HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - Chamberlin Neighborhood Airport Planning Committee - 03/16/2016DRAFT
CHAMBERLIN NEIGHBORHOOD-AIRPORT PLANNING COMMITTEE
MEETING MINUTES
16 MARCH 2016
The South Burlington Chamberlin-Airport Planning Commi ee held a mee ng on Wednesday, 16 March 2016, at 6:30p.m., in the Training Room, South Burlington Police Sta on, 19 Gregory Drive. MEMBERS PRESENT: C. Sargent, Chair; P. Clemins, K. Robison, K. Schlenter, P. Nowak, G. Maille, L. Brakel, J. Simson, M.Companion ALSO PRESENT: P. Conner, Director of Planning & Zoning; L. Krohn, C. Forde CCRPC; M. Smith, S. Smallridge, J. B. Hinds,Consultants; members of the public. 1. Agenda: Addi ons, dele ons or changes in order of agenda items: No changes were made to the agenda. 2. Open to the Public for items not related to the agenda: No issues were raised. 3. Minutes of 18 February 2016: Ms. Nowak moved to approve the Minutes of 18 February 2016 as presented. Mr. Schlenter seconded. Mo on passedunanimously. 4. Report of Noise Sub-Commi ee: Mr. Maille reported that the sub-commi ee con nued its discussion of goals with a focus on dra ing a noise and planningcommi ee to follow this commi ee. Mr. Maille noted a concern that sub-commi ee members Dave Hartne had not a ended any of the sub-commi ee’smee ngs. This has created a quorum concern as there are 6 members of the commi ee, which requires 4 members for aquorum. A mee ng had to be postponed because 4 members were not available. Mr. Maille then moved to remove Mr. Hartne from the Noise Sub-Commi ee for the reasons stated. Ms. Brakelseconded. Mo on passed unanimously. Mr. Companion voiced his concern that there should be a plan in process in the event this neighborhood becomesincompa ble for residen al use. He noted that a number of en es in the state deal with such an effect on a region. Heasked whether a “preparedness plan” could be put in place for this neighborhood, which hopefully would never beneeded. Mr. Simson felt it was the sub-commi ee’s work to do this. Mr. Maille felt there was a me issue as they have only un lJune to do the sub-commi ee’s work. He felt that should be part of the work of the commi ee that survives CNAPC. Mr.Companion recommended that the City Council explore this concept with other officials. 5. Overview and Commi ee review of dra concept neighborhood enhancements in the Chamberlinneighborhood: Mr. Smallridge reported on the enhancements that received a “high score.” These included: 1. Whimsical crosswalks2. Playful bike racks3. Pubic art (he showed examples using things with a local connota on)4. Banners/logos5. Gateways (he showed examples from other communi es).
Enhancements to exis ng paths/trails that were favored included:
1. Benches
2. Plant and tree labels
3. Fitness trails
4. “miniature museum” for local art work
5. Free lending library
6. Birdhouses (commi ee members also suggested bath houses and involving students in the building of these)
Mr. Smallridge then addressed the ques on of whether to allow for front porches. Mr. Conner noted the maximum
allowable now is for steps that are 5 feet in depth. Mr. Smallridge showed a typical street sec on with 20 and 30 foot
roads, with 5-deep steps. He then showed what it would look like with 12 foot porches and then with 12 and 6 foot
porches. He said it could be anything in between. He showed pictures of houses with porches, both covered and
uncovered, one and two-stories. He noted that it would take a change in the zoning regula ons to allow porches.
Mr. Snallridge said that even with porches there is s ll a lot of land from the street to houses. If people were to put in
street lights, they would have to be 3 feet back from the road, then another 6 feet for snow storage. He showed
examples of lights 18 feet and 14 feet tall and noted that not everyone wants street lights as they prefer to see the night
sky. Mr. Smith noted lights can be downcas ng. Ms. Sargent said that on her street, lights are far apart and not very
helpful for pedestrians. It can get “spooky.”
A commi ee member asked about solar. Ms. Hinds said there is more flexibility with LED. She suggested the town of
Essex as a resource for this. Mr. Conner noted that the general policy now is that all street lights must be LED.
Mr. Smallridge said that even with ligh ng there can be decora ve fences or hedges at the property line with landscaping
on the house side of the fence or hedge. This can be done in the city right-of-way with a “license agreement.” He
showed pictures of plan ng strips and front yard gardens in the public right-of-way. Mr. Simson noted this is good for
control of stormwater.. Mr. Companion noted that a good thing about the Chamberlin neighborhood is that it is all sand.
Mr. Smallridge then showed a concept of what a street could look like with different ameni es, including the possibility of
a linear trail. He showed possibili es for this as well. Ms. Nowak noted how a rac ve it now looks in front of Technology
Park. Mr. Maille said the land was acquired for Airport use and is private land and can’t be open to public use. He asked
if there is investment in trails/parks on this property, whether it puts the investment at risk. Could the Airport one day
say “it’s gone.” Mr. Conner said that’s a very important ques on and must be considered. There is, however, no harm in
proposing the idea. He noted that if Airport Drive is redone, the city has typically invested in rec paths, and there are
many ways that can happen. There are also requirements for landscaping when the Airport does major projects.
Ms. Hinds noted the use of the history of a neighborhood in public art (as with the Healthy Living Project). Mr. Conner
said there is a history of a trolley line in the Airport neighborhood.
Mr. Simson cited a project in Oakledge Park in Burlington where there are plaques to explain the history of the area. He
felt it wasn’t very expensive to do. Ms. Sargent said they should try to capitalize on the fact that the Airport is there, not
try to deny it is there. She noted the possibility of a museum with the history of avia on in the area.
7. Overview and Commi ee review of dra concept sugges ons/improvements for ins tu onal
arrangements:
Ms. Hinds suggested se ng up a framework regarding things that can enhance/affect the neighborhood, including:
1. Groups to contact
2. A “point person”
3. Audiences for different informa on
4. How to communicate (different kinds of communica on)
She drew a en on to worksheets which ask such ques ons as:
1. What do you want to be no fied about?
2. From whom should no ce come?
3. What is the best way to get informa on?
4. How o en would you like to be informed?
5. “My level of interest would change if….”
6. Discussions should be moderated by….
7. Other op ons to consider
With regard to the Airport, what should be the geographic no ce, and should there be ongoing discussion with Airport
officials?
With regard to schools, Ms. Hinds said there is probably a long- me horizon before anything is done with Chamberlin
School. Ques ons to consider are:
1. What is most important about the school’s opera on to your quality of life?
2. How might the School Board assure there is area representa on on master planning?
It was noted that there is a mee ng on the future of school on 22 March at 6:30 p.m. at the High School. Ms. Sargent
recommended that members a end that mee ng.
Mr. Maille asked if easements are needed for trails to cross private property. Ms. Hinds said they are. Mr. Krohn added
that state law protects private property owners from liability in these types of situa ons.
Ms. Sargent said something for the public to think about is where they would like to see connec ons. Mr. Maille said this
is par cularly important if Elizabeth and/or Patrick Streets are terminated. Mr. Conner stressed the importance of having
this start at the neighborhood level.
Ms. Hinds then addressed “resilience planning,” working through the “what ifs” with loss of power and other disrup ons.
People should consider building a local network for communica on and support. Ms. Hinds noted there is always a be er
“bounce back” when those networks are in place. Other things to consider are outreach to seniors, the disabled and
those with specific medical needs.
Ms. Hinds noted that transporta on enhancements are also important as there is the expecta on that there will be
changes to road networks in the area and possible road closures. Does the neighborhood want to be no fied of these
changes in advance? How much community involvement/par cipa on should there be? Should there be no fica on of
things happening on/to Williston Road? Etc.
With regard to visual enhancements, Ms. Hinds said these will require an engaged group who can determine who will
make judgments, what materials should/can be used, possible links with the school, etc. Ms. Sargent suggested the
Vermont Council on the Arts for poten al funding and a study commi ee to get some of these things done. Mr. Maille
cited the need to maintain the stockade fencing.
8. Next Steps:
Mr. Smith said at the next mee ng (April 14) there will be discussion on previous ideas received from the commi ee. At
the 2 mee ngs in May, discussion will focus on neighborhood enhancements, etc.
The last community mee ng will be on 7 June. The last commi ee mee ng will be on 16 June.
As there was no further business to come before the Commi ee, Simson moved to adjourn. Ms. Nowak seconded.
Mo on passed unanimously, and the mee ng was adjourned at 8:35 p.m.
___________________________________