
Date Voucher Number Reference Voucher Total Amount Paid
7/25/2019 VI-14889 63889995 1,774.21 1,774.21
8/20/2019 3612 Office Essentials 557.12
Date Voucher Number Reference Voucher Total Amount Paid8/5/2019 VI-14883 36335 8.62 8.62 8/12/2019 VI-14888 36353 548.50 548.50
8/20/2019 3613 City Of South Burlington 315,829.01
Date Voucher Number Reference Voucher Total Amount Paid
8/6/2019 VI-14886 JULY SEWER CHARGES 315,829.01 315,829.01
8/20/2019 3614 City Of South Burlington 241,709.40
Date Voucher Number Reference Voucher Total Amount Paid
8/6/2019 VI-14887 JULY STORMWATER 241,709.40 241,709.40
Printed: August 15, 2019 Page 1 of 2
South Burlington Water Dept. Accounts Payable Check Register Date: 08/20/19
Date Check No. Paid To Memo Amount Paid
Total Amount Paid:746,238.95
SOUTH BURLINGTON CITY COUNCIL
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
Printed: August 15, 2019 Page 2 of 2
JOINT CITY COUNCIL & PLANNING COMMISSION 1 AUGUST 2019
The South Burlington City Council held a joint meeting with the Planning Commission on
Thursday, 1 August 2019, at 6:30 p.m., in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset Street.
City Council Members Present: H. Riehle, Chair; M. Emery, T. Barritt, T. Chittenden
Planning Commission Members Present: J. Louisos, Chair; A. Klugo, T. Riehle, M. Mittag
Also Present: K. Dorn, City Manager; T. Hubbard, Deputy City Manager; A. Bolduc, City
Attorney; P. Conner, Director of Planning & Zoning; C. LaRose, City Planner; V. Bolduc, J.
Simson, S. Dooley, P. Thompson, F. & J. Kochman, R. Greco, M. Simoneau, A. Strong, S. Dopp, T.
Bailey, B. Britt, other members of the public
1.Agenda Review: Additions, deletions or changes in order of agenda items:
No changes were made to the Agenda.
2.Comments and Questions from the public not related to the agenda:
No issues were raised by the public.
3.Introduction and Welcome:
Ms. Riehle thanked the large number of residents who serve on committees and specifically
those who have been active on Interim Zoning (IZ) committees. She also thanked Planning
Commission members who have been addressing a long list of “deliverables” that the City
Council is interested in. She then briefly reviewed prior IZ efforts and the current effort.
Ms. Louisos thanked the Council for including the Planning Commission in the IZ process and
noted that Commission members also volunteer to serve on IZ committees and committees
related to City Center issues.
4.Status Report presentations by committees on interim zoning projects:
a.Affordable Housing Committee on Inclusionary Zoning:
Mr. Simson said the Committee has been working to provide affordable housing in the
Transition Overlay District on Shelburne Road. He then enumerated the reasons for this effort:
1.The Comprehensive Plan calls for housing for all incomes in the city and
specifically indicates the need for 1020 affordable units
2.The tax base depends on successful businesses, and they, in turn, depend on
employees who need local housing instead of long commutes. Most of the
JOINT CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION
1 AUGUST 2019
PAGE 2
city’s teachers, police, and firefighters live outside of the city because they can’t
afford to live in S. Burlington.
3.The city has an aging population who need to live near shopping, health care,
etc.
4.There is a need to attract more families to the city to take advantage of the
excellent schools.
Mr. Simson said the affordable housing supply is inadequate to meet those needs, and it is
important to balance the desire for open space with the need for housing.
The plan being proposed would expand inclusionary zoning to the transit overlay district on
Shelburne Road. This measure would not meet the entire need for affordable housing, but it
would help as an incremental step.
Ms. Dooley explained that the requirement to include affordable units begins with a
development of 12 units or more. 15% of those units must be affordable for people at 80% of
the median income to rent or for those at 100% of the median income to purchase. A one-
bedroom inclusionary unit would have to rent for $1375 (including utilities) maximum monthly
rent ($1650 for 2 bedrooms and $1906 for 3 bedrooms). A 2-bedroom inclusionary home
would have to sell for $281,500, and a 3-bedroom home for $325,500. For every required
inclusion unit, a developer would receive an additional offset unit (not affordable).
Ms. Dooley noted that of 15 homes for sale in the city in May, 2019, the lowest price 3-
bedroom home was $339,000, and the median price of all available 3-bedroom homes was
$416,000.
If a person moves into a rental, and then has an increase in income, that person would not have
to move out of the unit until he/she chose to move. The same is true with a purchase.
Mr. Simson said the committee will be holding hearings with the Planning Commission and with
the City Council as they have completed their work. He thanked Regina Mahoney of CCRPC for
her help in their effort. Mr. Simson hoped the Planning Commission will take this up quickly.
Mr. Barritt asked who would do the income vetting. Mr. Simson said it could be jobbed out to
Champlain Housing. Ms. Dooley added that the property owner has to submit a report each
year regarding the income and rental price of the units.
JOINT CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION
1 AUGUST 2019
PAGE 3
Mr. Simson said the next step would be to extend inclusionary zoning to the rest of the city. He
noted that inclusionary units can be smaller, but the outside must look the same as other units.
Mr. Chittenden asked whether reducing parking spaces would hinder affordable housing
efforts. Mr. Simson said they recommend one space per unit instead of 2. Providing parking is
an added construction expense. Mr. Simson also said the Committee is willing to work with the
Planning Commission on any PUD that is suggested (re: design, layout of parking, etc.). Mr.
Conner said parking depends on the form of the housing; some development communities may
want very few parking spaces.
b.Open Space IZ Committee:
Mr. Strong cited the work of committee members to achieve their charge of prioritizing
conservation of open spaces and sustenance of ecosystems.
Mr. Strong then reviewed the work of the committee. They looked at important areas of the
city and the work that had been done in the past. They were not charged with changing zoning,
condemning property, etc. The properties they reviewed were more than 4 acres in size with
less than 10% impervious. They looked at water, wildlife, forests, aesthetics, and agriculture in
relation to those properties. They also considered “big picture connectivity for the city.” They
have used on-line mapping managed by CCRPC and the State Biofinder (a great resource on
particular parcel).
Mr. Strong then showed a plan of 5 parcels surrounding Technology Park from the point of view
of riparian connectivity (affecting only 1 parcel), wildlife (affecting only 1 of the 5 parcels),
forests (affecting only 1 property), and affecting wildlife crossing and prime agricultural soils
(affecting only 1 property). They have done similar work with 180 parcels. The final report will
include the high-priority parcels. There will also be an Appendix with a page for each parcel
and what was found for each.
Mr. Strong then noted the challenges of determining what resources to be protected, PUD
guidelines, Natural Resource Protection areas (to avoid protecting what is already protected).
The anticipation is that all their parcel assessments will be in within 5 days, and they anticipate
a final report in mid-September.
Mr. Chittenden asked what the expectation is for the Planning Commission to do with the list of
properties. Mr. Strong said what they will probably have are potential strategies for
JOINT CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION
1 AUGUST 2019
PAGE 4
conservation/protection. A change in zoning is beyond their charge. Ms. Louisos noted the
Planning Commission has done a lot of work on standards for protection of resources. Mr.
Conner said there can be 2 or 3 paths at the same time: the official map can be a tool as can
acquisition/donation of land. Different parcels might be better for different tools. Ms. Riehle
cited the importance of open property having ecological value.
Mr. Kochman noted there is a map attached to the Comprehensive Plan with lands you can’t
build on. He felt it was important for the City Council to say these are important areas that
shouldn’t be built on. Ms. Greco agreed and said the LDRs must protect these properties;
otherwise it’s meaningless. Ms. Dooley said that people underestimate the challenge of writing
LDRs and the limited resources to do it.
c.Transfer of Development Rights IZ Committee:
Mr. Mittag introduced committee members and noted they represent a wide range of opinions.
He said the Committee’s focus has been on the conservation value of TDRs, and they have
reached consensus in their report. Mr. Mittag also reviewed the enabling legislation for TDRs
and indicated there is a Vermont Natural Resources Council TDR Guidance Document.
Mr. Mittag then reviewed the city’s history with TDRs. There were an estimated 2066 TDRs
available for transfer. Of these, 584 have been used. 114 were severed and transferred,
conserving 95 acres. 470 were used intra-parcel, equating to 370 acres of open space
conserved. Of the 1357 remaining TDRs, the city owns 116, and the remainder are owned by
landowners.
Mr. Mittag noted there are limited receiving areas as well as difficulty connecting TDR holders
with buyers as there is no reliable TDR data base.
One of the unintended consequences of the TDR program is that it could lead to densely
developed areas where the Comprehensive Plan encourages open space. Some residents argue
that receiving areas are worthy of conservation. Public surveys are included in the committee’s
report.
The committee is suggesting 4 options:
JOINT CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION
1 AUGUST 2019
PAGE 5
1.Eliminate the TDR program and with conventional zoning
2.Keep the program as is and purchase and retire the TDRs
3.Keep the program as it is
4.Amend the ordinance
The committee felt the first 2 options were not viable. Option 3 would leave sending and
receiving areas in the SEQ and not further the desire for open space. It is option 4 that the
committee recommends as follows:
a.Support conservation goals
b.Expand receiving areas outside the SEQ
c.Add new sending areas that are high priorities for conservation
d.Define a “dwelling unit” by area (square footage)
e.Re-designate sensitive receiving areas in the SEQ
f.Possibly have the city purchase and retire TDRs from select parcels
that have the highest conservation value
g.Work to develop a balance between the capacity for RDR usage and
the supply
h.Create a TDR bank
i.Maintain a map of where TDRs have been severed and where used.
This work could take several months, followed by public hearings.
Mr. Klugo noted that as long as developments in the SEQ are being built out at less than the
allowable density, there will be fewer TDRs used.
Mr. Chittenden said he liked the idea of expanding sending and receiving areas.
Ms. Emery suggested using a TDR for a store. Mr. Barritt said that is contrary to the enabling
legislation which allows only dwelling units.
d.Planning Commission on PUD/Subdivision/Master Plans:
Ms. Louisos thanked all the contributors to the Commission’s work. She showed the
Commission’s “work chart” of how work has been coordinated to date. They are meshing with
other committees, consultants and with the State, and quite a few of the pieces are completed.
JOINT CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION
1 AUGUST 2019
PAGE 6
Subdivision work will be wrapped up by the end of the year. She also noted there are some
things the Commission has not been able to “drop” (e.g., City Center, Form Based Code issues).
Ms. Louisos then showed an overview of what a PUD might look like. The Commission has been
working on different PUD types. One of these types would be required for a development on
more than 4 acres, except in City Center. There would be different percentages for residential
and commercial uses in different PUD types. One of the PUD types is a Conservation PUD in
which 70% of the property would not be developed. More than half of that property would
have to contain natural resources to be preserved. Other types of PUDs are Traditional
Neighborhood and Neighborhood Commercial.
Parallel to this effort are updates to subdivision and Master Plan regulations. New updates to
Chapter 12 will provide changes regarding resource protection across the city, not only in PUDs.
New things to be considered for protection include forests, river corridors, steep slopes, and
views.
Ms. Louisos then showed a draft version of a “guidance document” that would provide open
space requirement (with pictures), different street types (with design diagrams), building types
and what they could look like (e.g., urban store front), and would also establish better
transitions between areas. Some areas of the city might see increased density.
Ms. Emery questioned parking minimums for commercial developments and also whether
marking something “protected” is strong enough to actually protect it.
Ms. Kochman asked if it is still the plan to have developers bring plans to committees such as
Recreation/Parks for their recommendations. Mr. Conner said that is at the discretion of the
developer or at the order of the DRB. He added that a lot of work of the PUD process is to give
much clearer guidance to developers. Ms. Kochman felt the Recreation/Parks Committee has
provided valuable guidance to the DRB in the past and that the committees could do “clearing
house stuff” before a plan goes to the DRB.
Mr. Kochman said he was astonished with minimum parking standards for commercial
developments. He felt the DRB should be given broader ability to modify parking on a case-by-
case basis. He stressed that developers would not take into consideration those businesses
around them. Mr. Kochman also felt it is silly not to allow parking in front of a commercial
building and that could also be left to the discretion of the DRB.
JOINT CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION
1 AUGUST 2019
-PAGE 7
Ms. Emery said that proactive steps have to be taken to wean people from the car culture. Mr.
Kochman said he could accept that reasoning if the Council could create “logical public
transportation.”
Mr. Britt asked how people use variances to build in wetlands. Ms. Louisos explained the
wetland mitigation process for impact on wetlands. Mr. Klugo elaborated on the series of rules
that allow the “moving” of a wetland.
e.Economics of Land Conservation/Development:
Mr. Dorn said there are 2 components to this. For the first, they have retained John Stuart to
look into the financial component of providing services to properties. He noted that 72 cents of
every tax dollar goes to fund schools. The second component, calculating values of open space,
view sheds, etc., is harder to assess, and the city has not been able to find a rational way to
quantify the values of these things.
Mr. Chittenden expressed the concern with long-term effects on the Grand List.
Ms. Riehle said studies say what the city is doing now is not sustainable.
Ms. Greco cited a recent article regarding the health benefits of open space.
5.Facilitated discussion amongst Council, Commission, and Committee leadership of key
themes, significant decision points, overall schedule of completion:
Ms. Riehle noted a number of groups have asked for “a little more time.”
Ms. Emery asked if the Planning Commission sees the provisions for affordable housing as
feasible. Mr. Klugo said the Commission is good within the Transit Overlay District as that is just
a math calculation. Developers won’t go much higher than what they can build now (7 stories)
as steel construction is too expensive.
Mr. Riehle said he hasn’t heard the development is being held back. He felt committees should
complete their work, then go to the Planning Commission, then to public hearings.
Mr. Conner noted the Planning Commission will have to see how all of this balances with the
Comprehensive Pan. He asked if the Council is looking for anything different from the
committees.
JOINT CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION
1 AUGUST 2019
PAGE 8
Mr. Conner also noted the end date for IZ is currently 13 August.
Mr. Klugo felt that TDRs and the Affordable Housing pieces can move forward independently.
As there was no further business to come before the joint bodies, the meeting was adjourned
by common consent at 9:45 p.m.
________________________________
Clerk
SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL 1 AUGUST 2019
The South Burlington City Council held a special meeting on Thursday, 1 August 2019, at 9:45
p.m., in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset Street.
Members Present: H. Riehle, Chair; M. Emery, T. Barritt, T. Chittenden
Also Present: K. Dorn, City Manager; T. Hubbard, Deputy City Manager
1.Consider and Possibly Approve Addendum to Agreement with School District for the
Exchange of Rights and Interests in Real Property:
Mr. Dorn explained the sequencing of building of roads, parking lot and the new building.
Mr. Chittenden said he was concerned with unexpected costs.
Mr. Barritt then moved that the Council approve, and authorize Helen Riehle to execute on the
City’s behalf, the Addendum to the Agreement for the Exchange of Rights and Interests in Real
Property with the South Burlington School District. Ms. Emery seconded. Motion passed 4-0.
Mr. Dorn thanked the Council for its patience and support during the process of securing this
addendum.
2. Consent Agenda:
a.Entertainment Permit
b.Disbursements
Mr. Chittenden moved to approve the Consent Agenda as presented. Ms. Emery seconded.
Motion passed 4-0.
3.Consider and discuss the upcoming deadline for Interim Zoning:
Members felt there had been adequate discussion during the Joint Meeting with the Planning
Commission held earlier in the evening.
4. Other Business:
Nor other business was discussed.
As there was no further business to come before the Council, Mr. Chittenden moved to
adjourn. Mr. Barritt seconded. Motion passed 4-0. The meeting was adjourned at 10:05
p.m.
________________________________
Clerk
SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL 1 AUGUST 2019
The South Burlington City Council held a special meeting on Thursday, 1 August 2019, at 9:45
p.m., in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset Street.
Members Present: H. Riehle, Chair; M. Emery, T. Barritt, T. Chittenden
Also Present: K. Dorn, City Manager; T. Hubbard, Deputy City Manager
1.Consider and Possibly Approve Addendum to Agreement with School District for the
Exchange of Rights and Interests in Real Property:
Mr. Dorn explained the sequencing of building of roads, parking lot and the new building.
Mr. Chittenden said he was concerned with unexpected costs.
Mr. Barritt then moved that the Council approve, and authorize Helen Riehle to execute on the
City’s behalf, the Addendum to the Agreement for the Exchange of Rights and Interests in Real
Property with the South Burlington School District. Ms. Emery seconded. Motion passed 4-0.
Mr. Dorn thanked the Council for its patience and support during the process of securing this
addendum.
2. Consent Agenda:
a.Entertainment Permit
b.Disbursements
Mr. Chittenden moved to approve the Consent Agenda as presented. Ms. Emery seconded.
Motion passed 4-0.
3.Consider and discuss the upcoming deadline for Interim Zoning:
Members felt there had been adequate discussion during the Joint Meeting with the Planning
Commission held earlier in the evening.
4. Other Business:
Nor other business was discussed.
As there was no further business to come before the Council, Mr. Chittenden moved to
adjourn. Mr. Barritt seconded. Motion passed 4-0. The meeting was adjourned at 10:05
p.m.
________________________________
Clerk
Memo
To:South Burlington City Council
From: Tom DiPietro, Deputy Director of Public Works
CC: Kevin Dorn, City Manager
Justin Rabidoux Director of Public Works
Date: August 12, 2019
Re:Acceptance of the Pinnacle at Spear Stormwater System and Easements
Section 7.1 of the City’s “Ordinance Regulating the Use of Public and Private Sanitary
Sewerage and Stormwater Systems” (the “Ordinance”) describes a process by which
exclusively residential properties can improve their stormwater systems and then turn
maintenance responsibility for them over to the City. Once improvements are complete and
these systems are accepted by City Council, the stormwater superintendent can then work
with the State of Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation (the stormwater
permitting agency) to take these existing permits and include them under the City’s MS4
Permit authorization. This process provides the properties with valid State stormwater permit
coverage.
The Pinnacle at Spear neighborhood is eligible to transfer its stormwater permit to the City,
has completed all required steps in Sections 7.1(A) through 7.1(D) of the City Ordinance,
and has agreed to have the discharge from their stormwater system (State permit number
1-1155) covered under the City’s MS4 Permit. The neighborhood has also agreed to
convey easements over its stormwater system to the City, and the City Council needs to
approve acceptance of the attached Easement Deed and MS4 Permit Coverage Agreement
for the City to officially take over maintenance responsibility for this stormwater system.
I certify that this neighborhood has met the required conditions specified in the Ordinance
and that it is in the best interest of the City, and residents, for the City to accept transfer of its
stormwater permit and to provide MS4 Permit coverage for this neighborhood’s stormwater
system. The legal agreement related to MS4 Permit coverage and its related Easement
Deed has been reviewed and approved by the City’s outside legal counsel. I recommend
that Council votes to accept the transfer of this stormwater permit and related easements
over the stormwater system to the City and to formally provide MS4 Permit coverage for this
system.
If you have any questions, please contact me at (802) 658 – 7961 x6108 or
tdipietro@sburl.com.
10
STITZEL, PAGE &
FLETCHER, P.C.
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
171 BATTERY STREET
P.O. BOX 1507
BURLINGTON, VERMONT
05402-1507
DATED this ____ day of __________________, 201____.
IN PRESENCE OF:CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON
___________________________ By: ____________________________
WITNESS Kevin Dorn, City Manager
And Duly Authorized Agent
STATE OF VERMONT
COUNTY OF CHITTENDEN, SS.
At South Burlington, Vermont, this _____ day of ___________________, 201__,
personally appeared ______________________, City Manager and Duly Authorized
Agent of the CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON, and he acknowledged this
instrument, by him subscribed, to be his free act and deed, and the free act and
deed of the CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON.
Before me, ___________________________________
Notary Public
My commission expires: 2/10/19
Forms, Policies and Resolutions
Chapter 3-15
GRANT AGREEMENT RESOLUTION - SINGLE GRANTEE Form PM-1
WHEREAS, the (check one) [ ] Town [ ] City [ ] Village of
has applied for funding under the Vermont Community Development Program, as provided for in 10
VSA Ch. 29, and has received an award of funds under said provisions; and
WHEREAS, the Agency of Commerce and Community Development has tendered a Grant Agreement
# to this municipality for said funding:
Now, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED as follows:
1)that the legislative body of this municipality accepts and agrees to the terms and conditions of saidGrant Agreement;
2)that (Name) Titleis hereby designated as the person with overall Administrative responsibility for the VCDP activitiesrelated to this Grant Agreement; and
3)that (Name)________________________________Title_________________________________who is either the Chief Executive Officer (CEO), as defined by 10 VSA §683(8), or is the TownManager, the City Manager, or the Town Administrator, hereby designated as the AuthorizingOfficial (AO) to execute the Grant Agreement and other such Documents as may be necessary to
secure these funds.
Passed this day of , .
LEGISLATIVE BODY
(Typed Name) (Signature)
For Agency Use:
Processed By: Date:
R-2019-
RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING USE OF CITY INFRASTRUCTURE
WHEREAS, the City of South Burlington, Vermont recognizes the importance of full access to the range of telecommunication options for homes and places of work in a downtown; and,
WHEREAS, in order to support the development of the downtown and improved quality of life the City has reconstructed Market Street; and,
WHEREAS, all utility infrastructure on Market Street is required to be underground; and,
WHEREAS, to ensure an efficient use of space within the right-of-way, preserve the long-term integrity of the street, and ensure equal access by multiple telecommunication providers, public conduit and vaults have been installed as part of the project; and
WHEREAS, the capacity of the system is three to four innerducts per conduit installed;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the South Burlington City Council hereby directs that:
1. Telecommunications companies shall be allowed to install or maintain wire, glass, cableor any other telecommunications technology or material within City ownedtelecommunications infrastructure for non-municipal use upon execution of an
agreement governing installation, insurance, indemnity, removal, inspection, paymentof annual fees and any other items deemed appropriate by the City Attorney andDirector of Public Works.
2.The annual usage fess shall be set at $0.____ per linear foot.
3.All users must install service within 6 months of entering into an agreement with the City,
unless extended for cause by the South Burlington Director of Public Works.
4. Any design that inefficiently occupies innerduct/conduit in a manner that is deemedinefficient and restricts future capacity by competing providers may be denied a permit.
5. Annual fees shall be placed in the Capital Improvement Reserve Fund for the purposes ofoffsetting future telecommunication infrastructure capital costs.
6. Any underground work in the vicinity of a City owned conduit shall require a permit thatensures the protection and restoration of this infrastructure.
APPROVED this ______ day of August, 2019.
SOUTH BURLINGTON CITY COUNCIL
__________________________________ ________________________________
Helen Riehle, Chair Meaghan Emery, Vice-Chair
__________________________________ ________________________________ Tim Barritt, Clerk Tom Chittenden
__________________________________
David Kaufman
Motor Vehicle and Traffic
Ordinance
MOTOR VEHICLE AND TRAFFIC ORDINANCE 2
City of South Burlington Ordinance
Table of Contents
1.Purpose and Authority ..................................................................................................................... 3
2.Definitions ........................................................................................................................................ 3
3.Speed Regulations ............................................................................................................................ 3
4.Stop Intersections ............................................................................................................................ 3
5.Yield Intersections ............................................................................................................................ 3
6.Traffic Control Signals ...................................................................................................................... 3
7.Flashing Signals ................................................................................................................................ 4
8.One Way Streets .............................................................................................................................. 4
9.Right Turn Only Intersections .......................................................................................................... 4
10.Vulnerable Users .............................................................................................................................. 4
11.Civil Penalties; Waiver Fee; Enforcement ........................................................................................ 5
12.Severability....................................................................................................................................... 5
13.Repeal…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………5
MOTOR VEHICLE AND TRAFFIC ORDINANCE 3
City of South Burlington Ordinance
The Council of the City of South Burlington hereby ordains:
1.Purpose and Authority
This Motor Vehicle and Traffic Ordinance is enacted by the City Council to promote the public
health, safety and welfare of City residents under the authority it is granted to regulate the
operation and use of motor vehicles as set forth in 19 V.S.A. section 304, 23 V.S.A. sections
1007 and 1008, 24 V.S.A. section 2291(1), (4), and (5) and Sections 103 and 104 of the South
Burlington City Charter. This Ordinance establishes special traffic regulations on public roads or
highways in the City of South Burlington and shall constitute a civil ordinance within the
meaning of 24 V.S.A. chapter 59.
2. Definitions
The definitions set forth in 23 V.S.A. section 4 are incorporated herein by reference.
3.Speed Regulations
The City Council shall establish, by appropriate resolution, speed limits on City public roads and
highways and upon doing so shall cause suitable “Speed Limit” signs to be installed. Speed
limits established by the City Council shall be in effect when so posted.
4.Stop Intersections
The City Council shall designate, by appropriate resolution, stop intersections and upon doing
so shall cause a suitable “Stop” sign to be installed at the intersection. When a stop sign is so
installed, a motor vehicle operator approaching the stop sign shall operate the vehicle in the
manner required by 23 V.S.A. section 1048(b).
5.Yield Intersections
The City Council shall designate, by appropriate resolution, yield intersections and upon doing
so shall cause a suitable “Yield” sign to be installed at the intersections. When a yield sign is so
installed, an operator approaching the yield sign shall operate the motor vehicle in the manner
required by 23 V.S.A. section 1048(c).
6.Traffic-Control Signals
The City Council shall designate, by appropriate resolution, intersections and other locations on
City public roads and highways to be controlled by traffic-control signals and upon doing so
shall cause a traffic-control signal to be installed at the intersection or other location. When a
traffic-control signal is so installed, an operator approaching the traffic-control signal shall
operate the motor vehicle in the manner required by 23 V.S.A. section 1022.
MOTOR VEHICLE AND TRAFFIC ORDINANCE 4
City of South Burlington Ordinance
7.Flashing Signals
The City Council shall designate, by appropriate resolution, intersections and other locations on
City public roads and highways to be controlled by flashing signals and upon doing so shall
cause a flashing signal to be installed at the intersection or other specified location. When a
flashing signal is so installed, an operator approaching the traffic-control signal shall operate
the motor vehicle in the manner required by 23 V.S.A. section 1024.
8.One-Way Streets
The City Council shall designate, by appropriate resolution, any public road or highway for one-
way traffic and establish the direction of traffic and upon doing so shall cause a suitable “One-
Way” sign to be installed. When a one-way sign is so installed, an operator shall operate the
motor vehicle only in the direction designated.
9.Right Turn Only Intersections
The City Council shall designate, by appropriate resolution, intersections where only right turns
are allowed and upon doing so shall cause a suitable “Right Turn Only” sign to be installed.
When such a sign is so installed, an operator shall operate the motor vehicle only in the
direction designated.
10.Vulnerable Users
(A)All pedestrians shall obey the instructions of all traffic control devices that are applicable
to pedestrians.
(B)Every person riding a bicycle is granted all of the rights and is subject to all of the duties
applicable to operators of motor vehicles, except as to those provisions described in 23
V.S.A. section 1136(c).
(C)Whenever traffic is controlled by traffic-control signals, vehicular traffic, including motor
vehicles turning right or left, shall yield the right of way to pedestrians in the manner
required by 23 V.S.A. section 1022.
(D)If traffic-control signals are not in operation, the driver of a motor vehicle shall yield the
right of way, slowing down or stopping if necessary, to a pedestrian crossing the
roadway within a crosswalk.
(E)The operator of a motor vehicle shall not, in a careless or imprudent manner, approach,
pass, or maintain speed unnecessarily close to a vulnerable user.
(F)An occupant of a motor vehicle shall not throw any object or substance at a vulnerable
user.
(G)The operator of a motor vehicle approaching or passing a vulnerable user shall exercise
due care, which includes reducing speed and increasing clearance to a recommended
MOTOR VEHICLE AND TRAFFIC ORDINANCE 5
City of South Burlington Ordinance
distance of at least four feet, to pass the vulnerable user safely, and shall cross the
center of the public road or highway only as provided in 23 V.S.A. section 1035.
(H)A person operating a motor vehicle shall not turn left unless the turn can be made at a
safe distance from a vulnerable user.
11.Civil Penalties; Waiver Fee; Enforcement
(A)Any violation of a provision of this Ordinance which constitutes a traffic violation as
defined by 23 V.S.A. section 2302, shall be prosecuted pursuant to 23 V.S.A. chapter 24, and
such violator will be subject to the procedures and provisions set forth therein. From time to
time, the City Council shall establish by appropriate resolution full and waiver penalties for
violations of the provisions of this Ordinance.
(B)Police officers of the City of South Burlington and any other law enforcement officer
shall be authorized to issue and pursue before the Judicial Bureau a civil violation complaint.
The issuing officer shall indicate on the complaint the appropriate full and waiver penalty. A
civil violation complaint may, at the discretion of the issuing officer, be dismissed or a civil or
waiver penalty may be reduced, upon the successful completion of a reparative justice program
through the South Burlington Community Justice Center.
12.Severability
In the event that any section, subsection or portion of this Ordinance shall be declared by any
competent court to be invalid for any reason, such decision shall not be deemed to affect the
validity of any other section, subsection or portion of this Ordinance.
13.Repeal
The Motor Vehicle and Traffic Regulation Ordinance of the City of South Burlington adopted
April 28, 1958 and as amended from time to time thereafter, is hereby repealed.
Adopted at South Burlington, Vermont, this ____ day of _________ 2019.
SOUTH BURLINGTON CITY COUNCIL
_____________________________________ ___________________________________
Helen Riehle, Chair Thomas Chittenden
_____________________________________ ____________________________________
Meaghan Emery, Vice-Chair Dave Kaufman
_____________________________________
Tim Barritt, Clerk
Parking Ordinance
PARKING ORDINANCE 2
City of South Burlington Ordinance
Table of Contents
1.Purpose and Authority ......................................................................................................... 3
2.Definitions .............................................................................................................................. 3
3.Parking Prohibitions…. ............................................................................................................. 3
4.Unregistered Motor Vehicles and Unattached Trailers .............................................................. 4
5.Parking Tickets; Penalties ........................................................................................................ 4
6.Administrative Appeal and Enforcement of Parking Tickets ....................................................... 5
7.Removal of Unlawfully Parked Motor Vehicles .......................................................................... 5
8.Severability ........................................................................................................................... 6
9.Repeal…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..7
PARKING ORDINANCE 3
City of South Burlington Ordinance
The Council of the City of South Burlington hereby ordains:
1.Purpose and Authority
This Parking Ordinance is enacted by the City Council to promote the public health, safety and
welfare of City residents under the authority it is granted to regulate parking of motor vehicles
as set forth in 4 V.S.A. section 32, 19 V.S.A. section 304, 20 V.S.A. section 2904, 23 V.S.A.
sections 1008 and 1753, 24 V.S.A. section 2291, and Sections 103 and 104 of the South
Burlington City Charter. This Ordinance shall constitute a civil ordinance within the meaning of
24 V.S.A. chapter 59. Parking any motor vehicle in violation of this Ordinance is hereby
declared to be a public nuisance.
2. Definitions
(A)The definitions set forth in 23 V.S.A. section 4, as amended from time to time, are
incorporated herein by reference.
(B)“Recreation path” means a public path, or any portion thereof, used by the general
public for recreation; the South Burlington Recreation Path.
3.Parking Prohibitions
Except when necessary to avoid conflict with other traffic, or in compliance with law or the
directions of a law enforcement officer or official traffic-control device, no person shall stop or
park a motor vehicle:
(A)On the roadway side of any motor vehicle stopped or parked at the edge or curb of a
street (double parking);
(B)On a sidewalk or so as to interfere with pedestrian use or maintenance of a sidewalk;
(C)On a recreation path or so as to interfere with authorized uses or maintenance of a
recreation path;
(D)Within fifty (50) feet of an intersection;
(E)On any crosswalk;
(F)Alongside or opposite any road excavation when parking would obstruct traffic;
(G)Upon any bridge or other elevated structure;
(H)Upon any railroad tracks or within fifty (50) feet of the nearest rail of a railroad crossing;
(I)Within fifteen (15) feet of a fire hydrant;
(J)Within thirty (30) feet upon the approach to any flashing signal, stop sign, or traffic
control light located at the side of a roadway;
(K)In front of a public or private driveway;
PARKING ORDINANCE 4
City of South Burlington Ordinance
(L)In any space specified as reserved for a bus stop;
(M)Within twenty (20) feet of the driveway entrance to any fire station and on the side of a
public road or highway opposite and within seventy-five (75) feet of the entrance to any
fire station;
(N)On any public road or highway, or portion thereof, designated by order of the Director
of Public Works as a place where parking is temporarily prohibited because of road or
highway construction, repair or maintenance;
(O)On any public road or highway, or portion thereof, the City Council designates by
resolution as a place where parking is prohibited and indicated as such by “No Parking”
signs;
(P)On any public road or highway for the purpose of selling or renting the same or for the
purpose of displaying or advertising the same for sale or rent;
(Q)So as to interfere with the plowing or removal of snow;
(R)On any public road or highway between 12 o’clock midnight and 8 o’clock a.m. each day
during the four (4)-month period starting December 1 of each year and continuing
through March 31 of the following year;
(S)In a space designated as parking for persons with disabilities except when the motor
vehicle is equipped with a valid handicapped registration plates or properly displayed
handicap permit from the Vermont Department of Motor vehicles in accordance with 23
V.S.A. section 304a, or as otherwise provided by the law of the State in which the motor
vehicle is registered, and an occupant is a person with a disability.
4.Unregistered Motor Vehicles and Unattached Trailers
In addition to the prohibitions set forth in Section 3 of this Ordinance, no person shall stop or
park on any public road or highway for a period that exceeds twenty-four (24) consecutive
hours:
(A)Any unregistered motor vehicle;
(B)Any trailer, semi-trailer or trailer coach that is not attached to a motor vehicle. For the
purposes of this Ordinance, trailer or semi-trailer includes, without limitation, trailers
for boats.
5.Parking Tickets; Penalties
Any City law enforcement officer may issue a parking ticket for any motor vehicle parked in
violation of Sections 3 or 4 of this Ordinance, which shall set forth the penalty to be paid for
such violation. Parking ticket penalties shall be paid to the South Burlington Police Department.
The Police Department shall maintain copies of all issued parking tickets. From time to time,
the City Council shall establish by appropriate resolution penalties for violations of any
provision of Sections 3 or 4 of this Ordinance. Offenses shall be counted on a calendar year basis.
PARKING ORDINANCE 5
City of South Burlington Ordinance
6.Administrative Appeal and Enforcement of Parking Tickets
Within fifteen (15) calendar days of the date a parking ticket is issued, a person receiving a
parking ticket may appeal the violation by submitting a written statement of appeal to the Chief
of Police. The written statement shall state the facts supporting the appeal and an explanation
of why such ticket is believed to be unlawful. Within fifteen (15) calendar days of the date s/he
received a written statement of appeal, the Chief of Police, or his or her designee, will review
the statement and shall issue by mailing to the address provided in the written statement a
brief written decision on the appeal, which shall be final.
If, after exhausting this administrative appeal process, the violator has not paid any penalty
assessed for violation of this Ordinance, the City Attorney, at the direction of the City Council,
may institute an action on behalf of the City against the violator in accordance with Rule 80.9 of
the Vermont Rules of Civil Procedure.
7.Removal of Unlawfully Parked Motor Vehicles
(A)Removal. In addition to issuance of a parking ticket under Section 5 of this Ordinance,
City law enforcement officers are authorized to remove motor vehicles parked in violation of
Sections 3 or 4 this Ordinance at the expense of the owner of the motor vehicle.
(B)Record of Removed Motor Vehicles. The Police Department and the owner of any
garage to which a motor vehicle is removed shall keep a record of each motor vehicle so
removed by manufacturer’s trade name or make, registration number or motor vehicle
Identification Number, registered owner if the motor vehicle bears a Vermont registration, such
other descriptive matter as may be necessary to identify the motor vehicle, and the name and
address of any claimant thereof. In addition, the Police Department shall keep a record
showing the date of such removal, the place to which the motor vehicle is removed, and reason
for such removal. All such records shall be open to public inspection pursuant to the Vermont
Public Records Act.
(C)Notice of Removal. If a removed motor vehicle is not reclaimed within ten (10) calendar
days of the date of removal, the Police Department shall send written notice by certified mail,
return receipt requested, to the last known address of the registered owner of such motor
vehicle, if such motor vehicle is registered. If the motor vehicle is not registered, the Police
Department shall cause the notice to be published in a newspaper of general circulation in the
City within twenty (20) calendar days of the date of removal. The notice required by this
section shall contain the following:
(1)A description of the motor vehicle;
(2)Statement of the circumstances requiring removal;
(3)Statement of the procedure to reclaim the motor vehicle; and,
(4)Statement of appeal rights.
PARKING ORDINANCE 6
City of South Burlington Ordinance
(D)Appeal of Removal. Prior to, or within three (3) calendar days of reclaiming a motor
vehicle, the owner of a motor vehicle removed pursuant this Ordinance may make a written
request for a hearing before the Chief of Police. The written request shall contain a statement
of the facts supporting the appeal and an explanation of why such removal is believed to be
unlawful. The Chief of Police, or his/her designee, shall conduct a summary hearing at which
the motor vehicle owner may present relevant evidence. Within twenty-four (24) hours of the
conclusion of the hearing, the Chief of Police, or his/her designee, shall issue by mailing to the
address provided in the written statement a brief written decision on the appeal, which shall be
final.
(E)Recovery of Motor Vehicle. Before the owner of a motor vehicle removed pursuant to
this Ordinance shall be permitted to reclaim the motor vehicle, the owner shall:
(1)Furnish satisfactory evidence to the Police Department or the owner or person in
charge of the garage of his/her identity and of his/her ownership of the motor
vehicle;
(2)Pay to the Police Department all charges for violation of this Ordinance and all
charges for mailing and/or publication of the required notice;
(3)Pay to the owner or person in charge of the garage all charges for removing said
motor vehicle and all charges for the storing and parking thereof;
(4)Sign a written receipt acknowledging delivery of said motor vehicle.
(F)Charges for Removal. From time to time, the City Council shall establish by appropriate
resolution reasonable charges for the towing and storing of motor vehicles removed pursuant
to Section 7 of this Ordinance.
(G)Lien on Motor Vehicle. All charges for towing and storage of motor vehicles imposed
pursuant to Section 7 of this Ordinance shall become a lien upon the motor vehicle removed
and such lien may be foreclosed in accordance with the procedure provided in the law for
foreclosure of artisan’s liens.
(H)Charges not a Penalty. No charges made or incurred under Section 7 of this Ordinance
shall be considered a fine, penalty or forfeiture. The removal and storage of any motor vehicle
under this Ordinance shall not be a bar to the institution and prosecution of civil action against
the owner or operator of such motor vehicle.
8.Severability
In the event that any section, subsection or portion of this Ordinance shall be declared by any
competent court to be invalid for any reason, such decision shall not be deemed to affect the
validity of any other section, subsection or portion of this Ordinance.
PARKING ORDINANCE 7
City of South Burlington Ordinance
9.Repeal
The Motor Vehicle and Traffic Regulation Ordinance of the City of South Burlington adopted
April 28, 1958 and as amended from time to time thereafter, is hereby repealed.
Adopted at South Burlington, Vermont, this ____ day of _________ 2019.
SOUTH BURLINGTON CITY COUNCIL
_____________________________________ ___________________________________
Helen Riehle, Chair Thomas Chittenden
_____________________________________ ____________________________________
Meaghan Emery, Vice-Chair Dave Kaufman
_____________________________________
Tim Barritt, Clerk
575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburl.com
MEMORANDUM
TO: Kevin Dorn, City Manager
South Burlington City Council
FROM: Paul Conner, Director of Planning & Zoning
Justin Rabidoux, Director of Public Works
SUBJECT: Kimball Ave/ Community Drive (East) Intersection Impact Fee Eligibility;
Request to release propose street Irrevocable Offer of Dedication
DATE: August 19, 2019 City Council meeting
At the Council’s last regular meeting, staff provided a brief preview of two requests that will be made by
SunCap Property Group and Technology Park Partners: 1) to provide credit against transportation
impact fees to be paid by the developer for intersection improvements related to the development of a
FedEx Ground facility on Community Drive, and 2) to release an irrevocable offer of dedication for a cul-
de-sac street that has been approved as part of a prior subdivision in Technology Park, which will no
longer be needed.
1)Kimball Ave / Community Drive / Gregory Drive intersection
The Development Review Board is presently reviewing a proposal for a 144,000 s.f. FedEx Ground facility
on Community Drive. The traffic study prepared for the proposal indicates that the FedEx facility would
trigger the need for improvements to the intersection of Community Drive (east)/Kimball
Avenue/Gregory Drive. The applicant estimates the proposed project will use 15% of the resulting
improved capacity of the improved intersection. The applicant is proposing to construct the
improvements and requesting that the remainder of the cost of improvements – beyond the 15%
improved capacity - be credited towards their required traffic impact fee. The applicant has not yet
provided an estimated cost of the proposed improvements, but rough estimates are between $200,000
and $300,000. The project is estimated to generate 230 vehicle trip ends during the PM peak hour,
requiring a traffic impact fee of approximately $230,000.
Staff and the applicant are collaborating on the design of the intersection improvement, including a
feasibility analysis of a roundabout that the City has commissioned. This subject will be discussed with
the DRB at their next meeting, August 20th.
The 2007 Impact Fee Analysis Report (October 12, 2007) states that construction of project specific road
improvements not specifically identified in the impact fee analysis are not eligible for credits. The
affected intersection is not currently identified as a transportation improvement project. Therefore,
Council in not required to grant the applicant’s request under the current rules.
2
At the last meeting, staff outlined options for the Council, including either amending the Impact Fee
Ordinance to include Kimball Ave / Community Drive (east) intersection improvements, or denying the
applicant’s request.
As noted at that meeting, improvements to this intersection have been identified in the 2016
Comprehensive Plan as well as in the ongoing Tilley Drive / Community Drive / Kennedy transportation
study being undertaken by the City in conjunction with the CCRPC.
If the Council were to elect to amend the Impact Fee Ordinance to including this intersection, they
should do so understanding there are multi-step statutory requirements regarding defensible cost
sharing that need to be completed to ensure a legal update to the ordinance.
In addition, in order to keep impact fees similar to their current rates ($1,000 per pm peak hour trip),
staff would likely recommend removing another project from the current list. The top candidate would
be the Airport Drive to Airport Parkway connector, which, while still a planned city project, is not likely
to be constructed in the near future.
Finally, an important aspect in the Council’s consideration of the request is that based on the
calculations and the overall cost of the intersection, there may be a financial delta between (1) the
amount of project cost (15%) and impact fees eligible to be credited to the applicant for this, or even
future projects, and (2) the total cost of the project, as impact fees may only be applied to
improvements serving new development in South Burlington. We do not yet know these figures, but it is
possible and likely that some portion of the total intersection improvement above the eligible costs will
need to be borne by either the applicant or the City through the General Fund. No action is required at
this time, but staff felt it important to flag the issue up front.
Current update of Impact Fee Ordinance
The City is in the process of overhauling the traffic impact fee ordinance. That work is ongoing and is
expected to be completed around the end of the calendar year. As a part of that project, the ordinance
will point to an updated list of priority projects as identified in the City’s CIP for construction using
impact fees. This would be the cleanest way to include a new project, as the current ordinance’s
structure is built upon the specific financials of the eligible projects.
Recommendation:
Staff recommends that the Council consider the request. Should the Council elect to proceed, we would
recommend the following:
1.Direct staff to work with the Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission to begin the
calculations for improved traffic capacity and proportionality that can be attributed to meeting
the needs of new development.
2.Indicate this intersection be included as a priority project to be eligible for impact fees, following
the amendment of the Impact Fee Ordinance. The recommended timeline would be
commensurate with the overhaul of the bylaw, but if that timeline changes, staff could update
the Council and seek guidance as to whether a singular update to the Ordinance should be
completed with all related updated figures (and possible changes to impact fees calculated).
3
KImball Ave / Community Drive / Gregory Drive Intersection
2)Irrevocable Offer of Dedication
As part of a prior subdivision approval at Technology Park, a planned cul-de-sac road right-of-way was
approved to serve three commercial lots in the southeast corner of the property off Community Drive
(called “Community Way”). This roadway has not been built and the City has not acted on the
Irrevocable Offer. The proposed development is slated to merge the three lots that were to be served by
Community Way and create a single access point off Community Drive and therefore eliminate the need
and space for this future cul-de-sac. Staff has no concerns with this proposal.
The City Attorney is reviewing the process for Council to be able to release the Irrevocable Offer and will
update the Council at the meeting.
See attached subdivision plat indicating the planned cul-de-sac that the applicant is requesting the City
Council release its irrevocable offer of dedication for.
575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburl.com
MEMORANDUM
TO: Kevin Dorn, City Manager
South Burlington City Council
FROM: Paul Conner, Director of Planning & Zoning
SUBJECT: Proposed Land Development Regulation Amendments
DATE: August 19, 2019 City Council meeting
Enclosed with your packet please find a series of proposed amendments to the Land Development Regulations.
The amendments were developed and scrutinized by the Planning Commission over the course of several
meetings. Subsequent to these meetings, the Commission warned and held a public hearing on August 13th. The
amendments were approved by a vote of 5-0 (two members were away) for submittal to the City Council.
For ease of reading, we have broken out each amendment into its own self-contained document, paginated, and
with an amendment number (LDR-19-**) with each. This change, which will apply moving forward, will help all
users track the status of each amendment.
Also enclosed is the Planning Commission Report. The report, as required by State law, contains an assessment
of each amendment, addressing how each amendment is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and other
statewide priorities. There is also a brief summary of each amendment there.
As with past amendments, staff recommends that the Council acknowledge receipt of the amendments and
warn a public hearing. Staff and the Commission’s chair will be present to answer preliminary questions and will
be prepared to provide a full presentation of the amendments at the public hearing.
In brief, the amendments include:
•LDR-19-01: Eliminate minimum parking requirements for all uses citywide except multi-family housing and
accessory dwelling units, for which parking requirements are to be reduced
The amendment would eliminate minimum parking standards for all uses citywide except multi-family
residential uses & accessory apartments, which would have reduced minimum requirements. Standards for
the design of parking areas would be retained, screening of parking areas from streets would be enhanced,
and allowance for reserving parking to individual tenants of a multi-tenant property would be specified. The
Commission approved these amendments to support a pedestrian-friendly built environment and reduce
requirements the amount of land to be treated for stormwater, enable property owners to determine the
needed parking for their site, simplify sharing agreements amongst properties, and substantially reduce
zoning review process for changes of use and small additions.
•LDR-19-02: Amend transfer of development rights requirements to be consistent with enabling statutes
2
The proposed amendments consist of modifications to the City’s Transfer of Development Rights regulations
to be consistent with the enabling Vermont Statutes. The amendments make no policy changes to the
current system.
The draft amendments were prepared by staff (City Attorney in coordination with Planning & Zoning) per
request from the City Council, gathered feedback from the TDR Interim Zoning Committee, and presented to
the Planning Commission. Following receipt of clarifying feedback from the Commission, the amendments
were grouped with the remainder of these items public hearing and approval. The crafting of the
amendments included an individual review of assessment of each requirement under 24 VSA §4423.
•LDR-19-03: Establish Citywide River Corridor Overlay District and make minor modifications to the Flood Plain
Overlay District
The proposed amendment would establish river corridor protection standards for all major watercourses
and streams with watersheds greater than two acres in the City. The bylaw, developed based on guidelines
from the Vermont Agency of Natural Resources, would limit development and redevelopment throughout
the mapped stream and river corridors of the City. The primary purpose is to limit development in areas
most prone to future hazard from natural shifts in the river corridors. The amendments would also make
minor modifications to the flood plain overlay district, including updates to definitions and the addition of
shelters, congregate care, skilled nursing, and assisted living facilities to the definition of critical facilities
subject to the standards applicable to the 500-year floodplain.
In addition to the purposes listed above, adoption of River Corridor standards will make the City eligible to
obtain a higher Emergency Relief and Assistance Fund match from the State in the event of a Federal
Disaster declaration.
•LDR-19-04 Eliminate duplicative surface water protection standards for land within 150’ of Lake Champlain
and allowances for expansion of pre-existing structures within 100’ of Potash Brook within Queen City Park
Zoning District
The proposed amendment would remove the applicability of surface water buffer standards from areas
within 150’ of Lake Champlain and related standards regarding pre-existing structures along Lake Champlain
and within Queen City Park. The Planning Commission found that these standards are largely redundant to
recently-adopted statewide Shoreland Protection Standards. The amended regulations would require that
an applicant demonstrate compliance with the statewide standards prior to issuance of a zoning permit.
The proposed amendment would also remove the allowance for the expansion of pre-existing structures
located within 100’ of the centerline of the Potash Brook within the Queen City Park zoning district.
•LDR-19-05: Administrative Amendments: Authorize Administrative Officer to approve minor field changes to
site plans & allow for a joint administrative approval & zoning permit; minor technical corrections
The proposed amendment would expand the Administrative Officer’s authority to grant field changes to site
plans upon inspection, so long as the changes to the site plan are minor and do not impact the approvability
of the property. In addition, the proposed amendments would allow for a joint approval of an administrative
site plan and zoning permit. Minor technical amendments are also included, including reducing the required
number of full-sized plans required at application.
LDR-19-01 Parking Standard Revisions
Draft Approved by Planning Commission August 13, 2019 | 1
Amendment #LDR-19-01 Parking Standard Revisions
2.02 Definitions
…
Shared Parking Plan. An agreement for sharing of parking needs or requirements among two or more
proximate land owners reflecting their complementary parking needs (e.g., different peak use houoccasional
or sporadic use, etc.) as part of a development scheme to satisfy the general parking requirements and
achieve greater efficiencies
Shopping center. A group of two (2) or more retail establishments or restaurants, including all associated
outparcels (whether or not they have been subdivided from the original tract), having a unified design of
buildings, coordinated parking and service areas, and development plan in accordance with the
requirements of the zoning district in which it is located, and where customer and employee parking are
provided on-site, and provision for goods delivery is separated from customer access. The shopping center
shall be planned, constructed, and developed and/or managed as a unified entity. Non-retail uses, such as
offices, theaters, hotels, and automotive repair facilities, may be included in the overall development plan
provided such uses are approved by the DRB in conjunction with the overall shopping center.
3.09 Multiple Structures and Uses
…
(2)Umbrella Approval
(a)The Administrative Officer or Development Review Board may approve two (2) or more
separate uses in a single principal building or structure in conjunction with site plan, PUD or
conditional use approval, provided all of the proposed uses are permitted or duly approved
conditional uses in the underlying zoning district and all other applicable standards are met. Such
standards may concern trip ends, parking spaces, gross floor area dedicated to uses where applicable,
number of restaurant or retail food establishment seats, and other numerical standards related to the
provisions of these regulations. This shall be known as an umbrella approval.
(b)Where an applicant with umbrella approval proposes a minor change in use, the
Administrative Officer may approve the change as an administrative action and grant a zoning permit.
The criteria for determining if the change is minor shall include an assessment of projected p.m. peak
hour trip ends, required parking spaces, and other numerical criteria specified in the umbrella
approval. If the applicable numerical criteria are the same or fewer than those specified in the
umbrella approval, the change may be deemed minor.
4.06 RESIDENTIAL 7 WITH NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL DISTRICT - R7-NC
…
(3)Access, parking, and internal circulation:
(a) Parking requirements may be modified, depending in the extent of shared parking, the presence of
sidewalks or recreation paths, and residences lying within walking distance (defined as no further than one-
fourth of mile for purposes of this zoning district). Any requirements for shared access and/or parking must
be secured by permanent legal agreements acceptable to the City Attorney.
(b) Parking areas shall be designed for efficient internal circulation and the minimum number of curb cuts
onto the public roadway.
(c) Access improvements and curb cut consolidation may be required.
LDR-19-01 Parking Standard Revisions
Draft Approved by Planning Commission August 13, 2019 | 2
(3)(d) Where existing residential dwellings are converted to nonresidential use, the residential appearance
of the structure shall be retained.
5.08 Supplemental Standards for All Commercial Districts
…
C. Parking, Access, and Internal Circulation
(1)Parking requirements may be modified, depending in the extent of shared parking, the presence of
sidewalks or recreation paths, and residences lying within walking distance (defined as no further than one-
quarter (¼) mile for purposes of commercial zoning districts). Any requirements for shared access and/or
parking must be secured by permanent legal agreements acceptable to the City Attorney.
(2)Parking areas shall be designed for efficient internal circulation and the minimum number of curb cuts
onto the public roadway.
(3)Access improvements and curb cut consolidation may be required.
6.05 Supplemental Standards for Industrial and Airport Districts
…
C. Parking, Access, and Internal Circulation
(1)Parking requirements may be modified, depending in the extent of shared parking, the presence of
sidewalks or recreation paths, and residences lying within walking distance (defined as no further than one-
quarter (¼) mile for purposes of these districts). Any requirements for shared access and/or parking must be
secured by permanent legal agreements acceptable to the City Attorney.
(2)Parking shall be placed to the side or rear of the structures if possible.
(3)Parking areas shall be designed for efficient internal circulation and the minimum number of curb cuts
onto the public roadway.
(4)Access improvements and curb cut consolidation may be required.
8.12 City Center T3 and T3+ Neighborhood Building Envelope Standards
…
(E) Parking Standards
(1)Parking Amount Requirements
(a)Per Residential Unit 1 Min, 3 Max. See Note 4
(b)Per 1,000 gross s.f. Non-Residential 2 spaces Min. See Note 4
8.13 T-4 Urban Multi-Use Building Envelope Standards
…
(E) Parking Standards
(1)Parking Amount Requirements
(a)Per Residential Unit 2 spaces Max.
(b)Per 1,000 gross s.f. Non-Residential 2 spaces Min.
(2)Location & Screening
…
(g)No parking spaces required for ground floor tenants/ uses less than 5,000 sq. ft.
(3)Off-Site Parking
…
(c) Shared parking may be used to meet parking requirements (See Article 13).
LDR-19-01 Parking Standard Revisions
Draft Approved by Planning Commission August 13, 2019 | 3
8.14 T-5 Building Envelope Standards
…
(E) Parking Standards
(1) Parking Amount Requirements
(a) Per Residential Unit 2 spaces Max.
(b) Per 1,000 gross s.f. Non-Residential 2 spaces Min.
9.10 SEQ-VC Sub-District; Specific Regulations
…
C. Residential Design
…
(5) Off-Site and Shared Parking. The distance limitations of Section 13.01(D) (2)(b) shall not apply in the VC
sub-district; applicants may utilize off-site or on-site (as applicable) shared parking located anywhere within
the VC district or within any area within 1,000 linear feet regardless of zoning subdistrict.
D. Design Standards for Non-Residential Land Uses in the SEQ-VC Sub-District
…
(4) Parking
(a) Notwithstanding the provisions of Article 13 of these Regulations, each non-residential use shall provide
three (3) off-street parking spaces per 1,000 gross square feet. The DRB may grant a parking waiver in
conformance with Section 13.1(N)(3). The Development Review Board may allow onstreet parking within
500 linear feet of the nearest building line of the use to count towards the use’s parking requirements.
(b) The provisions of Section 13.1 notwithstanding, the DRB may allow shared parking anywhere within the
VC district, regardless of linear distance from the proposed use.
14.11 Conditional Use Review: Specific Uses and Standards
…
C . Convenience Store in Conjunction with a Gasoline Filling Station/Service Station.
…
(5) Maximum floor area. Such store shall have a gross floor area of no more than ten percent (10%)
of the lot area.
(6) Maximum height. Such store shall be no more than one (1) story high.
…
(8) Parking. Parking spaces shall be provided proximate to the store, at the rate of one (1) space per
one hundred fifty (150) square feet of consumer convenience center floor area. Where parking is located
near a residential district boundary, the applicant shall provide landscaping, and/or fencing or screening in
the mandatory setback.
13.01 Off Street Parking and Loading
A. Purpose. Parking areas and off-street loading, where provided, shall be designed in a manner that In
order to minimizes traffic congestion, air pollution, and the risk of motor vehicle and pedestrian accidents, as
well as to promote other elements of sound community planning., off-street parking and loading spaces shall
be required of all structures and land uses. Such spaces shall be provided and kept available as an accessory
use to all permitted and conditional uses of structures, lots, and land in amounts not less than those specified
in Tables 13-1 through 13-6, Schedule of Off-Street Parking and Loading Requirements within non-transect
zone districts, and neither less nor more than the standards set forth within the City Center FBC District (Article
LDR-19-01 Parking Standard Revisions
Draft Approved by Planning Commission August 13, 2019 | 4
8). Subject to the provisions of Section 13.01(N), Exemptions and Waivers, the requirements of this section
shall apply under the following circumstances:
All new structures erected for use on a property.
Any structure which is hereafter altered or enlarged.
All new uses of a property.
Any use of a property which is hereafter altered or enlarged.
B. Determination of Parking and Loading Spaces.
(1) Minimum Parking Amounts. Except as specifically provided for in Table 13-1, there shall be no minimum
number of parking spaces. See Article 8 (City Center Form Based Codes) for maximum allowable parking
by Transect Zone.
All structures and land uses shall be provided with a sufficient amount of off-street parking to
meet the needs of persons employed at or making use of such structures or land uses, and sufficient off-
street loading facilities to meet the needs of such structures or land uses, but not less than the minimum
standards of Tables 13-1 through 13-6, Schedule of Off-Street Parking and Loading Requirements within
non-transect zone districts, and neither less nor more than the standards set forth within the City Center
FBC District (Article 8)s.
No certificate of occupancy or certificate of compliance shall be issued for any structure or land
use until the required off-street parking and/or loading spaces have been established. Required off-street
parking and/or loading facilities shall be maintained as long as the use of structure exists which the
facilities are designed to serve.
The following methods shall be used to determine the number of required off-street parking and
loading spaces:
(a) The requirement for a single use shall be determined directly from the schedule of such
requirements in Tables 13-1 through 13-6. Within the City Center FBC District, requirements shall be
determined pursuant to applicable Transect Zone Building Envelope Standards.
(b) The requirement for a combination use made up of several different component uses (e.g., a
restaurant and bar; or a retail store combined with an office building or a storage area) shall be
determined by undertaking a shared parking calculation as explained under Section 13.01(E).
(c) When the required number of spaces is determined to result in a fraction, it shall be increased
to the next highest whole number.
(d) If the use is not specifically listed in the schedule of such requirements, the requirements shall
be the same as for the most similar use listed, as determined by the Development Review Board.
(e) When the schedule requires the number of spaces to be calculated per employee and
employees are on the site in shifts, the number to be used is the number of employees present during
the largest shift plus any provision for shift overlaps. In all other cases it shall mean the total number
of employees on the site or who will use the site for parking at any one time.
(f) A garage or a carport may be used to meet the requirements of this section. A driveway may
only be used to meet the requirements of this section where it serves a one-family dwelling. A
driveway can be considered to meet the parking requirement for a two-family dwelling if cars can
enter or exit independently for each unit.
(g) Uses which require approval pursuant to Article 14, Site Plan and Conditional Use Review may
be required to provide off-street parking spaces in excess of the requirements of this section and
Tables 13-1 through 13-6.
LDR-19-01 Parking Standard Revisions
Draft Approved by Planning Commission August 13, 2019 | 5
Notes applicable to Tables 13-1 through 13-6:
1.If all parking spaces are common, i.e. non-reserved, and if there are more than 10 DUs, the
requirement decreases to 2 spaces per DU
2.Any spaces required as part of the operational function, such as display, storage or queuing spaces
at the transfer station or service station, are in addition
3.Add 3 per 1,000 SF GFA for retail areas plus 3.5 per 1,000 SF GFA for office space
4.Parking need varies according to type of facility and will be determined during site plan approval
5.For the City Center FBC District (Article 8), these tables do not apply. See applicable Transect Zone
Building Envelope Standards
6.Bicycle parking may substitute for up to 25% of required parking. For every five required bicycle
parking spaces that meet the short or long term bicycle parking standards, the motor vehicle parking
requirement is reduced by one space. Existing parking may be converted to take advantage of this
provision
Definitions applicable to Tables 13-1 through 13-6:
“Employee” means the number of employees working at the specific location on the main shift plus any
overlap from prior or later shifts.
TABLE 13-1: PARKING REQUIREMENTS, RESIDENTIAL USES
Use Parking Space Requirement Notes (1)
Multi-Family Dwelling (studio or
1 bedroom units)
0.75 spaces per Dwelling Unit
(DU) plus 0.75 space for every 4
units;
Multi-Family Dwelling (2+
bedroom units)
1.5 spaces per DU plus 0.75 space
for every 4 units for all other DUs
2
Table Notes:
1.When the required number of spaces is determined to result in a fraction, it shall be increased to the next
highest whole number.
2.If no more than one (1) parking space is reserved per DU, the requirement decreases to 1.5 spaces per DU
Use Parking Space Requirement Notes
Single-family dwelling 2 spaces per DU
Two-family dwelling 2 spaces per DU plus 1 space for every 4
units
1
Multi-family dwelling 1 space per DU plus 1 space for every 4
units for studio and 1-bedroom DUs; 2
spaces per DU plus 1 space for every 4
units for all other DUs
1
Assisted living 0.6 spaces per DU
Congregate housing 1.2 spaces per DU plus 1 space for every 4
units
Accessory residential unit 1 per DU
Accessory residential unit w/o occupancy restriction
on lots of ½ acre or more 2 per DU
LDR-19-01 Parking Standard Revisions
Draft Approved by Planning Commission August 13, 2019 | 6
TABLE 13-2: PARKING REQUIREMENTS, COMMERCIAL USES
Use Parking Space Requirement Notes
Agriculture & construction equipment sales, service
& rental
2 per 1,000 SF GFA
Recreation facility, indoor 0.33 per person in maximum occupancy
permitted
Recreation facility, outdoor 0.33 per seat or per person in maximum
occupancy
Auto and motorcycle sales, service and repair 2 per 1,000 SF GFA 2
Artist production studio 2 per 1,000 SF GFA
Auto rental, with private accessory car wash and
fueling
2 per 1,000 SF GFA 2
Drive-through bank 5.8 per 1,000 SF GFA 2
Bed & breakfast, minimum 1 acre lot 2 plus 1.5 per guest bedroom
Car wash 2 per 1,000 SF GFA, minimum of 2 2
Commercial greenhouse 2 per 1,000 SF GFA
Convenience store, principal use 5 per 1,000 SF GFA
Day care facility 1 per employee plus 0.1 per licensed
enrollment capacity
Equipment service, repair & rental 2 per 1,000 SF GFA
Financial institution 3.6 per 1,000 SF GFA
Flight instruction 1 per employee (faculty and staff) plus 0.5
per student enrollment capacity
Use (continued) Parking Space Requirement Notes
Hotels 1 per room, plus 0.33 per maximum
occupancy in meeting and banquet rooms
Hotels, extended stay 1 per room plus 1 per employee
Indoor theater 0.33 per seat
Commercial kennel, animal shelter, veterinary
hospital or pet day care
1 per employee plus 0.5 per 1,000 SF GFA
Lumber and contractor’s yard 1 per employee plus 0.5 per 1,000 SF GFA
Mobile home, RV, and boat sales, repair & service 2 per 1,000 SF GFA 2
Office, general 3.5 per 1,000 SF GFA
Office, medical 5 per 1,000 SF
Personal or business service, principal use 2 per treatment station, but not less than
4 per 1,000 SF GFA
Pet grooming 4 per 1,000 SF GFA
Printing & binding production facilities 2 per 1,000 SF GFA
Photocopy & printing shops, with accessory retail 2 per 1,000 SF GFA, plus 5 per 1,000 SF
GFA of retail area
Radio & television studio 2 per employee
Research facility or laboratory 3 per 1,000 SF GFA
Restaurant, standard 18 per 1,000 SF GLA
Restaurant, short order 12 per 1,000 SF GLA
Retail sales 5 per 1,000 SF GFA
Retail sales up to 3,000 SF GFA 4 per 1,000 SF GFA
Retail warehouse outlet 5 per 1,000 SF GFA
LDR-19-01 Parking Standard Revisions
Draft Approved by Planning Commission August 13, 2019 | 7
Sale, rental & repair of aircraft & related parts 2 per 1,000 SF GFA
Seasonal mobile food unit 8 per employee
Service station with convenience store 10 per 1,000 SF GLA 2
Shopping center 5 per 1,000 SF GLA if GLA is 400,000 SF or less
5.5 per 1,000 SF GLA if more than 400,000 SF
Taverns, night clubs & private clubs 0.5 per maximum authorized occupancy
Motor freight terminal 1 per employee 2
Commercial or public parking facility 1 per employee 2
Warehousing, processing, storage & distribution 0.5 per 1,000 SF GFA
Distribution and related storage, as a minority of
floor area accessory to another principal permitted
or conditional use
0.5 per 1,000 SF GFA for the distribution
and storage portion of GFA
Wholesale establishments 0.5 per 1,000 SF GFA plus any
requirements for office or sales area
TABLE 13-4: PARKING REQUIREMENTS, PUBLIC AND QUASI-PUBLIC USES
Use Spaces Required Notes
Place of worship 0.5 per seat
Community center 0.33 per maximum permitted occupancy
Cultural facility 0.33 per maximum permitted occupancy
Educational facility: elementary and secondary
schools
1 per classroom and other rooms used by
students, staff or faculty, plus 0.25 per
student of driving age
Educational facility: college, university, or
professional school
1 per classroom and other rooms used by
students, staff or faculty, plus 0.50 per
student
Food Hub 1 per employee plus two per 1,000 GFA
Personal instruction facility 2 per employee
Municipal facility 3 per 1,000 SF GFA
Educational support facilities 2 per 1,000 SF GFA
Group home 1 per sleeping room plus 2 spaces
Group quarters 1 per sleeping room plus 2 spaces
Hospice 0.3 per bed
Skilled nursing facility 0.3 per bed
Social services 4 per 1,000 SF GFA
Public utility substations 1 per employee, minimum of 2 spaces
Cemeteries 1 per employee, minimum of 2 spaces 2
Parks n/a 4
Recreation paths n/a 4
TABLE 13-5: PARKING REQUIREMENTS, INDUSTRIAL USES
Use Spaces Required Notes
Light manufacturing 0.5 per 1,000 SF GFA, plus 1 space per
employee
Manufacturing & assembly from previously
prepared materials & components
0.5 per 1,000 SF GFA plus 1 space per
employee
LDR-19-01 Parking Standard Revisions
Draft Approved by Planning Commission August 13, 2019 | 8
TABLE 13-6: PARKING REQUIREMENTS, MISCELLANEOUS USES
Use Spaces Required Notes
Private providers of public services, including
vehicle storage & maintenance
0.5 per 1,000 SF GFA plus 1 space per
employee
2
Waste transfer stations 1 space plus 1 per employee 2
C. Location of Off Street Parking, Loading, and Vehicle Entrances.
(1) Except as provided in the City Center FBC District and in Sections 13.01(E) and (D), off street
parking and loading that is required for a use or uses under this section shall be located entirely on the
property on which the use or uses exist. The Development Review Board may approve required off street
parking that is located off the property (“off-site parking”) on which a use or uses exist, according to
Section 13.01(D).
(12) Vehicle Entrance. No curb cuts or vehicle entrance from any public street shall be constructed or
maintained except in conformance with all applicable standards of the City of South Burlington and
Vermont Agency of Transportation.
(32) The installation of acceleration and/or deceleration lanes on the adjacent public street may be
required if deemed necessary by the Development Review Board.
(43) Driveways shall be located more than two hundred (200) feet from signalized street intersections
(measured between the near edges of the driveway and intersection), except upon recommendation by
the Director of Public Works based on site-specific circumstances Greater distances are encouraged on
streets with high traffic volumes.
(54) Screening shall be provided where headlights from vehicles on site may be visible and project
parallel to a public street.
(5) Screening of aAll parking areas adjacent to a public street shall be screened from the street by
fencing, walls, or vegetation measuring at least three (3) feet in height.
D. Off-Site Parking.
(1) The use of any off-site, separately-owned parking by another person or business shall not require approval
under these Regulations. In no event, however, shall off-site parking and loading space for any non-
residential use be located in any R1, R12, R4, LN, QCP or SEQ district.
(1) Required parking and loading spaces shall normally be provided upon the same lot as the use or
structure to which they are accessory. However, there may be occasions where off-site parking is
beneficial, whether off-site parking is combined with parking requirements for other uses or parcels, or
just for one particular use. Parking could be provided off-site in combination with parking for other uses
that are the same (e.g. several retail establishments could combine parking) or that are different. If the
uses are the same, the parking requirement shall be determined by adding the parking space needs as per
Tables 13-1 through 13-6. If the uses are different, a shared parking calculation shall be undertaken as per
Section 13.01(E).
(2) Off-site parking may be provided for non-residential uses provided that the Development Review
Board approves a plan for off-site parking meeting the following requirements:
(a) The applicant(s) provides an acceptable overall design and an accurate site plan for all properties
affected by the parking proposal in conjunction with site plan or PUD review. All owners of the
property(ies) where the off-site parking will be provided shall sign the application.
(b) The lots involved generally shall be adjacent. However, at its discretion, the DRB may approve a
plan for off-site parking where the off-site parking is located within eight hundred (800) linear feet at
LDR-19-01 Parking Standard Revisions
Draft Approved by Planning Commission August 13, 2019 | 9
its farthest point of the property on which the associated use or uses exist. This subsection does not
apply to the City Center FBC District. See the applicable Transect Zone Building Envelope Standards
for standards.
(c)The applicant shall record appropriate legal documents to ensure that the off-site parking spaces
shall be available for use by the user or users for which the off-site parking spaces are being sought.
Such legal documents shall be acceptable to the City Attorney in form and content. Such legal
documents shall ensure the continued existence of the parking lot or facility to serve said uses so long
as they may exist. Such agreement shall guarantee also that upon termination of such joint use, each
subsequent use of the premises will provide off-street parking for its own use in accordance with the
requirements of this section and Tables 13-1 through 13-6.
(d)The required parking spaces to be provided, their locations and striping shall be shown on the
plan.
(e)In no event shall off-site parking and loading space for any non-residential use be located in any
R1, R1, R4, LN, QCP or SEQ district.
E.Shared Parking on a Single Lot. As a matter of public policy, the City of South Burlington finds that
the coordination of off-street parking between adjoining non-residential sites is desirable (1) to allow for
traffic circulation between sites rather than having all traffic entering and exiting the existing road system to
proceed from site to site, (2) to allow for improved pedestrian circulation, and (3) to reduce the overall amount
of paved surface on a site. This coordination can take various forms, from a simple paved connection to a
more elaborate plan to provide both a connection and shared parking arrangements. Such connection and
shared parking are not to be considered a parking waiver, but an agreement between the landowners and the
City of South Burlington to effect an overall circulation and parking plan.
(2)Where the Development Review Board determines that a proposed development consisting of
two (2) or more uses will generate different hourly, daily and/or seasonal parking demands due to the
varied hours of operation of each use and different peaking characteristics, the Development Review
Board may approve a site plan or PUD utilizing shared parking on the site that is the subject of the
application, or on another site (see Shared Parking, Section 13.01(E) above). The Development Review
Board may, at its discretion, allow for a reduced number of shared parking spaces to be provided, on or
off site, provided that:
(a)The applicant shall provide the Development Review Board with a site plan and a complete
and accurate description of the proposed uses and floor areas devoted to such uses. All uses
participating in the shared parking plan must be located within a convenient walking distance to the
shared parking facility, which generally shall be defined as one-quarter (1/4) mile.
(b)A shared parking analysis shall be presented calculating the parking demand for each
individual use by time period and, where applicable, by season, in the form of a matrix. The various
time periods shall depend on the uses being analyzed. These periods typically include a weekday
morning, weekday lunch time, weekday afternoon, weekday evening, Saturday midday and Saturday
evening. If the uses experience significant seasonal variations the analysis should be done for the peak
season and possibly for different seasons (summer, winter, special events, etc.) For each use, the
matrix should indicate the individual peak demand corresponding to the parking requirement as
indicated in Tables 13-1 through 13-6, then the expected demand for each time period being analyzed
in terms of a percentage of the peak demand and the number of parking spaces required for that use
at that particular time period. For instance, if there is a 50,000 SF office component in a mixed-use
project, the peak demand for that component is 175 spaces (3.5 times 50), and during the weekday
am period that component will have a presence of 100%, i.e. 175 spaces, during lunch time the
LDR-19-01 Parking Standard Revisions
Draft Approved by Planning Commission August 13, 2019 | 10
presence would be 90%, i.e. 158 spaces, during the weekday afternoon the presence would be 97%,
i.e. 170 spaces, and during the evening hours the presence would be 20%, i.e. 35 spaces. The same
analysis needs to be done for the other uses that are part of the sharing arrangement. To calculate
the total number of spaces required with the sharing arrangement the numbers of spaces required
for each use need to be added for each time period, and the largest number determines the
requirement. This analysis should be undertaken by a professional planner or engineer, and can be
based on the “Shared Parking” publication by the Urban Land Institute or on “Shared Parking Planning
Guidelines”, an informational report by the Institute of Transportation Engineers. In some cases the
applicant may have to undertake specific surveys of individual uses to determine the percentage
present at various time periods. If the parking demand of a new use is to be shared with an existing
use the applicant should undertake an occupancy survey of the existing parking facility.
(c)The parking spaces that are part of a shared parking plan cannot be reserved for individual
users or destinations, unless those reserved spaces are excluded from the calculation.
(d)The Development Review Board may order the property owner to construct the future
parking spaces if, at the Administrative Officer’s recommendation, the DRB determines a need for
additional spaces to be constructed. For example, a change in the use(s) or the ownership of the parcel
may be enough to require the installation of the parking spaces. In the event that the owner fails to
install the additional parking spaces within one hundred twenty (120) days of being so ordered the
City Attorney shall take appropriate action in a court of competent jurisdiction to restrain the use of
said premises. When this subsection is utilized, the site plan shall contain a statement, signed by the
applicant in such a form as shall be approved by the City Attorney, consenting to the provisions
contained herein. In addition, the property owner shall be required to submit a covenant, for filing in
the City Clerk’s office, in such a form as shall be approved by the City Attorney, indicating consent to
the provisions of this subsection.
(e)The approval of such shared parking shall be automatically terminated upon the termination
of the operation of any of the involved uses.
EXAMPLE OF A SHARED PARKING ANALYSIS
Weekday AM Weekday Lunch Weekday PM Weekday Eve. Saturday
Size Peak Parking (10-11 AM) (12-2 PM) (3-4 PM) (7-8 PM) (12-2 PM)
Building Use
1,000 SF
or DU Ratio Spaces
%
Present Cars
%
Present Cars
%
Present Cars
%
Present Cars
%
Present Cars
Retail 75.8 5 379 0.7 265 0.85 322 0.8 303 0.8 303 1 379
Bank 2 5 10 0.8 8 1 10 0.05 6 0.05 1 0.17 2
Restaurant 11.5 10 115 0.3 35 0.75 86 0.75 58 0.75 86 0.5 58
Office 157.6 3.5 552 1 551 0.97 535 0.05 513 0.05 28 0.17 94
Residential 155 2 310 0.5 155 0.5 155 0.95 155 0.95 295 0.71 220
Cinema seats 635 15.9 0.3 5 0 0 0 0 0.2 42 0.8 168 0.3 63
Total 1,370 1014 1108 1077 881 816
Notes: (1) The peak parking ratio typically corresponds to the zoning requirement and represents the amount of
parking that would have to be supplied if each use was built independently on its own lot. (2) The percentages for the
presence of each peak parking demand by time period are based on "Shared Parking" by the Urban Land Institute and
on BFJ experience. (Table produced by BFJ, October 2002)
F.Access Management Requirements. It is the intent of the City to minimize traffic and pedestrian
conflicts caused by vehicular driveways on public roadways by reducing the number of required driveways
and by minimizing the number of vehicles utilizing such driveways off public roadways. All applicants must
make an effort to reduce these impacts. All commercial lots (retail, restaurant, office, service uses, excluding
residential, agricultural and industrial uses) located adjacent to other commercial lots must provide a driveway
connection to any adjacent commercial lot. If the adjacent property owner does not want to provide for that
LDR-19-01 Parking Standard Revisions
Draft Approved by Planning Commission August 13, 2019 | 11
connection, the applicant must provide an easement to do so in the future when circumstances may change.
This driveway connection or easement should be located where the vehicular and pedestrian circulation is
most feasible.
G.Design Requirements for Parking Spaces, Parking Aisles, Lighting, and Landscaping.
(1)Design requirements for off-street parking and loading are provided in Table 13-82 and Figure 13-
1 within Section 13.01, Off-Street Parking and Loading, Section 13.06, Landscaping, Screening, and Street
Trees, and Section 13.07, Exterior Lighting. All paved parking spaces shall be striped or otherwise
physically delimited.
(2)The location of parking areas and loading docks shall prevent conflicts with entering and exiting
traffic onto a public street and prevent conflicts between vehicles and pedestrians. The distance between
access points and parking areas shall be adequate to minimize blockage and prevent back-ups onto the
public street.
(3)Provision shall be made for access by police, fire and emergency vehicles.
(4)Pedestrian safety. Insofar as practicable, pedestrian and bicycle circulation shall be separated
from motor vehicle circulation. Safe and convenient pedestrian circulation, including appropriate
sidewalks, shall be provided on the site and its approaches. The pedestrian circulation on site shall be
designed to minimize adverse effects of vehicular traffic on sidewalks and recreation paths.
(5)Bicycle parking or storage facility. See Section 13.14. At least one (1) bicycle parking or storage
facility shall be provided for all uses subject to site plan or Planned Unit Development review to serve
persons employed or residing on the premises as well as the visiting public. Additional such facilities may
be required as deemed necessary by the Development Review Board or as required within the City Center
FBC District.
(6)Stormwater management strategies that facilitate infiltration including but not limited to
recessed planting islands, bioretention facilities, and pervious parking spaces are encouraged in the design
of any off-street parking or loading area.
H.Number of Parking Spaces. The required number of spaces shall be as listed in Tables 13-1 through
13-6 above, except within the City Center FBC District, Transect Zones (See applicable Transect Zone Building
Envelope Standards) and the SEQ-VC subdistrict (See Article 9). For any use not specifically listed in the
schedule of such requirements, the requirements shall be the same as for the most similar use listed, as
determined by the Administrative Officer.
H. I. Handicapped –Accessible Parking Spaces. Parking spaces for handicapped persons shall be
provided for all non-residential uses. The size, number, type and location of parking spaces shall comply with
the current ADA Accessibility Guidelines. Handicap accessible spaces are required to be eight feet (8'0") wide,
with an adjacent access aisle five feet (5'0") wide. One in every eight (8) accessible spaces must have an access
aisle eight feet (8'0") wide and must be signed "van accessible". The number of accessible spaces required is
shown in Table 13-7 below.
Table 13-7 Minimum Number of Accessible Parking Spaces Required
Total parking
spaces in lot
1 -
25
26-
50
51 -
75
76 -
100
101-
150
151-
200
201-
300
301-
400
401-
500
501-
1000
> 1,000
Number of
accessible spaces
in lot
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 2% of
total
20 + 1 per
100 over
1,000
LDR-19-01 Parking Standard Revisions
Draft Approved by Planning Commission August 13, 2019 | 12
JI. Recreational Vehicles. Parking or storage facilities for recreational vehicles shall be provided in all
multi-family residential developments of twenty-five (25) units or more, except within the City Center FBC
District (where they shall be optional at the applicant’s discretion). Recreational vehicles shall not be stored
on any common open lands other than those specifically approved for such purpose by the DRB through the
review process. The Development Review Board may waive this provision only upon a showing by the
applicant that the storage and parking of recreational vehicles shall be prohibited within all private and
common areas of the development.
K. Access Drives. Commercial or industrial access drives connecting parking areas to a public street or
right-of-way shall be a minimum of fifteen (15) feet in width, or ten (10) feet if designated for one-way traffic.
Residential access drives serving garages and parking lots shall be a minimum of twenty (20) feet in width.
Aisles and access drives shall be privately owned and maintained.
J. L. Parking Reserved for Future UseReserved Parking. In order to minimize the construction of
unnecessary parking, In the event that an applicant can demonstrate to the Development Review Board that
its present parking needs do not necessitate the construction of the number of parking spaces required herein,
the Administrative Officer or Development Review Board may approve a site plan with reserved parking
reserved for construction at a future date. In such granting such an approval, the Administrative Officer or
DRB shall specify a timeframe during which said parking may be constructed without receipt of an additional
site plan approval. In no case shall such time frame exceed ten (10) years. Removal of parking reserve areas
shall require site plan amendment. requiring the present construction of a lesser number of spaces. In such
an event, the site plan shall show sufficient spaces reserved for future parking requirements with the
combined number of spaces being not less than that required by Table 13-1 through 13-6. In all cases, at least
two-thirds (2/3s) of the number of required parking spaces shall be provided. The remaining reserved space
shall remain unpaved or kept pervious until such time as it is needed, unless the reserved area is used for
internal circulation. The reserved area shall be shown on any site plan. The Development Review Board may
order the property owner to install the future parking spaces if, at the Administrative Officer’s
recommendation and the Development Review Board’s sole discretion, the need for additional spaces arises.
For example, a change in the use(s) or the ownership of the parcel may be enough to require the installation
of the parking spaces. In the event that the owner fails to install the additional parking spaces within one
hundred twenty (120) days of being so ordered, the Administrative Officer shall revoke the certificate of
occupancy for the premises, and the City Attorney may take appropriate action in a court of competent
jurisdiction to restrain the use of said premises. When this subsection is utilized, the site plan shall contain a
statement, signed by the applicant in such a form as shall be approved by the City Attorney, consenting to the
provisions contained herein. In addition, the property owner shall be required to submit a covenant, for filing
in the City Records office, in such a form as shall be approved by the City Attorney, indicating consent to the
provisions of this subsection.
K.M. Structured Parking. Structured parking is encouraged may be allowed by the Development Review
Board in conjunction with approval of a site plan or PUD. Structured parking shall be defined as any structure
consisting of more than one level and used to store motor vehicles. The parking structure may be stand-alone
or may be part of or attached to another structure. Such structures typically comprise parking decks, garages,
or roof-top parking areas. The Development Review Board may require design elements for parking structures
that specifically address safety, security, lighting, landscaping, and visual aesthetics as conditions for approval.
L. Reserved Parking Spaces. Reservation of non-residential parking spaces for single tenants or users is
strongly discouraged. Reserved parking, and associated signage, shall be permitted only under the following
circumstances:
(1) To meet or exceed Federal ADA requirements
LDR-19-01 Parking Standard Revisions
Draft Approved by Planning Commission August 13, 2019 | 13
(2) To provide a limited number of courtesy spaces for users (examples: 15-minute only, pick & drop off,
seniors, expectant mothers)
(3) To provide for electric vehicles, carpool spaces, car-share spaces, or other similar purposes
(4) To provide a minimal number of spaces for a small commercial business where other residential or
non-residential uses would otherwise dominate parking areas
(5) Where the Development Review Board finds that other demonstrated unique circumstances exist that
would require a limited number of reserved spaces. In such an instance, the Board shall permit only the
minimum number necessary to address the unique circumstances.
M. N. Exemptions, Waivers, Modifications of Requirements.
Dimensions. (1) Exemptions. Existing buildings and uses are exempt as follows:
(a) Structures and land uses lawfully in existence or in use or for which zoning permits have been
approved by the effective date of these regulations shall not be subject to the parking or loading space
requirements set forth in this section. However, any parking or loading facility now existing to serve
such structures or uses shall not be reduced except where such facility exceeds such requirements, in
which case such facility shall not be reduced below such requirements.
(b) However, no structure or lot lawfully in use at the effective date of this chapter shall be
enlarged unless the off-street parking and truck loading space requirements of this section are
complied with to the same extent as would be required if the entire pre-existing structure or use and
the proposed enlargement were being submitted as if they were a new application. The Development
Review Board shall require additional off-street parking and truck loading spaces with respect to the
proposed enlargement, but at its discretion may not require additional spaces with respect to the
preexisting part of the structure or use.
(2) Waivers. Except within the City Center FBC District, where the Development Review Board
determines that a proposed land use or structure is adequately served by existing or proposed parking
facilities, the Development Review Board may waive the off-street parking space requirements stipulated
in Tables 13-1 through 13-6, by no more than twenty-five percent (25%).
(3) Modifications of Requirements. The Administrative Officer or Development Review Board may
approve minor modifications to parking lot dimensions as specified in Table 13-8 where the applicant can
demonstrate necessity of modifications and where safety of motor vehicle and pedestrian circulation are
retained. Except within the City Center FBC District, where the Development Review Board determines
that unique usage or special conditions exist, it may require off-street parking spaces and loading areas
greater than the requirements of this section. The Development Review Board may reduce the
requirements of Tables 13-1 through 13-6 for the number of off-street parking spaces and loading areas
for non-residential uses and structures if it determines that overlapping use of parking spaces or other
unique characteristic cause the requirement to be unnecessarily stringent. See sub-sections on Shared
Parking.
Table 13-82 Parking Lot Dimensions
A L D W Di
Parking Angle
(Degrees)
Curb Length per Car
(Feet)
Depth of Stall (Feet) Width of Aisle (Feet) Depth of Stall (Feet)
0 22.0 8.0 12 8.0
20 24.9 14.2 12 10.1
25 20.1 15.4 12 11.4
LDR-19-01 Parking Standard Revisions
Draft Approved by Planning Commission August 13, 2019 | 14
30 17.0 16.4 12 12.7
35 14.8 17.3 12 13.7
40 13.2 18.1 12 14.8
45 12.0 18.7 13 15.8
50 11.1 19.2 13 16.6
55 10.4 19.6 14 17.2
60 9.8 19.8 15 17.8
65 9.4 19.9 17 18.2
70 9.0 19.8 20 18.4
75 9.0 19.6 23 18.6
80 9.0 19.2 24 18.4
85 9.0 18.7 24 18.3
90 9.0 18.0 24* 18.0
The width of an aisle serving a single row of 90 degree parking spaces may be reduced to 22 feet.
Figure 13-1 Parking Lot Layout
13.14 Bicycle Parking and Storage
A.Purpose. These standards for short term parking and long term storage of bicycles are intended to
recognize and promote cycling as a viable means of transportation and recreation for residents, consumers,
visitors, and employees.
B.Short Term Bicycle Parking
(1)Applicability. These standards apply to any application for development that requires site plan
approval under Section 14.03 of the LDRs, and all applications for development of parcels located in the
City Center Form Based Codes District.
(a)In order to facilitate a reasonable nexus between land development and bicycle parking
requirements, applications for development to which these standards apply on parcels with existing
development shall be permitted to phase in required short term bicycle parking as follows:
LDR-19-01 Parking Standard Revisions
Draft Approved by Planning Commission August 13, 2019 | 15
(i)For the first application, the applicant shall propose and install at least 50% of the
required number of bicycle parking spaces.
(ii)Thereafter, any applications for development of the same parcel shall comply with all
standards for Short Term Bicycle Parking.
(b) Where pre-approved bicycle racks exist on the site at the time of application, they may be
permitted to remain and count towards the minimum requirements of this Section provided:
(i)They are compliant with 13.14 B(2)(d)(i) and 13.14(B)(2)(d)(iv) of these regulations;
(ii)The bike frame can be attached in at least one place and the bike is supported to stay
upright;
(iii)The rack is not constructed of wood;
(iv)Each space on a rack where a bicycle frame can be attached in at least one place and
supported to stay upright shall be considered a bicycle parking space;
(v)If parking is on the end or outside of a rack, the parking space must be clear of
obstructions in compliance with Appendix G and not obstruct passageways.
(2)Standards for bicycle parking spaces (bps).
(a)The minimum number of bicycle parking spaces shall be as indicated on Table 13-10.
(b)Bicycle parking shall utilize the ‘Inverted U’ style or as shown as acceptable in Appendix G.
The rack may not be constructed of wood.
(c)If an applicant wishes to install something different, any bps shall meet the following
specifications:
(i)Allow secure locking of the frame and wheel;
(ii)Support a bicycle frame at two points of contact;
(iii)Meet the intent of the examples provided in Appendix G.
(d)Location & Serviceability. Each bps shall be:
(i)Securely anchored to the ground and on a hard, stabilized surface of at least six feet in
length and a width sufficient to satisfy the remainder of these regulations;
(ii)Spaced to allow easy access to each bicycle
(iii)Spaced sufficiently away from obstructions, including walls, doors, posts, columns,
landscaping, and other racks, in accordance with Appendix G.
(iv)Easily accessible from the street or multi-use path and protected from motor vehicles;
(v)Visible to passers-by and well-lit to promote usage and enhance security; especially in
retrofitted areas, or where good visibility is not achievable, an applicant may be required to install
directional signage.
(vi)Located at or nearby principal entrances where reasonably practicable, unless doing so
compromises the other directives of this subsection, including visibility and accessibility.
(vii)Dedicated bicycle parking areas, identified with striping and protected using bollards or
islands, are strongly encouraged.
(vii)Where existing vehicle parking is replaced with bicycle parking in accordance with Section
13.01, note 6, bicycle parking must still meet the standards herein and shall be safely separated
LDR-19-01 Parking Standard Revisions
Draft Approved by Planning Commission August 13, 2019 | 16
from vehicle parking spaces using striping, bollards, islands or other similar measures deemed
adequate by the reviewing party.
LDR-19-02 Transfer of Development Rights Technical Amendments
Draft Approved by Planning Commission August 13, 2019 | 1
LDR-19-02 Transfer of Development Rights Technical Amendments
2.02 Specific Definitions
***
Demolition. Any act or process that destroys in part or in whole a landmark, building, structure, or
improvement.
Density increase. For the purposes of the Transfer of Development Rights, the allowable increase in the
amount of residential development of a receiving parcel, expressed as a higher maximum average number of
dwelling units per acre of a receiving parcel than would be allowable on that parcel if it were part of a PUD
that did not use TDR; allowing a higher average number of dwelling units for each acre of a receiving parcel
also increases building bulk and lot coverage.
***
Development. (A) The carrying out of any change to improved or unimproved land, including but not limited
to the construction, reconstruction, conversion, structural alteration, relocation, enlargement or use of any
structure or parking area; (B) any mining, excavation, dredging, filling, grading, drilling or any land disturbance;
(C) any use or extension of the use of the land, or (D) the subdividing of land into two or more parcels.
Development Review Board. The Development Review Board or "DRB" of the City of South Burlington created
pursuant to 24 VSA Chapter 117.
Development Rights. See Transferrable Development Rights
***
TDR. Transfer of Development Rights or Transferrable Development Rights.
***
Transferrable Development Rights. The development potential of a parcel of land assigned by these
regulations and measured in dwelling units per gross acre, which may be severed from a parcel, the sending
parcel, and which may be transferred to and used on another parcel, the receiving parcel. To the extent that
the development potential of a sending parcel is used on a receiving parcel, rights or interests in the parcel
created by a legal instrument in perpetuity, conserving the sending parcel and limiting the possible uses of
the sending parcel to agriculture, forestry, natural area and/or outdoor non-motorized recreation shall be
granted to the City, a State agency or a Qualified Organization, as defined in 10 V.S.A. section 6301a, as
amended from time to time.
***
9.01 Purpose
A Southeast Quadrant (SEQ) District (SEQ) is hereby formed in order to encourage open space preservation,
scenic view and natural resource protection, wildlife habitat preservation, continued agriculture, and well-
planned residential use in the approximately 3,200-acre area of the City known shown on the Official Zoning
Map as the Southeast Quadrant. The natural features, visual character and scenic views offered in this area
have long been recognized as very special and unique resources in the City and worthy of protection. The
design and layout of buildings and lots in a manner that in the judgment of the Development Review Board
LDR-19-02 Transfer of Development Rights Technical Amendments
Draft Approved by Planning Commission August 13, 2019 | 2
will best create neighborhoods and a related network of open spaces consistent with the Comprehensive Plan
for the Southeast Quadrant shall be encouraged. Any uses not expressly permitted are hereby prohibited,
except those which are allowed as conditional uses.
9.02 Comprehensive Plan
These regulations hereby implement the relevant provisions of the City of South Burlington Comprehensive
Plan, and any adopted amendments to such plan, and are in accord with the policies set forth therein. In the
event of a conflict between the Southeast Quadrant chapter and other provisions of the Comprehensive Plan,
the Southeast Quadrant chapter shall control.
9.03 Uses
In the SEQ District, principal permitted uses and conditional uses shall be those shown in Table C-1, Table of
Uses.
9.04 Designation of SEQ Sub-Districts and SEQ Zoning Map
A. The SEQ District is divided into six sub-districts:
(1) SEQ-NRP SEQ – Natural Resource Protection
(2) SEQ-NRT SEQ – Neighborhood Residential Transition
(3) SEQ-NR SEQ – Neighborhood Residential
(4) SEQ-NRN SEQ – Neighborhood Residential North
(5) SEQ-VR SEQ – Village Residential
(6) SEQ-VC SEQ – Village Commercial
B. These sub-districts are shown on the map entitled Southeast Quadrant Zoning Map, incorporated into
this bylaw.
C. Areas designated SEQ-NR, SEQ-NRN, SEQ-NRT, SEQ-VR, and SEQ-VC shall be considered development
areas. Areas designated SEQ-NRP are designated as conservation areas, and are subject to supplemental
regulations in this Article.
D. Interpretation of Sub-District Boundaries.
In any location where uncertainty exists regarding the exact boundaries of a sub-district as shown on the
Southeast Quadrant Zoning Map, the affected property owner may submit a written request that the Planning
Commission define the location of the boundary with respect to the subject property. The Planning
Commission shall consider such request at a meeting of the Planning Commission held within 60 days of
receipt of the written request. At the meeting, the Planning Commission shall provide an opportunity for
persons, including municipal staff, officials, and consultants, to present information relevant to the
determination of the boundary location. The Planning Commission has the authority to invoke technical
review of any such submittals or to gain additional information. Within 30 days following such meeting, or any
continuation thereof, the Planning Commission shall determine the boundary location, giving consideration
to the original intent or purpose in designating such sub-district, as expressed in the Southeast Quadrant
chapter of the Comprehensive Plan.
9.05 Transfer of Development Rights and Residential Density
LDR-19-02 Transfer of Development Rights Technical Amendments
Draft Approved by Planning Commission August 13, 2019 | 3
The planned maximum residential build-out in the SEQ District has long been limited to approximately 3,800
dwelling units, plus an allowance for affordable housing density bonuses. In order to maintain this limitation
on the overall development of the SEQ District and to encourage both well-planned residential development
in clusters and the preservation or protection of open space, natural resources, scenic views and agricultural
uses, the Transfer of Development Rights is hereby authorized within the SEQ District.
A. Sending and Receiving Areas
(1) Lands within the SEQ-NR, SEQ-NRN, SEQ-VR and SEQ-VC sub-districts are designated as receiving
areas.
(2) Lands within the SEQ-NRP sub-district are designated as sending areas.
(3) Lands within the SEQ-NRT sub-district area designated both as sending areas and receiving areas.
B. Maximum Assigned Density: The maximum assigned density of a parcel or portion of a parcel in any
For the purposes of the Transfer of Development Rights, all land in the SEQ sub-dDistrict shall beis provided
an Assigned Density based on the maximum residential build-out of the SEQ District. The maximum assigned
density of a parcel shall be one point two (1.2) dwelling units and/or lots per gross acre.
(1) SEQ-VC: Lots in the SEQ-VC sub-district that were in existence as of the effective date of this Article
and that are two acres or less in size shall be allowed an assigned residential density of four (4) dwelling.
units. to the acre as of right. This density may be increased to no more than 8 d.u. to the acre through the
transfer of development rights. Development in SEQ-VC shall be according to Section 9.10.
CB. Average Development Density Allowable Density for Development that does not Include a Transfer
of Development Rights.
TIf a PUD does not use Transferrable Development Rights, the number of dwelling units that may be located
ondeveloped, or the number of single family house lots that may be created, within a contiguous development
parcel subject to a singlethe PUD or Master Plan approval shall not exceed an average density and a maximum
number of units per structure of theas followsing:
(1) In the SEQ-NRP sub-district, the provisions of Section 9.12 shall apply.
(2) SEQ-NRT: Four (4) dwelling units (du) to the acre
(3) SEQ-NR: Four (4) dwelling units (du) to the acre and four (4) dwelling units per structure
(4) SEQ-NRN: Four and two-thirds (4.67) dwelling units (du) to the acre and four (4) dwelling units
per structure
(5) SEQ-VR: Eight (8) dwelling units (du) to the acre and six (6) dwelling units per structure
(6) SEQ-VC: Eight (8) dwelling units (du) to the acre and six (6) dwelling units per structure.
(2) In the SEQ-NRT, SEQ-NR, SEQ-NRN and SEQ-VR sub-districts: One point two (1.2) dwelling units to
the acre and four (4) dwelling units per structure.
(3) In the SEQ-VC subdistrict:
(a) For lots that were in existence as of the effective date of this Article and that are two acres or
less in size: four (4) dwelling units to the acre
LDR-19-02 Transfer of Development Rights Technical Amendments
Draft Approved by Planning Commission August 13, 2019 | 4
(b)For all other lots: One point two (1.2) dwelling units to the acre and four (4) dwelling units per
structure
D.Allowable Density for Development that Includes a Transfer of Development Rights
If a PUD uses Transferrable Development Rights, the number of dwelling units that may be located on, or the
number of single-family house lots that may be created within, a contiguous development parcel subject to a
single PUD or Master Plan approval shall be increased to a maximum average density as follows:
(1)In the SEQ-NRT and SEQ-NR sub-districts: Four (4) dwelling units to the acre and four (4) dwelling
units per structure.
(2)In the SEQ-NRN sub-district: Four and two-thirds (4.67) dwelling units to the acre and four (4)
dwelling units per structure.
(3)In the SEQ-VR and SEQ-VC sub-districts: Eight (8) dwelling units to the acre and six (6) dwelling
units per structure.
Such average densities may be achieved only under as part of a PUD Planned Unit Development application.
See Section 9.13, SEQ Review and Approval Process.
Where a structure has been approved as part of a Master Plan prior to January 9, 2012 with a greater number
of dwelling units than those permitted in these Regulations, such approved number of units in a structure
shall remain in effect.
E.Development Rights Necessary to Obtain Density Increase
To obtain the increased density allowable in a receiving area, transferrable development rights must be
acquired from 0.83 acres of land in a sending area for each additional dwelling unit approved for development
on the receiving parcel beyond the maximum average density that would be allowable on that parcel if the
PUD did not use transferrable development rights.
CF. Affordable Housing Density Increase.
(1)Affordable housing bonuses pursuant to Section 18.02 are allowed in the SEQ-NR, SEQ-NRN, SEQ-
NRT, SEQ-VR, and SEQ-VC sub-districts. If affordable housing, as defined in Article 2 and regulated in
Article 18 of these Regulations, is proposed as part of an application for development, the Development
Review Board may grant a density increase in any of the eligible SEQ sub-districts according to the
requirements of Section 18.02.
(2)Calculation of the allowed density increase (i.e. 25% or 50% per Section 18.02) shall be based on
the maximum allowable overall density of the project as a whole, including non-contiguous sending
parcels where applicable. If a development plan is approved by the Development Review Board, the
applicable average density may be increased on the development parcel sufficient to accommodate the
affordable housing units.
(3)In the SEQ-VR and SEQ-VC sub-districts, the Development Review Board may allow residential
structures containing one or more affordable dwelling units to have two additional dwelling units, up to
a maximum of eight (8) dwelling units per structure. This provision shall not be interpreted to allow an
increase in the total allowable number of units for the project as a whole.
LDR-19-02 Transfer of Development Rights Technical Amendments
Draft Approved by Planning Commission August 13, 2019 | 5
(4)When an affordable housing density increase is granted in accordance with this Section and
Section 18.02, the designated affordable dwelling units shall not constitute units for the purposes of
calculation of Transferable Development Rights.
* **
9.12 SEQ-NRP; Supplemental Regulations
A.Any lot that lies entirely within a SEQ-NRP sub-district is subject to the following supplemental
regulations:
(1)Such lot shall be conveyed to the City of South Burlington as dedicated open space or to a qualified
land trust and shall not be developed with a residence, or
(2)Such lot may be developed with a residence or residences pursuant to a conservation plan
approved by the Development Review Board. See 9.12(B) below.
(3)Such lot may be developed with uses other than residences, as listed in Table C-1, subject to the
Development Review Board’s approval of a conservation plan that balances development or land
utilization and conservation. Such lot may also include the following additional development/activities:
(a)Driveways, roads, underground utility services, or other appurtenant improvements to serve
approved development or uses. Utility service components, such as transformers and amplifiers, may
be installed at ground level where such accords with standard industry practices.
(b)Landscaping, regrading, or other similar activities necessary to the creation of a buildable lot.
B.A lot that was in existence on or before June 22, 1992 and which lies substantially or entirely within a
SEQ-NRP sub-district may be improved with one or more single family detached dwelling units, subject to
conditional use review and the following supplemental standards:
(1)Where the lot is less than fifteen (15) acres in size, the Development Review Board may permit
no more than one (1) single family dwelling unit only if:
(a)The portion of the lot in any other (non-NRP) SEQ sub-district is insufficient to accommodate
the construction and use of a single family dwelling unit in compliance with these Regulations, and;
(b)The location of structures, yards, and access drives have no portion within a designated
primary natural community or its related buffer.
(2)Where the lot is fifteen (15) acres or more in contiguous area, the Development Review Board
may allow a subdivision of no more than three (3) lots and construction of one (1) single family dwelling
unit on each of these lots only if:
(a)The DRB shall determine whether the portion of the lot in any non-NRP SEQ sub-district is
sufficient to accommodate the construction and use of at least three (3) single family dwelling units
on lots approvable in compliance with these Regulations.
(i)Where the DRB finds that the portion of the lot in any non-NRP SEQ sub-district is
sufficient to accommodate the construction and use of at least three (3) single family dwelling
units on lots approvable in compliance with these Regulations, no subdivisions of land or
construction of new dwelling units shall be permitted in the NRP subdistrict;
LDR-19-02 Transfer of Development Rights Technical Amendments
Draft Approved by Planning Commission August 13, 2019 | 6
(ii)Where the DRB finds that the portion of the lot in any non-NRP SEQ sub-district is
sufficient to accommodate the construction and use of two (2) single family dwelling units on lots
approvable in compliance with these Regulations, the subdivision of land and construction of up
to one (1) new dwelling unit in the NRP subdistrict may be permitted by the DRB in compliance
with these Regulations;
(iii)Where the DRB finds that the portion of the lot in any non-NRP SEQ sub-district is
sufficient to accommodate the construction and use of one (1) single family dwelling units on lots
approvable in compliance with these Regulations, the subdivision of land and construction of up
to two (2) new dwelling unit in the NRP subdistrict may be permitted by the DRB in compliance
with these Regulations;
(iv)Where the DRB finds that the portion of the lot in any non-NRP SEQ sub-district is
insufficient to accommodate the construction and use of any single family dwelling units on lots
approvable in compliance with these Regulations, the subdivision of land and construction of up
to three (3) new dwelling unit in the NRP subdistrict may be permitted by the DRB in compliance
with these Regulations; and,
(b)such lots shall have a minimum size of 12,000 square feet per dwelling unit, and,
(c)the location of structures, yards, and access drives have no portion within a designated
primary natural community or its related buffer, and,
(d)The location of structures and access drives are clustered such that no dwelling unit is located
more than one hundred (100) feet from any other structure, and,
(e)The dwelling units shall be detached single family dwellings, and,
(f)Such subdivision plan shall be subject to the Development Review Board’s approval of a
conservation plan in a form acceptable to the City Attorney that permanently encumbers the land
against further land subdivision and development.
C.A single tax parcel existing as of the effective date of these regulations which exceeds one hundred
(100)acres and is located entirely within the NRP sub-district, as shown on the South Burlington Tax Maps last
revised 6/05 (June 2005), whether such lands are contiguous or not, may be subdivided at an average overall
density for the entire tax parcel of one (1) single-family dwelling per ten (10) acres. Any new lots so created
shall have a minimum size of 12,000 square feet per dwelling unit. Such lots shall be clustered in a manner
that maximizes the resource values of the property and shall have no portion within a designated primary
natural community or its related buffer. All dwelling units shall be detached single family houses. Such
subdivision plan shall be subject to the Development Review Board’s approval of a conservation plan in a form
acceptable to the City Attorney that permanently encumbers the land against further land subdivision and
development.
9.13 SEQ Review and Approval Process
A.Single family residences and two-family residences on a single existing lot are specifically excluded
from the review provisions of Section 9.13 of this article. All other development is subject to the provisions
presented below.
LDR-19-02 Transfer of Development Rights Technical Amendments
Draft Approved by Planning Commission August 13, 2019 | 7
B.For all development other than that listed above in Section 9.13(A), the Development Review Board
shall use the Planned Unit Development (PUD) review and approval process presented in Article 15,
Subdivision and Planned Unit Development Review.
C.Transfer of Development Rights and Non-Contiguous PUDs.
(1)The Development Review Board may approve a PUD application that involves non-contiguous parcels,
regardless of sub-district, if the following conditions are met:
The applicant shall demonstrate that development rights have been secured and encumbered from lands lying
within the SEQ-NRP or SEQ-NRT sub-districts, or adjacent lands on the same tax parcel lying within any sub-
district, or from lands acquired by the City or State for the purpose of providing public parks in any sub-district,
and EITHER that the sending parcel is sufficiently encumbered against further land subdivision and
development through a purchase or other agreement acceptable to the City Attorney to ensure conformance
with these Regulations; OR
All encumbered parcels not subject to a permanent conservation easement or restriction of similar binding
effect shall be reviewed as components of the PUD and shall be subject to the provisions of this article.
(2)If the conditions of 9.13(C)(1) above are met, the Development Review Board may then approve the
assignment (transfer) of all or a portion of the residential development density calculated for a non-
contiguous encumbered parcel to another parcel to satisfy the provisions of Section 9.05 above.
D.Master Plan Review. As per Section 15.07, Master Plan Review and Approval, the Development
Review Board shall require a master plan for any application for 10 or more dwelling units. In such a case, the
provisions of Section 15.07 shall apply in addition to the PUD provisions of Article 15, and the SEQ-specific
provisions of this aArticle.
LDR-19-03 Draft River Corridor Standards
Draft Approved by Planning Commission August 13, 2019 | 1
Amendment #LDR-19-03 Floodplain Overlay District and proposed River Corridors
Overlay District
2.03 Definitions for Flood Hazard and River Corridor Purposes
The following definitions shall apply to all lands within the Floodplain and River Corridor Overlay District.
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 stream.
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 intermittently 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.
Critical facilities. Facilities that are vital to public health and safety I ncluding es police stations, fire and rescue
facilities, hospitals, and public and private schools, shelters providing temporary housing assistance, assisted
living facilities, congregate care facilities, and skilled burning 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.
LDR-19-03 Draft River Corridor Standards
Draft Approved by Planning Commission August 13, 2019 | 2
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
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 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.
LDR-19-03 Draft River Corridor Standards
Draft Approved by Planning Commission August 13, 2019 | 3
Floodplain or flood-prone area. Any land area susceptible
to being inundated by water from any source (see definition
of “flood”).
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
flood hazard area. Grading results in minor or no changes in topographic elevations. If new material is brought
from outside the flood 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 flood 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.
LDR-19-03 Draft River Corridor Standards
Draft Approved by Planning Commission August 13, 2019 | 4
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).
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 which include 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.
Non-residential. Uses not defined as “Residential Use” in Section 2.02.
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.
LDR-19-03 Draft River Corridor Standards
Draft Approved by Planning Commission August 13, 2019 | 5
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 an 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.
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.
LDR-19-03 Draft River Corridor Standards
Draft Approved by Planning Commission August 13, 2019 | 6
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.
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.
LDR-19-03 Draft River Corridor Standards
Draft Approved by Planning Commission August 13, 2019 | 7
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
…
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.
…
(5)Overlay Districts. The following overlay districts are shown on the Overlay Districts Map:
FP Floodplain Overlay District
Traffic Overlay District
Scenic View Protection Overlay District
IHO Interstate Highway Overlay District
TO Traffic Overlay District
SVP Scenic View Protection Overlay District
Transit Overlay District
Urban Design Overlay District
BBW Bartlett Brook Watershed Protection Overlay District
PBW Potash Brook Watershed Protection Overlay District (reserved)
River Corridor Overlay District
B.Description of Certain Districts.
…
(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. (4) 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.
…
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
……………………………..
LDR-19-03 Draft River Corridor Standards
Draft Approved by Planning Commission August 13, 2019 | 8
…
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 in these regulations shall take precedence.
F.District General Provisions
(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 have not been mapped by the State of Vermont, the standards in this Section shall apply to
the area measured as fifty (50) feet from the top of the stream bank or slope, whichever is applicable
LDR-19-03 Draft River Corridor Standards
Draft Approved by Planning Commission August 13, 2019 | 9
based on a field determination consistent with the Vermont ANR Flood Hazard and River Corridor
Protection Procedure.
(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 Procedure.
(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:
(a)Hire a licensed land surveyor or registered professional engineer to stake out the RCO
boundary on the property; or
(b)Request a letter of determination from ANR which shall constitute proof of the location of the
river corridor boundary. In support of a letter of determination request, applicants must provide ANR
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. 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 update. 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.
G.Prohibited, Exempted, and Permitted Development in River Corridors
(1)Prohibited Development in the RCO District
The following are prohibited in the RCO District
(a)New structures, fill, accessory dwellings and any other development that is not expressly listed as
at least one of the Exempted Activities or Permitted Development as described below.
(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 networks (Nnew transportation or utility development that runs parallel to the
LDR-19-03 Draft River Corridor Standards
Draft Approved by Planning Commission August 13, 2019 | 10
river is not exempt and shall meet the Development Standards in section 10.07(I) below), 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):
(i)State-owned and operated institutions and facilities.
(ii)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.
(iii)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.
(iv)Public utility power generating plants and transmission facilities regulated under 30 V.S.A. §
248.
(v)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).
(h)Subdivision of land that does not involve or authorize development.
(3)Permitted Development. The following development activities in the RCO District are permissible
upon approval, provided they meet all other requirements of the LDRs.
(a)Construction of or additions to accessory structures that do not exceed, cumulatively, 500 square
feet, and are not used for habitation.
(b)Improvements to existing utilities that are within or immediately adjacent to an existing right of
way and serve a building.
(c)Replacement of on-site septic systems.
(d)Construction of or additions to an unenclosed deck or patio attached to an existing structure,
where such construction or additions are cumulatively 200 square feet or less and are located no less than
100 feet from the top of bank (or top of slope, if applicable).
(e)River or floodplain restoration projects that do not involve fill, structures, utilities, or other
improvements, and which the ANR Regional Floodplain Manager has confirmed in writing are designed to
meet or exceed the applicable standards in this bylaw.
H.Development Review Classification & Referral to Outside Agencies
(1)A zoning 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. All permits
LDR-19-03 Draft River Corridor Standards
Draft Approved by Planning Commission August 13, 2019 | 11
shall require that a permittee have all other necessary permits from state and federal agencies before
work may begin.
(a) If a permitted development activity listed in subsection G(3) above meets the criteria for infill
development and/or certain non-habitable and accessory structures in subsections I(2)(a) or I(2)(b),
below, then the activity shall require an administrative review by the AO and may receive a Zoning
Permit from the AO.
(b) If permitted development activity listed in subsection G(3) above does not meet the criteria
for infill development and certain non-habitable and accessory structures in subsections I(2)(a) or
I(2)(b) then the proposal shall be reviewed by the Development Review Board as a Conditional Use
and the DRB must find that the proposed development meets the River Corridor Performance
Standard outlined in subsection I(2)(c) prior to issuance of a Zoning Permit by the AO.
(2) Referrals to outside agencies
(a) Upon receipt of a complete application for new construction or a substantial improvement,
the Administrative Officer 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.
(b) If the applicant is seeking a permit for the alteration or relocation of a watercourse, copies of
the application shall also be provided to the following entities: affected adjacent communities, the
River Management Engineer at the Vermont Agency of Natural Resources, the Army Corps of
Engineers, and 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.
I. 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.
(1) 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 existing adjacent
development.
(2) Development outside of designated centers shall meet the following criteria:
(a) In-fill Development must be located no closer to the channel than the adjacent existing principal
buildings, within a gap that is no more than 300 feet (see Figure 1); or,
LDR-19-03 Draft River Corridor Standards
Draft Approved by Planning Commission August 13, 2019 | 12
(b)Down River Shadow: A non-habitable addition (garage, deck, patio, stairs, etc.) 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 of the downstream side of the existing habitable structure 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); or,
(c)River Corridor Performance Standard.
(i)The proposed development shall:
a.not be placed on land with a history of fluvial erosion damage or that is imminently threatened
by fluvial erosion; and,
b.not cause the river reach to depart from, or further depart from, the channel width, depth,
meander pattern or slope associated with natural stream processes and equilibrium conditions; and,
Figure 1: In-fill Development Standard
Figure 2: Shadow Area Development Standard
LDR-19-03 Draft River Corridor Standards
Draft Approved by Planning Commission August 13, 2019 | 13
c.not result in an immediate need or anticipated future need for stream channelization that
would increase flood elevations and velocities or alter the sediment regime, triggering channel
adjustments and erosion in adjacent and downstream locations.
(ii)In making its determination, the DRB may request or consider additional information to
determine if the proposal meets the River Corridor Performance Standard, including:
a.Description of why the criteria for infill development and certain non-habitable and accessory
structures in sub sections I(2)(a) and I(2)(b) 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.
J.Submission Requirements. In addition to all information required for permitted development, the
application shall include:
(1)Plan. A plan that depicts the proposed development, all water bodies, all River Corridor 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;
(2)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 zoning permit before work can begin.
(3)Supplemental Application Requirements.
(a)Information clearly demonstrating how the proposed development meets the requirements
for infill development and certain non-habitable and accessory structures in subsection 10.07(I)
Development Standards above; or
(b)A narrative and supporting technical information from a qualified consultant that
demonstrates how the proposal meets the River Corridor Performance Standard in subsection 10.07(I)
Development Standards above, or
(c)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.
(4)Waivers. Upon written request from the applicant, the Administrative Officer or DRB may waive
specific application requirements when the data or information is not needed to comply with Section
10.07 of this bylaw.
K.Permit Conditions
LDR-19-03 Draft River Corridor Standards
Draft Approved by Planning Commission August 13, 2019 | 14
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 applicable section of river solely to protect the public water access from lateral river
channel adjustment.
LDR-19-04 Lake Champlain / QCP setback
Draft Approved by the Planning Commission August 13, 2019 | 1
LDR-19-04: Eliminate duplicative surface water protection standards for land
within 150’ of Lake Champlain and allowances for expansion of pre-existing
structures within 100’ of Potash Brook within Queen City Park Zoning District
12.01 General Stream and Surface Water Protection Standards
…
C.Surface Water Buffer Standards (“Stream Buffers”)
(1)Applicability. The requirements of this Section shall apply to all lands described as follows:
(a)All land within one hundred (100) feet horizontal distance of the centerline of Muddy
Brook and the main stem of Potash Brook, with the exception of lands within the Queen City Park
zoning district which shall be subject to the provisions of (D) below.
(b)All land within one hundred (100) feet horizontal distance of the edge of the channel of
the Winooski River
(c)All land within fifty (50) feet horizontal distance of the centerline of any minor stream
(d)All land within ten (10) feet horizontal distance of the centerline of a drainage way
(e)Land within or abutting the high-water elevation of Lake Champlain, which for the
purposes of these regulations shall be one hundred two (102) feet above mean sea level datum.
All land within one hundred fifty (150) feet horizontal distance of the high water elevation of Lake
Champlain, which for purposes of these regulations shall be one hundred two (102) feet above
mean sea level datum.
…
D.Pre-Existing Structures along Lake Champlain and within Queen City Park
(1)Applicability. The provisions of this section shall apply to preexisting structures within the
areas defined as follows:
(a)All lands within one hundred fifty (150) feet horizontal distance of the high water
elevation of Lake Champlain, which for purposes of these regulations shall be one hundred two
(102) feet above mean sea level datum;
(b)All lands within the Queen City Park zoning district located within one hundred (100) feet
horizontal distance of the centerline of Potash Brook.
(2)Expansion and construction of pre-existing structures. Within the areas defined in Section
(D)(1) above, the expansion and reconstruction of pre-existing structures may be approved by the
DRB as a conditional use provided the requirements of the underlying zoning district and the following
standards are met:
(a)The structure to be expanded or reconstructed was originally constructed on or before
April 24, 2000. For purposes of these Regulations, expansion may include the construction of
detached accessory structures including garages and utility sheds.
LDR-19-04 Lake Champlain / QCP setback
Draft Approved by the Planning Commission August 13, 2019 | 2
(b)The expanded or reconstructed structure does not extend any closer, measured in terms
of horizontal distance, to the applicable high water elevation or stream centerline than the closest
point of the existing structure.
(c)The total building footprint area of the expanded or reconstructed structure shall not be
more than fifty percent (50%) larger than the footprint of the structure lawfully existing on April
24, 2000. For purposes of these regulations, reconstruction may include razing the existing
structure and/or foundation and constructing a new structure in accordance with the provisions
of the underlying zoning district regulations and this section.
(d)An erosion control plan for construction is submitted by a licensed engineer detailing
controls that will be put in place during construction or expansion to protect the associated
surface water.
(e)A landscaping plan showing plans to preserve, maintain and supplement existing trees
and ground cover vegetation is submitted and the DRB finds that the overall plan will provide a
visual and vegetative buffer for the lake and/or stream.
(3)D. Erosion control measures and water-oriented development along Lake Champlain.
Within the area along Lake Champlain defined in Section (D)(1)(a) above, tThe installation of erosion
control measures and water-oriented development within or abutting the high -water elevation of
Lake Champlain, which for the purposes of these Regulations shall be one hundred two (102) feet
above mean sea level datum, may be approved by the DRB as a conditional use provided the following
standards are met:
(a)The improvement involves, to the greatest extent possible, the use of natural materials
such as wood and stone.
(b)The improvement will not increase the potential for erosion.
(c)The improvement will not have an undue adverse impact on the aesthetic integrity of the
lakeshore. In making a determination pursuant to this criterion, the DRB may request renderings
or other additional information relevant and necessary to evaluating the visual impact of the
proposed improvement.
(d)A landscaping plan showing plans to preserve, maintain and supplement existing trees
and ground cover vegetation is submitted and the DRB finds that the overall plan will provide a
visual and vegetative buffer for the lake and/or stream.
LDR-19-05 Administrative Amendments
Draft Approved by the Planning Commission August 13, 2019 | 1
LDR-19-05 Administrative Amendments: Umbrella Approvals, Field Changes,
Combined Approval, and Technical Corrections
3.09 Multiple Structures and Uses
…
B.Multiple Uses in a Structure and Umbrella Approval.
…
(2)Umbrella Approval
(a)The Administrative Officer or Development Review Board may approve two (2) or more
separate uses in a single principal building or structure in conjunction with site plan, PUD or
conditional use approval, provided all of the proposed uses are permitted or duly approved
conditional uses in the underlying zoning district and all other applicable standards are met. Such
standards may concern trip ends, parking spaces, gross floor area dedicated to uses where
applicable, number of restaurant or retail food establishment seats, and other numerical
standards related to the provisions of these regulations. This shall be known as an umbrella
approval.
(b)Where an applicant with umbrella approval proposes a minor change in use, the
Administrative Officer may approve the change as an administrative action and grant a zoning
permit. The criteria for determining if the change is minor shall include an assessment of projected
p.m. peak hour trip ends, required parking spaces, and other numerical criteria specified in the
umbrella approval. If the applicable numerical criteria are the same or fewer than those specified
in the umbrella approval, the change may be deemed minor.
…
3.10 Accessory Structures and Uses
…
F.Accessory Uses in the IC and IO districts.
…
(5)No individual accessory use may exceed 3,000 SF in gross floor area except for retail sales
food establishments, which shall not exceed 5,000 SF GFA.
LDR-19-05 Administrative Amendments
Draft Approved by the Planning Commission August 13, 2019 | 2
14.05 Application, Review, and Approval Procedure
…
I.Field Changes and As-Built Plans
(1)Field Changes
(a)During construction, the Administrative Officer may authorize or require, in writing, at
his/her own determination or upon the request of the applicant, minor adjustments to a site plan
which do not affect the substance of the site plan approval. to the approved site plan when such
adjustments are necessary in light of technical or engineering considerations, the existence or
materiality of which was first discovered during actual construction. Such minor adjustments shall
be consistent with the spirit and intent of the approved site plan. All determinations of eligibility
for field changes are subject to the discretion of the Administrative Officer.
(b)Where unforeseen conditions are encountered which constitute require any material
change to an approved site development plan or where the developer otherwise wishes to modify
the approved site plan for other reasons, a an amendment to the approval site plan application
shall be filed with the Development Review Board or Administrative Officer for review in
accordance with procedures required for the amendment ofsuch applications.
(2)As-Built Plans
(a)Upon completion of any development or redevelopment pursuant to an approved final
site plan involving field changes as set forth in (1)(a) above, and prior to the issuance of a
certificate of occupancy by the Administrative Officer, the applicant shall submit to the
Administrative Officer as-built plans in paper and digital form, prepared and certified by a licensed
engineer, architect, landscape architect or surveyor, showing the location of all site
improvements, as constructed. Such plan shall be based on a field survey.
(b)Said as-built plan shall be reviewed by the Administrative Officer to determine if it is in
compliance with the approved final site plan, including any field changes authorized under
subsection 1(a) above. The Administrative Officer shall specify indicate its compliance with or
variation from the approved final site planthe Land Development Regulations by signature, and
shall file one (1) copy with the Department of Planning and Zoning.
(c)If variations from the approved final site plan exist, an amended site plan shall be filed
with the Development Review Board for review in accordance with the same procedures required
for initial applications.
(3)The provisions of this Section 14.05(H) shall apply to all types of approvals granted by the DRB
and/or Administrative Officer, including but not limited to subdivisions, PUDs, site plans,
miscellaneous approvals, and conditional use permits.
14.09 Administrative Review
A.Authority. The Department of Planning and Zoning is hereby authorized to conduct administrative
review and approval of site plan applications for principal permitted uses and conditional uses, as
provided below.
LDR-19-05 Administrative Amendments
Draft Approved by the Planning Commission August 13, 2019 | 3
B.Determination of Eligibility, except within the City Center Form Based Code District. All
determinations of eligibility for administrative review are subject to the discretion of the Director of
Planning and Zoning. The Administrative Officer shall not approve administrative amendments to master
plans, subdivisions, or variances. The Administrative Officer may review, approve, approve with
conditions, or deny administrative amendments to site plans involving a principal permitted use, site plans
involving an approved conditional use, and site plans of planned unit developments, if the proposed
amendment meets one or more of the following criteria:
(1)Relocation of site improvements and/or accessory structures that have been previously
approved, provided that such relocations do not alter the approved coverage for the site.
(2)Re-approval of plans if a permit issued by the Development Review Board has expired within
the preceding six months and no changes or alterations of any kind are proposed, including those
outlined in (4) below.
(3)Approval of plans showing as-built adjustments beyond standard field adjustments, provided
that such adjustments do not require the amendment of any condition of approval in the most recent
findings of fact.
(4)Minor alterations to an approved landscaping plan such as substitution of appropriate similar
species or landscaping or hardscaping materials, provided that the total value of landscaping
proposed in the amended plan is equal to or exceeds the amount approved by the Development
Review Board.
(5)An increase in building area and/or impervious coverage totaling less than five thousand
(5,000) square feet or three percent (3%) of the overall site coverage, whichever is smaller. Applicants
are advised that the cumulative total increase in building area and/or site coverage cumulatively
permitted through all administrative amendments on any one lot shall not exceed five thousand
(5,000) square feet or three percent (3%) of the overall site coverage, whichever is smaller.
Development Review Board approval shall be required for any amendment exceeding these limits.
(6)All coverage and other limitations pursuant to these regulations shall apply in determining
whether an administrative amendment shall be approved.
(7)Applications submitted pursuant to Section 3.06(J) of these Regulations (Exceptions to
Setback and Lot Coverage Requirements for Lots Existing Prior to February 28, 1974).
(8)Changes in use of all or part of a building or structure with prior site plan approval to a
permitted use in the applicable zoning district, provided the proposed use, whether solely or in
combination with other uses subject to the same approval, will not result in any permitting
requirement or threshold being exceeded or violated.
C.Determination of Eligibility within City Center Form Based Code District. The Administrative
Officer shall review all applications except:
(1)Applications for Subdivision or modifications to subdivisions (except Minor Lot Line
Adjustments);
LDR-19-05 Administrative Amendments
Draft Approved by the Planning Commission August 13, 2019 | 4
(2)Applications involving new proposed public rights-of-way, parks, or other land proposed to
be deeded to the City of South Burlington;
(3)Requests for development within any of the water or wetlands resources identified within
Article 12 of these Regulations;
(4)Applications for development within Areas of Special Flood Hazard; or
(5)Where specifically stated in these Regulations
D.Reporting of Decisions. All administrative approvals, except those within the City Center FBC
District, shall be reported by the Administrative Officer to the Development Review Board at least
annually, and all such decisions of the Administrative Officer shall state that the decision may be appealed
in accordance with State law.
E.Combined Administrative Review and Zoning Permit. Where a decision issued by the
Administrative Officer contains no conditions requiring modifications to plans or supplemental
submissions, the Administrative Officer may issue any required zoning permit concurrently with the
decision.
Appendix E: Submission Requirements
Site
Plan
Sketch
Plan
Master
Plan
Major
Prelim
Major
Final
Minor
Final
Subdiv
Sketch
Subdiv
Final
DRB
Non-
subdiv.
Admin
/ Site
Plan
Submittal requirement
√√√√√√√√√√Completed application form; three (3) one (1) full-sized, one (1) reduced
[11" x 17"], and one (1) digital copy of plans; and a list of the owners or
record of abutting property owners
All Districts Except City Center FBC City Center FBC District
BASIC INFORMATION
575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburl.com
South Burlington Planning Commission
Proposed Land Development Regulations
Amendment & Adoption Report
Amendments Approved by the Planning Commission August 13, 2019
In accordance with 24 V.S.A. §4441, the South Burlington Planning Commission has prepared the
following report regarding the proposed amendments and adoption of the City’s Land Development
Regulations.
Outline of the Proposed Overall Amendments
Following a public hearing on August 13, 2019, the South Burlington Planning Commission approved the
the following amendments to the South Burlington Land Development Regulations:
A.LDR-19-01: Eliminate minimum parking requirements for all uses citywide except multi-family
housing and accessory dwelling units, for which parking requirements are to be reduced
B.LDR-19-02: Amend transfer of development rights requirements to be consistent with enabling
statutes
C.LDR-19-03: Establish Citywide River Corridor Overlay District and make minor modifications to
the Flood Plain Overlay District
D.LDR-19-04: Eliminate duplicative surface water protection standards for land within 150’ of Lake
Champlain and allowances for expansion of pre-existing structures within 100’ of Potash Brook
within Queen City Park Zoning District
E.LDR-19-05: Administrative Amendments: Authorize Administrative Officer to approve minor field
changes to site plans & allow for a joint administrative approval & zoning permit; minor
technical corrections
Brief Description and Findings Concerning the Proposed Amendments
The proposed amendments have been considered by the Planning Commission for their consistency
with the text, goals, and objectives of the City of South Burlington’s Comprehensive Plan, adopted
February 1, 2016. For each of the amendments, the Commission has addressed the following as
enumerated under 24 VSA 4441(c):
“…The report shall provide a brief explanation of the proposed bylaw, amendment, or repeal and shall
include a statement of purpose as required for notice under section 4444 of this title, and shall include
findings regarding how the proposal:
2
(1)Conforms with or furthers the goals and policies contained in the municipal plan, including the
effect of the proposal on the availability of safe and affordable housing.
(2)Is compatible with the proposed future land uses and densities of the municipal plan.
(3)Carries out, as applicable, any specific proposals for any planned community facilities.”
A.LDR-19-01 Eliminate minimum parking requirements for all uses citywide except multi-family
housing and accessory dwelling units, for which parking requirements are to be reduced
Brief explanation of the proposed bylaw
The amendment would eliminate minimum parking standards for all uses citywide except multi-
family residential uses & accessory apartments, which would have reduced minimum
requirements. Standards for the design of parking areas would be retained, screening of parking
areas from streets would be enhanced, and allowance for reserving parking to individual tenants
of a multi-tenant property would be specified.
(1)Conforms with or furthers the goals and policies contained in the municipal plan, including
the effect of the proposal on the availability of safe and affordable housing.
Eliminating / reducing minimum parking requirements is consistent with each of the
primary goals of the Comprehensive Plan (p. 1-1). The amendment supports affordability
by reducing the requirement for space & funding to be allocated to parking; supports a
walkable and green community by promoting a land use pattern that is less auto-
dependent; and supports a strong economy by reducing city-mandated parking on private
land.
(2)Is compatible with the proposed future land uses and densities of the municipal plan.
The amendments support future land use goals and densities by reducing or eliminating
requirements for area dedicated to parking over additional building or additional green
space.
(3)Carries out, as applicable, any specific proposals for any planned community facilities.
The amendments do not impact specific proposals for any planned community facilities.
B.LDR-19-02 Amend transfer of development rights requirements to be consistent with enabling
statutes
Brief explanation of the proposed bylaw
The proposed amendments consist of a review and modifications to the City’s transfer of
Development Rights regulations to be consistent with State law. The amendments are not
intended to affect the function of the program.
3
(1)Conforms with or furthers the goals and policies contained in the municipal plan, including
the effect of the proposal on the availability of safe and affordable housing
The amendments are to better match the regulations with State enabling statutes; no
substantive policy changes are proposed.
(2)Is compatible with the proposed future land uses and densities of the municipal plan.
The amendments are to better match the regulations with State enabling statutes; no
substantive policy changes are proposed.
(3)Carries out, as applicable, any specific proposals for any planned community facilities.”
The amendments are to better match the regulations with State enabling statutes; no
substantive policy changes are proposed.
C.LDR-19-03: Establish Citywide River Corridor Overlay District and make minor modifications to the
Flood Plain Overlay District
Brief explanation of the proposed bylaw
The proposed amendment would establish river corridor protection standards for all major
watercourses and streams with watersheds greater than 2 acres in the City. The bylaw,
developed based on guidelines from the Vermont Agency of Natural Resources, would limit
development and redevelopment throughout the mapped stream and river corridors of the City.
The primary purpose is to limit development in areas most prone to future hazard from natural
shifts in the river corridors. The amendments would also make minor modifications to the flood
plain overlay district, including updates to definitions and the addition of shelters, congregate
care, skilled nursing, and assisted living facilities to the definition of critical facilities subject to
the standards applicable to the 500-year floodplain.
(1)Conforms with or furthers the goals and policies contained in the municipal plan, including
the effect of the proposal on the availability of safe and affordable housing.
The adoption of River Corridor standards is specifically identified in the Comprehensive
Plan:
Strategy 34. Implement identified projects within the All Hazards Mitigation Plan including
river corridor management.
Objective 26. Protect and improve watershed, stream, and wetland system natural
processes, specifically for stormwater treatment, riparian and aquatic habitat, and
floodplain and river corridor protection.
Objective 27. Include mapped river corridors (fluvial erosion hazard areas, floodplains,
and riparian areas) within designated open space areas intended for hazard mitigation,
resource conservation and compatible forms of passive outdoor recreation.
4
Strategy 63. Review fluvial erosion hazard areas and river corridors and adopt river
corridor protection bylaws and maps.
The proposed standards are intended to enhance the safety of new structures by avoiding
River Corridors. This, in turn, supports long-term affordability of housing.
(2)Is compatible with the proposed future land uses and densities of the municipal plan.
The proposed amendments will have minor impacts on land use and possibly achievable
densities by removing River Corridors from buildability. In practice, much of the land
within mapped River Corridors in the City are currently regulated by either floodplain
standards or stream buffer standards.
(3)Carries out, as applicable, any specific proposals for any planned community facilities.
The amendments do not impact specific proposals for any planned community facilities.
Exceptions in the River Corridor standards exist for the maintenance of infrastructure.
D.LDR-19-04 Eliminate duplicative surface water protection standards for land within 150’ of Lake
Champlain and allowances for expansion of pre-existing structures within 100’ of Potash Brook
within Queen City Park Zoning District
Brief explanation of the proposed bylaw
The proposed amendment would remove the applicability of surface water buffer standards
from areas within 150’ of Lake Champlain and related standards regarding pre-existing
structures along Lake Champlain and within Queen City Park. The Planning Commission finds
that these standards are largely redundant to recently-adopted statewide Shoreland Protection
Standards. The amended regulations would require that an applicant demonstrate compliance
with the statewide standards prior to issuance of a zoning permit.
The proposed amendment would also remove the allowance for the expansion of pre-existing
structures located within 100’ of the centerline of the Potash Brook within the Queen City Park
zoning district.
(1)Conforms with or furthers the goals and policies contained in the municipal plan, including
the effect of the proposal on the availability of safe and affordable housing.
The Planning Commission finds that the proposed amendment will not impact water
quality along Lake Champlain and instead will promote more clarity in implementation of
regulations. The Comprehensive Plan includes the following strategy to review duplicative
standards in the regulations:
Strategy 15. Conduct a comprehensive analysis of City regulations relating to permitting
with an eye toward ways to eliminate outdated or duplicative requirements and to further
streamline the process of obtaining needed permits with a specific focus on improving
5
predictability of the process. Move as much of the permitting process online as is viable to
improve customer access and service.
The Laker Champlain amendments are not anticipated to have any impacts on the
availability of safe and affordable housing.
The Commission also finds that the amendment to eliminate the allowance for expansion
of pre-existing structures within 100’ of the centerline of the Potash Brook within the
Queen City Park neighborhood support is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and will
not have an impact on the availability of safe and affordable housing. The Commission
finds that there are up to three homes within this affected area. These homes may be
maintained and restored, and may be expanded or reconstructed in manners conforming
with the regulations. The area in question is nearly entirely located within mapped River
Corridors.
Objective 26 states: “Protect and improve watershed, stream, and wetland system natural
processes, specifically for stormwater treatment, riparian and aquatic habitat, and
floodplain & river corridor protection.”
(2)Is compatible with the proposed future land uses and densities of the municipal plan.
The amendments are not anticipated to impact proposed future land uses and densities
as outlined in the Comprehensive Plan.
(3)Carries out, as applicable, any specific proposals for any planned community facilities.
The amendments do not impact specific proposals for any planned community facilities.
E.LDR-19-05 Grant authority for Administrative Officer to approve minor field changes to site plans
& allow for a joint administrative approval & zoning permit; minor technical corrections
Brief explanation of the proposed bylaw
The proposed amendment would expand the Administrative Officer’s authority to grant field
changes to site plans upon inspection, so long as the changes to the site plan are minor and do
not impact the approvability of the property. In addition, the proposed amendments would
allow for a joint approval of an administrative site plan and zoning permit. Minor technical
amendments are also included, including reducing the required number of full-sized plans
required at application.
(1)Conforms with or furthers the goals and policies contained in the municipal plan, including
the effect of the proposal on the availability of safe and affordable housing.
The proposed amendment is procedural in nature. The amendments are not anticipated
to have any impacts on the availability of safe and affordable housing, save for minor
improvements in the timeline for completion of projects.
6
The Comprehensive Plan includes the following strategy to review outdated standards in
the regulations:
Strategy 15. Conduct a comprehensive analysis of City regulations relating to permitting
with an eye toward ways to eliminate outdated or duplicative requirements and to further
streamline the process of obtaining needed permits with a specific focus on improving
predictability of the process. Move as much of the permitting process online as is viable to
improve customer access and service.
(2)Is compatible with the proposed future land uses and densities of the municipal plan.
The amendments are not anticipated to impact proposed future land uses and densities
as outlined in the Comprehensive Plan.
(3)Carries out, as applicable, any specific proposals for any planned community facilities.
The amendments do not impact specific proposals for any planned community facilities.
Vermont Master Naturalist Program
Advancing conservation, building community, and connecting Vermonters to the
wild heart of place
South Burlington Program Budget
•South Burlington Program design, materials and project costs = $1,650
•expert field course leaders ($400 X 5) = $2,000
•local coordinator = $500
•two scholarships = $850
Total = $5,000
Vermont Master Naturalist Program
Advancing conservation, building community, and connecting Vermonters to the
wild heart of place
South Burlington Program Budget
•South Burlington Program design, materials and project costs = $1,650
•expert field course leaders ($400 X 5) = $2,000
•local coordinator = $500
•two scholarships = $850
Total = $5,000
2018-19 Program Handbook
•
•
Vermont Master Naturalist Program
Advancing conservation, building community, and connecting
Vermonters to the wild heart of place
May 13, 2019
Dear South Burlington City Council,
I am writing on behalf of the Vermont Master Naturalist organization to seek financial support
for the ongoing delivery of the Vermont Master Naturalist South Burlington (VMNSB) program.
The program is currently training its first cohort of twelve South Burlington candidates, set to
graduate this month, and the goal is to recruit twelve or more new candidates to enroll from
September 2019 to May 2020.
The VMNSB program seeks to create teams of naturalists trained specifically in South
Burlington’s natural history across the earth, life, and social sciences. Through a series of five
field trips to key natural areas, VMNSB candidates explore the processes and timeline of major
events that have created the landscapes of South Burlington. Candidates spend time on each
site reviewing the geology, soils, plants and animals (natural communities), human land use
history, as well as the conservation history and management issues relevant for each site. The
program was modeled after the graduate-level professional training of the UVM Field Naturalist
Program, and the VMN program instructors are highly-trained faculty, graduates, and long-term
affiliates of that program.
Alongside their 30 hours of field training, VMNSB candidates undertake team volunteer projects
to address local conservation education and land stewardship needs, totaling at least 20 hours
per person. This year, the three VMNSB projects include an ecological assessment of the
Underwood Property, a city-wide wildlife corridor mapping initiative, and implementation of
place-based educational events in South Burlington schools. The Master Naturalists have also
been offering a series of walks to engage the public in the stories of their local landscapes.
After completion of the program, Master Naturalists are encouraged to stay active in their
community and will receive ongoing advice and support from the program instructors. South
Burlington thus stands to benefit long-term from a strengthened community of professionally-
trained naturalists acting as a citizen advisory group on local natural resource issues and
serving as expert resources for conservation education in our schools and communities.
In its first year, the VMNSB program was funded partly by participant fees and partly by a one-
time grant awarded to the umbrella Vermont Master Naturalist organization (through which
there are parallel programs running in Burlington, Williston, Montpelier, Bristol, Richmond, and
South Hero). The long-term goal is to have local sponsors contributing towards the cost of this
program in each town or city, with 50% of the $10,000 budget coming from participant
enrollment fees and the other 50% from a combination of municipal funds, a local land trust
and/or other local sponsors. A detailed budget is available upon request.
For the 2019-20 program year, the VMNSB program has received $1500 from the South
Burlington Land Trust, and we are requesting that City Council contribute the remaining $3500
to make this program financially viable for the coming year. In return, Council (or some of its
relevant committees) would have the opportunity to set the volunteer projects for 2-3 of the
VMNSB 2020 project teams by highlighting a specific problem, knowledge gap, or natural
resource assessment need. You would also have a guaranteed placement in the program for
one participant of your designation; the candidates are otherwise selected by an application
process. Beyond that, these funds would be going towards strengthening the naturalist
knowledge base and landscape literacy of South Burlington residents, towards our city’s greater
conservation goals.
Thank you for your consideration,
Sophie Mazowita
VMNSB Program Coordinator