Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - Planning Commission - 07/23/2019South Burlington Planning Commission 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 (802) 846-4106 www.sburl.com Meeting Tuesday, July 23, 2019 7:00 pm South Burlington Municipal Offices, 575 Dorset Street AGENDA: 1. Directions on emergency evacuation procedures from conference room (7:00 pm) 2. Agenda: Additions, deletions or changes in order of agenda items (7:02 pm) 3. Open to the public for items not related to the agenda (7:03 pm) 4. Planning Commissioner announcements and staff report (7:06 pm) 5. Planned Unit Development / Master Plan / Subdivision standards: a. Building Typologies b. Review table of proposed PUD applicably by zoning district 6. Discuss City Center portion of Official Map, including report from FBC Subcommittee & discussion of possible amendments to City Center Official Map 7. Staff update on possible solar requirements associated with new construction 8. Preparation for August 1st Joint Meeting with City Council and Interim Zoning Committee 9. Report from Committee / Working Group Liaisons: c. Open Space IZ Committee, Bernie Gagnon d. FBC Subcommittee, Art Klugo e. Natural resources working group, Jessica Louisos f. TDR Committee, Michael Mittag 10. Meeting Minutes 11. Other business 12. Adjourn Respectfully submitted, Paul Conner, AICP Director of Planning & Zoning South Burlington Planning Commission Meeting Participation Guidelines 1. The Planning Commission Chair presents these guidelines for the public attending Planning Commission meetings to insure that everyone has a chance to speak and that meetings proceed smoothly. 2. Initial discussion on an agenda item will generally be conducted by the Commission. As this is our opportunity to engage with the subject, we would like to hear from all commissioners first. After the Commission has discussed an item, the Chair will ask for public comment. Please raise your hand to be recognized to speak and the Chair will try to call on each participant in sequence. 3. Once recognized by the Chair, please identify yourself to the Commission. 4. If the Commission suggests time limits, please respect them. Time limits will be used when they can aid in making sure everyone is heard and sufficient time is available for Commission to conduct business items. 5. Side conversations between audience members should be kept to an absolute minimum. The hallway outside the Community Room is available should people wish to chat more fully. 6. Please address the Chair. Please do not address other audience members or staff or presenters and please do not interrupt others when they are speaking. 7. Make every effort not to repeat the points made by others. 8. The Chair will make reasonable efforts to allow everyone who is interested in participating to speak once before speakers address the Commission for a second time. 9. The Planning Commission desires to be as open and informal as possible within the construct that the Planning Commission meeting is an opportunity for commissioners to discuss, debate and decide upon policy matters. Regular Planning Commission meetings are not “town meetings”. A warned public hearing is a fuller opportunity to explore an issue, provide input and sway public opinion on the matter. 10. Comments may be submitted before, during or after the meeting to the Planning and Zoning Department. All written comments will be circulation to the Planning Commission and kept as part of the City Planner's official records of meetings. Comments must include your first and last name and a contact (e-mail, phone, address) to be included in the record. Published by ClerkBase ©2019 by Clerkbase. No Claim to Original Government Works. 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburl.com TO: South Burlington Planning Commission FROM: Paul Conner, Director of Planning & Zoning Cathyann LaRose, City Planner SUBJECT: PC Staff Memo DATE: July 23, 2019 Planning Commission meeting 1. Directions on emergency evacuation procedures from conference room (7:00 pm) 2. Agenda: Additions, deletions or changes in order of agenda items (7:02 pm) 3. Open to the public for items not related to the agenda (7:03 pm) 4. Planning Commissioner announcements and staff report (7:06 pm) Staff Report: Official Map Council action: The City Council reviewed the Planning Commission’s recommendation from the Commission’s last meeting (to not initiate proceedings to acquire land for the San Remo Drive extension) and voted not to initiate proceedings. The proposed stormwater facilities will now be reviewed by the P & Z department without regard to the Official Map. Warning of Public Hearing on LDR amendments: Per the Commission’s action last meeting, staff has warned a public hearing on the draft amendments to the Land Development Regulations. We have also posted all of the information, draft language, and Planning Commission Report to the City’s website. Orientation of new DRB members: Two new DRB members, Dawn Philibert and Jim Langan, have joined the DRB and have completed their initial orientation. Recent DRB Decisions: Booska Movers recently obtained approval for a ~25,000 s.f. facility to serve as their headquarters on Meadowland Dr. The City of South Burlington & South Burlington City Center LLC recently obtained approval for a subdivision off the north side of Market Street, establishing a parcel for the future city hall/library/senior facility, and establishing a parcel for the roadway segment between Market Street and the Marcotte School property. New digital location for Minutes, Agendas (and DRB files): As of this month, we have moved from our prior vendor, Clerkbase, to a new vendor, Laserfiche for all agendas, minutes, and packet materials. The functionality is very similar, but does allow us to more easily create hyperlinks to individual meetings’ agendas or minutes. This is the same service we are using for the digitization of DRB & zoning files, which are also now up and available for the public to use via our website (digitization of permits is ongoing, starting with the most recent). 5. Planned Unit Development / Master Plan / Subdivision standards: a. Building Typologies b. Review table of proposed PUD applicably by zoning district See enclosed materials & packets 6. Discuss City Center portion of Official Map, including report from FBC Subcommittee & discussion of possible amendments to City Center Official Map This item is intended as a report and possible follow-up by the Planning Commission on any recommendations from the FBC Subcommittee related to the Official Map. The FBC Subcommittee met on Monday 7/15 and will meet again on Monday 7/22. 7. Staff update on possible solar requirements associated with new construction Staff will provide a status report and next steps associated with the consideration of solar requirement associated with new construction as heard by the Commission in May from the Energy Committee. 8. Preparation for August 1st Joint Meeting with City Council and Interim Zoning Committee This item is intended to provide the Commission with some time to discuss expectations for the joint meeting and also to preview upcoming submittal of recommendations from various committees to the Commission. 9. Report from Committee / Working Group Liaisons: c. Open Space IZ Committee, Bernie Gagnon d. FBC Subcommittee, Art Klugo e. Natural resources working group, Jessica Louisos f. TDR Committee, Michael Mittag 10. Meeting Minutes Enclosed are draft minutes from your last meeting, July 9th, 2019. 11. Other business Enclosed with your packet are materials from the formal submittal of the two solar arrays off Spear Street (behind the Forest Service Building, adjacent to the existing trackers, and by I- 89 on an existing concrete pad). Staff relayed the Commission’s comments that you provided during the pre-application notice to UVM’s Campus Planning Department, the property owner. 12. Adjourn 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburl.com TO: South Burlington Planning Commission FROM: Cathyann LaRose, City Planner SUBJECT: Building Typologies DATE: July 23, 2019 Committee meeting The Commission last reviewed draft building types on February 26, 2019. Since that time we’ve been using the guidance you provided on the broad-brush types to better define the types and standards associated with each of the types. These will be used within new PUD regulations with several objectives and purposes: o Provide for good transitions between varying uses, neighborhoods, densities or intensities o Endeavor to provide for appropriate form and scale of buildings, rather than just density. For example, a 4 unit building can be startling or attractive depending on factors other than just the number of bedrooms inside the walls. o Provide for timeless buildings: allowing certain buildings to transform between shops, restaurants, office space, and even living spaces in response to market demands and fluctuations. o This is a great link for additional insight. I encourage commissioners to check it out. https://opticosdesign.com/blog/building-types-in-zoning-part-1-why/ Status: These typologies are approximately 85% complete. They are intended to get discussion moving with regards to setting expectations for new buildings, both in and out of PUDs. • Illustrative examples are meant to be for broad context and understanding only. These examples may not demonstrate every detail of the standards. • Still to be completed: o Testing of building type details against known and respected spaces o Further refining the “form” expectations for each type, especially around basic architectural elements such as building breaks (changes in height, materials, depth, etc.), windows, and prominent of entries o Update illustrations- to include more photographs and potentially contract for diagrammatic illustrations. o Transform spreadsheet format to illustrative user guide; this work has been contracted with our PUD consulting team. This will include connecting building types with open space types and street types. o Inclusion of appropriate lot sizes associated with building types where applicable. o Proceeding with PC guidance related to several questions. For consideration by the Planning Commission: • Will these building typologies have a place outside of PUDs? Should they be required for new buildings, regardless of whether they in a PUD? • Should some of the building types track closer to FBC building standards? Or should building development outside of the FBC be slightly less defined? Is there enough, to little, or too much focus on window treatments, glazing, doors, etc? • This draft has permissions for reduced setbacks but not many requirements. For example, should building types be located close to the street? Be required to have reduced lot sizes or lot frontages (ie- require buildings closer together)? • Are there building types missing here? • Are there types of development for which you don’t think there should be “types” (eg, industrial) • How would you like to proceed with review by other committees? Staff recommends presenting to the Affordable Housing Committee as soon as possible, and are happy to meet with others Building Type Intent PUD Type Use Access Building size Height Setbacks/ Building Location Glazing Parking Building style/Architecture Single Family Detached A building consisting of one dwelling unit. May include an accessory apartment within the building as permitted under the Land Development Regulations NCD TND CON Residential only, may include a home occupation Main entrance to the house shall be accessed directly from and face the street. Per Appendix C •On a corner lot, parking shall be accessed from the side street. •Garage doors may not consume more than 25% of the total façade of the structure. Varies Carriage House An accessory building that may be located on the same lot as a detached house, duplex, small multiplex or row house. It typically provides 1-2 accessory dwelling units or home office space above a garage or at ground level. NCD TND CON Residential only; does not count as a unit for purposes of density if it meets all requirements of the ADU regulations, Section 3.10E 20 feet maximum height •Typically located at the rear of a lot and must be set back beyond the rear of the main structure • Minimum 10' rear and side setbacks Behind prinicipal building Shall not be taller nor have a larger footprint than the principal building on the lot; architecture shall be complementary to that of the principal building Duplex A small to detached building that consists of two dwelling units attached to one another side-by-side or stacked vertically. NCD TND CON Residential only Each dwelling unit has its own primary entry that faces the street and is accessed from a porch, stoop or patio. Building depth: 28-60 feet Building width: 28-55 feet 1-2.5 stories •Garages are limited to single bay if facing the street at the street per dwelling unit. Additional bays must be located either behind the duplex or be side-loaded •Provision of on-street parking is encouraged •Driveways may not exceed 12' in width per unit Varies Cottage Cluster A series of small, detached, one-unit structures arranged to define a shared courtyard that is typically perpendicular to the street. A cottage cluster is scaled to fit within primarily single-family or medium-density neighborhoods, and includes 3 to 9 buildings. The shared courtyard takes the place of a private rear yard and serves as a community-enhancing element. NCD TND CON Residential only Shared courtyard, with units adjacent to the street having direct entrance from the street The main body of the individual cottages should have a footprint of no more than TBD 1-1.5 stories Vehicular access is to the rear of the structures, or a common parking lot may be provide. There should be no vehicular access through the shared courtyard. Varies, but are internally consistent Row House/Townhouse A detached structure that contains 3 to 12 very narrow to medium-sized dwelling units connected to one another side-by-side by a party wall. Each dwelling unit has an individual entry facing the street, and groupings of units often share uniform plans, fenestration and architectural treatments. NCD TND CON Residential only Each unit has an individual entrance that faces the public street and is accessed from a porch, stoop, or patio Individual units shall be between 20'-36' in width and not exceed 48' in depth 2-2.5 stories Setbacks: Reduced minimums. 10-25 feet to the front, 5-15 feet to the sides. Garages shall not face the street Groupings of units should generally share uniform fenestration and architectural treatments Multiplex, small A detached structure that contains 3 or 4 dwelling units. A small multiplex has a single building massing and has the appearance of a medium to large single-family home. NCD TND CON Residential only Each unit has an individual entry and the structure has at least one primary entry that faces the street and that is accessed from a porch, stoop or patio. The main body of the multiplex should have a footprint of no more than 40’ x 52’. •Secondary wings should have a footprint of no more than 28' x 32' 2-2.5 stories Setbacks: Reduced minimums. 10-25 feet to the front, 5-15 feet to the sides. To the rear of the structure Varies Multiplex, medium A large, detached structure that contains 4 to 8 dwelling units. Has a single building massing and may often have the appearance of a large single-family home. NCD TND CON Residential only The structure has at least one primary entry that faces the street and that is accessed from a porch, stoop or patio. Individual dwelling units may be accessed from interior entries •The main body of the multiplex should have a footprint of no more than 48’ x 60’. •Any secondary wings should have a footprint of no more than 32’ x 36’ 2-2.5 stories Setbacks: Reduced minimums. 10-25 feet to the front, 5-15 feet to the sides. To the rear of the structure Varies Multiplex, large A large, detached structure that contains 9 to 15 dwelling units. Designed and massed to appear as one or more large single-family homes. Large multiplexes can be located in a location that transitions from a primarily single-family neighborhood into a higher-density or mixed-use neighborhood. NCD TND CON+ Residential only The structure has at least one primary entry that faces the street and that is accessed from a porch, stoop or patio. •The main body of the multiplex should have a footprint of no more than 60’ x 72’. •Any secondary wings should have a footprint of no more than 36’ x 40’ 3-4 stories Setbacks: Reduced minimums. 10-25 feet to the front, 5-15 feet to the sides. To the rear of the structure Varies Apartment/Condo building, large A large, detached structure that contains 12-60 dwelling units, dependent on underlying zoning district. NCD Residential only Upper story units typically accessed via a shared interior or exterior walkway, first story units have individual or shared access Varies 3-5 stories, dependent on underlying zoning district Setbacks: Reduced minimums. 10-25 feet to the front, 5-15 feet to the sides. Minimum of 30% of area of façades facing a street •No blank walls more than 20 feet in length • Roof height variations STANDARDS* Building Type Intent PUD Type Use Access Building size Height Setbacks/ Building Location Glazing Parking Building style/Architecture Retail Building, small- medium Small-medium retail building typically services 1-2 tenants and is overall less than 15,000 SF in footprint NCD Retail, restaurant or similar Must have commercial entry door facing public street Varies based on underlying zoning district, maximum 15,000 SF •1-2 stories Minimum glazing on first floor facing street: 40% Per Article 14 Building breaks: minimum 1 every 60' Neighborhood Storefront Intended to serve people and businesses at the neighborhood scale. While the upper stories may provide for office space or residential occupation, the first floor is clearly intended for non-residential use. NCD TND •Ground floor retail or restaurant required •Maximum 5,000 SF GFA per use •Building entries emphasized with special architectural treatment •Commercial entry door •Footprint no greater than 6,000 SF •Maximum building width at street: 100 feet •2 stories •Maximum building height of 28 feet •Setback no more than 30 feet from road right of way •Detached and free- standing •Minimum on first floor: 40% •First floor windows minimum 7.5' in height Per Article 14 •Blank walls not to exceed 30' in length at street level •Residential vernacular required •Sloped roof required Retail building, Multi- tenant Multi-tenant retail building is intended to allow for a mix of tenants in a shared wall building. This is distinctly different than a ‘strip mall’ in that entrances are to face the street and there is the appearance of multiple detached buildings blended together. NCD Non-residential only •Permitted only on (insert collector level street type) •Public entrances at street front •A walkway in front of the building, connecting the tenant spaces is required Maximum ******** SF ground floor and ********* linear feet per tenant May range from 1-3 stories but must have an average minimum of 1.5 stories No more than 75 feet from road ROW; Front yard landscaping is required Minimum transparent glazing on first floor: 50% Per Article 14 •Each tenant space shall have the appearance of attached buildings, accomplished with a change in material, color, roof treatments or building height • Restaurant uses are encouraged to provide outdoor dining space Retail Building, large Recognizes need and desire for appropriately placed and spaced larger scale retail uses. These building forms are intended to be infrequent and limited in number. Such buildings placed at (CERTAIN LEVELS OF) street front will have increased architectural requirements. NCD Retail. Permitted only in zoning districts that allow retail sales of greater than 15,000 SF GFA (footnote 8 in appendix C) Must have commercial entry door facing public street •Single tenant building •Max based on zoning district •1-2 stories Located on (INSERT) street types only •No more than 50 feet from road ROW Minimum glazing on first floor facing street: 40% Per Article 14 If at (INSERT) Street Type: •Appearance of two full stories •Minimum percent of glazing that is transparent on first floor: 50% •Building breaks minimum 1 every 50 feet General Commercial Building Multi-purpose building. Generally serves office uses, but may include limited residential and/or retail uses. Can be interchangeable between residential and commercial in appearance. NCD TND Campus Interchangeable between residential and commercial; If designed for residential uses, limited to 12 units or less Publicly accessible entrance at streetfront, but principal entrance may be located elsewhere. TND: no more than 5,000 SF on each story TND: 2 stories max NCD: 3 stories max Campus: 5 stories max Minimum glazing on first floor: 40% Per Article 14 •Required window treatments •Balconies and stoops encouraged Urban Storefront Intended as commercial or mixed use for higher density non-transect areas with higher traffic volumes. Can include freestanding buildings or shared wall buildings. Buildings should have a recognizable base, middle and top and balance vertical and horizontal proportions. NCD Ground floor non- residential required Commercial doors on public street •2-5 stories •Maximum height determined by zoning district No more than 30 feet from road ROW Minimum on first floor: 40% Per Article 14 • Building breaks: minimum 1 every 80' •Flat roof encouraged •See description for further architectural goals Cottage Commercial Intended to provide for a wide mix of uses in a building with the physical characteristics of a small scale residential building. The building is versatile and could easily accommodate either residential or non-residential uses, distinguishable only through signage. May also serve as a live-work space. Buildings are expected to reflect the character of the surrounding area. NCD TND Underlying zoning district. Publicly accessible entrance at streetfront, but principal entrance may be located elsewhere. Maximum building width at street: 75 feet 1-2 stories Setback no more than 100 feet from road ROW •Minimum on first floor: 40% •Residential scaled or treated windows Rear of building or on street. Parking area may not exceed 1.5x the footprint of the structure. •Residential doors and residentially scaled windows on public street •Pitched or gabled roof required •Porches, stoops, and covered entryways are strongly encouraged Industrial Building Multi-purpose building for warehousing, industrial, or auto-oriented uses. Typically is functional in form but includes building breaks and fenestration to break up larger building sides. Campus Industrial, warehousing, auto-oriented May have one or more entrances Sides facing a street shall contain min*** fenestration Per Article 14 At least one building break per 100' along all sides facing a street Civic Building Medium to large attached or detached building dedicated to a civic use and designed to stand apart from its surroundings due to the specialized nature of its public or quasi-public use for public assesmbly. NCD TND Campus Examples include libraries, places of worship, schools, centers of government, performing arts, community centers, and museums Standards for all types All buildings must be oriented to the street See Slideshow for Illustrative Examples *important note- just because a type is allowed in a particular PUD type, doesn't meet it is permitted anywhere, on any street type, and without limitation. Language is under development by our consulting team to use these types in context. For example, apartment building may not be allowed except on certain street types or only with certain underlying density. Small multiplex may be required adjacent to existing low density development, and medium multiplex may be required to serve as transitional housing. There may be a required mix of housing types within a PUD. Building Type Intent PUD Type Use Access Building size Height Setbacks/ Building Location Glazing Parking Building style/Architecture * When used in CC FBC district, standards of Chapter 8 take precedent Questions for board: check required against strongly encouraged Con+ Conservation subdivision in districts with a residential density of 7 units per acre or more 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburl.com MEMORANDUM TO: South Burlington Planning Commission FROM: Paul Conner, Director of Planning & Zoning SUBJECT: Draft PUD type applicability by zoning district DATE: July 23, 2019 Planning Commission meeting As we edge closer to completing the PUD project, one of the remaining important tasks is to determine the applicability of each PUD type by zoning district. We had shown a version of this way back at the beginning of the process, but now that a lot more work has gone into the whole effort, PUD types have been narrowed, and we’ve better understood objectives (especially around Conservation PUD type), we wanted to bring this to you for your review. Enclosed are two tables, and four maps. The tables list off a proposal for the applicability of each PUD by zoning district. The first table shows this by CURRENT zoning district, and the second takes a leap to the discussions you had in May about re-alsigned zoning districts and lists those off by POTENTIAL zoning districts. The maps show proposed applicability geographically by CURRENT zoning districts. We don’t yet have a digital map of the POTENTIAL districts, as we know there’s some discussion to be had amongst the TDR Committee and Planning Commission about possible changes to certain districts. Further, we understand that the work of the IZ Committees generally may modify zoning districts, and so these would then modify with them. General Organization: The organization of these districts is relatively straightforward: 1. Development on more than 4 acres of land, except in the FBC district and likely a few other districts (Airport, Municipal, Parks & Rec, and possibly I/A) is required to be a PUD, per previous discussions. 2. All districts that allow for residential or commercial development may elect to be a Conservation PUD. The allowances within the conservation PUD & underlying zoning district will determine what can in fact take place on the property 3. Under the current draft, development on all such properties over the PUD threshold, with more than 50% natural resources (as discuss at your last meeting), would be required to be a Conservation PUD. 4. Traditional Neighborhood Development is an eligible option for zoning districts where the underlying density is UP TO 7 units per acre. 2 5. Neighborhood Commercial Development is an eligible option for zoning districts where the maximum density is at least 7 units per acre 6. Business Campus is an eligible option for non-residential and industrial districts As a reminder, TND neighborhoods are slated to have a NET MINIMUM Density of 4 units per acre, and NCD neighborhoods are slated to have a NET MINIMUM Density of 8 units per acre. (Net in this case means exclusive of top-tier natural resources) Questions for the Commission: 1. What should be done with the R1 District? Most residential zoning districts currently have a maximum density of 3-7 units per acre (even the R1-PRD and R2, which allow density increases through PUDs today). But the R1 along Spear Street has no density increases through PUD currently. Long story short, if TNC is permitted in R1, then development at 4 units per acre would be permitted in this area. 2. What would you like to do with the south end of Shelburne Road? The potential zoning change would move it from being an “industrial” district that allows housing, to a mixed-commercial-residential district. That would lead us to think that perhaps campus PUD is NOT the direction here. 3. Other feedback? Draft PUD applicability PC meeting July 23, 2019 Draft PUD applicability (By Current Zoning District) Conservation Traditional Neighborhood Development (TND) Neighborhood Commercial District (NCD) Business Campus Zoning Districts R1 Residential 1 District Permitted (1)Permitted R1-PRD Residential 1 with Planned Residential Development District Permitted (1)Permitted R1-Lakeshore Residential 1- Lakeshore District Permitted (1)Permitted LN Lakeshore Neighborhood District Permitted (1)Permitted QCP Queen City Park District Permitted (1)Permitted R2 Residential 2 District Permitted (1)Permitted R4 Residential 4 District Permitted (1)Permitted R7 Residential 7 District Permitted (1)Permitted Permitted R12 Residential 12 District Permitted (1)Permitted SW Swift Street District Permitted (1)Permitted AR Allen Road District Permitted (1)Permitted R7-NC Residential 7-Neighborhood Commercial District Permitted (1)Permitted Permitted C1-LR Commercial 1 with Limited Retail District Permitted (1)Permitted C1 Commercial 1 District (also designated “C1- R12” or “C1-R15”) Permitted (1)Permitted C1-AUTO Commercial 1 with Automobile Sales District Permitted (1)Permitted C1-AIR Commercial 1 with Airport-Related Uses District Permitted (1)Permitted Southeast Quadrant District SEQ-NRP Southeast Quadrant-Natural Resource Protection District Permitted (2) SEQ-NRT (Neighborhood Residential Transition Subdistrict) Permitted (1)Permitted SEQ-NR (Neighborhood Residential Sub District) Permitted (1)Permitted SEQ-NRN (Neighborhood Residential North Subdistrict) Permitted (1)Permitted SEQ-VR (Village Residential Subdistrict)Permitted (1)Permitted SEQ-VC (Village Commercial Subdistrict)Permitted (1)Permitted Permitted C2 Commercial 2 District Permitted (1)Permitted Permitted IC Mixed Industrial and Commercial District Permitted (1)Permitted I-O Industrial and Open Space District Permitted (1)Permitted AIR Airport District AIR-I Airport Industrial District Permitted (1)Permitted IA Institutional and Agricultural District (includes IA North and IA-South) Permitted (1) PR Park and Recreation District MU Municipal District (1) Required PUD type where Regulated Natural Resources Exceed 50% of total parcel area Draft PUD applicability PC meeting July 23, 2019 Draft PUD applicability (By Proposed Zoning District from May 2019 PC meeting) Conservation Traditional Neighborhood Development (TND) Neighborhood Commercial District (NCD) Business Campus Zoning Districts R1 Residential 1 District Permitted (1)Permitted LN Lakeshore Neighborhood District Permitted (1)Permitted QCP Queen City Park District Permitted (1)Permitted R4-PUD Residential 4 PUD District Permitted (1)Permitted R4 Residential 4 District Permitted (1)Permitted R7-PUD Residential 7 PUD District Permitted (1)Permitted R7 Residential 7 District Permitted (1)Permitted Permitted R12 Residential 12 District Permitted (1)Permitted R7-NC Residential 7 Neighborhood Commercial Permitted (1)Permitted Permitted RCT Residential-Commercial Transition District Permitted (1)Permitted Permitted C1-R15 Commercial 1 Residential 15 Permitted (1)Permitted Southeast Quadrant District SEQ-NRP Southeast Quadrant-Natural Resource Protection District Permitted (1) SEQ-NRT (Neighborhood Residential Transition Subdistrict) Permitted (1)Permitted SEQ-NR (Neighborhood Residential Sub District) Permitted (1)Permitted SEQ-NRN (Neighborhood Residential North Subdistrict) Permitted (1)Permitted SEQ-VR (Village Residential Subdistrict)Permitted (1)Permitted SEQ-VC (Village Commercial Subdistrict)Permitted (1)Permitted Permitted IC Mixed Industrial and Commercial District Permitted (1)Permitted I-O Industrial and Open Space District Permitted (1)Permitted AIR Airport District AIR-I Airport Industrial District Permitted (1)Permitted IA Institutional and Agricultural District (includes IA North and IA-South) Permitted (1) PR Park and Recreation District MU Municipal District (1) Required PUD type where Regulated Natural Resources Exceed 50% of total parcel area South BurlingtonConservationPUD applicability ² 5,400 0 5,4002,700 Feet Disclaimer:The accuracy of information presented is determined by its sources. Errors and omissions may exist. Questions of on-the-ground location can be resolved by site inspections and/or surveys by registered surveyor. This map is not sufficient for delineation of features on-the-ground. This map identifies the presence of features, and may indicate relationships between features, but is not a replacement for surveyed information or engineering studies. Map prepared July 19, 2019 LegendZoning district where ConservationPUD type Permitted DRAFT South BurlingtonTraditional Neighborhood Development PUD applicability ² 5,400 0 5,4002,700 Feet Disclaimer:The accuracy of information presented is determined by its sources. Errors and omissions may exist. Questions of on-the-ground location can be resolved by site inspections and/or surveys by registered surveyor. This map is not sufficient for delineation of features on-the-ground. This map identifies the presence of features, and may indicate relationships between features, but is not a replacement for surveyed information or engineering studies. Map prepared July 19, 2019 LegendZoning district where TND PUD type Permitted DRAFT South BurlingtonNeighborhood Commercial DistrictPUD applicability ² 5,400 0 5,4002,700 Feet Disclaimer:The accuracy of information presented is determined by its sources. Errors and omissions may exist. Questions of on-the-ground location can be resolved by site inspections and/or surveys by registered surveyor. This map is not sufficient for delineation of features on-the-ground. This map identifies the presence of features, and may indicate relationships between features, but is not a replacement for surveyed information or engineering studies. Map prepared July 19, 2019 LegendZoning district where NCDPUD type Permitted DRAFT South BurlingtonBusiness CampusPUD applicability ² 5,400 0 5,4002,700 Feet Disclaimer:The accuracy of information presented is determined by its sources. Errors and omissions may exist. Questions of on-the-ground location can be resolved by site inspections and/or surveys by registered surveyor. This map is not sufficient for delineation of features on-the-ground. This map identifies the presence of features, and may indicate relationships between features, but is not a replacement for surveyed information or engineering studies. Map prepared July 19, 2019 LegendZoning district where CampusPUD type Permitted DRAFT SOUTH BURLINGTON PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES 9 JULY 2019 1 The South Burlington Planning Commission held a regular meeting on Tuesday, 9 July 2019, at 7:00 p.m., in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset Street. MEMBERS PRESENT: J. Louisos, Chair (by phone); B. Gagnon, Acting Chair; T. Riehle, M. Ostby, M. Mittag, A. Klugo, D. Macdonald ALSO PRESENT: P. Conner, Director of Planning and Zoning; C. LaRose, Planner; T. McKenzie, T. Barritt, C. Snyder, S. Dopp 1. Directions on emergency evacuation procedures from conference room: Mr. Gagnon provided directions on emergency evacuation procedures. 2. Agenda: Additions, deletions or changes in order of agenda items: No changes were made to the agenda. 3. Open to the public for items not related to the Agenda: No issues were raised. 4. Planning Commissioner announcements and staff report: Ms. Ostby noted that UVM will be spraying at Swift and Spear with Roundup. They are looking at a non- Roundup product for next year. Ms. Ostby also noted that on Community Watch, a resident reminded people that trees can’t exceed a certain height in View Protection Areas, and there are some that have exceeded that height. Mr. Riehle questioned whether the Commission is on schedule with regard to Interim Zoning due to summer cancelations. Mr. Conner said the new regulations won’t be in place in August but possibly 3 months later. Strong progress is being made. Mr. Conner drew attention to the written staff report. He highlighted the new electronic access to all Planning Commission files. 5. Discuss City Center Portion of Official Map: A. Provide feedback to City Council on possible initiation of acquisition of property pursuant to 24 V.S.A. 442(5) – Official Map B. Discuss possible amendments to City Center Official Map Mr. Gagnon noted the Commission had had some executive sessions on this issue. 2 Mr. Klugo noted the Form Based Code Committee was to come back with recommendations; however, the sub-committee hasn’t met. Their previous meeting has been rescheduled for next Monday. They will then make a recommendation. The feeling is that a street is not appropriate there, but nothing more has been flushed out. Mr. Klugo noted that because of time constraints, they must get something to the Council soon. Mr. Macdonald said the Council asked a specific question. He felt the Commission should give them an answer sooner rather than later and deal with the official map after that. Mr. Conner reminded the Commission that if the City Council decides not to purchase the land, the proposed project will be re-reviewed by the DRB without regard to the official map, and that section of roadway will disappear from the map. Mr. Klugo said the Form Based Code Committee wants to be sure that north-south connectivity is not being eliminated. Ms. Louisos cited the importance of knowing how this will affect City Center as a whole. She noted that block size and connectivity has so much to do with the success of City Center. Mr. McKenzie stressed that the application that was denied was only for the storm ponds. They are not asking for anything else. Mr. Klugo said that is understood, but when that road comes off the map, the impact to City Center can’t be ignored. Ms. Ostby noted that the road could never have been built in the place where it was indicated on the map. Mr. Mittag added that the layout of City Center was all theoretical when the roads were laid out. Mr. McKenzie said they want connectivity and fully anticipate having connectivity but not as a $500,000 project. Ms. Ostby then moved that the Planning Commission advise the City Council not to move forward with purchase of the land under consideration. Mr. Mittag seconded. The motion passed 4-3 with Ms. Louisos and Messrs Klugo and Riehle voting against. Mr. Gagnon said the Commission won’t work on the official map at this meeting. He felt the Commission should let the Council know its concerns regarding connectivity. Ms. Ostby said that was the reason for the close vote. Mr. Gagnon suggested putting it on the next agenda and possibly getting some pre-meeting information. Mr. Klugo said he would try to get notes from the Form Based Committee meeting to members ahead of the Commission meeting as well. Mr. Conner reminded members that the sub-committee meetings are open to the public. He also noted that if 4 members attend, it must be warned as a Planning Commission meeting. 6. Consider warning public hearing on possible Land Development Regulations amendments and consider approval of draft Report: 3 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 Mr. Macdonald questioned how this will affect retailers. Mr. Conner said there would be no minimum. Experience is that many retailers are unconcerned with meeting the minimums. There are consequences either way but more negatives than positives with minimums. Mr. Conner noted that the City Attorney has done a preliminary review and found no “red flags.” If any issues arise at the public hearing, amendments can be made. Ms. Ostby asked about design requirements for parking structures, particularly when they are adjacent to residential areas. Mr. Conner said this change won’t dramatically increase the likelihood of a parking garage in the near future. Mr. McKenzie suggested a reduction rather than an elimination of parking spaces. He cited the issue of a neighbor using up all of your parking spaces because they didn’t put in enough. Ms. Ostby noted that one “carrot” for providing affordable housing has been to reduce parking requirements. Now that will be taken away. Mr. Klugo said the city is trying to encourage joint/shared parking arrangements. Mr. Conner noted that today both adjoining businesses need to show they have adequate parking and obtain approval in order to share parking. Very few businesses want to do that today. Under the proposed change, with no minimum, they could just sign an agreement with a neighbor. Mr. Gagnon said the flip side of that is the neighbor might not build any parking and just use yours. Members agreed to see what input they receive at the public hearing and make changes, if needed. b. LDR-19-02: Amend transfer of development rights requirements to be consistent with enabling statutes: Mr. Conner said the new language mirrors today’s policy. Language was added to include an allowance for an affordable housing bonus. Mr. Mittag asked why this is being done now when the whole thing is being reviewed by the Interim Zoning TDR committee. Mr. Gagnon said it just provides language to address the legal ruling. Mr. Barritt urged the Commission to move forward with the amendment. c. LDR-19-03: Establish Citywide River Corridor Overlay District and make minor modifications to the Floor Plain Overlay District: 4 Mr. Conner noted this amendment addresses hazards where a river may “move.” It adds some critical facilities that can’t be in the 500 year flood plain (e.g., nursing homes, senior housing). No issues were raised. 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: Mr. Conner said the amendment removes standards for construction within 150 feet of the Lake because State regulations address this. The second part allows for expansion of pre-existing structures within 100 feet of Potash Brook within the Queen City Park District. Mr. Conner noted that only 3 buildings are affected by this, but they likely would not be allowed to expand anyway because of other regulations. All have very steep slopes on the back side. Mr. Conner asked whether the Commission would like to proceed with the removal of this allowance within 100’ of Potash Brook in the QCP district. Commissioners concurred that they would like to see this section removed. No issues were raised. e. LDR-19-05: Administrative Amendments: Authorize Administrative Officer to approve minor field changes to site plans and allow for a joint administrative approval and zoning permit; minor technical corrections: No issues were raised. f. LDR-19-06: Modify table of open space types (Appendix F) and applicability n the City Center Form Based Code District: Ms. LaRose noted there are new open space types. The Commission would look at this again when PUD standards come back. Mr. Snyder noted the Form Based Code Committee has been reviewing this but has not provided any recommendations. Ms. LaRose said the Planning Commission has been reviewing it for 9 months. It provides much better opportunities. Mr. Klugo added that he did not expect the FBC Committee to weigh in on this subject as the amendments had already been drafted by the Planning Commission. Input is welcome as part of the public hearing. g. LDR-19-07: Modify landscaping requirements for parking areas with solar canopies citywide: Mr. Conner said this would modify the landscaping requirements for parking areas with solar canopies. Mr. Riehle said he is torn: he likes green space so there aren’t massive paved over areas, but he also likes the solar canopies. Mr. Conner said this would apply only to areas where there are solar canopies. 5 Mr. Klugo was concerned that with solar canopies a parking area could be very dark. Ms. Ostby said she would like to see perimeter trees required as a “middle ground.” She also wanted parking garages to be required to have solar on top. Members agreed to remove this item from the amendments going to public hearing. Mr. Macdonald then moved to warn the first six amendments for public hearing on 13 August, 7:00 p.m., and to approve the accompanying report. Mr. Riehle seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 7. Planned Unit Development/Master Plan/Subdivision standards: a. Review detailed outline of conservation PUD type b. Review table of proposed PUD applicability by zoning district Mr. Conner noted that in the NRP, if you have more than 100 acres, you can build one building on 10 acres. This would make that a PUD. Ms. LaRose noted this is an 80% draft. Staff is working with the consultant to develop a sheet like this for each PUD type. Members felt the left side of the outline was easy to understand, but the right side was confusing. Mr. Riehle noted that under “accessory structures,” there are cases where there is an L-shaped garage. Mr. Klugo said this can result in a nice forecourt. Mr. Riehle also questioned why a garage should be set back 8 feet if a house is 300 feet from the road. Ms. LaRose said they will look at that. Ms. LaRose noted there are places other than the Southeast Quadrant (SEQ) where there are important resources (e.g., the area behind Tree Tops Condos), and those could have been under these standards. Mr. Conner noted that is why staff is bringing in changes to underlying zoning. Mr. Klugo suggested there could be organization by “sub-groups.” Mr. Conner asked to postpone discussion of “b.” 8. Report from Committee/Working Group Liaisons: Open Space Committee: Mr. Gagnon reported that they met last week and have had a couple of public hearings. The public thought the rating criteria were good. They are now finalizing ratings for the next meeting and are beginning to discuss their report. This will be done quadrant by quadrant. Mr. Klugo suggested giving members of the public the criteria and see how they rate some parcels. 6 Form Based Code Committee: Mr. Klugo said they will be meeting next Monday and will take up the next steps regarding the official map and other issues raised by the public. They will then hold public hearings. Natural Resources: Ms. Louisos said Allan Strong has been working with them and they have had input regarding forest blocks, habitats, etc. They are now looking at those differently from other forest lands. Mr. Klugo asked Mr. Mittag if there can be a draft from the TDR Committee. He didn’t get the sense of a mechanism for a workable TDR program. He felt that what he has seen is more of an environmental protection document. Mr. Mittag said the committee will not be providing a draft TDR ordinance. 9. Minutes of 11 June 2019: Mr. Riehle moved to approve the minutes of 11 June as written. Mr. MacDonald seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 10. Other Business: Members agreed to hold the next meeting on 23 July. Ms. Louisos will be available by phone. Ms. Ostby will chair. Ms. Ostby noted that congregate housing does not count as “residential density.” The affordable housing committee will attempt to clarify some issues regarding congregate housing. As there was no further business to come before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned by common consent at 9:15 p.m. ___________________________________ Clerk