special meeting of the burlington planning commission with ... · 11/12/2019 · scott mapes fire...

The City of Burlington will not tolerate unlawful harassment or discrimination on the basis of political or religious affiliation, race, color, national origin,

place of birth, ancestry, age, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, marital status, veteran status, disability, HIV positive status, crime victim status or

genetic information. The City is also committed to providing proper access to services, facilities, and employment opportunities. For accessibility

information or alternative formats, please contact Human Resources Department at (802) 540-2505. Written comments on items may be directed to the

Planning Commission at 149 Church Street, Burlington, VT 05401, or at [email protected]

Burlington Planning Commission

149 Church Street

Burlington, VT 05401

Telephone: (802) 865-7188

(802) 865-7195 (FAX)

(802) 865-7144 (TTY)

www.burlingtonvt.gov/pz

Andy Montroll, Chair

Bruce Baker, Vice-Chair

Yves Bradley

Alexander Friend

Emily Lee

Harris Roen

Jennifer Wallace-Brodeur

Special Meeting of the


with the City Council Ordinance Committee

Tuesday, November 12, 2019, 6:30 P.M.

Lorraine B. Good Room, Burlington City Arts, 135 Church Street, Burlington

AGENDA I. Agenda

II. Public Forum- Time Certain 6:30 p.m.

III. Proposed CDO Amendment: ZA-20-04 Minimum Parking The Committee will continue a discussion of a proposed amendment related to the minimum requirements for

new parking in selected areas of the city. This amendment comes as a result of the Mayor’s Housing Summit

and subsequent policy reform recommendations.

Staff Recommendation: Discuss proposed amendment and provide direction to staff to inform the

preparation of draft ordinance language.

IV. Commissioner Items a. Dates for additional Joint Committee meetings

V. Communications a. Minutes from the Planning Commission’s September 24, 2019 meeting, and Joint Committee meetings on

October 15, 22, and 30 are enclosed begining on page 2.

b. Communications are enclosed in the agenda packet beginning on page 15.

VI. Adjourn

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.burlingtonvt.gov/pz


149 Church Street


Telephone: (802) 865-7188

(802) 865-7195 (FAX)

(802) 865-7144 (TTY)




Yves Bradley

Alexander Friend

Emily Lee

Harris Roen


Burlington Planning Commission Tuesday, September 24, 2019, 6:30 P.M.

Conference Room 12, City Hall, 149 Church Street

Draft Minutes

Members Present B Baker, H Roen, A Montroll, A Friend, E Lee

Members Absent Y Bradley, J Wallace-Brodeur

Staff Present D White, M Tuttle, S Durmick

I. Agenda

Call to Order Time: 6:36

Agenda No changes to the agenda

II. Public Forum

Name Comment Commission Action

No Comments

III. Report of the Chair

A Montroll None

IV. Report of the Director

D White The City Council held first reading for the Zoning Administrative Officer

ordinance, and the Council Ordinance Committee is expected to finish discussion

of the Inclusionary Zoning amendments on 9/30

M Tuttle announced that on 9/26 there will be a community book discussion on

The Color of Law

D White announced that Friday is the annual meeting of the Vermont Planners

Association, for which M Tuttle will be elected president

V. 2020 Meeting Schedule

Action: Approve the 2020 meeting schedule as presented

Motion by: E Lee Second by: A Friend Vote: Approved unanimously

Type: Action Presented by: M Tuttle

Discussion/Notes:

M Tuttle noted that the schedule was created to avoid BSD breaks and other known conflicts

VI. Municipal Planning Grant Application

Action: Approve the resolution supporting the city’s application to the MPG program

Motion by: E Lee Second by: H Roen Vote: Approved unanimously


Discussion/Notes: (see next page)


Burlington Planning Commission Minutes p. 2

Tuesday, September 24, 2019

The City of Burlington will not tolerate unlawful harassment or discrimination on the basis of political or religious affiliation, race, color, national

origin, place of birth, ancestry, age, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, marital status, veteran status, disability, HIV positive status, crime victim

status or genetic information. The City is also committed to providing proper access to services, facilities, and employment opportunities. For

accessibility information or alternative formats, please contact Human Resources Department at (802) 540-2505.

M Tuttle described that Planning and CEDO have been working together on a proposal for an

economic development strategy for the City, and are applying to Vermont’s Department of

Housing & Community Development’s Municipal Planning Grant Program to seek funding to

support said strategy (including an update to the Jobs & People Report). The application

requires a resolution of support from the Planning Commission. The city is applying for $22,000,

with the 10% match requirement in the department’s FY20 budget.

M Tuttle noted that the economic development strategy will come before the Planning

Commission when it is being developed, and ultimately will want to incorporate it into planBTV.

VII. Housing Summit Policy Reforms

Action: No Action Required

Motion by: NA Second by: NA Vote: NA

Type: Discussion Presented by: M Tuttle

Discussion/Notes:

M Tuttle noted the purpose of this item was to follow up on three of the policy reforms which

emerged from the 2019 Mayor’s Housing Summit (Short Term Rentals (STRs), Accessory

Dwelling Units (ADUs), and Minimum Parking Requirements) which have zoning implications. It

is anticipated that the Commission will discuss these amendments with the Council Ordinance

Committee in a series of joint meetings in October.

Commissioner Comments:

Commissioners spoke about the economic benefits of STRs in terms of potential sources of

revenue for property owners, tax revenue for the city and state, for tourism access, and to more

fully utilize existing housing stock (i.e. while students are on breaks), but also noted the

challenge of ensuring that STRs benefit residents within the context of of chronically low-

vacancy rates and high rental rates. Commissioners noted there is a high demand & occupancy

rate for STRs, but there must be a balance between STRs & long-term rental units.

Acknowledgement that a legal realm will need to be created which will encourage STR

permitting and compliance, and that enforcement will be the largest factor in regulation.

Because rental platforms themselves are not responsible for host compliance, tools such as

HostCompliance and AirDNA will be used for data collection and to aid enforcement.

Questions were raised about the transition to these regulations– what will be the process for

illegal rentals to become compliant?

Distinctions were made between the proposed parking requirements of ADUs and STRs within

the policy reforms, and Councilor Bushor was concerned about ADU property owners not

permitting their ADUs as STRs, and therefore not complying with parking requirement of STRs.

Regarding parking reform, a Commissioner reiterated that there is a need to look at how and

where the ordinance permits shared parking resources.

VIII. Committee Reports

Executive No Report

Ordinance No Report

Long Range H Roen – Proposed that the Long Range Committee discuss the recently announced

Net Zero Road Map in upcoming meetings. M Tuttle commented that the City

Council recently passed additional climate resolutions, which will require the

Planning Commission to address how its work is related to these goals in its annual

report. Will be a topic for future meeting.


Tuesday, September 24, 2019





IX. Commissioner Items

Next Meeting Next meeting is on Tuesday, October 8th at 6:30 pm in Conference Room 12

H Roen – raised question about the vegetation management on Pine St. D

White commented that it is private land and is being worked on under the

watchful eye of the Department of Environmental Conservation

E Lee noted that St. Paul St. is being widened and added that she would like

an equal weight of consideration for the pedestrian experience. B Baker

raised concerns about lack of tracking the elimination of on-street parking

due to these projects. A Montroll proposed that when Great Streets is

complete, it be brought back to the Planning Commission for discussion. M

Tuttle noted DPW will be invited to a future meeting.

X. Minutes and Communications

Action: Approve minutes and accepted the communications

Motion by: A Friend Second by: E Lee Vote: Approved unanimously

Minutes Filed: August 27, 2019

XI. Adjourn

Adjournment Time: 7:40 pm

Motion: E Lee Second: H Roen Vote: Approved unanimously


149 Church Street


Telephone: (802) 865-7188

(802) 865-7195 (FAX)

(802) 865-7144 (TTY)




Yves Bradley

Alexander Friend

Emily Lee

Harris Roen


Burlington Joint Planning Commission Tuesday, October 15, 2019, 6:00 P.M.

Fletcher Room, Fletcher Free Library, 235 College Street, Burlingon

Draft Minutes

Members Present Planning Commission: A Montroll, H Roen, Y Bradley & J Wallace-Brodeur,

City Councilors: S Bushor, C Mason & A Roof

Members Absent A Friend, E Lee, B Baker

Staff Present D White, M Tuttle, I Jakus, B Ward, K Sturtevant, S Durmick

I. Agenda

Call to Order Time: 6:15 pm


II. Public Forum


Scott Mapes Fire safety code, which required sprinkler systems to be

added to his Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU), will add

$25,000 to the cost of construction.

Amy Magyar Excited about the policy changes- was denied zoning

permit for an ADU due to a stacked 4-car driveway. Look

further into fire safety code requirements for ADUs

(specifically the requirement for sprinkler systems). A lot of

this information wasn’t available until was in the process.

III. Proposed CDO Amendment: ZA-20-03 Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs)

Action: No action- discussion only


Type: Action Presented by: M Tuttle & I Jakus

Discussion/Notes:

M Tuttle stated that the purpose of the joint meetings are to discuss the Housing Summit policy

reforms which have zoning implications (ADU, minimum requirements for new parking, and a

regulatory framework for short term rentals). End goal is for there to be a zoning amendment

that the Planning Commission will warn for and hold a public hearing on, before forwarding to

the full City Council. Issues arising related to other ordinances (like building codes) are not

technically in the Planning Commission’s purview, but they can invite other city staff or make

suggestions on related ordinances that help support the zoning changes.

I Jakus reviewed information on ADUs and introduced Eli Spevak, who has worked for AARP and

on ADUs around the country, and is on the Portland, OR Planning Commission.

Basic outline is from the City’s ADU White Paper from 2018, with some adjustments based on

feedback from the Housing Summit to increase the size of ADUs and to take into account lot

coverage as a barrier. The City is proposing to: allow ADUs in any zone given that it is a single



Tuesday, October 15, 2019





family home (not just RL zones), streamline the permitting process by taking out the conditional

use requirement, removing the parking requirement, allow an alternative maximum size, and

address lot coverage if stormwater impacts are mitigated.

Commissioner/Councilor Comments:

It was clarified that the proposal is to allow an ADU on any single-family home, include non-

conforming homes.

There were questions about the proposal to eliminate the parking requirement, and suggestions

to consider an alternative approach, such as allowing stacked parking for ADUs. Some

Committee members expressed concern about conflicts due to lack of on-street parking in

some areas, while others noted that the priority should be solving a housing crisis, and that

requiring a parking space upfront is overkill. M Tuttle shared an example of an Old North End

property seeking to build an ADU that would have to make significant modifications to

accommodate parking if it is required, versus using an existing driveway if it is not. E Spevak

noted that in many cases an ADU couldn’t be created if parking is required—it’s a choice

between a home and a space for a car. It was further noted that not requiring a space does not

mean an owner wouldn’t provide one.

There were some questions about the maximum size of an ADU, particularly for detached in

newly constructed structures. Committee felt that repurposing an existing structure (such as a

garage) would not have an impact. The Committee asked whether there should be different

requirements for the size of a newly constructed ADU. E Spevak noted that Portland used to do

this, and switched because people would circumvent by building a garage and then converting

it. M Tuttle noted that the current calculation for ADU’s size is complicated, and savvy

owners/designers have built ADU’s that are nearly the size of the primary home, so changing the

max size does not necessarily prevent this, but allows very small homes to the opportunity for a

more livable ADU size.

Several Committee members asked questions about the affordability of creating an ADU,

specifically the building/fire code concerns raised. B Ward noted some situations he was aware

of where the units were too far away from the street for a fire truck to access, and that the

biggest concern was making sure this information is upfront. M Tuttle noted other changes to

address cost- such as permitting process, cost to create more parking spaces, and technical

assistance Homeshare Vermont, AARP, and others are offering.

There were questions about whether the lot coverage waiver was in conflict with the city’s

stormwater goals, and if there was an alternative scenario such as utilizing a bonus like

inclusionary and senior housing. M Tuttle noted that this is highly site-specific, which is why a

dedicated percentage or a clearly defined list of improvements are hard to include in the

ordinance. There was hesitation about allowing this for new construction, particularly when the

city has a firm stance on non-conformities.

IV. Reapprove Municipal Bylaw Amendment Report ZA-19-06 Article 7 Signs

Action: Reapprove the Municipal Bylaw Amendment Report

Motion by: Y Bradley Second by: H Roen Vote: pass unanimously

Type: Action Presented by: D White

Discussion/Notes:

The Council Ordinance Committee approved the Sign Ordinance with some minor

modifications.







V. Reapprove Municipal Bylaw Amendment Report ZA-a9-10 Inclusionary Zoning

Action: Reapprove the Municipal Bylaw Amendment Report

Motion by: J Wallace-Brodeur Second by: H Roen Vote: pass unanimously


Discussion/Notes:

Council Ordinance Committee accepted a number of the recommendations from the Planning

Commission. Most specifically, they accepted the framework for requiring off-campus

institutional student housing projects to participate in the Inclusionary process. The Committee

did not make changes to the provision for parity between the IZ and market rate unit sizes, and

did not include a method for averaging the AMI to calculate rents.

VI. Commissioner Items

Action: N/A

Motion by: E Lee Second by: H Roen Vote: passed unanimously

Type: Action Presented by: NA

Discussion/Notes:

Next meeting is Tuesday, October 22nd at 6:30 in the Miller Center

Congratulate M Tuttle for being named President of the Vermont Planning Association

VII. Communications

Action: No Action Required

Motion by: Y Bradley Second by: H Roen Vote: unanimous

Type: Discussion Presented by: NA

Communications Filed:

A memo transmitted to Mayor Weinberger regarding the 2019 Department Head Report

A notice transmitted to the Burlington City Council regarding the examination and public

hearing of the Shelburne Street Rotary Redesign Project

A memo transmitted to Chittenden County Planning Commission Chairs and related head

figures regarding proposed land development regulation amendments in South Burlington

VIII. Adjourn

Adjournment Time: 7:43 pm

Motion: J Wallace-Brodeur Second: H Roen Vote: pass unanimously






149 Church Street


Telephone: (802) 865-7188

(802) 865-7195 (FAX)

(802) 865-7144 (TTY)




Yves Bradley

Alexander Friend

Emily Lee

Harris Roen


Burlington Joint Planning Commission Tuesday, October 22, 2019, 6:30 P.M.

Miller Center, 130 Gosse Court, Burlington, VT

Draft Minutes

Members Present Planning Commission: A Montroll, H Roen, B Baker, J Wallace-Brodeur, E Lee

City Councilors: S Bushor, C Mason, A Roof

Members Absent A Friend, Y Bradley

Staff Present M Tuttle, D White, S Durmick, I Jakus, S Gustin, K Sturtevant

I. Agenda



II. Public Forum


Amy Magyar Suggested that ADU size restrictions be dependent upon

whether the structure is new or existing, and that tiny houses

be considered within ADU policy changes.

Ericka Redic Reminded the Commissioners & Councilors that any

additional costs to property owners will be passed on to

tenants (i.e. tax increases, fees, and new regulations).

III. Proposed CDO Amendment: ZA-20-03 Accessory Dwelling Units

Action: N/A- discussion only.


Type: Discussion Presented by: M Tuttle

Discussion/Notes:

M Tuttle shared a presentation with information and recommendations responding to the

questions from the last Joint Commission meeting. Topics included: affordability of creating an

accessory dwelling unit (ADU), building and fire code requirements, maximum size limits,

parking requirements, and proposed lot coverage waiver. (Presentation is available on the

website.)


S Bushor asked if there is a way to reduce the cost of a sprinkler system in an ADU. Based on

staff from the Fire Department and Building Code agency that we use national/Vermont fire

codes applied in Burlington. Any changes to this would be the purview of the Council Ordinance

Committee. Cost depends to comply depends upon the size and layout of the unit itself; some




options like tank-supplied sprinkler systems are more affordable than having to connect to the

main water line, but also take up more space within an ADU.

B Baker asked if a 2nd means of egress could replace the need for a sprinkler system. D White

responded that if the front door accessing the unit is more than 50 feet from the curb (or a fire

rated access drive), it needs to have a sprinkler system.

E Lee noted that it would be helpful to have resources to navigate these codes (e.g. a code

analysis), since it can be cost prohibitive to hire professionals to comply with these

requirements. M Tuttle responded that this can be part of an FAQ and technical guide.

A Roof commented that he would like to see carveouts in the zoning policy language for

additional allowable ADU size to allow for a water tank in order to encourage affordability.

A Montroll suggested that the Commission revisit the issue of size limits for accessory

residential structures at a later date due to concerns about allowable height.

M Tuttle explained how the proposed changes to the maximum size limits of ADUs (either 30%

of the size of the home or 800 sq. ft.) will allow medium and smaller sized homes the access to

build an ADU. S Bushor expressed concern that ADUs would be too large compared with their

primary housing (e.g. 900 sq. ft. house and 800 sq. ft. ADU), and E Lee pointed out that

accessibility needs would be difficult to accommodate even within 800 sq. ft.

C Mason observed that 2-story ADUs would open up more possibilities due to ease of

compliance with lot coverage and setbacks. E Lee pointed out that residents would probably be

less offended by a 2-story structure where half is underground. M Tuttle noted that this would

not be prohibited today or under the proposal.

J Wallace Brodeur echoed what E Lee had said in regards to supporting an aging community

through attentiveness to adequate size and accessibility of units.

S Bushor was concerned that the parking requirement differentiation between ADUs and short

term rentals (STRs) would not allow property owners an option to convert the use of their units.

M Tuttle responded that the parking proposals for ADUs and STRs were developed to be

complimentary to one another with the intention that there would be a higher bar to meet for

an STR.

J Wallace-Brodeur expressed that residents should be allowed to use the driveways they have

through the Commission allowing more flexible through stacked parking. M Tuttle & D White

responded that proposing to allow stacked parking without the need for an attendant, and to

do this in addition to not requiring a space to be built on-site.

IV. Proposed CDO Amendment: ZA-20-04 Minimum Parking

Action: Topic deferred due to time


Type: NA Presented by: NA

V. Commissioner Items

Action: N/A



Discussion/Notes:

Next meeting is on Wednesday, October 30th at 6:30 pm in Contois Auditorium of City Hall

Staff will send out a poll for additional meeting dates of the Joint Committee.



VI. Communications

Action: N/A

Motion by: Second by: Vote: N/A

Type: Presented by: NA

VII. Adjourn

Adjournment Time: 8:15

Motion: J Wallace-Brodeur Second: E Lee Vote: Approved unanimously

The City of Burlington will not tolerate unlawful harassment or discrimination on the basis of political or religious affiliation, race, color,

national origin, place of birth, ancestry, age, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, marital status, veteran status, disability, HIV positive status,

crime victim status or genetic information. The City is also committed to providing proper access to services, facilities, and employment

opportunities. For accessibility information or alternative formats, please contact Human Resources Department at (802) 540-2505.


149 Church Street


Telephone: (802) 865-7188

(802) 865-7195 (FAX)

(802) 865-7144 (TTY)




Yves Bradley

Alexander Friend

Emily Lee

Harris Roen


Burlington Joint Planning Commission Wednesday, October 30, 2019, 6:30 P.M.

City Hall, 149 Church Street, Burlington, VT

Draft Minutes

Members Present Planning Commission: H Roen, E Lee, Y Bradley, B Baker, J Wallace Brodeur

City Council: A Roof, C Mason, S Bushor

Members Absent A Montroll, A Friend

Staff Present M Tuttle, D White, S Durmick, I Jakus

I. Agenda



II. Public Forum


Steven Marshall Declared Burlington’s need for more affordable housing and

encouraged eliminating single-family zoning

Tammie Brownell Affirmed that she has everything she needs to create an

Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) except for meeting the

parking requirement, and therefore hopes that said

requirement will be changed.

Jack Hanson Advocated for the prospect of eliminating parking

minimums, revising parking maximums, and simultaneously

incentivizing alternative modes of transportation.

Richard Watts Expressed the benefits of Transportation Demand

Management (TDM) programs at UVM, and would like to

see aspects of this program expanded to the City.

Joan Shannon Proposed that the Commission consider the potential of a

bowling alley addition to the South End Enterprise Zone.

Encouraged the elimination of the stacked and tandem

parking restrictions for ADUs.

Amy Magyar Encouraged the elimination of stacked parking restrictions

for ADUs. Suggested that different parking requirements be

considered for ADUs being used as Short Term Rentals

(STRs).

Kirby Dunn Expressed the need for ADUs to be thought of as owner

occupied housing, and for the removal of any double

standards which make it more difficult to construct an ADU

than a single-family home. She would like to see the ADU



Wednesday, October 30, 2019

process simplified, and if not possible in all neighborhoods,

to start in Wards 4 & 7.

Jason Van

Driesche

Recommended a book for the Committee to read: Thank

you for being Late: An Optimist’s Guide to Living in the Age

of Accelerations by Thomas Friedman and encouraged

maximum flexibility for all of these ordinances.

Adam Frowine Encouraged the City to address the lack of affordable

housing in creative ways amongst the community, and

believes ADUs are a step in the right direction. Pointed out

that those who have the most to gain don’t have the

opportunity to be at the meeting.

Laura Jacoby Dismayed to see that there was no discussion to put the

money saved from not building parking into a fee that funds

alternative modes of transportation.

Madeline Advocated for any policies that advance sustainable, active,

and effective mass public transit to reduce the region’s

carbon footprint.

Tyler Maas Shared an update on legislation that passed in California in

2017 to make it easier to develop ADUs: Los Angeles went

from developing 250 annually to 4,000 ADU permits drawn

in 2018. Now people are asking for laws to become even

more accommodating.

Patrick Murphy Encouraged the Committee to consider costs for residential

parking permits, replace current parking minimums with

maximums, require developers to provide TDM initiatives,

and all other reforms which potentially encourage

alternative modes of transportation.

Erhard Manke Encouraged the Committee to do what they can to liberalize

ADU initiatives to help with Burlington’s affordable housing

crisis. Concerned ADUs will only become a vehicle to create

STRs instead of increasing the housing stock.

III. Proposed CDO Amendment: ZA-20-03 Accessory Dwelling Units

Action: Approved municipal bylaw amendment report and warned for public hearing.

Motion by: E Lee Second by: H Roen Vote: Approved Unanimously

(vote included Planning

Commission members only)

Type: Discussion & Action Presented by: M Tuttle

Discussion/Notes:

M Tuttle shared information on the issue of lot coverage as a limitation for individuals looking

to build ADUs, particularly how it impacts neighborhoods in a significantly different way, and

discuss the proposed solution of a lot coverage waiver (presentation is available on the website).

Commissioner/Councilor Discussion:

J Wallace Brodeur was concerned about the accessibility of a stormwater waiver. Stated that if it

is not simple to understand & implement, it could pose a barrier rather than provide a workable

solution. Also asked about the practical difference between 650 & 800 sq. ft. in terms of storm

water management. M Tuttle responded that the proposal to decrease the max. size is because,

from a stormwater perspective, any sq. ft. of impervious surface is a concern.



B Baker pointed out that an engineer might have to be hired to calculate the volume of

stormwater runoff and mitigation, adding to the cost of an ADU. Staff responded that the

Department of Public Works (DPW) Stormwater Team would help people work through these

issues on a case-by-case basis, but that in some cases an engineer may need to be hired.

S Bushor reminded the Committee that one of the first steps needs to be creating an ADU Guide

which clarifies the process to the public and explains where potential costs may lie.

J Wallace Brodeur stressed that this process will require a concerted effort in terms of multiple

city players, and that everyone involved needs to be aware of their new roles as well as the

importance of this effort. Staff assured that the DPW Stormwater Team sees this as a potential

opportunity to learn about how we manage stormwater at a residential scale, and are therefore

invested in their role in the process.

Y Bradley asked if there should be a floor on the lot size or on a lot that already has existing lot

coverage over the allowable lot coverage. M Tuttle noted that staff did not recommend this

because the number may still not address the issue for some neighborhoods, and that with

setback requirements there will be a built-in floor, but the Committee could consider if it deems

necessary.

S Bushor was concerned that parking standards seemed inconsistent if someone had an ADU

that they wanted to use intermittently back and forth as a STR. A parking space is not required

in the proposed ordinance to build an ADU meant for long term housing, but is required for

STRs. J Wallace Brodeur commented that they should eliminate as many barriers for ADU

construction as possible, and that eliminating the parking requirement is one step towards

creating a more favorable policy.

C Mason was concerned that someone could receive a lot waiver under the pretense of using

the ADU for long term housing, and then convert the unit into a STR. Staff replied that it is

possible and that there is not a precedent for tying lot coverage to a specific use, but that the

proposal for STR that may limit the potential for this, such as a STR requiring parking.

The Committee asked questions about why parking would be required for STR’s. M Tuttle

indicated that the proposal on ADU’s does not address this, and that there would be the ability

to talk about parking specific to STR’s when that ordinance is before this committee.

In reference to the Deed Restriction Provision, S Bushor commented that if a unit is transferred

from an owner-occupied unit to an investment property, code needs to be informed so they can

enforce the necessary criteria which would have to be met because of the transition of use. S

Bushor also noted the inconsistency in the ordinance regarding extra space added to a single-

family home under the 4-unrelated ordinance not applying to a discontinued ADU. Staff noted

this was a policy decision by Council when ADU laws were initially adopted.

Y Bradley expressed that in order to create affordable housing, City needs to stop creating

additional expenses (e.g. sprinkler, hiring engineer, etc.) in building that housing. B Baker added

that unpredictability is an even larger issue than cost. C Mason affirmed that the Council will

follow up on the sprinkler impediment.

IV. Proposed CDO Amendment: ZA-20-04 Minimum Parking

Action: No action


Type: Discussion Presented by: D White

Discussion/Notes:

D White shared a presentation to address the issue of eliminating the minimum parking

requirements in Burlington (presentation is available on the website).




A Roof & J Wallace Brodeur stated that they would like to know more about the Impact Traffic

Fee: who pays them, how it is assessed, what the money goes towards, etc. D White replied that

the next meeting will include an informational session on Impact Fees.

S Bushor mentioned that she would like to see the implications of the existing Impact Fee to

determine how it should be changed in order to make a difference in creating public

infrastructure. D White explained that this ordinance amendment will not specifically deal with

the Impact Fees because it is part of a larger study.

V. Commissioner Items

Action: N/A

Motion by: H Roen Second by: E Lee Vote: NA


Discussion/Notes:

E Lee proposed to add the bowling alley amendment - as introduced by Joan Shannon during

Public Forum - as an item for the next meeting. D White agreed that the Commission should

have a larger conversation about the issue, and the Commission agreed that staff will reach out

to Joan to learn about the timeline for this issue.

The next Joint Committee meeting is on Tuesday, November 12th

VI. Communications

Action: No action

Motion by: N/A Second by: N/A Vote: NA

Type: Discussion Presented by: NA

Communications Filed:

A memo transmitted to the Ordinance Committee in regards to short term housing proposal

Feedback

A memo transmitted to the Joint Committee members in regards to eliminating the parking

minimums

Notice regarding South Burlington’s proposed land development regulation amendments

VII. Adjourn

Adjournment Time: 8:35

Motion: H Roen Second: E Lee Vote: Approved Unanimously

special meeting of the burlington planning commission with ... · 11/12/2019 · scott mapes fire...

Documents