Planning Commission

9/12/2024 - Minutes I. Call to Order Members Present: Mike O’Brien, Chair; Abby Bleything, Vice-Chair; Connor Daley; Sarah van Ryckevorsel; John Baker City Staff Present: Ravi Venkataraman T Guests Present: Kristine Lott, Mayor; Ruth Steinmetz Call to Order by: Mike O’Brien F Meeting Start Time: 6:32 pm Minutes Recorded by: Ravi Venkataraman A II. Changes to the Agenda None III. Public Comment R None IV. Approve Previous Meeting Minutes D Minutes/Notes: l Motion by Sarah, seconded by Mike, to approve the April 25, 2024 meeting minutes. Voting: 4-0 (Two abstentions). Motion carried. l Motion by Sarah, seconded by Abby, to approve the June 13, 2024 meeting minutes. Voting: 4-0 (Two abstentions). Motion carried. l Motion by John, seconded by Abby, to approve the July 18, 2024 meeting minutes. Voting: Unanimous. Motion carried. l Motion by Connor, seconded by Sarah, to approve the August 8, 2024 meeting minutes. Voting: 4-0 (Two abstentions). Motion carried. V. Discussion: Unified Land Use and Development Regulations (ULUDR) – Sections 4.1 and 5.16 (Replacement Units) Minutes/Notes: Ravi provided an overview of the updates to the draft regulations since the last Planning Commission meeting, noting the changes to the applicability and the payment in lieu sections. Mike asked whether the payment in lieu section is based on the per unit price or for the price of the entire property. Mike suggested that the payment in lieu should be 25 percent of the per unit value of the property. Mike added that for a hypothetical property valued at $300,000 with five units, the payment in lieu for the entire property based on the draft calculation would be $75,000. Ravi said that $75,000 per unit would be close to the suggested amount for a payment in lieu in inclusionary zoning, that for inclusionary zoning he has calculated an appropriate fee in lieu calculation to be $80,000, and that therefore a payment in lieu of $80,000 per unit in this context makes sense.  the entire property. Mike suggested that the payment in lieu should be 25 percent of the per unit value of the property. Mike added that for a hypothetical property valued at $300,000 with five units, the payment in lieu for the entire property based on the draft calculation would be $75,000. Ravi said that $75,000 per unit would be close to the suggested amount for a payment in lieu in inclusionary zoning, that for inclusionary zoning he has calculated an appropriate fee in lieu calculation to be $80,000, and that therefore a payment in lieu of $80,000 per unit in this context makes sense. Sarah asked for clarification about the red text and the plain text. Ravi said for readability purposes, he put all the new sections in plain text. Commission members asked for all new texts to be provided in red for clarification purposes in future meetings. Abby said that the intent of the payment in lieu is to provide flexibility, but it shouldn’t be priced too low. Abby said that in previous meetings the commission discussed only allowing payment T in lieu in the Gateway District. Ravi reviewed the revisions to the exemptions section that has been made since the last meeting. Abby asked if the commission wanted the payment in lieu section to be applicable in the residential districts. Mike said that he would prefer that it not be available in the residential districts. Sarah agreed, suggesting that the payment in lieu option could be added to the residential districts over time. Connor agreed. F John asked about the applicability of the section, and whether it would affect converting residential units from three bedrooms to two bedrooms. Ravi said that in most cases he does not have jurisdiction over internal modifications, unless a new unit were to be created. A VI. Discussion: Unified Land Use and Development Regulations Section 4.17 (Transportation Demand Management) Minutes/Notes: Ravi provided a brief overview of the draft text. Ravi said that this draft text is a first draft, that more conversations are needed with stakeholders in the coming weeks, and that R he aims to take into considerations the commission’s and stakeholders’ comments into a revision for the next meeting. Sarah asked Kristine if City Council would be ok with this concept. Kristine said that she has previewed this to some City Council members and has not fielded major concerns yet. Kristine added that she will share the draft text with City Council members for comments. D Sarah said that overall the draft text makes sense, and asked about the sizing and square footage. Ravi said that the sizing was based on projects that have happened in Winooski and on ordinances in other municipalities. Mike said that the ratio between residential and commercial uses seem too low. Ravi said that he will adjust the ratio to match the trips generated from the use. Sarah asked if this would support the creation of grocery stores, which need space for loading docks. Ravi said that it could, depending on the parking reductions the applicant obtains and whether it is enough for loading docks. Sarah asked about ADA considerations in the TDM considerations. Ravi said that ADA considerations are already written into our public works specifications and building code, but that more could be added on that aspect. Sarah asked for clarification regarding e-bike and e-scooter charging. Ravi said that he was thinking micromobility devices. Abby suggested editing the text to micromobility devices. Sarah asked if parking is unbundled in a hypothetical project, whether a parking space could be bought at a later time. Ravi said that that may depend on the rental agreements and deeds in place. Abby noted that clarity is needed on the rounding for the parking reduction calculations. Mike said he’d prefer rounding to the nearest whole. VII. City Updates  Abby noted that clarity is needed on the rounding for the parking reduction calculations. Mike said he’d prefer rounding to the nearest whole. VII. City Updates A. Updates from the Mayor Minutes/Notes: Kristine reviewed actions during the last City Council meeting—the resolution on F-35s, the Lafountain/Dion scoping study, and the changes to the parking ordinance. Kristine added that GMT will be attending the forthcoming City Council meeting to talk about the service reductions. T B. Updates from the Inclusion and Belonging Commission Minutes/Notes: Ruth discussed the co-chair model for the Inclusion and Belonging Commission going forward. F C. Updates from City Staff Minutes/Notes: Ravi reviewed day-to-day permitting—that during his tenure, he has not had to review and approve many permits. Ravi noted that the DRB approved a A 22-unit project at 111 East Allen Street recently. Abby asked if the changes to Act 250 could be discussed at the next Planning Commission meeting. VIII. Other Business None IX. Adjourn Motion by: John D R Second: Sarah Meeting End Time: 7:41 pm