 In case of emergency, we have two exit doors here and over there marked with the exits. Please leave immediately and gather in the parking lot just outside the door to the south. If those doors are blocked for some reason, proceed back out through the lobby, out the main doors around the corner and into the lot. Tom Hubbard and I will be responsible for making sure the building is cleared. So please, if an emergency is declared, leave to exit petitions. Thank you. Item three, agenda review. Are there any additions, deletions, or changes in order of agenda items? The only thing I would note is that he had anticipated a reception from 6 to 630 honoring Chief Whipple, and he is arriving momentarily. So item seven is, you know, they leave the job and it's like their time clock is different. So item seven is the ceremonial part, so we have a proclamation to read or a resolution. So we'll take a very short moment then to allow people to say something to Trevor and grab a cookie or some fruit or whatever. So we'll have a truncated reception. So moving on to item four. Are there any questions or comments from the public that are not related to tonight's agenda? Okay, seeing none. Announcements and the city manager's report. Tom? Can't think of what I did last week, but I will say, I'm very excited that again, for the second year in a row, on Sunday, December 9th, will be the second annual Ugly Sweater Runs. Binder Ugly Holiday Sweater, and that will be organized by the Rotary of the Veterans Memorial from 10, 10.30 a.m. until about 1 p.m., so I hope to see a lot of you in your ugly sweaters. What's the date on that again? Sunday, December 9th. December 9th. Okay. Bring your dogs. Dog friendly events. Okay. Does the dog have worse sweaters? Yes. No. Mine didn't. Mine didn't. I had an ugly one that had a dog on it. Okay. Councilor Emery. Since the last meeting, other than the police ceremony power and command. Okay. David? Campus was visited last week, nothing but campus stuff. Okay. That's it. Tim. I went to the city council meeting last week that we had. Oh, well, I did that too. See? Not just campus, then, right? Oh. I'm going to inform the public that I am wearing a long sleeve shirt tonight. First time since, like, April. And pants. Not shorts. So that means there's a change in the weather and the temperatures. So sorry about that. But maybe summer will come back. And that was your job, too. We're good to see you. That's right. On a more sobering note, I didn't attend the Howard Center's sponsorship meeting. So Sue Kleebold coming to speak at SBHS last week on Wednesday night, where we talked, well, she talked about her experience as Dylan Kleebold's mother. Dylan was one of the two shooters at Columbine back in 1995. And there was also discussion about suicide and prevention and things like that. So very serious night. And then I went to the change of command last Friday, which was fun. Especially later on at the upper deck. And that's all I have. Okay. I also attended the change of command. I didn't make it to the upper deck, but the ceremony was really lovely. The words were gracious and thoughtful. And I appreciated the walk out. What did they call that? Walk out. Just the walk out. That was just a nice touch. I'd never been to one before. That was kind of cool. I also had an airport commission meeting. And I think it was last week when we had the first planning, the airport planning, the master planning. And so I went to that. And mostly they kind of related the timeframe and the purpose of master planning. And there were, we did an exercise with sticky dots or dots. They had done a survey open to the public maybe several months ago about kind of a SWAT analysis of the strengths and weaknesses and opportunities and what's the other one? Strength, weakness. A threat. Opportunity and threats. Thank you. And then everyone in the group, it was fairly small. There weren't all that many. Well, there was only half of the people on the committee that showed up. And then several residents. And so everyone was allowed to put dots on different things and add to the different items under those four. And then they were, and then the meeting was over. So there wasn't a whole lot of discussion, but they will get back with us on the results of that. So that was kind of interesting to see where dots landed in different places. And then at the airport commission meeting, there wasn't, we got an update on what's happening on the different projects. They will continue to be, unfortunately, some more, in one place they have to polish the asphalt or whatever the runway to make it, I don't know, they have to polish it one place and then they have to rough it up somewhere else. So they continue to put the finishing touches, I guess, on the new runway and taxiway. So it is taking longer than they had anticipated, so there still will be some noise at night, because they can only do it between midnight and 5.30 in the morning. It's hard to get out between the airplane landings and takeoffs just to do it. Absolutely. Did they talk about the removal of some shrubs and trees? We did bring that up. And that is a, and I think I had posted on the front porch forum, they are taking out some of the shrubs that used to be around the foundations of the houses that were demolished and some kind of scraggly tree lines, I guess. It will be made to look like a park. They have to, at first I had to cut it down and haul it away and then they have to get the stump removal group in to grind them up and then smooth it out and plant grass. I know there has been some concern by the public. The reasoning on the airport side was as expressed by the airport director is that they feel it makes it look more park-like and also is a safety concern when they drive around to look and see if there are people parked or loitering where they shouldn't be, they get a clearer view. I know some of the residents are unhappy about that, but I think ultimately it will look as nice as the area just opposite the actual airport parking garages. I don't know if you can see the garages, but change is always a challenge. Okay. City managers report. Thanks, Helen. Tom and I have begun our meetings with staff on the CIP. Those meetings will go on this week and next. Numbers are pretty significant. We will be working with staff on that over the next two weeks. We are beginning the public information sessions for the November 6th vote related to the community center, library city hall. In your pack or on your desk and there are some in the back to is a schedule of those public meetings. You'll see that a couple of them at notes possibly cancelled and cancelled. As much as they are going to be rescheduled. The 11th, I might also add, is the evening of the firefighters dinner. I don't know, Tom, if you want to speak or somebody wants to speak to that. So there would not be one that night, but nonetheless there will be six, possibly seven, and some of these are locked in. The first one actually is tomorrow night at the library. So I am also speaking to the seniors, the residents at Allenwood on Wednesday night for information meeting for them. Fire prevention day is Saturday. I think it's 10 o'clock at the fire station here. It's a great event for young kids to come to and learn about fire prevention. They have cookies and food and balloons and all kind of fun stuff. So if you've got a child or grandchild, it's a nice event to come to. The community collaborative, the community mental health collaborative is meeting here in this room on the Thursday at 8 a.m. It's the larger group to include all the communities that are involved in the community outreach program. And we were pleased to host the governor's capital for a day event Thursday of last week. We had Secretary Flynn of V-Trans, Secretary Moore of A&R, Deputy Secretary Brady of ACCD, Kitty Buckley from the Department of Housing Community Affairs, and Megan Sullivan who now is the Executive Director of VEPSI and of course we have a lot of issues before VEPSI with our TIF district. And so it was good to have them here. They toured Allard Square which is slated to open in about three weeks. And there's a fair... There's a lot to do. There's a lot to do there. Helen gave a good overview of our proposed project. We walked out of Allard Square and in front of the lot which we have an option on. And Helen and I reviewed the project for them and then Justin led a tour such as he could down Market Street dodging excavators and cement mixers and large trucks. And I think it was... We got as far down as to see the Champlain Housing Trust, the 60 units of affordable mixed affordable housing. The excavation is beginning for the foundation there. They have all the permits now? Yeah, they're digging a hole over there right now. We didn't get as far as we could past that intersection. It was raining out muddy but they would have also seen David Schenck's project now. The site is cleared and I think construction will begin on that. Our one regret was we could not get them over to City Center Park. They didn't have enough time for that. But we have invited them to come back and see the park. I thought it was a great opportunity. Helen, did you? I knew I'd done... It seemed like I'd done something every day last week and then I blanked on it. But no, that was great. And they will when closer to, or maybe when they have the grand opening or the ribbon cutting for the Allard Square, they will invite us and you can see the tour. It's pretty impressive, the different. And we were shown one of the apartments at market rate and one at the supported raider. I don't know what you call it. And they essentially are, well they're very similar. One difference is I guess in market rate there's a closet where you can have a washer and dryer up and down and they have two bedrooms. One is quite small but it looks like it will be really very, very nice. And they have a stairway as you walk in front and center so they're hoping that that encourages people to walk upstairs rather than take the elevator. So they're doing, they've designed some things within the design to really promote wellness and walking and those kinds of things for the elderly. And we also met with Patrick the Duke and talked with him. Jennifer Murray couldn't make that meeting. We had sort of Friday meetings to kind of get updated on the library's plan for their campaign and we kept them up to date and that's been good. Yeah. And we have Sobu Life, the fall version of Sobu Life which has a four page spread on the community center and also Penny for Paths and some other great stories. It's going to press today so it is out the door and going to press. And then the website has been significantly updated and we have the RAC card so we're going to continue to work on refining the message and the public information and putting that out. And then the last thing I had is a notice I need to read. Tom DePietra asked me to read it if I could. This involves a public meeting in Williston related to the replacement of the culvert and bridge at Kimball Avenue and Marshall Avenue. And let me just read that because it has to be in a public meeting. A public meeting for the Kimball Avenue, Marshall Avenue culvert replacement study will be held as part of a regularly scheduled Williston Select Board meeting on October 16th, 2018, or 2018. It's not 1918, is it? My father was born. The project engineer will review proposed alternatives developed for this project and provide a summary of design considerations for each alternative. Interested parties are encouraged to attend the meeting. If there are any questions regarding the meeting or if you cannot attend but want to submit comments, please contact Tom DePietro South Burlington, Deputy Director of the Department of Public Works. And this also involves the potential for a bike and pedestrian facility to cross Muddy Brook there. So it's an important project. Should council members go? Absolutely. Anybody's invited? If it says 8 p.m. and it's a public meeting, should we depend upon that starting time? Since it's part of the regular, is it part of the regular? It must be part of the regular meeting. Yeah, you've got the press release there? Yeah. Yeah, you all have the press release as well. New to question, yeah. Yeah, and the other paper I was just hoping to confirm whether or not this was in the article about the O'Claire property agreement. And the second to last paragraph in that article stated that a portion of the open space fund is going to be used toward penny per pound. Is that not correct? That is not correct. That's a misunderstanding. Yeah, I read that and I think what Paul Connors was saying is giving some examples of other times when the community has passed a penny for whatever and then the council has been in charge of how to disperse those funds. And I think it just got mixed up. Mixed in. Of course, the penny for the open space fund is in there. Right. Yeah, but that was a good catch. That's all I got. All right. Number six, the consent agenda. Second. Includes disbursements and approval of the submittal of the state municipal planning grant application. Is there any discussion or questions? It was moved and seconded. All in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. The motion passes. Okay. Now the fun part. We've got 10 extra minutes. So should we do the ceremonial part first? Okay. Do you want Trevor to come up here? Sure. We have to invite him now. Please, Trevor. Former chief. Tell him what to do. That's right. Trevor time. Thank you, Mr. Manager. I just assumed that it usually took you 20 minutes to get here from Barry when you were 20 minutes. No, no, no, no, no. It takes you 40. Okay. So we have a South Burlington City Council resolution. Whereas the members of the South Burlington City Council are celebrating service to the citizens of South Burlington by Chief Trevor S. Whipple and the community has benefited from Chief Whipple's positive caring and professional leadership. And whereas Chief Whipple has exemplified the most important qualities of a police officer and leader, integrity, trust, professionalism, fairness and respect, and has served the people of South Burlington for 12 years and the citizens of Vermont for more than 30 years as a police officer. And whereas Chief Whipple has served as the lead juvenile instructor in Vermont and as a lead animal cruelty investigation instructor. And whereas Chief Whipple has been a leading force in the development and implementation of community outreach, a program created in partnership with the Howard Center and six participating communities to embed mental health counselors with first responders, which has made a tremendous improvement in our response to residents and visitors suffering from mental health challenges. And whereas Chief Whipple has been a leader in the effort to form the Chittenden County Public Safety Authority, which will enable the consolidation of multiple and separate emergency dispatch services in Chittenden County into one unified service thereby greatly improving the efficiency and effectiveness of responses to residents and visitors in crisis. And whereas Chief Whipple has been actively, has actively participated in the Constitutional Council of Accountability with law enforcement officials to address issues and measure progress toward a fair and impartial system of law enforcement. And whereas Chief Whipple was recognized by his peers as a respected leader in law enforcement by being elected president of the Vermont Police Chiefs Association and whereas Chief Whipple has been the acknowledged leader in focusing law enforcement and attention to the growing problem of human trafficking in Vermont and whereas recognition of Chief Whipple's leadership extended to the national level with his appointment to the Medal of Valor Review Board and his services chair for four years. Now, therefore, let it be resolved that on behalf of the residents of the City of South Burlington, the City Council does hereby recognize and extend its deepest appreciation for Chief Whipple's service and dedication to the residents of the City of South Burlington whose lives are the better for his years of service and that Chief Whipple exemplified the commitment to justice and fairness that leads to making a true difference in a community. And let it be further resolved that we the members of the City Council recognize and honor our Chief of Police, Trevor Whipple, for his devotion to duty, compassion for victims, mentorship to other officers, and commitment to community. And let it be further resolved that a signed copy of this resolution shall be presented to Chief Trevor Whipple and that this resolution will be inserted in its entirety in the minutes of this South Burlington City Council meeting. So please come forward. We all want to take your hand and a photo off. But thank you so much for your support. I thought you didn't wear shorts and you wore long. Thank you. Any words? Okay, a few words. Very good. I have a few minutes. Thank you. My formal prepared words were on Friday afternoon and I thank you to the members that were able to attend and that was a very meaningful, somewhat emotional ceremony for me. I think as I said on Friday to certainly the council, the manager, the deputy manager, and to the community, it's really been an honor to serve this community. And it's an honor because I was chosen, chosen by then Chuck Hafter and the City Council at the time, and continued to be supported through the end of my tenure last Friday. As I joked a little bit in my speech on Friday, it was always, not always easy, but it was always respectful dealing with whoever the council was at the time. We didn't get every budget we wanted. We didn't get every request we wanted, but that's what city government is about. It's about balancing and it's about finding that balance that works for the services and the taxpayer. So I think just, I'm rarely brief, but to be brief and not get emotional, it really has been an absolute honor to serve this community. It's been, I told Sean Burke, he won the lottery when he was chosen to work here. So I certainly wish him well. I thank Kevin for the last two months of a transition period to work with Sean. It's really given me a comfort and a little bit possessive of the department, of the community, frankly, and what we've built here. And I think Sean Burke will bring it forward and raise it even higher than it is now. So I just simply say thank you to the council and thank you to the community for allowing me to serve. It's been an absolute pleasure. Well, thank you very much. What we'll do is take a brief recess so people can, we can have a real reception and have some food and the audience has the chance to personally speak to the former chief of police. Is it FMOR apprentices? Pardon me? RET apprentices. What does he think behind his name now? RET period or FMOR? Esquire. Emeritus? I don't know. You guys become emeritus this time. What do you put behind your name now? Retired? I mean, the standard is chief of police with friends retired in there. Okay, so we have 20 minutes to partake. Again. That was fine. It's hardly so bad. It didn't work. Nobody came in and you were gone. What about this? Difference between those two. So I asked Bob to come in and talk a little bit about the VLTs process and the kind of mission and what next steps would be if the council considers VLT a partner for the next phase of this. Great. Thank you. I'm Bob Heizer from Vermont Land Trust, and what I was planning on going over was again, an overview of VLT and just to give you a sense of what our conservation easements look like on public land, and the process that we typically go through with communities, and then any questions or discussion you want to have afterwards. So Vermont Land Trust is a private independent nonprofit organization. So we have Vermont in our name, but we're not part of the state government, we're an independent nonprofit, and we were established in 1977, so we're just over 40 years old. We have over 5,000 members and we've conserved. Can you turn on the volume, please? I will try to speak louder. Thank you. You're welcome. Hold the mic closer, maybe? Okay. So we've conserved over 570,000 acres, and we hold 1,900 easements across the state. We have several different types of projects, they can be categorized in different ways, but I think of them many people know of our farmland conservation efforts for conserving privately owned farmland, and also large tracks of forest land that will continue to be managed in part of the Vermont landscape and part of the Vermont land-based economy. Then in the bottom left, we have family lands that might not be large commercial farms or large tracks of forest land, but that are really important parts of our rural landscape and rural economies. Then on the bottom right, we have a category of projects that are dealing with communities and conserving lands for various reasons that are important to communities for various reasons. To give you an idea, so I'm going to focus on that last category. To give you an idea of other projects that we have conservation easements on in other areas. So the Mills Riverside Park, some of you may be familiar with, a little over 200 acres in Jericho. The Mudpond Park in Williston, that's about the same size as the Wheeler Nature Park. We recently added some land to that. Casey's Hill, and the idea of just going through these examples is to give you a sense of the variety of projects we've done and also what we'd be drawing from if we were to develop an easement for Wheeler Nature Park. Casey's Hill is a 10-acre property, but the public values there far exceed the measurement of acres. It's a very popular sledding hill, and Preston Pond is a 400-acre property in Bolton, that is somewhat of a town forest, but also has a lot of ecologically significant areas, so they consider it a nature area as well. We have had a lot of town forests recently and in our history that we've conserved. On the top there, you have a new Westford Town Forest, and in the middle a new Richmond Town Forest. Then at the bottom, the Catamout Community Forest is yet to be formed, but is currently in the works in Williston on the side of the Catamout Family Outdoor Center. We also draw from experience of working on land that's now owned by the state, so the Bolton Valley Nordic and back country was an 1144-acre property that is now part of the Mount Mansfield State Forest and has a Vermont Land Trust conservation easement on it to protect the recreational areas and also the wildlife habitat there. Similarly, UVM just created its latest natural area, the Kars-Beaver Pond in Heinsberg, and again an easement to protect those natural features, but also the public's access to them and the educational resource there. I'll try to pick up the speed here, but some non-profit or easements we hold on non-profit owned land that have similar functions as some public land include the Interveil Center in Burlington, Shelburne Farms in Shelburne, this is the Breadloaf Campus in Ripton, the Middlebury College's Breadloaf Campus. All these are examples of easements that have a lot of similar features to the ones we hold on town-owned land. Just a quick run through the basics of what a conservation easement is, is a voluntary perpetual legal document. It's actually a deed by which a landowner, be it a city or private landowner, gives away some of its rights that it has as a landowner to that property. So if you think a bit as an owner having a bundle of sticks, each one representing a right, landowners are hanging on to the right to recreate on their land, to manage their land, but giving away rights to subdivision and development of that land. It's recorded in the land records and it runs with the land, so to speak, so that a new landowner would need to live by that easement as well. The easement focuses on protecting the land's key resources, so that'll be different for a farm conservation easement or a conservation easement on public lands. So it would focus on, for productive land, say the agricultural soils or the, on a natural habitat area on the biologically important areas or water resources or the outdoor recreation opportunities. More often than not, on almost any time of easement, there are multiple purposes for conserving a property. And the purposes are really important because the whole easement is measured against the purposes of why the land was conserved. And so the easement protects those purposes by limiting things like subdivision, commercial or residential development, mining, excavation, trash dumping, motorized recreation, permanent rights of way, conveyance, or forest management without an approved forest management plan. And it permits the things on the right, farm and forest management, recreation and trails, educational uses, and structures of certain types with permission, and we can get into that more, if you'd like. But that, again, ties back to the purposes of the easement. Conservation easements on public land vary in that they include those components on the last slide, but also tend to have things that require allowing the public to access the property at a minimum for pedestrian uses. And there's typically a management plan provision which would require that the city or town develop a management plan with public input, and the things that might fall to the management plan level are things like forest management, if the city or town wants to do it, consistent with the easement, but if they wanna do that, if so, where and when trail development, the mix of recreational uses that it will allow on the property and how those will coexist, any structures to serve those uses, or the idea of how the city might manage dogs, those would all typically fall into a management plan, which would need to be approved by VLT to make sure they are consistent with the conservation easement. And then finally, another element of town or city-owned properties under conservation easements, there's usually some limit on the transfer of the property by the town or city so that it can't be sold to a private individual or entity that's just not set up well to manage that kind of public access or public land. The conservation process is typically we have initial conversations to develop the broad project configuration, what land is in and out of an easement. And for example, we usually try to exclude, and not always, but infrastructure such like as houses or things that aren't integral to the park or the farm or whatever it may be. So in this case, the house would be something we'd want to talk about and whether that would be included or excluded from the easement. And again, our typical preference is to exclude those from the area that's conserved. We typically do an ecological assessment. You all are ahead of the game with your management plan, but we still like our ecologists to go out there and look at the property. And then we would just agree on the major easement components and sign a memorandum of understanding that went through the partner roles, the key features of an easement, the timing, project costs. There are project costs that we would have to take on and somehow cover, and I can go into that further if you'd like. And then memorializing the process that we were gonna work together on to get that conservation easement completed. And then we would, once we signed that memorandum of understanding, we would start drafting a conservation easement, doing a title search, and we'd have our staff go out and develop a baseline documentation report, which is establishing the existing status of the land as it's being conserved, so we'd have something to measure against over time. And then the management plan and closing, that the order of those two can change or be flexible in that a lot of people or a lot of towns or cities might have a plan in place or only have an interim plan in place until they can develop a more complete plan with more public input after a year or so. And then after the land's conserved, the city and VLT would work together to make sure the ongoing management is consistent with the conservation easement. Answer any questions you might have. Okay, are there questions? Tim? Yeah, have you had any instances where, I'm just curious, were an easement was violated somehow and you had to take action? Sure. And in those cases are, approaches to try to find an amicable way to settle whatever violation has occurred. But there are times when either it's just, there's no kind of putting the trees back or, and so in those cases, there could be a monetary component of a solution or a restoration component of a solution. Or it could be, we've actually now had to have a structure taken down. So things like that have taken place. Did that include some legal recourse on your part as well, or? We do have an attorney on staff and we can go to court if there's an easement being violated and the landowner just will not cease to that activity. But so far we've had to actually go to court very few times. I noticed all those pictures were pretty much fall scenes, so. Yes, yeah. They were quite beautiful, so. You're right in tune with tonight. Long sleep shirts and pants. Yes. Do you have a question? I do. We've looked at some of these things that some of the slides we got for the wheeler plan and there was some information about dogs. And so I'd like you to explain. About what? Dogs. Oh. And the use of the parks for dogs. I'd like to hear you explain the reasons for the various stipulations that you have in the agreement. I'm glad you do. Yeah, so in our conservation easement we're mostly focused on making sure this land and land-based resources available to the public and available for those various uses. Various uses meaning outdoor recreation, potential agricultural community gardens that exist out there, or a natural area and those natural functions. But when it comes to how humans will interact on the property, the easement is largely silent and asking the town or city to sort out what activities consistent with the easement will be allowed and not allowed. So something like whether dogs are allowed or allowed on a leash is really up to the city or town to determine in their management planning process and is really not something that's hardwired into a perpetual conservation easement. How about dog parks? You know, we've never come across that but as long, you know, what I would speculate is that as long as it were set up in a way that any ecological impacts were minimized, I could see that being acceptable use under the conservation easement so long as the community decided under management planning process that it was acceptable or that's what they wanted to see. Regardless, regard to water or the different plant species. I was thinking mostly dog waste. Okay, thank you. Tom? So you looked over the Wheeler Task Force report. Any concerns, anything that jumps out at you, things that you'd speak to and their main conclusions that all of a sudden pose a challenge for you and then the second part is you said you might speak to some of the project costs. I'd love to hear what that ballpark is or what you'd offer in that realm. Sure. And I have reviewed that. You know, I would love to review it more carefully with the city, but nothing jumped out to me as really problematic that I saw in first review. And some of the things that were discussed as far as being in the conservation easement and the management plan, I think those would be critical to sort out and along the lines of management of dogs would be something that it would be very hard for us to enforce in perpetuity how dogs are managed. And so it would be clearly in our eyes something that would fall to a management plan. And the cost, so our cost we think about is in two categories. And we, you know, I have a lot more fun talking about the great resources that are protected by our easements, but it is true that we don't wanna take on an obligation to monitor and enforce an easement and uphold that easement in perpetuity unless we have the capacity to develop it in a way that will best set it off for success and that we have the resources in the future to monitor and enforce it in perpetuity. So the perpetuity question is for every project we set aside with the Vermont Community Foundation an endowment so that we know and the community knows that there will always be the financial resources for us to monitor and enforce that easement. And so for a property that's heavily used by the public that's in the ballpark of $25,000 that we set aside with the Vermont Community Foundation. And we also wanna know that in researching the property and working with the community and having our attorneys draft the easement and creating a baseline documentation report that we can do that effectively upfront so that it will have these perpetual impacts. And so that ballpark for that work is around $15,000. So- Annually? No, those are both upfront one-time costs that together would be in the $40,000 ballpark. And we'd wanna work out a budget and fine tune that but that's kind of a ballpark statement. And so just to follow up on the Wheeler Conservation Easement Task Force recommendation they wanna suggest that we divide the property into two one section around the Wheeler House and then the rest. So would you be the steward of both of those sections and you just have different rules for the Wheeler House and that isn't a problem? Do you have, I'm asking a lot of questions. No, I got, yeah, that's fine. Do you have that experience on other properties about? So I did see that recommendation and also in here I was nervous reading things that I had said. But I did say that, you know, in the conservation easement we typically wouldn't divide something like that. And again, it might be a management planning function basically because we're trying to within the bounds of protecting those resources. We wanna be as flexible as possible because over the 40 years of our existence I think we started out with a good level of humility and I think it's only grown as to our ability to predict the future. So we wanna make sure we're flexible enough that if there's a really good reason to have a small school or small outdoor classroom shed or structure outside of a complex that we in 2019 thought was a good place to have structures, we wanna be flexible enough to be able to react to that and if it's not a big resource impact. So I guess what I'm saying is that delineation of a farmstead complex and the more natural area we would see as in the management plan and if the community decided in 50 years that they wanted to do something outside that complex and wanted to change their management plan as long as it was consistent with the conservation easement and protecting those resources, we could approve that. So that delineation we would see as being a management plan delineation. Is that clear? Yes, that's helpful. And I don't think the concept I'm going to raise was actually in their plan, but I know in the past we've talked about the opportunity with the Wheeler house and the adjacent lands to use that as a venue for events, private and public perhaps. That would in fact raise revenue, like a beautiful spot for a wedding or something like that. And I'm curious and I can't remember what the task force, I don't even know if they dealt with that or included that, does anyone remember? I mean, I just read it again, but I can't remember. But is that something that would be, could be part of an easement or is that really counter to what you see as the best use of these natural resources? Yeah, so holding aside for a minute the house and the area right by the house, I'll distinguish between those, but we do have conservation easements that enable events on conserved land and that contemplate the ability to, and even for recreational activities throughout the property, the charging of reasonable fees, if it helps to maintain the park, that can all be consistent with the conservation easement. If it were something that we're really clearly gonna be an area where you want it to be for commercial use, it's probably best to just exclude that area from the conservation easement. But if it's an area that will be operating as a public park and at times will generate money to help the town continue to operate that park, that can be consistent with the easement. The house, again, it would be our preference to exclude that from the conservation easement anyway. Oh, okay, so really, excuse me. Any other questions? Yeah, so if you excluded the house, would that be worded in the easement in such a way that the footprint of the house is then well-defined so that if something happened to the house and needed to be, let's say rebuilt if there was like a fire or something like that, right? Would it be able to expand the footprint of the house or would it be locked into the original footprint or something like that? I mean, we would tend to exclude an area around the house and if it were to be excluded, we'd work with the city to determine what's a logical area around the house to exclude with it and then there would be a meets and bounds description of what's included in the easement and what is not and what is not, we would have no say over, yeah. Okay, are there any other questions? Well, I guess just going off of that and just hypothetically, are these agreements ever revisited with your conservation partners so that you would change the term? I'll pick a couple of years ago because throughout the nation, at times and typically they're amended to incorporate additional, either additional values so more restrictions or more land or something like that but they can be amended. There was a lot of controversy about that and there's a lot of scrutiny by the IRS on that type of activity so they don't happen that much anymore. Amending to include more land or something like that that's just clearly additive value, we will still do at times but other amendments, there's become more scrutiny that even if it's an additive, a case of adding restrictions, we gotta be very careful. Any, Tom? I would just say that when I first heard about conservation easements about three years ago, I had no idea what they are. I am not an expert now but I've asked you some questions at the break and also others as well so I feel very comfortable working with you as a partner so I think that's where the discussion's going next and I think you have the most experience and firsthand knowledge of the Vermont character. Great, well we don't have any action item but this was meant to help inform us so that we can move forward with the Wheeler Land and I guess you're gonna be part of the eclair, yes? Or no? Well I don't know if we wanna talk about that tonight. Yeah, they're involved. Well that could be a future conversation but. A major part. Well and I should have said at the beginning, you know I was able to walk the Wheeler Nature Park with folks from the task force a couple years ago and then sit in on one of their meetings so it's exciting that you're moving ahead on its conservation, it's great. Your presentation was excellent. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Great, okay we'll move on to item nine. This is a joint council meeting with the planning commission so we're gonna take a moment and add some tables and chairs. It looks like we need a lot more chairs. More people standing then serve on the planning commission. Is that broken, that chair over there? Where do you wanna meet me? Kevin, I'll mind you. And we're probably gonna wanna. I won't take it. Put this for his office. I'd be a sick person. Do you want to move your table a little bit more? I think you're gonna be turned around to. This is the chair. We'll move up a little bit then for my chair. Contract. Is this better or worse? Better? Well, I would think you'd be better, you'd be able to see the screen more easily. That makes sense. Yeah, good. I'm looking for time to take out the camera. Sorry. I'll find them at home. Or in the middle of the meeting. Okay, fine. Yeah? That's there. That's right. That's the question. Talking to Ted. Is Sue sitting over here? Yeah. I think so. I think so too. Sure. What are we doing? I'm gonna see in one of these two some of my name. Okay. There you go. There you go. It's there now. You need some more mics? Kevin and I can share one. My wife gave it to me. I got these mics. Want me to get them up? I'll just sneak it. We harvest them. Yeah, you can give Megan it. We're cozy. We're closer. We've got the old one. This is cozy. We need a little bonfire. Maybe some tea-like camera. We need a good piece. Hardly, by getting stung. My wife had a good bee shoot. Okay, are you all set up? It's not passing me. I'm getting stung and it's like... Where the camera is... I gotta get in one of those bee shoots. So... Buggers. Paul, are you ready to roll no? But it's kind of fun. Not quite. It's such good suggestions. For our things to talk about. Maybe at the end, next to Michael, and move the mic. Did that work? Doesn't matter. You just need a microphone. Well, Monica has her... I mean, she could move the mic over when someone wanted to speak, yes? We gotta share a minute. They're trying to figure out when the public wants to come up and speak or ask a question. I would put a chair right at the... next to Michael. Oh, you don't have any chairs? They could kneel. Michael, you don't have to put it there now. It's just when a public member wishes to speak. Okay. So are we... No. Is Paul ready now? Paul. Oh, there he is. I'm sorry. Okay. He's in the middle. He's in the middle. Monkey in the middle. All right. So why don't we get ready or start with item nine, which is a joint council meeting with the Planning Commission. Welcome and thank you for agreeing to meet with us. And the design is really to receive a review or an overview of the current status of development projects and growth projections for the future. This really came about when quite a number of public members, some of whom had been before the Planning Commission, also came before City Council and really wanted some answers to questions about growth and development in this city. And we didn't have the answers. And so we agreed at that time to have a public hearing with a presentation by our director of planning to address some of those questions. Invited the Planning Commission to join us because it certainly is part of their purview. And we should all be aiming in the same direction or helping each other move forward. And so that's the reasoning for this joint meeting and our hope is to really start that conversation or continue it, actually, about where we are with growth and development, with some facts. There probably will be questions that arise tonight that we might need more information in order to answer. And that's perfectly okay. That's what tonight is about, to have that kind of conversation and sharing of information and broad thinking by both the City Council and the Planning Commission. So without further ado, our director of planning, Paul Conner. Great, thank you very much. Again, Paul Conner, director of planning and zoning with the City of South Burlington. Thank you for having me here and of course all the commissioners being here as well, thank you. As a presentation, what we're going to do is to discuss, I'm going to do the bulk of the presentation on the parts of what's actually happening here. What are the recent trends? What can we see in the near future? Jessica Luiso's chair of the Planning Commission is going to also speak a little bit about in the big picture what does our comprehensive plan say? What are some of the current work that they're working on that really informs this whole subject area and we'll go from there. So thank you for the people in South Village who've got a beautiful little neighborhood to be taking pictures of there. So do you want to start a little bit with the comprehensive plan? Sure, I also wanted to say there's been, we've gotten quite a few questions about what the charge of the Planning Commission was so I just wanted to in one sentence say that we're appointed by the City Council and with that we're charged with overseeing revisions to the Land Development Regulations, our zoning, as well as undertaking planning studies and updating the comprehensive plan. So that's what I thought would be good to talk about first because the comprehensive plan really sets like a really big vision for our city, the near future, looking at the next 20 to 30 years and updating that on a cycle. So the last time we updated this it was a complete rewrite which hadn't been done in a very long time adopted in 2016 but it spanned an almost five year period to really go through and look at every single section get extensive public input and during that time we actually had a period of interim zoning where there were many different committees formed in addition to our standing committees. So we had input on various subject matters as affordable housing, city center related form based code, open space, agriculture as well as all of our standing committees and all of them gave feedback on the text as well as goals, objectives and strategies. So kind of through that whole process we came up with this document. One of the big things about it or I guess a summary is the vision and goals. So that's actually up on the screen here. We've kind of broken that down into a couple categories with kind of some overarching themes. You can see affordable and community strong with various goals, walkable, green and clean and opportunity oriented. And then within each of those goals there's then objectives that go along with them which state very specific kind of numeric goals or objectives of the city. And then 139 strategies that are ideas for how to implement them. A lot of those are related to our land development and informed land development regulations. Many aren't. Many are things like you know support funding for recreation paths and you know would maybe support an initiative like the pennies for paths initiative. So some of them are not really necessarily related to land development. Within there one of the things that we actually wind up talking about a lot is that there's a lot of competing goods where you know maybe and this is something we struggle with everywhere. There's two things that are really quite good and you know how to look at those within a certain context within certain parts of the city. Within the comprehensive plan there's subject matter areas so a chapter on energy a chapter on agriculture a chapter on road infrastructure different kinds of categories where we've done an analysis and came up with the objectives and strategies as well as sections where we broke down different areas of the city. We have four different quadrants in our central districts so we have five different kind of geographical areas where we looked in depth. So I think that that's kind of a big kind of overarching look at the comprehensive plan and then we use this comprehensive plan which is kind of a guiding document to then inform our land development regulations and we're working kind of all the time within our work plan to kind of implement the things that we have written in this visionary document and get them into our work and our planning documents and land development regulations. So I think that's the overview on that and Paul has some updates. So first couple of things that we thought we'd present as it relates to the plan is starting last year in 2017 after the 2016 plan was adopted the planning commission started having started doing some analysis on an annual basis of how what's happening what are the development trends taking place. So don't adjust your eyes that map in the middle is intentionally fuzzy it's not a blurry screen that might be a bit of a blurry screen too but the map in the middle is the city's is the conference of plans future land use map it's intentionally blurry because it is not a regulatory document of itself the zoning regulations lay out the actual zoning districts the comprehensive plan this map is intended to show generally speaking what are what are the targets. So in this the green represents very low intensity to principally open space types of uses in the future the yellow represents low intensity primarily residential so that it has a lot of our historic neighborhoods as well as some of our current ones the orange represents medium intensity with some mixed use in it so it would send to see more condominiums in there some more neighborhood commercial type activities the red represents our medium to high intensity so really the areas of the city where the plan promotes the most intense mixed use activity and then the blue is really our employment areas the airport meadowland business park etc so the way that we've one of the metrics that we've used to evaluate this on the left and on the right are two charts showing what percentage of all housing is being built in each of these areas so you can see that historically so from beginning of first house that it still exists in South Burlington to present about 61% of all the housing units are in our low density areas and another 23% are in our medium density so that's almost three quarters whereas with the focus in the comprehensive plan in seeing development and redevelopment taking place in our city center area and along Shelburne Road and parts of Williston Road we've seen that from 2010 to 2017 27 and 39 so about almost 70% of development has been taking place in either the residential in either the high intensity or the medium intensity with only 32% happening in low intensity areas so that's one metric second metric this is also in the comprehensive plan the ease of being able to plan different parts of the city the plan has four quadrants and a district because there's no word for five that goes with quadrants easily unless you're the city of Portland Oregon where they do have five quadrants in their city but that's Portland the so this again shows the percentage of housing on the left all time that's in various areas in the last 10 years of where we've seen housing taking place by area here you'll see that there has been a little bit higher proportion than in the last graph of areas in development in the southeast quadrant as compared with elsewhere some of that is not a surprising story because some of these other neighborhoods are much more built at historically Jessica is going to speak a little bit about the planning commission work program then we'll get into some more numbers but I want to give that broad overview first well we are not going to speak on every single item on the work program because it's nine pages long and has 16-7 items on it so we've over the last couple years we've been really trying to make a good process for prioritizing our work I think we've gotten better at it so you can see some of the information that goes into that we have identified work for the current year which is the green a few projects kind of in the wings that we've also thought are really important maybe to find partners and other committees or find funding to kind of get them in the lineup or if we have some gaps in our schedule to kind of fill in with those items that said there are many projects kind of waiting in the wings for future years we as part of our work plan tied all of these to the comprehensive plan goals you can see the last column actually identifies what plan goal we're addressing with that particular project within here we've also ID items that other committees could potentially take on as part of their work plans you know or ones that we want to try to seek funding for in the near term one example that kind of fits both of those was a discussion we had recently about the gap in future needs assessment of parks we had a discussion about whether or not it fit one of the funding sources that was available identified that it's really something that maybe should be led by one of the parks committees so I mean that's kind of an example of something that shows up on here but maybe we wouldn't wind up being the lead to facilitate funding something like that so there's also a lot of ongoing items on here including meeting with the DRB committees even the council capital improvement plan input items that are transportation related such as the wilson road network study and incorporating some of those results into our official map and the form-based code looking at the transportation overlay district to kind of focus those areas to be more multimodal when it was originally adopted it didn't take into consideration a lot of the walkability we're really shooting for now traffic impact fee update as well as looking at the Tilly Kimball community drive study we have in the as a priority project looking at the wildlife and natural resource standards to try to establish a clear review criteria for conservation on parcels during the development process looking at scenic views to establish more protections in addition to the few scenic views we have identified and in the plan already looking to give input on the airport noise compatibility plan which will be happening later this fall we also hope to work on the official map update that actually hasn't been done since 2004 there's been quite a lot of work to identify a lot of bike and path facilities that should be on there but aren't actually a part of the official map yet and that's a document that also looks at infrastructure like water towers or road connections and things like that so that's something that's kind of in the in the work plan some of the things that we've been working really hard on is to really make sure that the city center form-based code really works so now that some buildings are being implemented getting feedback from that process seeing if there's areas that need to be tweaked it really makes the center of the vision that people have envisioned over that very long planning process one thing that we've been working with the affordable housing committee on is different initiatives to include possible expansion of inclusionary zoning to the rest of the city which is now part of the form-based code area only to see if that's appropriate in other areas we developed a new policy on that we'd like the public to follow when bringing new items to us we have found that it's kind of hard to make a appropriate work program when we almost you know every meeting or every other meeting have somebody coming in with a new project and then you know to have to go back and look at the work program so we've identified that in October and in April we're going to try to batch look at new potential LDR change requests and you know so we can really evaluate them more efficiently in addition like in context of what we're working on and then at that time we would re-evaluate the work program with kind of all of those new items kind of all together to really be more fair to the public and we have been talking about expanding the open space requirements criteria citywide in city center there is very specific criteria for open space to be high value uses of land that would otherwise be developable this is a change from kind of the lot coverage idea where basically you would have a certain part of your parcel or percentage of your area that could be covered with impervious either pavement or building and then what's left is then your open space so the idea with this is to take a certain percentage of land that would otherwise be developable and create high value open space that's really usable and we have a whole criteria system for what that looks like and what those requirements are and things like size requirements and so we've been working to expand that citywide and kind of have something that's appropriate in city and as part of that that's actually part of development and master planning project which is one of our biggest projects that we've been working on that incorporates lots of different things that we've gotten feedback on for a long time including a lot of requirements recommendations that came from public hearings back when we were doing the comprehensive plan and then work with the form based code which only got implemented in city center so what you're looking at here is kind of a reimagined idea of developments that's context sensitive realizing that numbers don't just create a community so a number of like a density number doesn't necessarily create the community or the efficient use of land that we'd really like to see so we've completed phase one of this and phase two is about 80% done we've worked on this over dozens of meetings and had outreach to multiple committees and developers it would create new standards for large developments including thresholds for when they would be required to be used and procedures the idea is that there's multiple types you can see here there's multiple rows here showing different types of communities or neighborhoods that could be created depending on where you are in the city and the context of what's around for each of these there is kind of the box diagram and imagined possible layouts what something might look at like from above with kind of a distribution of open space developed areas municipal or civic uses like maybe a post office or a shared community pavilion or something like that and then the pie chart shows kind of the breakdown of each of those different categories of kind of land use or requirement within each of those areas and as part of this you're really looking at the buildable area instead of all the open space just being the wetlands or something that wasn't developable and then for each of those things there's really specific criteria on what it would look like let's see so there'd be some master planning for future phases so you'd see the whole thing all at once criteria for open space types, building types, street types really specific application expectations which makes it kind of more streamlined for the applicant looking at context and the geographic applicability of things as well as an affordability context and we're actually looking at minimum densities as well as maximum to really try to look at really the most efficient use of land which isn't part of our current regulations so I think that's kind of a general overview of this quite big project that I think we're pretty excited about really trying to take a lot of those comprehensive plan goals to look at some of the bigger developments that might occur in the future I don't know if I got it all that's great thank you so LDRs would eventually come out of this yeah so like I said we're about 80% complete and I mean that is you know to getting it into the LDRs as the new subdivision regulations so replacing our current PUD developments that I think people aren't necessarily happy with we're not getting the creativity we're giving flexibility but without the benefit to the city I think because maybe the land development regulations they would yes this would be part of the land development regulations alright so the grant that we just approved tonight so the timeline the grant that you approved tonight is for the last piece of the puzzle which is to take all of the work that the planning commission will have done and put it into a very user friendly guidebook for how to do it so the actual work of developing the standards is underway this would be the let's make something that isn't looks a little less like this in the end so that there's a really clear picture for all users about it's not just text describing what a good neighborhood looks like actual images when will the PUDs come before us I guess that is the question the same question over the course of the winter is the goal the guidebook may be after that but that's the goal we just had an update at our last meeting and that's what we were talking about like winter December winter or more like April the idea of the November winter but I think it's probably more like March April winter you know it takes a lot of time for us to get the public input we need and really hash out the details and with something this big we want to make sure it's right so just a little bit more on numbers and then we'll look at some maps in a minute here so I went back we looked back at almost 40 years of development history the blue bars here represent number of dwelling units for which we've issued zoning permits on a given year so it could be a single family home it could be a unit in a 10 unit building or a 20 unit building we see not surprisingly that there are some cyclical trends to it and this does this is a net number so you'll see for example 2012 there's very little there part of that is because 2012 was the year that a lot of homes were removed from the airport and so it's only fair to note where housing numbers went down our trend line is pretty steady overall at a little bit under 150 dwelling units a year on average most of the last decade has been right around there you will see that there's been a little bit of an increase since 2008 and that's not really surprising given what happened in the early 2000s this is not that far off from what's happened nationally which was there was a lot of development that took place and then 2008 came around and there wasn't a lot that's happened and so over the last decade it's come back to our sort of more traditional average on the right there is a short small graph that's part of a memo that staff presented to the planning commission a few weeks ago about what was the comprehensive plan in 2016 anticipating and what's been happening there's some big asterisks to this you'll see here that it shows an annual average population growth from 1990 to 2016 of about 1.5% annually and from 2010 to 2016 of about 0.75% the data for population comes from the U.S. Census Bureau and it's an estimate it's not a count so the way that the Census Bureau does it is that they use the 2010 number and then they gather input on a monthly basis from us from every community in the country on the number of new housing units and then they make an estimate about the number of people per household so typically at the end of the decade when there's the next count those numbers get adjusted fairly significantly because there's not there's no actual count happening between 2010 and 2020 however using the information that they gave the most recent one is 2016 shows a a population growth of about 0.75% the comprehensive plan has two numbers in it and I wanted to be clear about this because I think there's been some community discussion on this the comprehensive plan included in it the results of a demographic analysis done by McKibben Demographics for the school district it was done in 2014 2015 that was a forecast so the forecast is what is the anticipated population change using birth and death rates in migration out migration the demographic forecast done in 2014 2015 stated that they felt that there would be a small population growth from about a little bit under 18,000 population to about 18, 3 or 18, 4 by 2020 and then it would level off back down a little bit to about a little over 18,000 again by 2025 that's the forecast number we won't know whether they were correct or incorrect until we get some actual census counts the second number that's in the comprehensive plan is as Jessica mentioned there's about 60 objectives in the plan and one of them is to anticipate and prepare for a growth rate of and here it said 1 to 1.5% population growth and so here we're seeing that's sort of right in the range of where we've been historically as part of where that number came from the second number in the far right column is the average number or average percentage of increase in dwelling units year over year and as the blue chart suggests it's been a little bit under 2% for the last 25 years or so this one is numbers that we have these are numbers that we generate based on zoning permits so we're pretty comfortable with those numbers so for the last 6 years, 7 years it's been 1.5% growth on average in the number of dwelling units and the comprehensive plan says 1.5% to 2% this chart here which has lots more colors in it is saying basically the same thing as the last one but it's a breakdown of the types of dwelling units that we're seeing so blue represents single family red represents duplexes green represents multifamily which could be anything from a triplex up to a 40 unit building or a 50 unit building and the orange one it shows up is for congregate housing, senior housing that is very specifically service oriented ones again you'll see a couple numbers where if you look really closely at the bottom you're seeing a negative number on the single families and that's because of largely because of near the airport that there's been a couple years where we've actually had a net negative in homes in single family homes on the far right is another metric that the planning commission and developed and is in the comprehensive plan it is targets for number of affordable housing units being built annually so the plan has in it the goal of or an objective excuse me of about 24 dwelling units per year being built between 2015 and 2025 at 100 to 120 percent of median income and about 82 dwelling units being built per year at the 80 percent of median income or less those are strong objectives since that's the total historically of housing and this has been about 150 there's been some years of significant affordable housing being built the dark blue line there represents the numbers at 80 percent of median income it's very high in 2018 thanks to our friends at Champlain Housing Trust acquired the property immediately to the north of here so it's pre-existing housing with five dwelling units that are now permanently affordable thanks to Champlain Housing Trust this isn't new housing but it is permanently affordable we're also seeing new affordable housing being built two places on Market Street as you know as well as other places through either density bonuses or inclusionary zoning you asked us to speak or I was asked to speak a little bit to sewer capacity this represents the red line represents our total capacity this is for both this is what south Burlington owns for both Bartlett Bay and airport parkway so airport parkway is actually a larger facility but folks in Colchester have a certain amount of that allocation this removes that entirely the blue lines here represent south Burlington flows on an average daily basis or an average annual basis excuse me into the airport parkway facility and the orange represents into the Bartlett Bay facility so we can speak more in detail but I did want to show you sort of a quick snapshot of where we are now on to some maps so the next few maps here are showing what's been happening and what is what's happening in the near future in south Burlington this is the area of the city that is largely are either TIF district or the city center form based codes area as of today there are five significant projects going on and just for those who can't see that all the text there top left hand corner is an approved project for 88 multifamily dwelling units off quarry hill road the one in the middle on the left there is the soon to be completed 39 senior housing over on market street that is being run by cathedral square all of those will be affordable the next one down is the pit that you may see right next to the seers auto on dorset street that is replacing a former dermatologist building with six dwelling units on the second floor and a new dermatology office down below and then basement for storage and lab work and that kind of stuff on the right side of the page you see a rectangle there that is the next building being built by snider braveman that's going to be a 60 unit dwelling being owned and operated eventually by shampoong housing trust 45 of those dwelling units are going to be affordable and they include everything from one bedrooms to four bedroom units in there and then lastly in the bottom right immediately next to where you've seen the four town home buildings go up about three years ago are going to be four more that have just received approval for 12 total town homes included in that will be two affordable inclusionary units I know that there's a lot of interest in knowing more about what's going on in the southern half of the city so the next set of maps here are all showing on the left side shelburn road and on the north is i-89 so that's the boundaries of this line that you see on the bottom right hand corner there that's the southeast quadrant zoning district and over on the left side you see a red line that sort of snakes around and that's our mixed used shelburn road commercial district just to give you a little bit of context here we've got several different zoning districts going on here the top right hand corner is the industrial open space district and we've got residential districts in between shelburn road and spear street the blue in this represents neighborhoods that are already built this is built up areas that already exist in the in this part of the community if you'd like I can go into all the assumptions that go into that but basically it's a house on usually a quarter acre or so but in some cases up to a couple of acres where reasonably the likelihood is that that would be viewed as a built out neighborhood does not mean that there couldn't be some additional house lots that take place in here somebody might have a large lot there might be a couple of parcels in there where a handful of additional homes could be put that kind of thing but this is sort of largely I think we would view this as being built out areas the two brown spots in there are the two solar rays that exist in southeast quadrant just for a frame of reference there this next slide here the dark blue represents areas where in this part of the city where development has either been approved or an applicant for development has reached the stage in their development review process where they have vested in their approvals meaning that they have the right to be reviewed under the current regulations or the regulations that they were that they submitted under at the time so that's an important point and why we wanted to highlight these so these projects here I'm going to go from the top left again in the top left hand corner is Spear Meadows neighborhood that includes 48 dwelling units in one to three unit buildings it also includes 14 acres of off-site conservation through the TDR program the planned unit development final plat was approved in 2017 I would note that there's also an appeal going on of that but that's in the courts the second one on the left side is pointing to essentially the middle of the map and that is a recent project with the name of Dorset Meadows it is at this time under development review the plan submitted is for 164 dwelling units in one to four unit buildings and 65 acres of off-site conservation through the TDR program a complete preliminary plat has been submitted and so they're under the rules in place today the next one on the left is a very small not entirely built out area the Irish farm neighborhood off Allen Road there's five to seven house lots have not been built there but largely the neighborhood is built out last one on the bottom left is South Village South Village has three phases to it it was originally approved for 339 total dwelling units and a large amount of open space around it phase one and phase two are about two-thirds and about half built and phase three recently received its final plat approval and it's just beginning construction now so in total a little over half of all of South Village has been built out jumping up to the top right the Rye neighborhood has been under construction for the last few years this is off Hinesburg Road just before you get to Oak Creek Village it has 52 dwelling units in one to four unit buildings four non-residential lots about 26 acres of off-site conservation through the TDR program and it received its final plat approval in 2013 so there as the market is demanding they're building the dwelling units and the market rate and the non-residential the next one points down to a few different sites around the golf course the golf course has was approved for development in the late 90s and then various parts of it went under appeal from development review starting in 2002 and 2003 the settlement was reached and has been revised a couple of times to where now they have at a master plan level 354 total dwelling units approved about 90 to 95 of those are remaining most of them in four areas excuse me five areas that are pointed out in blue there so one of them just received its final plat approval that's the one that sort of looks like a little foam finger in the right hand side there and that's for 10 dwelling units on the right hand side next to the bottom is a sort of a reverse letter C that's the cider mill 2 neighborhood cider mill 2 neighborhood consists of right now 142 proposed dwelling units and 22 acres of off-site conservation through the TDR program a smaller version of this project meaning one where they had left a portion of their developable property for future development was received a final approval back in 2008 in 2015 they came forward to the city and began looking at the remaining portion of it which was the highest density zoning district adding that in adding that acreage in and so they received a preliminary plat approval for this neighborhood in the spring and have just begun their review with the development review board of the final plat for this revised version of it just earlier this month or last month excuse me and then lastly a small neighborhood being built off Dorset Street on Sadie Lane has 11 dwelling units it was approved in 2012 and I think five or six of them have been built so that's what's currently happening in this part of the city this next map sort of combines the information that we just saw so the light blue is existing neighborhoods the dark blue is the ones that are either approved or vested under the current regulations the green here represents areas that are open space natural resource protection which is a zoning designation or a rural and these are areas that we're pretty confident these this is this is not just a statement of what it's not a statement of what is open space it's a statement of what will be forever open space in the future at least under the regulations as they currently stand there are some assumptions that go into this it includes our natural resource protection zoning district which I'll speak about in a second it includes park land that the city owns or that the district owns or that the Board of Trustees for has permanently has indicated it's for permanent conservation it also includes some properties where there are some cross covenants between different private property owners to where a majority of several different properties would have to vote in order to allow for additional development so we put that as being essentially open space and it includes private condominium space as well condominium so there might be a large condominium like south village where as part of their approval they created dozens of acres of open space and so then it's it's both a development approval and it's in their deeds that that is common land owned by the by the association the cross lines there that's the Eau Claire property so or at least the development portion of the Eau Claire property for those in the audience who were not aware the council voted a couple weeks ago to contribute towards the long-term conservation of the property as part of an option agreement with the goal of conserving the whole property given that a the closing does not take in place officially and be that even after closing there are the city's contribution to the property shown there is about 30 or 40 percent of the development potential the various different entities will be involved in seeking the funds to conserve the rest of it over time so it's sort of blinking towards conservation but I didn't want it to be presented as being a a done deal the yellow in here represents basically properties that don't fall as being long-term open space or existing development or approved development so it's essentially the properties that could be developed in the coming months, years, decades I did want to make a couple of quick notes on it especially on the top left-hand corner you'll see three large, three or four large light yellow chunks those are for the most part not all of them but most of them are owned by the University of Vermont and they are zoned what we call institutional agricultural the university, that zoning district does allow for campus development to take place which could be it could be the Hortfarm it could be presently it could be classrooms it could be dormitories it could be all the things related to a university it does not currently allow for non-university related activities so as you may know there's one of the parcels up in the top-top piece that the University offered to or put out a bid for developers to potentially seek a zoning change non-university related housing so I wanted to make that caveat and the top right-hand corner that's industrial open space property so it's a little bit of a different situation from the southeast quadrant Have we either the natural resources committee, the planning commission or any other previous council prioritized with the commitment of the open space funds any of these properties as to what more priority has that been done the recreation and parks committee and the natural resources committee have each developed a scorecard for evaluation of properties as either an opportunity comes up or a threat comes up or the council or staff might be interested in looking at a property and so there's a scoring matrix but I'm not aware of a priority having been made yet of here's one through ten about what we would what we would go for I can say that the that's right I'm sorry I should correct that the city's official map which Jessica spoke about does is a regulatory tool which does highlight a handful of properties for which the city has listed the very highest priority meaning that it's essentially becomes a right of first refusal on those pieces and probably the most well known of those in the last few years it was a portion of the underwood property was under that and when the opportunity came to acquire the whole property that was one of the factors that the council at the time had looked at and said boy you know this has already been identified as one of the top top properties Do you know if any of these parcels are on that official map yes yes it's a little bit more complex but yes the brown one in the middle which is a solar farm is I believe on the it's either on the existing official map or it's on a draft one and so that gets a little bit tricky because the official map says that when development takes place the city council has a right of first refusal essentially to acquire it but solar farms don't go through local regulation they go directly to the state so they're exempt from local regulation just to follow up how were these parcels identified to be on the list of right of first refusal those ones that's developed through a process very similar to adopting zoning regulations if they're going to go on that program on the official map a similar you may have read some about the hanaford case in heinsberg that's been a similar function of the town had identified a portion of the property to be a town green and that was some of the what made the news on this whole thing but the process would be to identify them and then have a public process just like amending zoning to place these restrictions on a property and what led us to identify this parcel in particular those ones I think were identified as being opportunities for large parks distributed in the southeast quadrant beyond that I think it predates me and I think therefore everybody else on the commission so that process has not been done in a long time it's not something that we do annually on a five year basis that's part of why when I was talking about possible projects was that gap it needs analysis for parks because it is something that's come up with us that hasn't been done for a long time really to make sure that you know we have all areas of the city covered with land so was it the view at underwood that probably put it on the priority list that's why the city wanted first-writer refusal to purchase it I think that it was a combination of the view particularly at that part of the city at the time looking out forward and seeing that around that time the pinnacle neighborhood had been built the veiledrive neighborhood was being built South Village was just starting to come online at the time and so probably looking to see these are some spectacular views and now's the time to identify that can I just ask you in terms of the yellow, the light yellow that has development potential and is not developed is correct so with the exception of the industrial properties and UVM and the Eau Claire stuff is the rest of that privately held? yes so as we look at that it's not held lands by individuals who may or may not live in Vermont or may or may not live this does not it does not include things like wetlands on this analysis very broadly speaking the green the natural resource protection district contemplated one of the wildlife quarters were the major areas of natural resources but it doesn't necessarily include site by site analysis so here some of the properties for example the one of the it sort of looks like a sort of an arm in the air there right in the middle of the corner of yep, right there that's the corner of Old Cross Road and Dorset Street at least a portion of that shows up as being wet having wetlands on most maps and so while there is development potential it may not be full development potential there one more question the Acreage that's been set aside for open space through the TDR program are they shown on this map? yep, so that's my next map yep and then Monica do you know where the primary wildlife part is? yes, it will be easier to show on the next map so just to point of clarity the east woods right now yep, I do but it's not really conserved permanently right now it kind of is yellow because it's UVM ag land that the Board of Trustees is just currently deeming to be in that area but it's right, so there's a lot of interpretations in a lot of these things here so for example in that one the University of Vermont master plan lists all their properties and what their plans for it are and it's approved by the Board of Trustees several of the properties are either undesignated for campus development or designated for potentially going to not becoming part of the campus the east woods property which is the top left hand green there is shown in their master plan as being a green space it does similarly to how the city may own properties but it's not to say the Vermont land trust for your last conversation yet to permanently conserved it is not permanently conserved but it is in their master plan as a long-term conservation property so but a change in their Board could technically change that it's just to be clear it's not permanently conserved and one could say that about any municipally owned piece of land but I'm trying to sort of give the best likely scenario and the other green that we're showing because that according to our zoning is the more yes but yes and then if the property is owned by the University they don't pay any property taxes right generally speaking yes they pay payment in lieu for buildings where there are buildings but not typically property that's my understanding of how payment in lieu program works large I mean they probably pay something for the horticultural farm buildings right but I would say even if they were just a farm they would at that size they would likely be in the current use program where they would be paying a reduced taxes to anyway so this is the last map that I've got I just wanted to show I think I'm glad Monica mentioned the Eastwoods property because I think it's another important thing to describe in here what these green corridors represent so this is the zoning in the southeast quadrant there's sort of two categories there's green and there's everything else the everything else is areas where residential development and in some cases where there's a little bit of red there commercial development is permitted and the green represents primarily conservation there are very small examples of where some very rural levels of development are permitted but basically that's the conservation district the city developed this in 2006 which was a reform of it was a major study at the time which was an update from a major study in the early 90s to look to see what are the key resource areas in the southeast quadrant where are the wildlife corridors where is the active agriculture taking place and where are the connections between it so counselor to your point there were essentially three wildlife corridors identified in a natural resources analysis nearly two thousands and they follow those three north south strips the one in the far right is along the muddy brook the one in the middle starts at Shelburne pond up through the that whole big contiguous green block and and connects up to the Wheeler Nature Park up at the top and the one on the left is near South Village and connects in through the golf course that one is a large wetland complex that we call the Great Swamp in that area so those were the three major wildlife corridors found so they're primarily north south not east west that's correct I'm not an expert at wildlife corridors on residential I know a little bit more about them on ski mountains but they're not a lot were found in that study it was principally north south so the three that are there essentially are intact that happens yes I mean there's the portion if right in the middle Tom if you can point to where cider mill is there just a little bit to the right of that where those three big streets go down you see if there's a street in the middle of the green there that was approved prior to this zoning coming into play the developers that project worked with us to you'll notice there's a bit of a gap between the north south streets there they worked with the city to actually relocate about 8 housing units in there to try to create a little more of a wildlife corridor but it was approved prior to the existence of the rules that are in place so they have to sort of go through the neighborhood the wildlife across the street yeah that's where the barriers are so the other reason that I wanted to show this map in addition to showing sort of the results of the study in the early 2000s was to discuss was to mention sort of how the southeast quadrant zoning works today so southeast quadrant has an overall density of 1.2 dwelling units per acre across the whole land which is a total of about 3,000 dwelling units overall potential including wetlands so yes the 1.2 represents across the entire thing just blanketly just straight math from there there are as I said there's green and there's everything else and the way that works is that the back in it used to be that our regulations said that if you had less than 50 acres of land you could build one house every 10 acres and if you had more than 50 acres of land you could build two houses per acre and that was deemed by the city back in the early 90s to be both not good planning and also completely not fair that if you own 49 acres you get four homes and if you had 50 acres you had 100 homes on the property that led to a rezoning that started to create what was called restricted areas areas where development was discouraged and areas where it was encouraged were called at the time non-contiguous planned unit developments which meant you could build a neighborhood and you could have sort of in the vicinity the open space and that's essentially how the Dorset Farms neighborhood is built and so the Dorset Farms neighborhood is relatively compact part of its compactness is that across the street where you see some of that cross-hatching that's the they use that land to be their density so that's how that worked that's why it's called transition that's part of why it's called transition yeah but regardless of the zoning the piece on the essentially both sides of Dorset Street in that area have had all of their development potential removed because it's all being used by Dorset Farms so even if the zoning were different homes can't go there because they've already moved their development it looks like there's a there was a big mound for septic that was built on that corner of cheese factory and that's in Shelburne yeah so then the current zoning which came into place in 2006 further sort of separated out the conservation areas and the development areas the way it works is that the if you own land in the conservation area you have the theoretical potential of 1.2 dwelling in its nature but in practice you can only actually build if you have less than 15 acres of land you can build one house on it and if you have more than 15 acres of land you can build three total homes on it up to 100 acres the rest of your potential the 1.2 dwelling in its breaker is something that you can sell to the what we call receiving areas the other colors in here so if it's the brown or the beige or the red the property inherently has 1.2 dwelling in its maker so if it's 10 acre property inherently it's got 12 dwelling units that can be placed there but the zoning allows for up to four or in some cases up to 8 dwelling units per acre to be built there development rights from the green so if somebody let's say that same 10 acre parcel if they wanted to build up to the 40 dwelling units and they met all the other standards of the regulations then they would have to buy 28 transferable development rights from elsewhere which means about 25 acres of conservation and so I note this both just to describe how this works explain why I was mentioning this in the other maps and also show that these are sort of linked so while I'm showing them as green they're green in part because the land owners in that land that's how they when the land was re-zoned that's how they were able to retain potential future economic value to the property that's the decision that the city made rather than just straight down zoning them they said your development potential lasts but we're going to allow you to sell development rights to other areas and also it's not non-buildable property it's essentially non-buildable well there are it includes both unbuildable areas which are wetlands and buildable areas correct so you can have a TDR to get money for it to keep it undeveloped even though it could be wetlands and it could never be developed anyway yes in practice what we're seeing in the last few years though is that at the state level when any project that goes through Act 250 has to if you're affecting agricultural soils which essentially everything in the southeast quadrant is considered an agricultural soil you have to do you have to mitigate for your building homes on agricultural soil and so the way that that is done often is by conserving land somewhere else what we're seeing is in the development community folks are wanting to they've been buying TDRs from land that is deemed good quality agricultural soils so that they are able to use their TDRs and their state agricultural mitigation at the same time rather than having to do two separate things so while TDRs can't be used from wetlands we're seeing them more recently being bought from better quality soils for agriculture so that a developer is able to meet two regulatory objectives and there's a total of how many TDRs have been sold and bought or whatever the right phrases it's at 127 I counted 127 for all of the yes it's a hard number because if a property like South Village has both natural resource protection districts and development districts they just do an internal relocation and so you could say that South Village use 200 of them except there isn't a D-transfer because it was all their property so it's hard to give that exact number do you know where the wetlands are just looking at them ma'am first or two? we are working with our GIS folks to get the best mapping that we can on this wetlands are notoriously difficult to know where they all are we're taking a look at some relatively new state data called the Vermont possible wetlands map is that what it's called? the ones that we have they're just they're not super useful for planning purposes advisory wetlands advisory layer so we are taking a look at that and if council or the commission is interested probably in the next couple weeks we'll be able to show you guys what we think we've got for that yeah absolutely I heard you say there was just looking at the entire quadrant maximum capacity of 3,000 units with all the acreage how many units are there now and then also tied to that have you counted up the acres on your previous slide of the undeveloped potentials I'd love to know what the difference between the 3,000 and how many units are there and how many acres there are because I would give us an idea of development where to go out as the TDRs currently would allow the kind of density we'd be exposed to with those projects do you understand what I'm asking? I do as an actual physical count I believe the last time I looked at this there was a little bit more than 1,500 total dwelling units existing so maybe that was a few years ago so let's call it 1,600 existing we'd have to add these ones into it from this map as being approved essentially and from there we could figure out the total potential remaining essentially I've not done the math using this map but we could certainly do that that's about another 800 the previous one was another 800 on top of the 1,600 so that put us at about 2,400 600 remaining that sounds in the ballpark for the purposes of a discussion but I wouldn't I wouldn't put in a report yet do you have an acreage of the yellow spots? I don't know I'd be happy to run the numbers on you I don't want to make a guess in the southeast quadrant 100 and something maybe 1 to 200 maybe would be my guess but I could be off by 50% either way on that the whole southeast quadrant is 3,000 acres it's about 2,700 acres and 3,000 dwelling units potentially so how many acres is the green? the green is about half of it that's right, you said 50, 50 you showed that before let me rephrase that that green is half of it this green is larger than the other green because it includes Stonehouse Commons has 10 acres of common land associated with it or as I mentioned before the Dorset Farms is a conserved area that by zoning is allowable but isn't otherwise or there's some large house lots that they have cross restrictive components on them so that realistically there's not going to be much of anything being built there so it's somewhat more than that half maybe 55 to 60% is green it's just so I can count up those numbers yep absolutely happy to share it with we can share it with you and we can post on our website as well for everybody to get another question when TDRs are used to conserve land who owns that conserved land? the owner remains the owner of the land it's the fee simple ownership the conservation restriction is the city of south Burlington unless the city of south Burlington assigns it to say the Vermont land trust but the owner remains the owner so let's say it's a farmer so they get to own the land so for example if a farmer were to sell their TDRs they still have the absolute right to farm that land but the TDRs list the restrictions similarly similar but not quite the same thing as what you just got a presentation from Vermont land trust can they still have their house or their up to three houses on 100 acre parcel right in the TDR if they if with a let's say they've got a 90 acre piece of land if they sell they can build theoretically up to three they would have to retain three TDRs if they sell all 90 TDRs then they sold all 90 but if they retain three of them they could build three homes and does the value of the land change when they sell the TDRs that's a question that I'd prefer to refer to our assessor because how they've been valuating the potential of TDRs and the potential of conservation is not something that's my area of expertise if they sell the development rights property will be valued as agricultural it will be valued as agricultural once the rights are sold once the rights are sold there may be homes on it or something which could alter the value so it depends on what's on the land but if there's nothing on the land it would be it would be zoned agricultural well it would be it's zoned conservation yes so if the current owner is in the green and they just haven't sold their TDRs yet their property is going to be higher than their neighbor who is also in the green but sold their TDRs I'd prefer to pose that question to the assessor because what I don't know about assessing could fill a much larger room than this one but as I understand it for residential areas there's more more values placed to what's on it than what its potential future is but I'd happily get come back to you with an answer to that Paul do you have any idea how many landowners are involved in all that green open space in the green we don't as a city on any of that we do own some of it so we own we don't own it but we do have permanent conservation easement this is a big piece of land that is owned by the Muskie Valley Parks District this right here is the Scott property owned by the city of south Burlington this here and this here the bread and butter farm which are not owned by the city but that the city contributed towards its permanent conservation this here is the underwood property that the city does own and Wheeler Nature Park adjacent properties that are owned by the city the city now owns a 22 acre piece right here going north to south that has been added to the Wheeler Nature Park this is Dorset Park that the city owns and then we own these pieces over here also Oak Creek did you want to Oak Creek here and this little one here will be ours in the not too distant future so those are the ones the city either owns or has been a participant in its permanent conservation and you have the future ones that that may yeah the slash dimple very ancient Dave's question do you know how many property owners are talking about in the yellow not the green and how many of those parcels are four acres or larger versus 10 acres or larger we can run the numbers for you pretty easily on that I didn't run it that way but we can do that we can do that in the next couple days for you the number within the southeast quadrant probably 20 20 landowners in the yellow there would be a guess I could be off by 10 either direction but it's not a huge number heard from a previous discussion there's a potential build out of 600 units on these acres which we don't know how many acres there are but I'd love to really pin that number down that difference total acreage remaining capacity so Tom said with potential of 600 more units but that's that's it right there's no more potential after that land development regulations change but that's unlikely is that right I would I feel as though in this conversation we backed into the 600 I'd like to verify it but let's assume for discussion purposes that we're not that far off then yes that is that that would be correct unless the zoning changes are unless very rarely only once so far somebody has sought a density bonus for doing high levels of affordability South Village did that so that could be above and beyond the numbers because they don't you don't have to buy TDRs to do affordable housing I'd certainly welcome how prioritize of these remaining undeveloped parcels what's of most interest to us I'd company that discussion with funding or putting up our one penny back up to its full funding so that we could position the city to be ready to acquire those parcels if they become available in the coming years okay and your PUD LDRs that you're working on what I saw was that there was going to be somewhat like the South Village there was going to be open space within the village much more than in the traditional residential would that alter the pattern of development we've been seeing in the southeast quadrant the remaining parcels I think the way Jessica described it was really accurate in saying that our current PUD regulations allow for flexibility but they don't necessarily require creativity and so there have been some examples of some really well designed well thought out neighborhoods that are very compact with substantial open space and this we could be talking about the southeast quadrant we can be talking about elsewhere in the city also and there have been ones that have not been as well done in that the objective of the PUD project largely would be to much more clearly steer development into that first box of creativity in return meeting the city's stated goals of walkable neighborhoods of open spaces of affordability of energy efficiency of smart intelligent land uses and transitions between neighborhoods but feel free to say otherwise you have another question I do have another time we're talking a lot about the southeast quadrant but in the initial slides you showed us the whole city where there was also some green could you talk a little bit about how the PUDs would apply to those areas or just well I mean the idea with the PUDs that would be that they would apply to the whole city and especially any larger parcels I mean we definitely have larger parcels in other parts of the city the former Kmart comes to mind or there's a lot I'm thinking of just behind the Williston Road north of Williston Road there's a large swath of land there the PUD types in here you can see in that little thumbnail you have to sort of go from a conservation PUD which presumes a lot of open space in a compact neighborhood all the way down to a much more built out one of a neighborhood center what's really interesting about the way that this has been developed is that these may have applicability at very different scales so there may be a conservation type that makes sense in a very rural area where it winds up being a low density to begin with and then you take that low density and you put the homes in a very small clustered area there may be another part of the city that is maybe a medium density area or somewhere where it makes sense to have more homes but where the objectives of the amount of conservation may still be very high and so it may say in those areas that rather than single family or duplex homes maybe it's going to be town homes or multi-family housing and then a large amount of green space so the amount of housing on the property may be very variable depending on where in the city but the objectives where the city's goal is conservation it can be applied there where the city's goal is to be creating a neighborhood center or a downtown city center adjacent to city center it may want to be more built out in some of those areas but still have high quality open space Rocky ridges some acres I mean there are lots of varieties in the acres in our city and then the remaining acreage of our city so I guess the question I would have with regard to your work is do you look at what the various acres look like in order to determine what is most appropriate for a specific area in the city given its topography its natural profile and all those resources so this is actually a good point so the allocations like the pie chart is only applying to the buildable area so it gets rid of the wetlands it gets rid of the stream buffers the flood plains like all the areas where you can't build because we have restrictions on that and it looks at the area that's left and then how we want to apportion the different building types and open spaces within the rest of that the open spaces are put in the wetlands right so it's not just the wetlands you're working with to really get those high quality open spaces that people like and can use isn't it can you go forward to the slide that showed maybe the last slide second to last slide that one so of the of the development potential that might be owned by about 20 landowners you said 20 in the southeast quadrant so there's more at this point do you know of proposals by owners that are that are percolating it's a loaded question sorry I mean we know about the Dorset Meadows project and that's caused a lot of consternation so I'm percolating so I own a four acre lot and I don't have any plants for my three acres you were putting a big swimming pool on that I'm sorry but I'll tell you this I understand that with Village Residential if I didn't own those three acres somebody could and I could be wrong Paul but when I met on this a while ago somebody could put 27 units behind my house as a mathematical number yes they'd have to meet all the other standards as well it may prove challenging to do it so I have some serious concerns about how TDRs could be used I'm glad I own that land because if somebody was trying to put 27 acres on my backyard I'd have to put 27 units in those three acres I'd be up in arms you want to hack my dog park yeah I'll do the city if you make me so Councillor Kaufman to answer your question the Development Review Board in the top right hand corner there's a little looks like a little flag there that's in yellow the Development Review Board has seen a sketch plan application in that property where is that specific just to the left of the brown it's next to Willowbrook it's the name of the street that would wildflower excuse me wildflower lane elsewhere just as Councillor Chittin described we've had conversations with the folks we do try to respect individual property owners privacy when they come and talk with us about it so I don't have anything that I can publicly say but we have conversations with people all over the city there's yeah if you're sitting on that land, you're thinking about options it's not necessarily that they want to put a ton of houses on it they've got to put kids through college well or they're developers and they bought the property from someone else the what? which is that will be the property as a developer we ask that question that's another question from your example Councillor Chittin mentioned taking into account that possibility of 23 units there so when we add up all the potential homes in the southeast quadrant are we taking into account his potential we're also on yeah so yeah so the math is all the acreage times 1.2 that's the maximum so it's about 3,000 total is what could be built okay but I could buy TDRs the 1.2 represents the entire southeast quadrant TDRs not TDRs that's the math how that gets applied whether it actually ever whether all the TDRs get sold or not is another question in the areas that are zoned like the property you just mentioned 8 units nacre thus far we're seeing it substantially below that so link road and goldenrod street in that same district and they got built that about 2 units nacre in that district because that's what the developer chose to do which brings up its own challenging questions of efficiency of land use in an area like that any questions is it safe to say that depending upon the standards as you mentioned to Councillor Chittin about just because you have a certain amount of acreage you might not be able to fit them in units on there but I would say that there's some percentage of TDRs that probably will get stranded over time I think it's something that we've been monitoring when it was put into place there were more potential receiving lands than sending lands with the idea that not every single property is going to be built at the maximum density as development has taken place and as a lot of it has been below the maximum well below the maximum then it is possible that the city could wind up in a place where there are TDRs sitting out there we've heard from some landowners who own land in the NRP who have expressed concern about that their ability to sell those TDRs their capability in that per se because they've never promised that every TDR that could be produced could be consumed is that a true statement or let's put it this way with spear metals for existence for example if that lawsuit is successful and changes the nature of the density so that it's lower than it was to be expected and if that were to happen again let's say at a subsequent development you know the development is less dense right so that would back out a bunch of TDRs that aren't needed so looking forward at other developments in the future here I could see where if there was sufficient legal action by whatever groups that was taken there may be you may end up with a surplus of TDRs that are not marketable I'm not an attorney so I'm not sure that I could jump into that somebody at some point could make an argument that that the city did a regulatory takings by not allowing them to make economic value of the property whether that would be a successful argument is a whole other question and one that would suggest that somebody who's taken more than one undergraduate legal class answer the developer buys the TDRs and even if he if he cannot then you're saying that he's stuck not necessarily that or no the later no one wants to buy it I got five TDRs up for sale every development that goes by if the anticipated TDRs that aren't used there reduces the available land to use as TDR on so you may find yourself in a place where they are stranded because there's no more available land to reallocate the TDRs to as you expand the receiving area the city is the one that's saying it has to be in the S.E.Q. it doesn't say it doesn't have to be in the S.E.Q. get density elsewhere other places the TDRs could be used is the precedent for an inter-municipal exchange of TDRs in Vermont to my knowledge there are a grand total of two possibly three communities that have done TDRs period Stowe does them but only in a very limited area related to Stowe Mountain Resort Colchester has them but as I've been told it's not ever actually been deployed so in terms of case law we're it there is Vermont statutes do allow for joint planning districts and joint zoning in some cases there is one joint planning district in Vermont in the Matter River Valley Watesfield, Warren and Feaston but they all currently have their own separate zoning I believe I've read under statute that you could share it but I don't know that it's ever been tried here elsewhere I'd be happy to do some research and look to see elsewhere in the country if it's been used in that manner to expand into the whole city yep it's TDRs it is one of the planning commission had a working group a few years ago that began to look into the subject it is legally allowable the questions that would need to be resolved in something like that are what what does the in order for a TDR to function there has to be a demand for something beyond what can already be done somebody has to want to buy something and so the question would be where is there demand somewhere else in the city that exceeds the current allowances such that somebody would want to buy it and then conversely looking to see what are the objectives for what are the objectives in the southeast quadrant is it to have more dispersed development is it to have more compact development in fewer areas and how do we deal with some questions of equity in terms of more compact development taking place in areas of the city that are have a lower median income in other areas that are being that have a higher median income how that is done would need to be looked at carefully and for what exact purposes it's being done but certainly TDRs are not strictly restricted to the southeast quadrant. Do you have many more slides? That's all my slides. I know you always just have one more. That's okay. That's my job. The other question had in addition to looking at the natural land when you do the discuss regulations is do you look at the economics and do you hear from managers and about our budgets and the resources that we have where in the city it's more expensive to service as opposed to other parts of the city or things like this. That's a great question for those who were able to attend this summer I know several of the members of the council were able to attend a great video presentation over at Magic Hat by a gentleman by the name Joe Minnacosi who was talking about that subject area and what's the long term cost benefits to a community. We started those conversations with our various different departments. Everyone's a little bit different and so for example the fire department it's about people and dwelling units it's not necessarily about where they are same thing on the police side there's more complexity in a larger building but there's trade-offs to other areas. In the public works side it's a road like Feral Street is a very efficient road for them because they plow it once and that's several hundred housing units it's a little more complex in an environment like that for fire because they have to have the equipment and the staffing and the training to be able to get into a four-story building but we have started those conversations with all of our departments and I think that the as Jessica said from the very beginning in the comprehensive plan a lot of the goals have been to support areas like city center Shelburne Road, Williston Road, Dorset Street where it's a win-win for the city in a lot of ways. To follow up do we know if the school department in their visioning exercises they're thinking about that as well in terms of the development and student load? Yeah. Do you mean the numbers of students to the locations where they live? Probably both I mean because if they're way out in the far reaches of our community that's a longer bus ride right? So you probably need more buses because you gotta get everyone. That means more cars because people don't want their kids on the buses for that long so then you have 100 cars that's when we next communicate with the school district we'll ask them. I know that they look very closely at the numbers I don't know how closely they've looked at the geographies I think they do look at geography because they have to Right but future geographies I don't know to what extent they've engaged in that or not but it's a great question Have future school sites been identified anyway? Well that's another piece if they are looking to either consolidate or build more I don't know I mean that's their visioning part that I mean we have some former visioners on the planning commission You can probably better answer that but I just wanted to offer one thing that I heard from a community member that in regards to how do you know about future available land coming up I mean other in New York I believe there is an ordinance in a certain area where ad land of over a certain number of acres is going to go on the market by private citizen I believe there's they need to post two months prior to actually go into the market so that anyone knows and then there's also an amount of time before they can accept an offer there's just a way of letting other people know what's coming down and anyone can have a chance I don't know which part of New York and what the ordinance is but I thought it was an interesting idea and Sure, great. Are there any other comments or questions from planning commission members? I know we sort of hog the mics here but you're more familiar with the work you've done I guess, I hope Thanks for having us for all the information and some of the questions and additional are there any other questions by the council? All that with Paul and Jessica and crew that was very helpful and very clear Thank you Great, so why don't we take a five minute break and then we can Sir, can we ask anything of the planning commission before we get a break? We lost all friends and everybody's heads here Is that okay? We could take a couple questions sure, but I don't want Yeah, no I don't need but if you have a good question why don't you come up to the mic and tell us who you are, please So I was in particular that really gave me some kind of contra-name Everybody, hi I know a 1575 Thursday stream If you could pull up a slide when you were talking about sewage I'm sorry Noa He just said Noa 1575 Thursday stream So the slide had to do with sewage and its allocation That's it, right? Right, and who is that sewage shared with? You mentioned that There's another million gallons in the airport parkway wastewater treatment facility located over by the landfill What other town is that shared with? Right, so there's another million gallons that is owned by three different legal entities within the town of Colchester Okay, so if we were going to allocate those away from them They already own those So we can increase over that is what my question is So you're showing me that a million plus gallons is going to Colchester or whatever People or companies or facilities or governmental agencies But that's already gone So a million gallons of sewage is already not part of our ability to allocate to our own citizens because we've already given that away to another town So the town of Colchester When it was built We built a new facility for the price we sold it for When the airport parkway facility was built it was built as a shared agreement between the two communities replacing an old one in Colchester so that red line has another million gallons above it that doesn't show it Right, because for clarity we were only showing the South Burlington Okay, so there's another million gallons that belongs to Colchester And the proposed building of another couple thousand communities of multi-use or multi-family or homes of two and a half, three nuclear families Would that overtake that? Do you have that information? Because you showed this slide and if we don't have that information that slide is useless to me So we have provided a memo and update to the City Council in 2014 and 2016 on this subject Yep, and we're happy to do an update to that as well for 2018 And what does that show? We above or below that sewage Please let him answer I'm sorry, thank you So what it shows is that the City has a projection based on current usage rates and based on how much the State assumes every household will use which is 210 gallons of wastewater per day somewhere in the 20 to 35 year range of capacity before we reach our capacity And that study was done, I'm sorry, when? That's two years ago Two years ago. Are we above or below that projection right now? Do you know? Since that time we ran the most recent numbers of the last 12 months and our average daily flows are actually down from what they were the estimate from a couple years ago So we actually have more capacity in our plant, it appears For our current usage does that include growth? So the the plant is getting more efficient Right, so the plant is measured on how much is actually going through it Our projections are based on what the estimate is but the plant is actual like how much is going through it Is the red line our capacity? Yes, it's the capacity that belongs to South Burlington for the two plants combined And with a lot of the new development the requirement is to have lower flush toilets which might be why we're using Right, so right now every two bedroom household or above is estimated to consume 210 gallons of wastewater per day Our public works director mentioned to me last week that the state is actually considering revising that downwards because what used to be called low flow is just what's installed now New development, there isn't a high flow It is the low flow today But we're so close to it now I can't imagine if we're going to add a thousand homes and add 10% that we're going to be right at that number and if we're right at that 2.5 or I'm sorry I'm going to go up to 3.5 How do we How is that even sustainable? How many homes do you... What's the cost of a new facility? How many homes use the 2.5 million gallons that we're using right now? There's about 9,000 households in the city And how many units, like bedrooms with that? Probably 80% of the homes in the city are going to be two bedrooms or more? So we have a million gallons left for 600 versus the 2.5 million that was used for the 9,000 This is 9,000 including commercial as well but if this is what all we're currently using another thing to Mr. Hyman's point if the southeast quadrant got built out plus the 800 we were talking about And city center the other things that are really on the board or Old Farm Road Your point is appreciated We're looking for those numbers The million gallons represents about 5,000 additional households not including the non-residential if it was all just homes being built But I think that's one of the we need to understand if there's businesses or city center or denser areas if they use more than the 210 or even if it's just reduced to 190 that's an issue that the council is sensitive about because you want to have that included in your planning so that we have the resources to expand fewer capacity before we get to the point where you know the 2018 number include permitted units and only constructed units All the numbers in the bar graph represents the actual physical being used The number is a little high in 2018 because we did put in what the average flows to Burlington have been so if you remember the voters approved moving over the east with neighborhoods so there's a bit of a bump there that's included technically it's not flowing to our facility today but we put it in because we know that it's flowing several weeks this chart only shows what is physically going through the plant today we do have in 2016 we did a memo that projects both the approved and the future and we're happy to update that for you too as well we just didn't want to overwhelm with 30 more slides this evening Thank you one more slide on the question the wildlife corridor if you could pull up that slide the slide with the development it's actually a lot clearer than this one I'd like you to tell me how from corridor on the left one we get to the corridor on the right three I don't know if you hunt or I don't know if you spend a lot of time tracking the wildlife it's not going to happen that's not a wildlife corridor I think the research was showing that there's north south but north is Burlington the research was done and that's what it showed the animals I'm just telling you as a property owner and I've spoken to people in for my own property and I've spoken to people at Arbor Day people at Fish and Wildlife I've had them out to my house, I've tagged trees I've removed invasive species this is not appropriate corridors maybe for this meeting it is but I just want to say when you say appropriate or do you mean accurate both there's no way the animals can't go north because they're going to run into Burlington across 89 I'm moose, the black bears the bobcats in my woods are not going into Burlington or the university across 89 going south it's a little bit easier going towards the east I guess that's the east this direction as I'm looking and seeing it here the left is the lake they're not crossing Silver Roan and going down to the lake east and that's it but those are not ways to keep wildlife in our communities and that is one of the things that I've read multiple times in Burlington's Directives I mean that's one of the big things and I'm sorry I took so much time I sold the slides living here thank you thank you very much another question in the 2016 comprehensive plan it states anticipated that the city's overall population will continually increase modestly through 2019 and then level off by 2025 at approximately 18,310 residents and what actually has happened according to the U.S. census report following the population numbers for south Burlington in 2017 it's at 19,140 so from year 2000 to 2017 the population increased by 1.68 percent a year which was the total of 4,262 people and at that rate by 2025 would be 3,560 more than anticipated and that number comes from your 2016 comprehensive plan so I think that's something to really pay attention to thank you just to reiterate that the number is in the comprehensive plan it is the result of the McKibben demographic forecast of what they anticipated would be the case I didn't put it in this chart because the methodologies are so different and given that the census is an estimate until 2020 it felt a little bit of apples and oranges which is why instead it just shows only what the plan objective is not what the plan forecast was but it is in there as the forecast one last one and then I really do because we're continuing this conversation for two more items so but can you just go to the slide with the numbers I just want to make sure I know you were going to finalize the numbers per development I know you were going to get a better number than the 600 but I just want to make sure we weren't double counting in terms of the 1600 units that you said roughly were in the area and I think you said there were 800 on this slide but a lot of those have already been built so they're already within that 1600 so the incremental from this slide is maybe half of that I can't really see the numbers it's a great point we'll make sure that we're not double counting anything like that I just want to make sure everyone's aware it could be closer to like a thousand units within the southeast corner we'll get a firmer number because we all want a number not a guesstimate so we'll take that five minute break and then we organize thank you very much planning commission you're always welcome I'm glad we talked about it at the last meeting because I mean I basically went off of what they were talking I think so go into the first one and then they change the followings up to a good point until you actually have the sense it's just a pretty high point yes so that was really helpful and we're going to move on we have a item 10 presentation by a south brolin citizen's group on matters related to growth in the community certainly extent an extension of our earlier presentation and you have we have about half an hour for that for your presentation and then if there's questions and comments so thank you very much and would you please identify yourselves for the record and begin I'm Allison Chalnick I'm a new resident to south burlington and I'm tech support Burlington since 2006 presentation is the work of many residents and it's not my work just the the speaker here for a group of people who have met numerous times to discuss our concerns with regard to the preservation of open green spaces in our community and this presentation is the result of those meetings we value and want to protect our open lands even though every city study report says we should preserve open spaces the city's LDRs seem to allow these rural lands to be encroached upon the comprehensive plan is the vision of the residents and as you can read here we are going to be taking our arguments directly from the comprehensive plan on the lower right side of most of the pages that you'll see there is the section and the page of the comprehensive plan that we are our quoting so comprehensive plan as you know is a framework for accomplishing the community's aspirations and has to do with the quality of life and how we envision every aspect of the community experience in south Burlington and it recommends a number of actions and practices that should be undertaken by the city so in particular we are concerned with the conservation of important natural areas the quality of life livability etc the long term sustainability of the of the city these are pictures of wildlife taken recently the scenery, the vistas, the animals and the birds are all in the southeast quadrant of the community the comprehensive plan is truly comprehensive it looks at sort of every aspect of life in our community and we feel that we're on a path to unsustainability that we have too much growth and too much development and you can read here some of the major points we're trying to make about city services the ability of the city departments to support the development and the problem we feel there is with too much residential construction across the city the city's current population we argue already exceeds what was anticipated to be its target population in 2025 and so that puts a lot of pressure on the city services the senior city staff have already expressed their concerns over unsustainability the outgoing fire chief talked about the budget not being sustainable budget cuts equipment not being replaced in a timely manner et cetera the impact on the fire department and the police department is substantial and finally there is a negative impact on public works department but we want to make sure that you understand that we are talking more than about just money the city staff has been saying for years that demands placed on them from the growth in housing and population are not sustainable financially but we think they're not sustainable environmentally either here are some beautiful views of the natural beauty in south burlington but these areas may soon be lost to housing developments unless we make some changes and here are some of the changes that are being made that we really don't want looks like the area is being prepared for housing but stripped of natural resources like trees that we think are important to the sustainability of our community so we feel like development is taking priority over conservation the conservation of wildlife corridors the preservation of our natural resources et cetera we're worried about our wetlands in particular we'd like to conserve the functional wetland areas to rehabilitate impaired waterways and we're also very concerned about the possibility of flooding we're concerned about the development leading to storm order problems and there's some clear evidence that constructing more and more impervious surfaces is going to increase the amount of storm water runoff and lead to erosion and flooding and we feel like this is already beginning to happen we're also concerned about the pollution of watersheds and there are five here that already seem like they've been negatively affected the comprehensive plan calls for avoiding new development in areas that are going to promote and paying attention to areas that are going to be eroding and we feel like development is being built in areas that could prevent these responses and we're not paying enough attention cleaning up water pollution alone is estimated to cost $50 million affected open rural lands are essential for wildlife all these pictures were taken in the southeast quadrant recently so these are some of the birds and animals that live near us we'd like them to continue living near us tree shrubs and other soil cover are more than aesthetic amenities so we're concerned about their absence trees and vegetation clean and cool our air and there is a direct relationship between tree canopy and childhood asthma these pictures were also taken recently in the southeast quadrant this is a picture that's not very easily analyzed but it has to do with the biodiversity in our area and we're concerned about that as well we're also concerned about the quality of our agricultural soil and the agricultural areas in the in the city and concerned that we are paving over our fertile soil we're also concerned about our scenic views there were 17 key scenic view locations identified but only 6 have been protected this is another area that is being developed that is just heart breaking especially given what was there before so we feel like developments are changing the Vermont quality of our lives there are some areas that are being built in the southeast quadrant this summer we want to remind our community that we took this climate pledge and it seems to me that we're not paying much attention to having made that pledge in addition our resource conservation areas are disappearing yet development continues to be built in these areas again these maps are not terribly useful but if anyone wants a copy of this presentation you can see me after and I can make sure you get one so we the public are concerned we're concerned in many areas but mostly areas that have to do with the beauty the sustainability and the health of our neighborhoods on election day students at St. Michael's College did a survey it wasn't a random sample it's not terribly scientific they're just asking people coming out of the voting booths what they thought but you can see that open space is something that people coming out of voting care deeply about the methodology was sound yeah well I'm a sociologist too and I love the stuff my students do but it's not always what you want to sort of place bets on I do I do they're suggestive here's some battery cells the 211 community survey results the top five concerns listed in the order of importance so we feel that more studies aren't needed here are some pictures of all the studies over the past decade the need to develop long range management plans for the city's open space has become clear again this is directly from the the plan and it says that we lack the well defined coordinated city open space plan clearly what we heard before suggests that people want to go in that direction and know that that's a need and so we're saying we're asking that the city council finally act and we have some ideas about the major concerns the city's finest environmental assets should be preserved they're there they're beautiful and we want them to remain there for our children so the southeast quadrant objectives and strategies as listed in the comprehensive plan are ones we feel that should be paid attention to through zoning land conservation and general land use why general land use objective 39 of the comprehensive plan says the majority of all new development will occur within the Shelburne Road Williston Road Kennedy Drive corridors and other transit areas but we feel like that doesn't seem to be happening we should plan better for a network of interconnected open spaces to conserve and accommodate ecological resources and enhance the biological diversity within the city not destroy it these strategies too are directly from the comprehensive plan substantially restrict new subdivision and development from primary research conservation areas retain healthy and high quality existing trees you saw what the picture earlier where all the trees were gone maintain the city's wildlife diversity maintain existing overall tree canopy we feel like we have the tools the comprehensive plan is a good plan and that somehow it's not very well integrated with decisions about land use so we have some specific recommended actions that are here you can read them they are directly from the comprehensive plan so we're not proposing anything new and our basic message is there's a disconnect there's a disconnect between the comprehensive plan as visioned by the citizens says we want and what we seem to do in the application of land development decisions we allow development on lands designated as primary and secondary conservation areas we allow development to be essential to wildlife survival forest primary agricultural soil and habitat blocks so we're asking for you to act to do something so that there's a better connection between our vision and what we actually do and here are some of the municipal planning tools we can use if we immediately enact an interim bylaw to call a two-year halt to all new development in the rural and forested areas of the city and during that time figure out how to go forward in a more judicious way and Dr. Goose of course said it all unless someone like you cares a whole off a lot nothing is going to get better it's not so that's really the end of our presentation there are a bunch of people here who have been meeting for quite a long time I am not the expert I am only the spokesperson so if people have questions please feel free and we'll try to answer them as they come your ideas and concepts connected to specific parts of the comprehensive plan and I certainly appreciate you focusing on that because that is what is supposed to be guiding our development and our vision are there questions or comments by people on the council that was yeah in regard to the presentation or anything else I reviewed that before and when you combine what we saw earlier what we saw here there's a lot to absorb there there are some real worrisome areas but I also found in the presentation earlier some areas that made me feel the ball's presentation which was probably the best land use presentation I've seen ever in almost half a century in town quite honestly and it did allay some of the concerns I had had that doesn't mean we're headed in the best possible direction what to do I guess becomes becomes the question but those are great information I don't really have any questions it's all pretty clear I would just say and it's observation I think anyone who's been paying attention and reading the local paper the Burlington Free Press and who hasn't been attending meetings or receiving emails like we have that even the general public would be aware that there is a level of concern in the community that has really reached the level of the council and I think all these people and these concerns that are not new I've been hearing them I wanted to testify to the fact that that there is you know a level of concern that rises I think to to be on our work plan absolutely and honestly if your group hadn't pulled all this together and brought this to the forefront I'm not sure we got to the point of asking Paul to put together what must have taken you a little bit of time to put together that presentation that really brought a lot of what's going on into the public view and that's really good now and is it definitely a strong level of concern which I share I would just observe I was on the council when we had interim zoning several years ago and it was really only actively followed up for a year and then there spots on the council that changed and some of the work was ended and really lost the energy I guess to follow up and I think it's clear that the intentions of that interim zoning period was really to take a breath look at a lot of the things that were occurring or not occurring in the community and then really try to get information and task the planning commission to align the land use development regulations with the comprehensive plan and the vision for the community and I think we did some of that and then we got bogged down with other things and didn't continue so many of the ideas or thoughts that you or the reality of what's happening in the community that you have articulated have come to pass in part because we didn't follow up as a council and as a community to really align those regulations so that what we say we want in the comprehensive plan which everyone thinks about the comprehensive plan it's well written, it's clear it's thoughtful it certainly had strategies and all sorts of action items it took I think Jessica said five years to work on so it's not something undertaken lightly it had a lot of public input and it's a good read really so I think we are at a spot where we really need to continue with getting our rules and regulations aligned with the comprehensive plan and I really appreciate you putting it some of those things together in a document and for your activism and interest it seems to me that you can encourage people to align that's true but unless you have some limitations on process that make it impossible for people to make decisions that aren't aligned the tendency for things to come out of line again will be there so for example I don't know what the process should be but it's possible that you would have a process that says a decision about land use can't be made, it's not legitimate unless it somehow harkens back to the comprehensive plan and says and this is how that decision is aligned with the comprehensive plan or else it isn't a decision that is there's ways to make sure legally that the comprehensive plan has to be paid attention to well I think the process we have now is to have the land use regulations carry out the intention of the elements in the comprehensive plan and it doesn't do that as effectively as we would like in fact that was when we were when Megan was on the council and they were discussing or debating interim zoning that was a complaint of the design, the DRB the design review board that they couldn't say no to things because the regulations which are their rules for making a decision unless you want to go to court on everything you know they had to say yes when they believe that it was not necessary development or decision for the city the process we have I think the curve on making effort to get more in the decisions made in our legal because it was an arbitrary design review board thank you if there's no and you if you this will be brief the proposal has many and I was going to go through the press and we established by importance of grant from the Vermont and our master plan with an act done before that you just alluded yes are we doing a study on the next item thinking we would get thank you professional staff to respond to given the planning department and flooding areas that was the site but the staff planner here we have not developed the ozone levels I think there was a comment about that there was a comment about the quality standards Vermont has been doing quite good on that mostly because of the national standards emissions have done better there's no factories here in Vermont so that's the reason we're good on that and also to revisit the numbers on Paul had a chart on it but it would be interesting to see as somebody who lives very close to 70 buildings behind the cinema the neighborhood where I live is more than shouldering the burden of growth and all that so again I would be sure the staff has an opportunity to respond and we just not move just because we operate on facts I would love to ask the staff about their 7th to last slide about the specific recommended actions I feel like we're doing a lot of these efforts and staff their thoughts so thank you Dan I'm having a little technical difficulty do you are you trying to turn that off or turn it off he called for a slide but it's a very old computer so I'm just and it's creating tension yeah I'm sorry let me pass that you didn't see what's that did you copy to jump these are the requests so Paul do you want to respond to some of the I'm sure there were some things that jumped out at you as well when we are this is the first time we've had a chance to look at this I don't know how much detail staff wants to get into tonight about these recommendations I think we need to go through the report and look at the accuracy of some of the statements made conclusions that were drawn and and maybe come back to the council at a I was Paul Conner director of planning and zoning I was going to say the same thing that Kevin said Dan Albrecht is correct that just in terms of the question of floodplains and water quality we're a fortunate community in that we were built after a lot of the communities that were built right in the flood plains your Montpeliers your Warrens places like that and we were able to from an early stage and have continued to essentially prohibit all development in our flood hazard areas the 100 year flood plain we have a very small handful of homes that are in those but that's where we're fortunate historically and at the forefront of standards today and in the terms of stormwater we a few years ago adopted a citywide requirement that is below the state threshold in terms of both water volume that goes off of property and the amount of development that triggers a review and so we're proud on both of those fronts there are opportunities in rare circumstances where wetlands can be impacted but for class 2 wetlands which are higher quality ones they have to first get state permit before they'll be considered at the local level and we regulate class 3 wetlands which are the lower quality that the state doesn't regulate at all they are reviewed and an applicant has to make a convincing argument around the functions and values to the development review board but we would love the opportunity to go through and answer councillor Chittin's questions give you a status report on all those different points in there which is great I would just also point out just as a sort of an aside I mean part of the development that's planned for city center will actually remediate current stormwater runoff that is part of very old development of central school and some of the other commercial buildings along Williston road so in that respect I guess that's an example of new development that will mitigate in a very positive way some of the very things that are hurting or harming I guess that's potash right? potashbrook so you know I'm happy to share that with you that's a commitment and an activity of this community at least in that that area so that's a plus positive thing yes in the back Lucy Yankowski I live in Queen City Park I grew up in South Burlington I've for nine years spent in Burlington as a young adult spreading their wings I've lived in South Burlington all my life I've seen a lot of changes and I want to say thank you to the city council great job in regards to the purchase that is pending right now South Burlington has always been very involved in trying to keep and preserve as much open space as possible my dad was on the natural resources committee that was one of the things that they were very involved with trying to do could we do more probably but I think we've done a really good job we do what we can people complain about their taxes well it takes funds to buy these lands it takes funds to preserve them it takes funds to take care of them you have to remember all of that and also I'm sure there's a lot of people in here that if South Burlington was able to preserve as much open land as they would have liked to that a lot of you wouldn't even have your homes so we do have to have some development there was a great presentation natural resources committee is working on trying to help preserve and mitigate a lot of damage that could be happening and will be occurring stay involved be informed and help support the city council and the planning commission and the development review committee that's the best way to support our city with trying to preserve what we've got and hopefully the developments that will be coming up in the future will be done in a smart way that we can keep as much land as possible open and that's where condense developing really makes a difference thank you Lucy there's Gal in the front and then in the back can you please just identify yourself when you showed the green space how much of that was a golf course I mean the golf course takes up a lot of land and it's not used by very many people except for the people that belong to the country club so how much of that the map was that was that a green space or was that developed the golf course is after the golf course was built it was put into the map the one where it's still zone resource protection I don't know the acreage of the golf course but it is in there including both the areas that are for golfing but also all of the areas that are not golfing wetlands and forest areas I don't know the exact acreage but I could get it but the housing that was developed there is in the yellow right I guess my other question is what are the plans for Dorset and Spear when all these developments have all these people driving down them because they're just small roads now and they're going to have to be bigger and are there plans for that because you're going to be having a lot of traffic coming in towards Burlington really important question when you dance along those same lines would interim zoning stop those two projects what two projects it would just be new ones I mean it would stop ones that we don't know about yet but in terms of the traffic well I think that's one of the additional things that needs perhaps a little more have we done any study on that Paul we have done a corridor study for both south Dorset streets so basically from City Hall south and Spear street right now we're currently doing a study for the area of Tilly Drive and Kimmel Avenue which has to make some assumptions and so we're being looking at some of those studies in the southeast quadrant a little bit so they have been examined that's part of the tool of the official map that we talked about earlier about designating where connections need to be in order to accommodate future needs and of course one of the things that whenever we're looking at a corridor study is a challenge is that the users of those streets include south Burlington but they include everything to the south of Burlington as well and for which we have little to no say so I guess I'd be happy if you'd like as a follow-up at a future time to come and talk with you about all the transportation planning we didn't really get into that this evening for a desire to It's not important though, won't it? Oh yeah, no it's Queenie Austin's going in that's happening, that's right on our Dorset and if these new communities are going in I think that that's going to be an important thing those numbers are pretty good to have especially before we approve 200, 300, 400 mm-hmm No, I think the traffic pieces is an important part before or after, that's the other thing I identified the lady in the back then we'll go to Vince and then we'll go there I'm Kristie Stern I'm a relatively new resident of South Burlington, my family and I moved here five years ago I think you call me a flat lander I am too I'm originally from Savannah, Georgia and I grew up in a very small town we had one school and it eventually split into an elementary school and a high school so I know the growth that happens to a city and some of the good things and some of the bad things that come out of that I've lived in Manhattan, I've lived in Atlanta I've lived in huge cities but I chose South Burlington specifically for my family because it's this small, beautiful community with gorgeous views and to the lady's prior point I don't mind paying higher taxes to preserve that and to have this great little community that we have but my concern is that if you look at places like DuPage County, Chicago which has just boomed and had a ton of growth development, their taxes have actually gone up, their city services have gone down, we all know the crime rates I would hate to see that happen to South Burlington, the cities that I've lived in and I've watched them grow I would hate to see it happen I happen to live in the southeast quadrant I love walking, it's just peaceful in their open fields and it's beautiful and there's wonderful wildlife but if you put 160 homes on top of that it's not going to be beautiful anymore and if my taxes are going to go up I'm going to get less city services I could just as easily move back to Atlanta because we have some great views there, we have to drive we've got traffic, you guys are going to have traffic, Gloria has a 16 year old he's learning how to drive even today now without those houses we can't get off of no one farms and make a left on despair in the mornings to take him to school I'm the one that ends up driving because it's like the rat race you're in between cars but I know the gentleman asked for not to do an interim but I would ask that you do not to do a new study, I don't want to add any more cost but at least a line, I saw the planning committee you guys had a great presentation it's like you're doing a scorecard method for your working plan and you had three greens and a couple of yellows and you had some significant reds, it took you a lot of time to do that, if you had a little more time and you could align with the city's comprehensive plan which the citizens want I think it would just be a better opportunity that the city doesn't turn into a mini Atlanta all for city growth love the idea of a city center, absolutely love it, build it, grow it but do you, big density where big density makes sense the comprehensive plans identified places, let's build there, I have no problems with that but don't take away the views, don't take away the wildlife corridors, on Dorset street when they started digging up on Nolan farms and Dorset, there was a dead fawn in the road, I've never seen an animal like that there's a bobcat that comes out in my neighborhood now, during the day you know, the dusk the evening, that's never happened to us in the five years but as we keep building that puts my kids at risk it puts our, I mean if we take away their habitat there's no place for them to come except into our neighborhood so I would ask, let's build where it's logical to build let's not take away the views take an entrance to give yourself some time to align and to get your scorecards mostly in the green so you're ready to go and you make sure it's aligned with the comprehensive plan and South Burlington can stay this beautiful little town with high taxes but still attract the people that want to be here because of the community and what you have Thank you very much Vince and then Vince Baldwin I also live in the Southeast Quad it's very late so I'm just going to just one point of information the mention of the golf course made me smile and here's why I've been on several committees on how to preserve the Southeast Quad beautiful views, farmland and so forth and one of them came up with the idea of a golf course in order to preserve the long vistas and if that wasn't done we were afraid they were all going to get filled in and we were going to lose it and so when we finally got a contract with someone to do the golf course, everyone city council, the planning commission was just delighted so I just wanted to say that we've come a long ways but we've also done some great things in the past Thank you So I'm Abby Crocker for the most of you couple quick questions Paul I know you showed a bunch of great slides earlier and I kept scratching my head about one of them the visual of the Southeast Quadrant with the black line around it and the greens and the yellows was the black line to represent sort of the TDR availability and asking because it sort of went below Wheeler Nature Park and Southeast Quadrant includes Wheeler Nature Park so I was wondering what that black line was So the comprehensive plan talks about everything south of the interstate and everything east of Spear Street as being the south eastern part of the city from a zoning perspective and you're right where the TDRs apply is within that black line and so that's what it for since about 1970 ish that's always been what's been zoned as the Southeast Quadrant functionally of course Wheeler Nature Park is very much part of the Southeast Quadrant but it's zoned as a park so it's neither here nor there in terms of TDRs and development because it's zoned as a But all those things sort of closer to Heinsberg Road like that privately on yellow square that was above the black That's correct So that's Southeast Quadrant on the official map The plan is in the Southeast Quadrant The zoning perspective is currently that large one that's right near Route 116 is currently zoned industrial open space The Planning Commission was approached during the development of the last conference about doing something that was more a transition from the nature park and the village endorsement park over towards the industrial area So in the plan it shows it being a transition district and so that is part of the planning development project would be to enact that to make more of a transition area and that's something that both the property owner and the planning commission would pay for And I'm just asking because when we're talking about, first of all I appreciate everybody's sort of enthusiasm for being here and I love the city council meetings like this and all of the hard work that goes into all of this and I really love to hear the idea of stepping back and thinking about what we're doing and how it's reflecting the comprehensive plan because I know how much work and how complicated it is that goes into building that and also how when we find that we address one issue we actually create another and so to me one of the things that I just wanted to mention specifically as we brought it up was if we add housing, we add cars and then we talk about a transportation study which leads to the concept of the east west connectors through the southeast quadrant and east west connecting roads through the southeast quadrant will alleviate some of the traffic but it will be at a direct impact on the wildlife corridors so I think sometimes when we look at the different studies that we have available they're sort of done in silos and it would be great to sort of bring them together in terms of how one solves one problem that might create another and as we're thinking about that specifically one of the things that we've mentioned in different scenarios in different spaces sort of again and again is that concept of how do we strategize for east west connector roads through the southeast quadrant and what's in the comprehensive plan today and in the official map today can be a relic from a different time and lots of different groups have brought those up again and again and I hope that everyone is just mindful of the kinds of concerns that have been raised about east west connectors and the last comprehensive plan one of the new strategies that was added specifically was to take a step back and look at how adding new roads through some of these wildlife corridors and protected green spaces in that area would have a negative impact or a positive impact depending on which way you're looking at it and I just wanted to bring that up specifically because with that black line in the southeast quadrant map there it sort of looked like that potential connector was outside of the southeast quadrant in terms of east west so I wanted to make sure that that wasn't the case. It is in the southeastern part of the city for the plan but the zoning is technically outside of it but there's zoning that applies in all parts of the city so it's not it just happens to be the best where the PDR is applied. Okay. Thank you. Hi. Hi. My name is Donna Smith. Paul and other panels and I come here definitely with a sensitive new resident and as a person who's been working very hard over the last year to learn quite a bit about my new home I like the other woman actually just relocated from Atlanta, Georgia with my family and we did so with great intention we I had lived there for many many years moved to Asheville, North Carolina for a while which also had an explosion of its population moved back to Atlanta for a couple years working at the at the same place both times I saw a 15 minute commute turn into a 30 minute commute turn into a 50 minute commute this is three and a half miles I drove to work over just a 15 year period and it happened with a lot of medium and high density housing that came into an area a wonderful community that really exploded over a short period of time with really poor regulation and management I understand like I get it like I felt quite honestly a little naive and a little selfish at the same time coming in tonight because I just landed here a year ago and I have these expectations about what the quality of life is going to be like and I understand that there's economic viability that people have to have homes that that places grow but at the same time I very intentionally with my family chose South Burlington as opposed to two other places we were looking at in the country because we could get the jobs we wanted but we could also most importantly offer our family the quality of life that we wanted to we did not have that quality of life in Atlanta we paid high taxes there we paid higher taxes here and we knew that was going to happen but we felt like the trade off was worth it and then what I feel like is a little bit of a bait and switch because when we came here we were you know so a couple of things first of all when we were planning to move here you know inevitably the two things we often heard were from our folks in the south oh my gosh that's the prettiest state in the whole country oh that place is so beautiful I go there all the time whenever I can get there because I have family near there or oh we had a wedding there but I could never live there because it's too cold and I was like yes that's what keeps the population down you know so that's one thing and then secondly always hearing about how smart Vermont is they're smart with their development they don't even let billboards on the interstate they're so creative they're so innovative and I love that about the interstate I smile every time I drive on the interstate and there are no billboards that's what we came here for and so you know to come and land within one year here that there's a huge development coming off of Spear and Swift there's a big one coming off of Dorset and Nolan Farms it shocked me like I got a little concerned and I felt a little guilty like I said because like the other woman said I'm here because their house is built that's why I can be here but I also came here because realtors and people at UVM and people in South Burlington said yes it's true Vermont is smart but guess what South Burlington is really really smart because they preserve green spaces and they preserve the land and they know how important it is to take care of their environment and that they care about this quality of life that's why we chose South Burlington we looked at several other places we chose Vermont we chose South Burlington to get away from the 50 minute commute to get away from the concrete the congestion on the streets to have our children feel safer so we could thrive we have traded in some of the economic benefits that we could have had other places because this is where we wanted to be and I've been doing my best as a new citizen to try to learn I mean I have learned so much here tonight from everybody who's spoken I've been reading actually recently little history books about Vermont trying to understand the politics figuring out how it can be not just a taker in Burlington in South Burlington Vermont but also a giver how to be a participant in my new community and one of the quotes I read recently in a book I was reading I really thought was great it was a short little thing apparently from a Vermont school girl says I love Vermont because the trees are close together and the people are far apart I love people I don't see and I came here to get away from people but I'll tell you compared to Atlanta Georgia it feels like the people are far apart in just the right distance there's breathing room when I drive out I mean I get giddy when I cross over spear sometimes and I don't even see a car in either direction on an early Saturday morning that would never have you could go out at 4 a.m. where I live before and see a car so I just want to say please please please be what I was told you were by our country and by the people who live here smart and creative and innovative and protecting our quality of life here because I really want to stay here I want to live here for the rest of my life so that's all I have to say and I hope it doesn't come across as being a new greedy person wanting what you've had for so long but it is really very important to me and I understand growth has to happen but just can we please think think a lot about what you do first and I trust that our leadership here and the citizens that are speaking tonight will have an impact on the kind of growth we have thank you any other comments just wrap it up yeah long line my name is Darryl and Peters and I just wanted to thank everybody for this all of this information I tried to get everything down that Paul said it was really helpful I'm thrilled that it's going to be on a website where I can study it and I was also struck and I hope I don't misquote you in the other paper article about the Eau Claire yes the Eau Claire conservation and one of the things that you were cited as saying was that parcel B which is 117 acres and if it were fully developed it could have another 224 or 54 units on it and you said that is not sustainable in terms of fire, police public works etc it would not be financially sustainable for the city to have that addition well we're going to have loads of additions if I took notes properly so my question is this could we just take a breather could we do some interim zoning or something and let's actually project what all of what we've already committed to what it would need to be sustainable for all of the city services and what kinds of impact it might have on transportation or other things I just think we need time to do that they put a lot of time into the presentation tonight but we can't just keep demanding this this sort of information this is hard work and I just would urge you to give us some time to assess exactly where we are thank you okay last one and then I'd like to get to the next topic because we'll have lots of comments on that as well I'll be very brief my name is Steve Partillo I'm the second city council clearly you guys and women devote a lot of time to this and we appreciate that I'm also part of the group Save Open Space South Burlington and it's really heartening to hear that you guys actually hear us and basically Helen echoed what our main argument is and that is that the comprehensive plan the LDRs do not represent the comprehensive plan and going forward is that we've already exceeded the population goals that are stated in the comprehensive plan there's just not going to be resources to accommodate that and ultimately we will all pay the price and likely we will see taxes go up as a result of that generally when you have development studies have shown time and time again it adds to the tax base yes but the infrastructure that's needed to support that generally exceeds what the tax revenue is and again I want to thank you and I'll keep my comments brief but I implore you to take action tonight you guys have the tools and hopefully you'll utilize them thank you okay a question yeah so let me just introduce myself my name is Fritz Burkhart I live in Oak Creek I think one of the things which I'm just hearing from everybody over and over again is that we're concerned that we have sufficient resources to handle growth whether it be sewer, roads, school fire, police and I was actually rather concerned actually seeing some of the comments that we don't have sufficient resources to cover the police and the fire expenditures in that were commented and one of the things that I'm really concerned about as to taxes if we look at the last 10 years if we look at the city's tax rate and how quickly it's increased it is increased at 3 times the rate of inflation over the last 10 years 3 times the rate of inflation so the point is if we were just increasing with inflation the city portion of the tax rate would start with a 3 it starts with a 5 this is a big issue for comparison the school's tax rate has been increasing with inflation over the last 10 years yet many people say that the school's spending is not sustainable but the city is going at 3 times that rate and so we've seen here a growth of 10% in the amount of housing we're seeing that we've already got approvals for 10% more which is what we're expecting for us to have city center to be successful we need a significant increase in the amount of value which is put on those properties and it raises the question of do we have the assets to do this we have said with city center that this can be done with no new taxes with no new taxes but we're already having trouble funding what we've got and I'm really concerned about this going forward I wish I could say do this or do that but these are just my thoughts I think it's important because I'm not sure that you've looked or seen all of these numbers thank you for your attention okay we'll move on to item 11 this is a discussion of possible action on a resolution to request a public hearing on draft interim bylaws and counselor Emory has worked with the city council with a SEL to prepare this so would you like to sure and I will just preface a little bit my remarks with just some history in 2012 I was on the council and I voted against interim zoning at the time and for various reasons I think that the most prominent reason for me was that I sense that the community was strongly divided and I was very nervous about you know a very divisive issue dividing the community and leading to backlash and that is in fact what happened I was also concerned with the leadership at the time in the city and did not feel confident that it was going to be successful as it turned out there were wonderful studies performed and in fact studies are required so if we do go ahead with interim zoning we need to explain the reasons why we need this time of study so I want that to be clear to everybody so studies were performed and they were done diligently but because political will was lacking they did not lead to any I would say tangible benefits which is regrettable however the studies are there and we should put them to good use and we are putting them to good use as best we can I also want to say that when I got back on the council in 2014 so I got off 2012 and I got back on in 2014 I was faced with a reality that I that had altered a little bit when I got off in 2012 we were coming off the recession of 2008 rebuilding I would say just a clear structure and should I say format for budgeting that I felt was moving in the right direction and in 2014 when I got back on I felt that was still in place and that there was real integrity to the way that things were budgeted that we weren't borrowing money from this ledger and putting it over here which I think just leads to sustainability to be quite honest with you you are able to plan and that's in fact what we put into place were capital improvement plans and human resources improvement plans and I saw all that wonderful well beginning almost 3 years ago I started feeling that we were on a path where I had to perk up my ears and pay more attention I was running in 2016 and I included in that campaign platform what I had heard the fire chief and our public works director say to the council development had to really be carefully considered because more and more growth was going to lead to a tipping point where our city services and the burden on our existing staff and equipment was not going to be sufficient and that we would have to increase not just three times the cost of living or the cost of living but even more acutely than that in order to cover the shortfall and since that time that is only I think increased I have seen them before me now many times since then and we have consistently had to put aside things on our CIP our capital improvement plan put aside things on our human resources improvement plan to the point where we had as shown here tonight we had one of our departments had say you might as well throw that CIP out at least before when we didn't have it we had our vehicles replaced more regularly and this is of great concern and if this is news to you I am sorry it is certainly something that was held in public session that was stated in public session and that has raised alarm bells in my head for quite some time I am also very aware that we are not the only revenue collecting government body here we have the school board and they are providing an invaluable service a required service for us if we are going to be a smart state we need to continue to be a smart state and I am a flat lander as well so I was very glad to hear Vermont's reputation when I moved here with my young family I live in a traditional neighborhood just so you all know I live over in the northeast quadrant so I live right near Chamberlain school I love it because I love my neighbors first of all I have a yard I am on a quarter lot and I walk to the bus and I take it to work every day and I do not put any CO2 as little as possible except when I go grocery shopping into the atmosphere or take my daughter actually to soccer at our veterans Memorial Park what I want to say in addition to those things is that when we are hearing things here on the council about what our committees are working on and we are hearing things from researchers from UVM especially about the need for affordable housing the need for to maintain our forest blocks all of these things and I know that these things are going to bubble up to us one of these days I don't know how to balance these things and I feel that given the economic burden that we are going to have to self we heard just at the beginning of the meeting tonight that the initial discussions for this years the upcoming fiscal year budget is going to be tough that the increases so far are going to be kind of hefty for us to lift and when I hear the need for affordable housing and we need to think about the forest blocks with regard to Act 171 which our legislature passed and when I think also about the studies that show certain types of development being more a drain on the tax dollar and on our city services than others and I just thought I'd put this out there and I'm happy to make this study available to whoever wants it it was sponsored by the USDA so the Department of Agriculture and although they did not include cities or villages in Vermont there was New Hampshire New York, Maine, etc so the northeast and for residential development that brings in a dollar of revenue the requirement of city services costs about average a dollar 31 for business development for every dollar of revenue that they bring in the city services cost about 31 cents for agriculture for every dollar of revenue that they bring in in their property taxes okay their cost to city services is roughly about the same as business sometimes lower sometimes higher depending on the community in question nevertheless this is a trend that was across the board consistent and that as to me we have to think very carefully about what types of development the density of development thinking about our need for affordable housing think about where it should be located so we can put that cost benefit analysis and we could think also about what benefit the land provides to us from the USDA study the agricultural working landscape actually brings more into our city coffers than takes out of them but there are also studies that show that for every dollar we spend on conserved land we get nine dollars back and that's for water filtration and all kinds of services that nature provides for free so I think that given the alarm bells that have been going off in this room for the last three years I I did it on my own we have been talking with staff to the degree allowable by law in terms of process about interim zoning but I wanted to bring it out into the open because I truly think this has to be a public discussion and that's why I did it on my own I drafted I put down all these thoughts here on the sheet of paper and called for these two studies now I see this not as a finished product I see this as a first step and I'm the one making it and letting there be discussion of course I would suggest that this body if we determine that this is a step that we should think about what we have already agreed to as a body such as city center that that is a priority and that is a type of development and a density of development that has been vetted that has been voted upon et cetera et cetera and that kind of space should be exempt okay and there are other possibilities if we go ahead with this that we should consider okay so with that I just want you to know that I do not see this as a final document I see this as a way to bring this discussion into the open and I did my best to get what I see as the economic factors both tangible and intangible there on the page for us to consider comments by council members or questions what is the document interim zoning any thoughts from a process perspective where are we at with this from a process perspective my understanding and I am certainly we have Andrew who is here is that this and if we it could be another time that the notice would go into the paper announcing a hearing and once that notice gets into the paper that the bylaw is in effect although it is not applicable we will not start the board that receives plan applications then at that public hearing we would then vote on whether to implement it or not right yes so it would be semi implemented at the point of the warning but not fully implemented until that vote right I believe so is that right Andrew is that about yourself there is an interim step this is a resolution this isn't the bylaw the next step the council the council would need to have a draft ordinance to impose interim zoning in order to warn the public hearing and for it to vest at the point of the warning a interim bylaw would need to be drafted at that point do we have content for the bylaw yet well this is potentially some content you need a purpose statement which is what that is which is what that is and a couple of studies and then there's some other language to relate to different sections of law so this could be the first step council takes there are a few routes that council could decide to go down which is one having an additional meeting a special meeting or at the next regular meeting a discussion about what the bylaw would be or what's happened and occurred in the past is maybe direct to councillors or a councillor to draft a bylaw with the city attorney consistent with the purpose statement and to put that up for a public warning for a date certain date certain could be a time that the council is choosing at some point after the public hearing obviously for November maybe the November regular council meeting sorry Andrew Bullock city attorney so I think we can discuss whether this purpose captures some interest or importance to the council whether we have other options to explore or if interim zoning if we want to go forward with that do we want what are the components that we might want to add to this in terms of I think some of that may relate to Paul's responses to the presentation that we had so that we understand what conflicts there might be and we have the most accurate picture possible which I don't think we quite have complete right now at least I don't because you said there are some areas that are not you know that don't match what you see as the most accurate picture although they did their research and came up with what they feel is the most accurate I think we need one more session of discussion in order to decide exactly what should possibly be in a resolution to be able to go forward I don't think we're going to figure that out responsibly so there's a lot of effort put in here and I appreciate that amount of effort but there this has to be vetted by planning and zoning for accuracies or inaccuracies because I thought I saw a few inaccuracies and I'd hate for them to be presented as fact but in fact they're not right so that's really important to the equation here and I appreciate that because there are a lot of perceptions around the city of lots of things that are going on where there's open earth and trees have been cut down and houses going in but in some of those places are not in the southeast corner but it's important before we make a decision to push the pause button that we understand exactly what the consequence is going to be for I mean we think we know that I think Paul pointed out that there are developments that already have the preliminary plat submitted they won't be affected and I'm assuming that this proposal would then still not affect those at all so the point is then the question is what and I think Paul had a map that sort of showed what was left in the southeast quadrant so there's not a lot left I mean you could argue that there's a ton left but in terms of what's developable there's not a lot left so the question becomes at what price are we going to spend time and the city's money trying to figure out for those people that own that land to develop it because we have an LDR set that defines exactly what can happen we have a comprehensive plan and I'm sure that there are lots of comprehensive plans out there that the LDR do not implement precisely because the LDR I mean the comprehensive plan is a vision the LDR is a legal document the legal document is what drives the DRB and what drives all of the submissions by the applicants to figure out how they're going to build what they're going to build how the storm water is going to be designed and where they can put the houses and where they can't because of wetlands and so on and so forth and where the streets are going to go and how the infrastructure is going to be built and whether the police department says that they can turn a fire truck around at the end of that street or not so then I appreciate the arguments that some residential growth is more expensive than other growth but I also appreciate the fact that this city has financial obligations that go simply beyond whether there's money for a you know the capital improvement plan right so there are some obligations that are driving our taxes I mean we had to take out an eight million dollar loan for the pension fund a few years ago and we're paying a top interest rate on that we've been taking money out for city center reserve fund for a while so there are a lot of drivers here that go beyond what the possibilities are for the expense of future developments but I appreciate your concern I appreciate your argument I'm just not ready to jump off that cliff yet because I think that you literally will be jumping off a cliff and the two things I do not want is for the city to be embroiled in a series of suits which we have been in the past and they have been expensive but I want to give due diligence on what planning zoning to please vet this first so I just I want to make it clear that my resolution is separate from that presentation that I did not base it on their conclusions and I really see this as an economic study on sustainability both natural sustainability as well as our constructed infrastructure and our city services and fiscal system I would just echo all the comments I just heard Dave and Tim say and I would just add to it that I would love to hear about these specific recommendations and what we're doing I feel like we're doing all of these but I don't show up to work here every day so I'd love to know from the staff whether or not they're doing it and as I said before I would love to explore refunding our full penny so that we can restock that open space fund so that it will position us to acquire parcels as they come free in the years to come it's worked really well in the past so we borrowed against it but I think we should have a whole penny for parks a penny for open space, a penny for bike paths I love the pennies and affordable housing and affordable housing like this and then our budget increases at our high we could get into the details about why pennies are advantageous but it secures that funding so that we don't have to take a bond out to act on certain circumstances and it also commits the council to have those fundings set aside so if priorities change the resources are there I'd also just say I love what I heard Monica say I want to explore that notion that's in New York as these 20 parcels come online what could be done with an ordinance asking if it's a green space how could that be warned so I'm intrigued by that I'd love to know more and I also would just say I want to explore these TDRs and how we can get these TDRs to possibly work in the whole city creating a market creating a demand I think there's things that we are doing that we can do that are happening and that's what I'd love to hear more information about because I feel your pain as Bill Clinton might have said I live in the southeast quadrant I grew up in the southeast quadrant the southeast quadrant does not look like the southeast quadrant that I grew up in I'm accepting of that to some extent but I want to keep it green for my kids I want my kids to have open fields and play spaces and farms and all that and I'm fully supportive of that being a priority for us to have the right picture and do it right and based on what you know taking off what you said which is what we were talking about Paul I wonder if it's possible for you and and Alana and whoever you can get to work with you you know we look at at the use of municipal planning tools and there's that list it starts with a line land development you know I'd like to hear what your thoughts are on each of those items and what the priorities are and where you see the biggest problems are before as Tim said we jump off a cliff which if we're in real if it turns out gee this isn't going to work out then we may have to jump off the cliff but I think we need one more good long discussion session to get us there and this is very hard to do in an open meetings in meetings and forums that are only take place on a scheduled we don't have a retreat is what I'm saying if we could take the next three days and sit down and figure this out it'd be great but we can't but I do think we need in light of the two presentations that were made and and all these bullets I think can you do that before before Paul answers I mean he works for you he does work for me Paul's I would remind council that Paul's making a major presentation to you at your next meeting October 15th on sustainability issues and he put that off to insert this into it which is fine but he's still coming back with that and then on top of that we have a new zoning administrator Paul's plate is fall we will if it is if it is the will of the council the staff will work together and take this on but I I want to remind you that his he's got a load on his plate staffing the planning commission and the DRB and there's a lot going on so I don't know that this can't happen immediately responding line by line to the citizens generated presentation is worthy of this time I would put forward some things but line by line I'm not I gotta go back to some things not line by line just to get to the image of a cliff I think we are on a cliff I think we're on a fiscal cliff and I think that what we need to determine is whether or not the tools we have at our disposal will make that cliff less steep and we will actually survive it that's the question I think that's before us to be quite honest comment from the public yes oh I'm sorry I did not see your hand I saw his much earlier but you did I'm sorry I did I saw hers because it couldn't see his they're both going to get to go why don't you come up and then Sarah okay yeah I thought I saw so Sarah it's late I just have to echo what Megan has said the presentation tonight was one piece of information to put before the council for informational purposes it may or may not be perfect as it was presented and certainly everyone would welcome clarification on certain points about it but it has nothing to do with holding up this interim zoning action that you might or might not take what I'm in favor of doing this I I'm feeling that probably you can't do it tonight I understand that but I don't think there's many minutes to waste before we do this because we've already since that the train is out of the station we already have several very big developments on our plate that we can't really absorb now we can't wait for the next ones that we don't know about yet to be on the agenda of the Planning Commission and or the DRB before we act so we need to get this going if you're going to do it at all if you do it at all and I hope you do there's a couple of things that I thought we needed to buy time to do that I don't see here everything that I see here is fine but Tom mentioned that we might explore this New York idea that that's a great idea we need to explore the TDR's and the biggest one of all that I've been hearing throughout this discussion is that we need to somehow better align our LDR's with our comprehensive plan and maybe I'm missing it but I'm not seeing that here in so many words so to me that's job one find the right tools the right wording for the LDR's that will accomplish what we want to accomplish through the comprehensive plan it is there I apologize the first page okay so that to me is job one and these other things would be items 2, 3, 4 maybe 5 but we need to do studies and interim zoning is to give us time to do studies right but studies is kind of a funny word I mean you can study the lineup of the comprehensive plan with the LDR's we've got a consultant to help you see where the mismatches are where the pitfalls are that to me would be a study and that seems to me completely in line with what we need some time to do but if we just keep chugging away the developments are just going to keep on rolling and we've I think demonstrated pretty well tonight that we can't let that happen indefinitely so thanks well again Dan Albrecht on the issue of the studies Miss Emory brought up the previous studies done in the last interim zoning but then things politically changed, the market changed political will wasn't there I suggest just revisiting those studies in regards to Mr. Kaufman's comment about it, not enough time this is the public's process, the public's dollars that are being spent that I don't see a problem with the all day retreat if you want to get it right I mean right but if it's public process it's worth the time to get it correct it's worth large public meetings many of the folks in this room were very involved in school discussions when they wanted to consolidate all the schools and all that and that led to a lot of good community discussions which led to good inclusive outcomes of all viewpoints in the city so if you're going to take the time to do this if you're going to time to put a hold on people's I don't live in the southeast quadrant I live in a 1200 square foot Cape over on Proctor Avenue I don't have a view of the mountains I don't have any conserved lands bought with my tax dollars and your tax dollars in my area so if you do that if you're going to say oh anybody owns a four acre parcel or whatever this zoning bylaw is going to affect then you might as well just apply it to everybody no house additions no pools, no fences no interior modifications to further improve properties so if you're going to treat a certain class of landowners and say we are going to put your property rights on hold then do it across the board well to respond to that for the environmental purposes now on Proctor Avenue I believe behind Proctor Avenue there is some natural land just like there is between Victory Drive and Mills Avenue in my neighborhood I have an 1800 square foot are you talking about rice woods? no I don't know I don't know its connection to who it belongs to but I know someone who walks their dog there there's a little sliver of city land right at the corner who it belongs to let me continue so again the studies are there the capacity is there to address this issue that doing interim zoning seems a fairly strong measure as someone who assisted the city with development review during interim zoning it was a really awkward process of this whole thing of the DRB looking at something then the city council looking at some of this two track system for no real end because the DRB development is supposed to be done by what the LDRs say not what some with all due respect to people who have served on the DRB what somebody on the DRB thinks or what they likes what they feel is appropriate it sets the ground rules that the ground rules are so back to the issue of the concern of here if the concern is the pace of development in the southeast quadrant then change the zoning bylaws don't make it 1.2 acre as the given 1.2 units per acre change that then we would have a lawsuit like you're not allowed to change zoning down zoning is very difficult to do we've been told because that was a question we asked legal council but there's ways you can tweak bylaws to change the nature of development that's what LDRs are with back to the issue of the relative cost of different types of development one of the challenging things from a land use perspective planter with the southeast quadrant is it's a giant subdivision in the sense of the word it's a giant retail area you've got no commercial very little a little bit of that new rice development has got a couple buildings there which is nice so when you talk about traffic I mean I have to look at all the folks here from Dorsen and Speer and all over the quadrant who come over to my deck of the woods whether it's Price Shop or Hannaford's to go up to another market of the woods to go to healthy living there's no services down there so if you really wanted to look at what is the sustainable development from a cost standpoint which is the city concerned about you'd zone more of the southeast quadrant for commercial instead of having all the quadrant drive everywhere else to everywhere they go I'm just saying from an academic professional standpoint that's what you would do because business development costs less city services well if that's the case then why don't you zone for it but there are no city services out there there isn't water and sewer that's one of the kickers you've got water and sewer this is not Shelburne or Charlotte but you've got huge I don't have internet I've got a landline I don't have services I don't have trash collections I don't have services if you were to do it correctly right if you were to do it correctly you'd have more commercial services there so people don't have to drive over you'd have a school out in that neck of the woods which has been discussed excuse me can I please not be interrupted by members of the public I'm happy to have council members interrupt me that's your prerogative thank you all I will say is that there is open industrial there and there there is little by little businesses that are opening there but I can't determine who's going to move in and what type of business we'll move in that's not what we do and with regard to the school that's another another conversation to have and we know I think just based on the meetings that have been held is that a new school would cost a large amount of money but nevertheless if this community requires it that conversation will be held and I don't know that's for you to choose someone from the audience but it's all of this is I think has to be done methodically and I think that our notions of how to fix these these things we're really non-knowledgeable and I think we have to be very careful of that and I drive by the way to Wheeler too so I do drive into their neck of the woods and enjoy it quite a lot and I hope to enjoy a player you did say that your comments were based strictly on an academic perspective or a practical perspective it's not going to happen but it's okay to mention right well I remember interestingly and when I was a grad school UVM 16 years ago I was talking to the developer of South Village and at that time new urbanism was all the rage and I asked him I said didn't you have commercial plan in this oh yeah we originally did but we knew there would be holy hell to pay if we tried to pay the zoning so that's sort of faux new urbanism because it's got the houses and it's clustered and that's great but there's not so much of a coffee shop that wouldn't fly today but 16 years ago things looked a whole lot and just as a point we talked about we've been talking about traffic a whole lot I have to come out onto Spear Street opposite Nolan Farmer at the end of pheasant every single day I see all the traffic we inherit from down you know it's very hard as Paul said to determine what's our traffic and what traffic it's on oh you do have quite a lot from oh my god it's time it takes me 4 or 5 minutes to get out of there and that's there's not much of south Burlington left below and so virtually all those cars are coming up from towns to the south and there's nothing we can do about that yeah Helen has the same problem it makes for interesting mornings sometimes you have to time when you leave otherwise you can sit there forever did you want to total on those cars that are coming through now there's another comment yeah I think some of the counselors are on the right track I only found out about not that I'm a developer I own anything what little I have but I only saw it because Monica was kind of posted on the community watch page and then I bugged Paul about hey when's the agenda coming out so that agenda came out on Friday I believe and here the game on Monday right exactly but it's a big it's a big step to affect a lot of moving parts a lot of property owners and all so well I don't think we're in a rush to pass this from a public standpoint I see what the agenda says you could adopt a resume well but that's one way to get people here to get comments as well so hopefully yeah it's more people will show up no you can't have it both ways like oh we're just discussing it well I never heard about that it wasn't for action I mean we've got 18,000 people in the city and we've got what 50 of us here well you'll be on the television you'll be famous 80,000 thanks but thank you Evan yeah no one else has succeeded Evan Langfield I'm the president CEO of O'Brien Brothers so I just want to say a couple quick things I am a developer I am a local developer although I will say that we don't have any development interest or aspirations in the southeast quadrant whatever that matters however what I would say is that there's been a lot of discussion on the comprehensive plan and there was one slide that provided a bunch of the issues that the comprehensive plan weighs in on and I would say that ecology and wildlife and open space are major and important aspects of the comprehensive plan but they are just one important aspect of the comprehensive plan and like any good democratic process there's a lot of balances and compromises that have to be made and that's one of the important aspects of the comprehensive plan that need to be weighed as well secondly when I think of interim zoning I think of it as an emergency measure which it is in fact and when I think of emergency measures I think you take an emergency measure because you don't have any other alternatives available to you I believe we have a process that's available to us if we think that there's issues with the land development regulations we have a process in place that we can take advantage of these larger projects don't sneak up on us for the most part the development project please let him speak please I know you have a different perspective the development project that we're currently on the way on took 17 months of permitting locally to pull our final permit so there was a lot of public process we had dozens of meetings hundreds of residents both neighbors and other folks throughout the community meet and we discuss them we met with them privately we adjusted our development to try and improve for the overall betterment of the community I don't think anybody came out saying this is the best project ever I didn't get 100% of my way and I don't think anybody got that I think again that's a democratic process I think that there's a number of folks in this room that well it's on tonight that there are a number of new folks to town which is a great thing but I think there's also a number of folks in this room Councilor Emory alluded to this earlier who went through the previous in-term zoning process and I don't think it was one that any of us should undertake lightly moving forward I'm still slightly scarred from it there are some other folks that feel the same way it was a divisive and polarizing time in this city and I wouldn't say that anybody should go through that process again lightly and I would say that we should take every possible step to work this out through the available measures to us before taking an emergency one like in-term zoning thank you any other comment yes anyone after this okay my name is Denise Olsky and go ahead excuse me desperate times call for desperate measures and I think we're at that point I really do if you keep putting this off more things are going to be approved and then it's too late I went to a DRB meeting and they said oh don't worry Dorset Meadows is only in sketch you don't have to worry now it's there that you can't take it back so I think time is of the essence and we need to act now otherwise there'll be a million petitions asking for whatever you know all the developers they want this they want that and then it's too late so it's already too late for some but again and the other thing is I am from Bucks County, Pennsylvania and you don't want to know how this turns out it is not pretty thank you thank you John I think really quick John Simpson I'm a long time citizen been in town almost 40 years I chair the affordable housing committee but that really is irrelevant to tonight I just want to say that if you are considering seriously going back to interim zoning I would advise against it for reasons that have already been stated but please do not do it for the city as a whole if you want to focus on certain areas of the city like the southeast quadrant we could probably survive that but if we we have other issues other than all of the issues that were very eloquently listed tonight and one of them is certainly supporting our economy by having more affordable housing and more development of the type that also pays its way as commercial or industry we have city center that we don't want to put any delay on and so please be very cautious about how far you go with any kind of delay or moratorium on development keep it local to where the issues are most critical if you're going to do it at all thank you I get a sense from the council that you would like a little more information from Paul we also will have at our next meeting a sustainability presentation which does relate to this I'm assuming I mean it's more than just city services is it not? okay so what is your pleasure? well there's obviously a sense of urgency something's got to change because I've seen noticeable change in the last handful of years and it's very worrisome and my wife says to me they're paving over south Burlington and I said we can't let that happen and we can't let that happen we do need answers to a few more questions it's hard to do as I said a few minutes ago in short meetings although this one's getting long at scheduled times but I think first I'd like to hear Kevin you said there were several points that are in here that need further explanation I'd like to hear those explanations Paul I'd like to see Paul Kevin city I'd like to see what you feel the priorities are in order to get what's going on what you would call under control I'll say that I have for the folks here and you probably sense it I have a lot of faith in the work that Paul does I think Echo Tom we need another Paul he's extremely factual based everything that he presents is based on what he perceives as the proper facts and I think that's really good for the city so I'd like to know what you see as the priorities in order to get this what you might call rampant development under control because although I'm on the other side of spear street I shudder at the thought of what is it called dorset meadows is that the name of the thing I mean I shudder to think what that's going to do to that to that area and then I'd like to hear how the planning department before we get into a situation that we might later regret I'd like to hear from the planning department how you think we can best go about getting things under control I'd like to hear your plan but I don't think we can take months to figure this out we've got to have something going I don't have a whole lot of patience to go much further before we might have to do something like an interim bylaw for the southeast quadrant because we haven't been able to identify quickly what steps we're going to take to get it under control without doing that and that's kind of how I see it but we don't have all those answers yet does some of that make sense to you on your overflowing play and let me Andrew can I ask you a question just from an interim bylaw perspective I could ask you later but folks are sitting here does that have to be for one to two years or can you do like three months and then revisit it what's allowed so it's up to two years I believe so you can put any specific time on it and then renew it or not there has to be a public hearing to enact and there also has to be a public hearing to repeal so there would be one and two years is the longest that it can go for but you could go a handful of months if you wanted to potentially as I understand well I think and I'm fine if you want to have another meeting in a week to work on this further so we don't keep dragging it out that's fine by me I love not eating dinner on Monday night I think ideally it would be a meeting of its own so that we don't go to midnight I think that our minds are clearer and I think it's just fair for the public who's interested that they don't have to wait till 1045 to get to the agenda item that they came to hear about everybody's leaving we're not done no they don't want to miss Colbert I'm hoping we could postpone everything else on here till the next meeting I really don't want to do any more this evening yeah I know so I think does that does that make some sense and I don't my fellow counselors does that make any is that all right you see that what I just said I the only thing I don't know how much staff can say this is how to stop rampant development I don't think that word would ever cross Paul's lips so I think that Paul just like how to manage how to manage development that's a better word how to best manage we can provide factual information and review we can answer questions about regulations but the policy decisions have to be made by the council but can you recommend what the priorities might be so there's a clear as possible picture I'd love to hear his thoughts I mean you're the guys that are in it every day can we ask the planning commission to do I mean they are working on the PUDs they're 80% done that does address I think some of the issues we've talked about at least it they believe it will make it more creative and you know have more open land that isn't just what do you say that's not going to please these people well I'm just saying that's one thing but but I what I was saying is that can we ask the planning commission to come up with a list of priorities they have a number of things already on their list that's at our pleasure anyway right they would be better positioned than the staff would be well that's what I'm thinking they're better positioned than the staff but I guess if the council wants to just go at it we can conceptually what is what I would like to see is if this is a quote emergency unquote right then the planning commission should furnish us with what they think are the tools to somehow mitigate it and so the only interim that I would ask for is that the planning commission sort of put on hold whatever else they're working on unless it's relevant to this and tell us what they think is a process to quickly I think that's what I was saying what are their priorities what are the steps that they would need to take to offer to us that we should do LDRs and we should do you know finish the PUDs and we should do I don't know what else sewer allocation I just want to caution us we are the political body staff isn't the planning commission isn't and these are political decisions we've asked Paul about the tools that are available to us that is something that we could do as we were talking about process and the tools that were available to us we discussed sewer allocation which wasn't necessarily an effective tool and there was basically interim zoning that seemed to be left there's also always the planning commission as we as we know right but these things in the planning commission take time and something that I think would be in our better interest were we to go the interim zoning route which is a political decision based on I think budget concerns and I hear I heard tonight that they're starting to look at the city services and looking at planning from an economic perspective based on kind of the you know that social meeting that was held in July that I couldn't attend unfortunately but I think that my goal for interim zoning would be to do that an accelerated rate and then to take it to the planning commission and say now let us put these into land development regulations based on the outcome of the study right because they can't do that study and we have a very qualified person who presented something at Magic Hat that knows how to do these studies and I think in my view our situation is calling for it I don't I don't I don't agree that it's a political decision I think it's a responsible decision we have to do responsibly what's in the best interest of the people of South Burlington and right now the folks of South Burlington are extremely worried about the pace of development and I include myself in that but I don't see that as a political decision in the southeast quadrant as I say to my students we are all political political is based on policy and policy is the city and city-state if we're going to go back to ancient Greece and so political is when the citizens get together and they put forward their opinions and all those good things and then a decision is taken but that decision is based on that political discussion yes Professor Emery it's going to be a responsible political discussion but I and if we can't cite a clear road to some quick action to respond to these concerns and what has to happen then I'm aware of the zoning bylaw but we have a few more questions to answer before we get there and I think and I hope that's acceptable to you folks because we don't have all those pieces in place tonight and you don't take off without all the pieces in place so what we have scheduled in two weeks is the sustainability presentation which addresses some of the questions I would like to see a separate meeting I would like to know if next Tuesday is possible I'm okay with that but is that further discussion with the anticipation of making a decision before we get the sustainability information or sustainability discussion to my mind had to do with our sustainability goals with regard to solar and things that don't necessarily have to do with these questions so I don't see the direct relationship unless I'm mistaken well Paul what did you believe you were putting together I thought it was going to be as much services and you know how many police and that connection with development and it's my thinking was to be speaking about those things but to be trying to come out of a less of a land use perspective because that's what you're talking about this evening but if you like to move in that direction but the idea was to try to bring forward some of the other aspects that aren't just about but they all interrelated more but the sustainability is one that has so I just didn't want to repeat myself so I guess I'm trying to understand then the timing if we have a special meeting next Monday Tuesday or Tuesday rather then we won't have that presentation because it won't be ready but we will have some answers to some of these questions and how does that get closer enough close enough to coming down on whether we're going to have a stepped cliff or jump over it or I mean it's a lot of work to do he isn't able to do the sustainability for next Tuesday that's my point so my question is what will be what will we learn and discuss next Tuesday that will get us closer to making a decision well let me just put this question out there are you able to say which areas of the city would be more expensive to develop for our city services than others I we're putting them on the spot here at midnight I don't think we can do that I mean there's both the geographies and the matter which that takes place so I mean for Shawn it's like do you need an extra police car and two people for the complete build out of southeast quadrant how many more plow trucks do you need how many more people need to drive them but it's also what type and density of development would help us pay for that which is the you know but the density it could be it could be a density question it could also just be a density within the PUD question as well so if the PUD is 25 acres let's say you pack everything into a smaller area to leave more open space you're going to have fewer roads but if you're going to have one house every 1.2 houses every acre you're going to have to have a lot of road to go connect all those houses together so that's a good question to ask because that's how we can control the density within the development there still may be TDRs you still may have blocks of 10 townhomes together whatever it might be but there's still going to be unhappy about the fact that that open land that was there before now gets developed correct me if I'm wrong you don't want any new development in the southeast quadrant above and beyond the permits or the developments that already have been proposed is that a fact or not but I'm asking you personally the people that are here that support this beyond beyond no one dorset meadows which already has its prelimin you don't want any other homes built on any land in the southeast quadrant that hasn't been proposed yet is that true or false okay so that's what I wanted to hear so that is totally inconsistent with what the LDRs and the comprehensive plan has today so what's the compromise is the compromise a change in density a change in arrangement on those properties you could have a package to buy the properties for conservation so then that begs the question for the Vermont Land Trust and for our open space fund we just spent $600 we're going to spend $606,000 to try conservation easements on over 100 and how many acres is it total A, B, and C? 375 375 in the quadrant so I don't know how much more finance we can push towards that goal of conserving more space other than outright going and buying the land from people that we don't even know of is for sale yet well I would like to propose that we have a special meeting next Monday Tuesday because I don't think we would be any closer to a decision I would entertain having either continue the discussion in two weeks depending on our agenda or if once we get the sustainability and some of the additional comments from Paul about the presentation or questions you've asked we could then have a special meeting if we need to focus just on what are our options what do we want to do one of which might be interim zoning I don't I've got another possibility so that in two weeks we can dedicate all of our time to sustainability in this maybe we should have a very short meeting next week for other business totally unrelated to this so that we don't get bogged down in two weeks with regular business is that a meeting right after three weeks from now it's a spillover do we have enough stuff in a week from now I don't know we're leaving some stuff on the table we're not doing any more tonight well I'm okay with having the sustainability and a further discussion of this if the agenda allows and if it looks like a bunch of stuff comes up that we have to do maybe we can meet the next day or something I don't know well we couldn't do that we have to warn it within 48 hours well but Friday we'd know well I'm still I'm still all I'm saying is if in two weeks is the next time we're meeting let's dedicate it to the sustainability and the continuation of this with some of the answers and push our regular business off either do it next week or do it the following week with an extra meeting and get it yeah we could there could probably just be a consent agenda I don't recall I think we have somebody appearing for a report but I can't remember what it is I can send you a note on that tomorrow morning why don't we plan on that Paul just one quick parting thought to pick up on what what Councillor Barrett was saying I think that ultimately whether it's yourselves or the commission the the question for the long term of the regulations or the actions of the city not just the interim zoning but the long term the afterwards is what does what does success in southeast quadrant look like and I'm not asking that to be answered tonight I think that's just the question but I think that that is fundamentally the question the city has wrestled with since it did a study in 1990 since it did a study in 2005 what does it look like to be successful and taking into account all the things that were talked about tonight but it's not necessarily a single obvious answer so I just want to leave with that thought so does that sound like a plan I move we adjourn wait a second what do we have left anything that we have to do was there something we had to do nobody's going to die we were going to agree to the budget right we have things we have to do do you need that tonight well does anyone have a problem with the budget schedule Tom hey Tom can you be quiet I think we have one more item that doesn't involve interim zoning or anything is the council comfortable with at least what would be nice is to agree to the budgeting process you read through it were there any concerns anyone had about the timing or the date this is much like you've seen in years I have to change one date it's the one listed for November 2nd should say November 16th has nothing to do with any action that you need to take but I'd like to get that posted on our web I move we accept the fiscal year 20 general fund budget schedule as proposed by Tom Hubbard any discussion all in favor is there anything else we need to do I don't think there's anything else so motion to adjourn second all in favor thank you right on midnight is it after midnight