Municipal Infrastructure Commission

6/8/2021 - Minutes I. Call to Order Members Present: Christopher Page, Laura Dlugolecki, Timur Tsutsuk, Peter Wernsdorfer City Staff Present: Jon Rauscher City Councilor Present: Bryn Oakleaf Call to order: 6:37 PM by Laura Dlugolecki II. Public Comment Introduction from Bryn Oakleaf: Excited to join tonight, talk about priorities for the year ahead. Long-term Winooski resident. Worked for ANR for 8 years, now works for Efficiency Vermont. Serving as Board Chair for CSWD, representing Winooski as commissioner on that board for four years. Commission members introduce themselves. III. Approve Previous Meeting Minutes The last meeting was in March. Commission takes a moment to review. Timur’s name is misspelled, minutes accepted with a change to the spelling. Motion by: Timur Seconded by: Chris All in favor. IV. Department and City Updates Brief visit from Senator Sanders. Wanted to get a sense of what kind of needs Winooski has. Had a very good conversation, highlighting ongoing projects. Water distribution piping, $14M in backlogged replacement work, difficult to take on without federal help. Transportation: Burlington-Winooski bridge, worked with others to come up with design. Senator Sanders affirmed that there is a lot of money potentially coming to the municipalities. But there aren’t enough contractors, so that projects and funding need to be spaced out more to make sure things get done. Physical infrastructure and human infrastructure; New American population, the kinds of things that can be supported. Very useful discussion. Project updates: l Myers Pool opened on Sunday. This weekend was a great success. Sunday the pool was completely full, but made $900 in opening day (what previously was made in a year at Myers Pool). Budget was based on much lower revenues, so this is good news. Pool is fully operational and is beginning to see use. l Hickock Street: in its final phase of work. Mainly sidewalk construction now, with 600 ft of new sidewalk. Should be wrapping up at the end of July. Full road reconstruction will take place in the next few weeks; new pavement through corridor, including West Lane. l This wraps up bond vote projects from last few years, allowing us to focus again on Main Street. Still working on easements, could take 5-6 months to get through that process. We’re into 90% design, will get an update to council soon. l Jessie left mid-May to take an opportunity in South Burlington; City Manager Search committee is reviewing resumes now. Sounds like we have some good candidates,  take place in the next few weeks; new pavement through corridor, including West Lane. l This wraps up bond vote projects from last few years, allowing us to focus again on Main Street. Still working on easements, could take 5-6 months to get through that process. We’re into 90% design, will get an update to council soon. l Jessie left mid-May to take an opportunity in South Burlington; City Manager Search committee is reviewing resumes now. Sounds like we have some good candidates, looking forward. V. Tree Removal at 32 Malletts Bay Avenue l Due to new tree ordinance, if trees are removed in the public right of way there needs to be a public hearing. This can be accomplished via MIC meeting. l As part of new ordinance, if a tree is deemed not a public hazard, we do have to go through a process in order to remove. These trees are located at O’Brien Community Center, a city-owned parcel. Proposed development involves the removal of six trees, but proposing to plant 8 new trees. There are some mature trees that we would prefer they don’t remove. Generally, not incredibly healthy trees, but it would be good to salvage the trees at the northern end of the parcel. Trees should be posted before we have another public hearing. l Laura: For replanting, is there any kind of stipulation regarding location of trees? l Trees will be replanted in proximity to existing trees. Replacement trees are much smaller than mature trees. l Technically this meeting serves as a public hearing. Will put up signage on trees to see if folks have concerns. l Peter: When you put sign up, be mindful of wording of sign. “This tree may be removed” not “will be”. Give plenty of lead time. Overall sounds like we’re on the right path. l It’s a new process; in the past, the trees would have just been cut. Mostly on city property. l Bryn: Are trees located on roadside or more on ends of the property? l There is one on roadside. Curious about shading near bus stop. l The trees are located away from the bus shelter. l Building is a 20-unit building, 3-bedroom facilities. “Perpetually-subsidized housing”: CHT pays down payment cost. Great project in general, meets a lot of housing goals. VI. Discussion on Municipal Infrastructure Commission Priorities for Upcoming Year Background: There’s the Municipal Plan, drives the work of the city; City Council helps direct that work. City Council can direct commissions to advise or work on certain priorities. City council members are having a retreat (June 26) to go over all the different commissions’ priorities to do some strategic planning. Need to stay within parameters of municipal plan. Bryn: In looking at Master Plan, there are six key objectives. Jon: When we did a retreat, we identified some specific tasks that draw back to Master Plan. As we wrap up FY 21 document, there’s stuff that’s going to remain (Main Street, for example). In general, looking for some high- level “what should we add?” sorts of things. Laura: Certainly providing input as-needed on Main Street and updates to transportation master plan, pedestrian-oriented maintenance efforts. As a commission, we have talked a lot about pedestrian issues, crosswalks, bike lanes, safety improvements; things that link back to transportation planning. Bryn: Was looking through the MIC 2020 Work Plan. Sidewalks, transportation impact fee, tree commission-related business, transportation master plan implementation priorities, Main Street, items listed on the 2020 work plan. Form-based code; would that come to this committee for input or review? Jon: There are aspects that could come to MIC. Impacts to right-of-way, sidewalks, etc. that we may want to weigh in on. Probably dealing with street issues and impacts. Potentially commission-related business, transportation master plan implementation priorities, Main Street, items listed on the 2020 work plan. Form-based code; would that come to this committee for input or review? Jon: There are aspects that could come to MIC. Impacts to right-of-way, sidewalks, etc. that we may want to weigh in on. Probably dealing with street issues and impacts. Potentially stormwater issues as well. Laura: Might be helpful for us to look at Master Plan goals to help us decide some of the priorities are going to be. On the one hand, it seems that City Council should request the commission to provide specific input. Bryn: What priorities are in the master plan, how are we progressing on those? What’s coming up in terms of city issues to pay attention to? Thinking about form-based code. Reflecting on where some progress has been made; will revisit later. Where are some project gaps? Where are we seeing emerging need? Objective #1 may not be high priority (data management and technology). Federal goals, various acts that have been passed. Assisting our communities by staying in line with energy goals (what are they?). Incremental progress can go a long way. Baseline things in FY 22: Traffic Calming, funding will come our way. Main Street continuing to move forward, so will be providing feedback on that. Also updating stormwater ordinance, but could be more technical. Things coming our way. Phosphorus control plan; has that been developed? YES, it was a regulatory requirement. Could be some BMP prioritization. Laura: A little off-topic, but there were two or three instances last year where there were some groups (street or neighborhood) who were upset about a traffic issue, and they came to the commission. It was unclear what next steps were; it was an opportunity to have a hearing but we should know if we do public hearings for traffic/infrastructure issue? The intent of the traffic calming policy manual is to lay out a process for how to address those concerns and put some measurable data. Temporary options, like temporary speed bump, for a trial period of possible improvements. MIC can be body that hears these requests. Some of that stems from not having a policy in place. Timur: enhancing bicycle access is a priority for me. Peter: Pursue alternative energy on our own terms; much more feasibility. Same goes for clean water. Those would be things I’d like to push for as priorities. Water Distribution Master Plan: prepared by Peter! We do have a prioritization plan with concept cost estimates for each location. Hickock Street was a top priority, but we have plenty more. Peter: the whole point of the commission at its inception is an effort at citizen-driven government. There needs to be enabling legislation somewhere for us to be a host for public hearings. This is a venue where those concerns should be heard first. Public engagement: What improvements could we do to get more folks involved or be more open to request? Postcards and door-knocking, communications campaign. Cheap, effective, wide-reaching. Knocking on doors is the easiest way to get a hold of folks. The City used to do community dinners; could be of value to attract a broader diversity of residents and businesses. Surveys, postcards, maybe some other ideas that can come through grant process. If we can incorporate some recommendations from audit to broaden access/interest, that would be good. Depending on avenue of engagement, some voices can overshadow others. Or not even accessing them. Timur: Could do some outreach through the school; parents are more likely to look at than spam mail. Folks were grateful for us to hear their issues, is there a way that the City can circle back with them and give them some feedback on their requests?  access/interest, that would be good. Depending on avenue of engagement, some voices can overshadow others. Or not even accessing them. Timur: Could do some outreach through the school; parents are more likely to look at than spam mail. Folks were grateful for us to hear their issues, is there a way that the City can circle back with them and give them some feedback on their requests? Peter: Public call-in meetings, would have them in neighborhoods; just a public question and answer. People came out and presented their issues, and you’re then forced to confront the issues. Problem is that they take up time after work (people don’t want to go to evening meetings) for all parties. Paul Sarne excels at his job, and he’ll have ideas about how to communicate with people. Having this discussion about our role; commission was designed to be liaison between general public and city, and we’d also be sharing information with the public. Finding ways to weave that in to the work that we do will strengthen the commission. It also sounds like providing input on transportation issues is really important; updates, bike safety, a “biking master plan” for the city? (what areas need bike lanes/bike access the most). We need to continue working on sidewalk upgrade priorities. Using outreach to find out from community members what their priorities are. Any opportunities to weave in climate change resiliency and energy efficiency is very important. Form-based code: maybe there’s some way that we can provide input on various topics, how we can improve energy efficiency across the city. There might be opportunity for MIC to look at what improvements we would want to see as an offset for additional housing units. Basically in Form-Based Code, there is an incentive that no one is taking advantage of. Would be a good one for this group to look at and set some realistic targets. Would need to bring in a developer to get reality check on a few things. Most recent energy code was effective September 1st, 2020. If 3 stories or less, residential; >3 stories, commercial. If you could incentivize people (do away with parking minimums in certain cases) to create pedestrian-friendly development, could be interesting to look at. But on all of these issues, showing people how these ideas improve quality of life is really important. Building trust and getting response is something we really need to keep working at. Traffic Calming Policy, Main Street Feedback, maybe Stormwater ordinance, BMP prioritization for projects in Phosphorus plan, Transportation Plan are a few specific things. In order to access historical preservation funding, City has to create a commission; “Certified Local Government”. For Infrastructure Commission, maybe a short-term goal of determining whether we create a commission. It would be great to hear what comes out of retreat. Is next step for us to make our upcoming year’s work plan based on this information? Once council sets agenda, we can pull out the appropriate things for the commission to be working on. Arranging over e-mail for scheduling. Once we have a workplan, perhaps we can start having more regular meetings (previous meeting was in March). Jon: Still doing remote, but by July we may be free to go in-person but assume remote for now. VII. Adjourn Motion to adjourn: Peter Wernsdorfer Seconded: Chris Page All in favor. Meeting adjourned at 8:03 PM. Seconded: Chris Page All in favor. Meeting adjourned at 8:03 PM.