Planning Commission

SOUTH BURLINGTON PLANNING COMMISSION 10 JUNE 2025 South Burlington Planning Commission held a regular meeting on Tuesday, 10 June 2025, at 7:00 p.m., in Room 301, City Hall, 180 Market Street, and via Zoom. MEMBERS PRESENT: J. Louisos, Chair (arrived late), M. Mittag, D. MacDonald (chaired the opening of the meeting), D. Leban, C. Lawrence, H. Riehle ALSO PRESENT: P. Conner, Director of Planning and Zoning; K. Peterson, Senior City Planner; T. Barritt, S. Dooley, R. Doyle 1. Instructions on exiting the building in case of an emergency: Mr. MacDonald provided instructions on emergency exit from the building. 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: The City Center day care center is now open and is accessible from the Trader Joe’s side of the building. 5. Review LDR Amendments: Ms. Peterson noted that there is now clarification between smaller fitness facilities and larger ones, depending on what is available at the facilities. Larger facilities PAGE 1 are now considered “general commercial.” The style of the building is also important. Larger ones could be changed to a warehouse use, etc. Mr. Conner noted that a former movie theater just changed to an indoor recreation use. Ms. Peterson said this isn’t a perfect solution, but it keeps small facilities allowable in retail areas. Ms. Riehle noted that The Edge parking is now always full as the use has become more intense. She asked what happens as these smaller uses evolve. Ms. Peterson said that is a “flaw in the system.” However, if they change a part of their use, they would have to go to the DRB regarding traffic and other concerns. Mr. Conner said that as infill happens, there are some regulations that would have to catch up. He noted that a parking management program is now starting in City Center. Ms. Leban asked whether transportation impact fees come into play if there isn’t a change of use. Mr. Conner said some things depend on the success of the business. Ms. Peterson added “you have to play to the middle.” Ms. Peterson noted that Article 7 was inadvertently omitted from the meeting package. The only change there is the wording change requested by UVM which the Commission approved in March. Ms. Peterson also noted receipt from Sandra Dooley of feedback on the definition of “long-term care facility.” She showed the added language which excludes group homes and residential care facilities defined by State law and separately regulated. Staff would like to make a change and replace “congregate care” with this definition. Ms. Dooley clarified that in Act 18, the independent living arrangements are covered by “inclusionary zoning.” Ms. Peterson said staff was proposing that all long-term care facilities would be exempt from inclusionary zoning which is not what Ms. Dooley is proposing. Ms. Dooley said her language is a way to maintain some affordability for seniors. Mr. Conner said the challenge is whether to exempt all of it from inclusionary zoning or create a separate category. PLANNING COMMISSION 10 JUNE 2025 PAGE 2 Ms. Peterson suggested the umbrella use with the statement that what is now called “congregate care” is not exempt from inclusionary zoning. Members were OK with that. Mr. Conner noted that field is evolving, and they may have to go back and look at it again in the future. Ms. Peterson said staff has been discussing some things with UVM. The I-Ag area did allow educational facilities support facilities, but that was removed. UVM is concerned that a future DRB may narrow what they can do because of the specific elimination of types that are now allowed (e.g., restaurant). Staff agrees to let UVM do what it could do before the change was made. Alternatively they could put something in with more definition. UVM is OK with going to the public hearing with what is now written and possibly address their concerns later. Staff will have a time for UVM to present to the Commission. Another UVM concern involves Centennial Woods Way which is the driveway to the Double Tree and then continues to a connector street. On one city map it was shown as an existing path; on another city map, it was show as an existing street. It has also been shown as a “planned right-of-way.” Ms. Peterson showed the area on a map. Mr. Conner said it begins as a driveway to the Double Tree then turns into something more like a road. Staff is OK with how it is shown and feels that UVM is also OK with it. The policy is that if there were to be major development there, it would have to become a full road. It does get used a commuting way today. Mr. Conner noted UVM also pointed out an areas that is to be added to form based code which was not updated on the map being shown. Ms. Louisos then asked for public comment. Mr. Doyle said there are a number of things on the Official City Map that are good, but there are no connections shown to Williston Road at intersections. Some connections are 1000 feet apart. He was concerned that there is no City Center grid. He would like to see something parallel between Market St. and Williston Rd. Mr. Doyle also advocated adding to San Remo Drive for safety around the school access. He suggested combining some areas to get larger blacks for development. PLANNING COMMISSION 10 JUNE 2025 PAGE 3 Mr. Conner said the expectation is to look at the Mary Street intersection where the intersection is now 80 feet away. There is a sidewalk being put in on Mary Street now, but the street is not open. Ms. Louisos acknowledged that there are other things on the Official City Map that the Commission may want to discuss. Ms. Peterson said that discussion would be premature without knowing UMall’s plans. Ms. Louisos suggested adding a shared use path line on part of the UMall area. Mr. Conner was OK with that, and will advise UMall of that. Ms. Peterson noted staff has received nothing concrete from UMall people as yet. Mr. Conner said they have engaged a design firm which has communicated with staff. 6. Possible vote to warn a public hearing on amendments LDR-25-01 through LDR-25-07 for 8 July 2025 and include Planning Commission reports: Ms. Riehle moved to warn a public hearing on LDR amendments 25-01 through 25-07 for 8 July 2025 as presented with edits made at this meeting and to include the Planning Commission reports for each. Mr. MacDonald seconded. Motion passed 6-0. Ms. Riehle then moved to warn a public hearing for 8 July 2025 at 7:00 p.m. on amendments to the Official City Map 25-01 with the addition of a shared use path made at this meeting with the accompanying report. Mr. Mittag seconded. Motion passed 6-0. Ms. Leban spoke regarding one element of future act 250 tier 1A review, the next item on the agenda, that South Burlington‘s LDR’s do not adequately address, as they are based on a 30 year old VT Municipal Lighting document not in tune with today’s lighting technology or outdoor lighting standards. The organization, Dark Sky International, offers free access to its recommended lighting ordinance language, as well as review of municipal and state lighting ordinances for compliance with its standards. (the rest of the paragraph is fine as is) Mr. Conner said to let staff know if there are any communities of South Burlington size using this model. Ms. Peterson believed it is worth looking at next year but is too big a topic for the time the commission has this year. 7. Act 250 Updates: Mr. Conner said the Statutes show how Tire 1A and 1B work. After the Regional Plan is adopted, a municipality can apply for Tier 1A. South Burlington has PLANNING COMMISSION 10 JUNE 2025 PAGE 4 already applied for Tier 1B which is very straightforward. Tier 1A is a higher bar, and the municipality must show there are things in place including the following: a. An adopted municipal plan b. A downtown designation c. Identification of river corridors d. Permanent regulations that further smart growth standards and conform to the guidelines established by the Board (Mr. Conner said he felt the city can create a good narrative about this) e. The Tier 1A area is compatible with the character of the adjacent National Register, Historic Districts, etc. f. The municipality has identified and planned for maintenance of significant natural communities; rare, threatened and endangered species located in the Tier 1A area (the DRB could hire a third party technical review and make a decision based on their report) Mr. Conner said South Burlington doesn’t have many historic structures. New development must be compatible with these. The city may have to add something to the regulations to designate this. g. Public water and wastewater systems or planned improvements have the capacity to support additional development within the Tier 1A area h. Municipal staff is adequate to support coordinated comprehensive and capital planning, development review and zoning administration in the Tier 1A area Mr. Conner said staff will spend time on this so the City Council will be able to go into this with their eyes open. The window for this to open is July of 2026. The main benefit of Tier 1A is eliminating redundancy while maintaining all that should be maintained. Tier 1A would give a full Act 250 exemption, but the State Energy Code would still apply. Ms. Louisos said the Commission should go through each criteria to see where the City might not comply. Mr. Barritt asked which areas in the City this would apply to. Mr. Conner said the downtown and village designations and planned growth areas. In South Burlington, this is pretty much areas served by sewers. Isolated business areas PLANNING COMMISSION 10 JUNE 2025 PAGE 5 (business parks) do not apply. The community can decide what it wants to include. 8. Meeting Minutes of 27 May 2025: Mr. Mittag moved to approve the Minutes of 27 May 2025 as written. Ms. Louisos seconded. Motion passed 6-0. 9. Other Business: As there was not a lot planned for the 24 June meeting, members agreed not to hold that meeting. Mr. Conner said he was thrilled to report that 339 Garden Street has been made available to the general public. As there was no further business to come before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned by common consent at 8:47 p.m. ___________________________________ Clerk PLANNING COMMISSION 10 JUNE 2025 PAGE 6