 You just want to be out of the way. Oh. I thought it was just seven. I was very glad I... This was past his prime and he was looking pretty rough, but it was still a good past. It's like Katie and friendship are busy. Yeah. What was he doing on a bar? I trust everybody otherwise would be up at the bar. Oh, and then ask other people to share it. Yeah, yeah. I figured with all the city council folks here and yourself that you'd be able to get the food. I understand. There's the protective spouse. I walk there a lot and cross right there. It's really, it is. It's challenging. Megan. I want to switch seats with Michael and Bernie. Because the camera doesn't point right. I just about ready to get started three or three weeks. Still waiting for a few more members of the council just to get back with Bernie. So I'll just basically sit here with Bernie. But you said we could, yeah. Our daughter is a rising senior. Development of another rising senior. What comes up? What jumps out? Gills number one still. Which one? I think, aren't you? Oh, I'm sorry. Oh, no, you're next over right there. Yeah. Sorry. We went and visited McGill in February or February break. And it's still number one. Really? It was wicked cold. Oh, the wind. Yeah. That's great. It is. It is great. I had no idea. I know it was a good school, but you know, you're on the campus and you get to hear the students talk. I'm very impressed. It's like big school. She's looked at, well, you've actually been that big, right? It's a 10,000 undergrad. So she's been to a 10,000 and a 60,000. Awesome. Thanks, Paul. And a bunch in between. An urban campus, a traditional college campus. We went through the paces with all three girls. Really? Where did they end up going to school? Can we come to order, please? Can anyone hear this? Yes. Is this on? Yeah. Well then, why aren't they listening? Hey! You need to gavel. Where's the gavel? I know. That was well done. Paul did. Paul did? Paul did? Paul did? Who's Canadians? I know it's not a Whistle like that, too. He's part Canadian. All right, so we don't do the so to the flag do we okay? Okay, I would like to call to order the city council and planning commission joint special meetings and then later a city council special meeting for Thursday, August 1st 2019 and Our first item is the agenda and I look to the two committees Are there any additions deletions or changes in the order of the agenda items? seeing none I Would then open the meeting to the public for items not on the agenda related to the agenda. Is there anyone who wishes to? Share something with us. That's not on the agenda Okay, seeing none Then I'd like to fish officially welcome you and State at the very onset Really warmly felt thank you to the large number of residents both who serve on existing committees But then a lot of other people who have been active on the various committees for interim zoning it's really been a labor of love by a lot of people and I very much appreciate that it Reminds me again or sort of underscores that we really are we have a real community in South Burlington I think we continue to grow that we're in competition tonight with So who night out but But look how many people are here, so I really want to thank people I know many of the committee members Work full-time and they have families and then they also Contribute significant time want to appreciate the work in particular that the Planning Commission has done in terms of really Creating some subcommittees so that they can address in a timely way a pretty long list of activities Or deliverables that the City Council was interested in so I do want to thank you and just a kind of a brief Reason we're here When I was first on the city council, we had interim zoning it only lasted a year It was stopped rather abruptly we had completed some of the reports, but then we never got to the point of of Developing land use regulations to turn those visions into Something that could happen In terms of development and growth in this community so we heard from a lot of people throughout the city for a variety of issues who were really interested in Having time again to really think about How we best want to continue to develop the city? I think you know we have a lot of things going on City Center the O'Brien Development and I think for many people though those have been in the works for a long long time That was kind of shocking to see a whole forest go really quickly Although we sort of knew that was going to happen because it was going to be a development of quite a few homes So duh, they're going to cut down some trees and build the homes But it's always sort of shocking and then I think City Center was another place that you know It's just a ton of old it wasn't even old growth It was just kind of new crummy growth that was there forever. It was a looked like a forest And that came down if you develop that so I think people really were looking for the City to continue to think carefully about future development and how some of our values get translated into action So we did enact Almost unanimously the City Council this Interim zoning and so tonight we're going to hear from those committees were at the end of our first period of The interim zoning we included in that resolution an opportunity to extend it if we need to We'll hear tonight from the committees and that will help the council Determine whether we need a little more time or if the end of August is an appropriate time to Complete our work and then then really move on Jessica would you like to make any comments or I guess I'd like to say that I'm really proud of our planning Commission members they've each been Volunteering to participate in one of the committees we've also gotten a lot of pressure to Continue not completely put on the backboard or the work of city centers So we have three commissioners who weren't on the IZ committees who have been kind of working on the city center Push to this side Great, and I forgot to add I mean one thing that did one tangible thing that did come out of the last IZ was We had a an affordable housing committee and the council agreed even though Interim zoning ended that that was a viable committee and we needed to make that a standing committee So we did do that so we will hear that from them tonight while they're not Technically Interim zoning committee their work certainly will inform some of the other policy issues and Work of other committees, so it seemed appropriate. They have been working hard on some recommendations So it seemed to make sense to include them in this sort of pulling together all the minds and thinking and work of So many people So we'll start With affordable housing John Simpson is the chair would you come forward and I think what we'd I think what might work best is to Hear the report and then ask clarifying questions and let's not get into Real picky youn questions all of these committees Serve under the open meeting law. They are open to the public So if you wanted to really specifically get answers to a Concept or an item you can always go to that committee So let's look for clarifying and and serve general comments. I think would be helpful. So John welcome and thank you Vice chair, I guess she is but we work as a team as we do with the whole committee and And so we thought we'd just divide up the presentation tonight We are and I do appreciate very much the opportunity to be included in this effort because we saw when The area to be covered by Interim zoning was decided then we saw a large area of the city that wasn't included and And at the and we had been working for several months on an effort to have a Zoning change that would allow and would it require some affordable housing In that area it which is the transit overlay districts long Sheldon Road and Willison Road and so Because the development was limited in the rest of the city We felt that it would be important to push forward with our effort and hope that it wouldn't get pushed aside by all of the attention on the On the open space issue. So you very Kindly gave us the opportunity to do that and we're here tonight To talk about what we've done And I interrupt you for just a second. I apologize Megan emory councilor emory is on the on the Satellite or the other phone thing Megan. Can you hear? Megan? Yeah, can you hear? Can you hear John Simpson's? Yes? Okay? Thanks. Sorry John great And in my instructions Paul said don't just wade through the report the reports there People have seen it. So I'm gonna say something else and then we will get to some of the meat of the report But I wanted to have a little background in there Why do we do what we do? Why do we have an affordable housing committee and why are we? Working so hard and passionately do to move this issue forward Well, first of all a comprehensive plan calls for housing for all Incomes in the city and then specifically the comprehensive plan Puts a number on the number on the needed housing that's affordable and so and that number is what is a thousand 20 something like that, but we're a long way from near and So we feel we are directed definitely by the comprehensive plan to do this work secondly, I think we all agree that our tax base And you know having a good successful community depends on successful businesses and Businesses need and depend on good employees and Employees need housing make an afford That does not demand an expensive time and energy-sucking commute from way out of town and yet certainly we can Document and anytime you talk to businesses. They all say the same thing and Including our own city employees and the school employees most of them live out of town because they can't afford to live here so and another group and we have our whole the population of Vermont and the population of South Burlington is aging and People in that category category I'm in We need to live affordably near friends shopping and health care and South Burlington has Okay, Megan are you still there? When she's coming up from New York, she'll be here later. I believe of course Long as it doesn't cut into my time I'll stop the clock You don't have to with you tonight Megan happen again, okay, let me something happen there. I'm turning it back up Okay, thanks John, okay, I started to talk about our Aging resident fellow aging residents and I really need to live affordably near friends shopping and health care and then families we all want to have more families in this community and Our schools are excellent and families want to live here and they want to take advantage of our recreation opportunities But right now our housing supply is inadequate to meet those needs But most people who want to live here for jobs schools and aging well. It's why our committee works so hard We hope to build consensus in the community to balance the living needs of our communities people with a desire for open space What we're proposing and introducing tonight is a change in the land development regulations that will extend The inclusion inclusionary housing requirements that are now enforced in the city center To the entire transit overlay district along Williston and Shelban roads and you have our report and it is In front of the all the group here, and we can certainly make it available or you will to any of the People in the audience or online. I'm going to call on Sandy to give you some of the detail from What we're proposing in the land development regulation amendments But we're very clear that this measure will not meet the entire need But it will bring the potential of a significant number of homes for city school employees managers and young professionals and their families and Seniors who want to downsize to a convenient location That we it's an it's an incremental step. It will require on the product center to build the houses We're already seeing that in the city center, and we just feel that that concept will be acceptable considering the offsets and that we've proposed which you'll hear about in a minute to Incentivize private sector to actually build some housing that is affordable to this group that we are talking about That are probably characterized best by police environment teachers and people like that Who still can't afford to live here Without having a little lower price point on their house So Sandy would you go through the detail, okay? Well, some of it is on the screen, but essentially the requirement to include Affordable units starts when a development has 12 or more units of housing that they're proposing to build It the requirement is 15 percent of the units So, you know, if there were a hundred units it would be 15 units with if the whole department development would be Portables the for rentals that's For households when the income is out of below 80 percent of the median and for home ownership It's when income is out of below a hundred percent of median and I'll just give you some figures These are from the Ron housing finance agency for this year. They're based on HUD Amounts of these these are for Chittin County. They don't really have it broken down for South Burlington a Two-person household this would relate to rentals at 80 percent The median that's, you know, a half or above and half or above below Is 58 thousand six hundred and fifty dollars for a three-person household, it's sixty six thousand dollars And for a four-person household, it's seventy three thousand three hundred For the home ownership, which is at a hundred percent of median that's seventy three thousand three hundred 82 thousand five hundred for a three-person household and ninety one thousand six hundred for a four-person household just to then For rents and these may seem a little high, but they include utilities and There's a separate you they have a separate table But I don't have it with me of the how much the utilities actually are but for eighty percent for a one bedroom apartment, it's One thousand three hundred and seventy five dollars that would be the maximum allowable monthly rent But that includes utilities For a one bedroom a one thousand six hundred and fifty for a two-bedroom and one thousand nine hundred and six For a three-bedroom that aren't very many of those out there on the market now for the purchase For a I'll skip the one bedroom a two-bedroom household the the maximum purchase price at a hundred percent of Median income is two hundred eighty one thousand five hundred dollars and for a three-bedroom the maximum Considered affordable is Three hundred and twenty five thousand five hundred also one of our committee members She actually works for the housing finance agency gave us some information about new home prices in South Burlington in May of this year and There were fifteen Homes for sale that had three bedrooms the median price was four hundred and sixteen thousand dollars and four hundred and sixteen five hundred dollars and the lowest price was 339 Five hundred so We haven't even gotten to We don't begin to get into the range that would be Affordable for the household incomes that we're targeting The We're required by law when we ask developers or when developers are required to provide affordable housing to provide some offsets to To the cost of that and in the rule is for every required inclusionary unit the developer gets a bonus Offset unit and that offset unit is not Subject to the affordability requirement so that a hundred unit development that I talked about for which there would be a Fifteen unit requirement for affordables They that developer is Has available to him or her 15 additional units so it could be a 115 unit development and it would still be 15 required the There's There's a lot in the rules about How this is done If you want to know about just sort of practicality our the committee says that if Somebody moves into a rental and their income changes They don't the Landlord or the property owner does not have to Recompute income every year the income eligibility is determined every time someone moves in So if you move in and you get a nice raise And you would no longer really qualify for the affordability that that would mean you have to move out If you wouldn't there wouldn't be another Redetermination of affordability for that rental unit until that household moved out So it's a it's a move-in affordability And the same sort of the same thing for home ownership if you it's when the household buys the house and You know, there would be really no way to require them to sell it if they Is their income increased? It's again when they sell the house. It has to be They are eligible for 25% of the increase in the value of the house and And there also is an additional value added for any improvements That increase the market value of the house say they put a new kitchen in or something and so but it's it's not Not until they sell the house. Is there a new income? eligibility requirement for the house I Just I've wanted to leave room for okay. That's That's all yeah, we we I know we'll have at least two public hearings at the planning Commission And the city council agreed to move this forward in which we will be delving into all the weeds on this So I think if people have questions certainly we'd like to answer them. I just wanted to say that We have completed our work. We have submitted the proposal the Language of the ordinance we've been ably helped by Regina Mahoney from the Regional Planning Commission and Our drafting is done. It's in Paul's hands, and I'm hoping that it's something that the Planning Commission will be able to take up quickly So that this goes into effect. I just wanted to say people are familiar with the apartment building on Shelburne Road I'm sure that was built the last couple years by mr. Larkin and That's the kind of thing that this would cover it doesn't include not include any affordable units because we didn't have this in place But we'd like to have it in place before the next one goes up So I'll now open it for questions. Are there any or comments Tim yeah, I have a few but maybe somebody's gonna be safe for later discussion when it it starts moving into the Planning Commission realm But I just I just had a couple questions so the administration of the Perpetuity and the income vetting of the people that would be considered for this housing would be done by what agency? Well, it is up to the city manager But we've made a suggestion in our draft that it being contracted out which other communities do to the Champlain Housing Trust And is that what I know that when Eric Farrell came in with the Olympiad? He had some affordable units in there. I was like three And I don't know how that's going if anybody has like a progress report on whether those units are They're okay, and they're and it's working out and they're actually being you know rented by by the folks that was intended for as anybody heard whether it's okay, there is a requirement in the rules that Property owner has to submit a report once a year to indicate This is after it's been billed and rented if there have been any Move-ins to the affordable units. What was the rent that was is was charged and what was the income of the household? I believe Paul might I is it black water or what's the name of the? Smoky black day. I think they've been doing it in collaboration with with Planning unit staff, and I know they have the the it's if the ones that are under construction now are the ones that have an affordability Haven't yet reached the point when they have to do annual reporting To develop the framework for that So my last question is if you were considering a PUD like to say in the southeast quadrant where the land is expensive and the Units are probably going to be in that 400 to 500,000 range So would this rule? Pressure the developer to change the format of those units so that they would be smaller so that it could be constructed at a lower price to be If to be meet the eligibility requirements if the you know if the next step would be to extend These rules to the rest of the city All we're asking now is Inside the transit overlay district, but if it were applicable to the southeast quadrant Yes, and the and the rules set out what Changes they can make and they could if the unit itself would be 75% the size Exterior has to look the same, but interior wise instead of granite countertops You can have four mica and then you don't have Dishwasher etc etc etc. They there are ways that you know still we're maintaining quality You can bring the price down as a as a builder One more question. So, let's say developer a has two Lots and they're not part of a PUD and so they go well I want to build this whole unit and they get a contract with CHT, right? And so they build a whole six units of affordable housing, but this building they want to do all market rate Would does this allow for them to sort of like get you know credit for having the one building and but not the Other building just because they're they're not part of a PUD, but they're by the same developer Or would you force the all market rate to have the inclusionary zoning? that's That's already permitted in the development I mean that's how the city has approached it in the development behind Shaw's there are in Fortably CHT units that are not quite a hundred percent affordable that they usually have some market rates And then there's East it's Eastwood The two condominium developments that are that are Eric's And they have no affordable, but it's a whole package. They are where the the CHT affordability ones are Making it possible for the market rate units plus that's also happening in city center the CHT building is That's under construction garden apartments and our square all of those affordable units are being used to Meet South Burlington Realty's affordability requirements for that for the buildings they construct later I see in the planning commission report later They are going to be talking about adjusting parking standards to eliminate minimums except for multifamily family housing and accessory dwelling units in Your affordable housing lens on the top down that that issue in the south Burlington. Is that a constraint restricting? Affordable housing units the number of parking spots that are required I'm not familiar enough with the current LDRs But is that something that you stumbled across and the required number of parking spaces for higher density building throughout the transit Overlay district before the planning commission undertook this initiative. We were going to include in our recommended amendments that it be one parking spot per unit Instead of two or whatever so no more than one no more than one so we were We were we understand that providing parking is an extra expense Especially if you're putting in an underground garage or whatever, but it's parking spaces take up space and they pave and you know, they're not ideal and so I Think that we're going to work with the planning commission on in any PUD that's suggested which is where these are going to come up to You know work on the design of the parking and the layout so that it is Meets all the requirements, but it's also not overburdening the developer And I just might not we might want to coordinate with what is currently being is in front of the planning commission because yeah You're eliminating all or the proposals to eliminate all except for multifamily and then to reduce the family, right? And so we might just say I Change ours to deal only with multi-family as we're not opposed to eliminating them for other I would just add Tom that We've heard from the development community. It depends on on the form of the housing but Generally speaking there We have worked with them within the confines of our existing regulations to help them Have as few as necessary So depending on some of them like the beacon place wanted very very few because there's very few car owners in there And we and they had to put more in than they wanted others Especially where it's either senior housing or one one bedroom ones the current standards are high for what their actual use is As it gets to larger units it gets a little bit closer But it's been presented to us as being an obstacle Great and Megan. Do you have any questions? I Am gonna hold off into the planning commission, okay, but I'm grateful to Sandy for providing the numbers which tell a story Thank you very much Okay, open space interim zoning committee and Alan Strong is the chair Thanks so much great to be here So a lot of the interim zoning open space committee is here Behind me take a bow. They've done some remarkable work and They've really put in a lot of hours working towards putting a report together for all of you so As you can see here. I'm the I'm the chair Duncan Murdoch is the vice chair and then We've got Tammy Vince Amanda Anyway, it's a great group so Um, should I just ding you Paul? Hang on. Just give me one second here. I'm going to do a minor Thoracian so that we have fewer people training their neck So I'll just I'll mention I I made this as a as a power point Which I thought might be a little bit easier to run through the report the that the City council asked for is in the agenda so folks can take a look at that written as well and Um This power point is now on a city computer. So it's it can go wherever it needs to go as well So just to kind of review our charge The prioritization for conservation of existing open spaces forest blocks and working landscapes in south burlington in the sustenance of our natural ecosystem scenic beach sands and river corridors and There's been Quite a bit of work done on conservation in open space in south burlington before If you want to give it a click You can see we've had an open space strategy and open space plan There open space is mentioned in the comp plan as well as uh, where the wild things are which looked at some of the wildlife important wildlife areas in the city so What we're hoping to do or what we've really been trying to do is build on some of the work that's been done in the In the city in the past What I wanted to mention and I I guess you know probably the planning commission and And city council knows this but we've we've actually had two Two public meetings and really trying to get some feedback from the public which has been really helpful But I did want to just mention that we were not charged with Condemning property altering property values buying land changing zoning regulations are telling the city where to develop We really are trying to focus on those key areas in the city where They're important environmental resources natural resources and things that we feel should be conserved or protected So, uh, this is this is essentially the process that we've been going through so we have a Basically a data layer that was given to us essentially sort of through paul from the chitenden county regional planning commission that is Roughly about 180 properties that are Greater than four acres in size and have less than 10 percent impervious surface So that's kind of been the population that we've really been using To try to say these are the ones that we're going to focus on we're not going to go any smaller And we don't want ones that have more more paved area And sort of directly related to our charge. We've looked at these parcels and have tried to assess Five different criteria so water wildlife forest aesthetics and agriculture And i'll give you a little bit of a kind of sort of a quick and dirty overview of how we did that But that's kind of the meat of what we've been doing And so we've basically split up this population of 180 parcels and the whole committee has been taking chunks of these And going through some data layers, which i'll explain in a second to assess whether or not they're providing these These environment and natural resource values We're also trying to look at an additional criteria That tries to look at sort of big picture connectivity for the city of south burlington and We're still kind of grappling with what that's going to look like But we've got sort of three kind of candidate models that we're looking at one is in the The areas not necessarily parcels but areas that were highlighted in the 2002 open space strategy Biofinder which is a statewide database Also has priority areas that they meant that they highlight for the city of south burlington And then we have also a map of potential wildlife corridors in south burlington So we're also using those to kind of get at you know, sort of bigger picture You know wildlife riparian connectivity that sort of thing so What what we've really been using our kind of two primarily primary tools is the online mapping inventory map that is Of south burlington, which is kind of managed through the chintenden county regional planning commission It's a little picture of that on the left and then the state agency of natural resources biofinder So both of those are publicly available databases I know we'll talk a little bit about some of the issues with The precision of mapping in a little bit But they're really great in terms of being able to assess what are the resources that are Could be found on a particular parcel So I was just going to this will just take a second But what I wanted to do is just run through really quickly the type of work that we've been doing and these are You know not necessarily high or low priority parcels just five parcels Right next to each other that are kind of around the perimeter of technology part So you can see one two three four five those five areas the red's a little bit light But I think you can kind of make it out So if you if you click ahead the the next one shows riparian connectivity And so you can see in here that it shows up in parcel one But not in two three four or five 10 oh, okay. I see Thank you So it's that the dark blue is the riparian connectivity So it's just showing up in one of the five parcels So that would get a score a plus score for riparian connectivity Same thing here for parcel number one shows has a has some wetlands there none showing up in two through five This is a forest blocks that have been mapped by one of our committee members So again, you see that in one but not in two through five Wildlife road crossings, which is something that biofinder has has mapped You can see that in one a little bit in two through five right along the interstate So but if you oh, I think there was one more which is the prime agricultural soil So again, it shows up in one but not in in two through five So in this case it's it's really obvious that these were the only five that we were looking at That one really shows a lot of high environment and natural resource values Two through four don't really have nearly as much value And that's the kind of work the committee has been doing essentially assessing these 180 parcels for these various natural resource attributes No, there you go So, um, I guess this is kind of uh, just an update in terms of where we stand some of the challenges that we're facing This is sort of our, um, I guess what we're looking at in terms of what we envision the final report to look like So an executive summary Introduction a little bit of context the methodology that we've been using which you know We'll go into a little bit more detail than I just did here results Which would be kind of a list of our high priority parcels as well as a map We have some mapping capabilities on our on our team here. So Some GIS skills. So I think we'll be able to put a nice map together Um discussion and some of the caveats some of the challenges we've been facing But then one of the things that we've been uh, that we would really like to do and I I I think it's I think it's doable in the amount of time that we're envisioning this to take Is an appendix that essentially has a You know a page half a page something like that for each parcel that we evaluate so Literally anyone could go back and check our work assess our work It would have the numerical scores that those um those parcels received as well as you know a few sentences Or maybe a short paragraph that really talks about some of the attributes or some of the you know significant resources that those parcels have Challenges, uh, I think we're getting really close. We're having you know that it's you know There's always some challenges in terms of data management and interpretation But I think we're getting those under control As um again as I think you've you've heard about in some of these meetings before Some of the mapping that's been done are essentially Interpolations use of you know topography certain features. So they haven't all been ground truth That's really some estimates of what's out there. So We're doing the best we can with the data that we have But mapping precision is something that you know when we suggest an area That might want to be conserved. We would always you know put in the recommendation that there should be You know an actual survey done Um, and I think again, we're coming to um, we're we're kind of getting over this But we're just you know trying to you know some alignment with the city state and county databases In terms of you know making sure parcel numbers align and that we're all talking about the same thing But I think we're getting really close on that so Um, I think there's maybe two more um To just kind of note in terms of connection with the other um interim zoning committee work I think the one that is um probably Something that we've been challenged by in a couple of a couple of ways is really trying to Get a better handle on what the PUD guidelines are going to look like and what you know natural resource Protection areas are going to look like and and essentially what that boils down to for us is that we You know in essence want to make sure that the things that we're recommending for Conservation are not ones that are necessarily you know, I guess we we sort of say we're kind of thinking We only have a certain number of you know chips we can sort of lay on the table And so if we're suggesting a bunch of areas to be conserved that are you know wetlands or really steep slopes Or in the hundred-year flood plain We don't want to you know We don't necessarily want to use those to say these are the ones that should be Protected if they're already protected, you know through regulations So, you know sort of you know, I think there has to be some you know kind of synergies in terms of you know sort of understanding What some of these guidelines and what natural resource protection is going to look like Um, I think that's you know in essence. That's the biggest one. We have also Really been evaluating these on a parcel by parcel basis So we have not been you know kind of saying you know, this is 10 wetland and you know 4 100-year flood plain We've just kind of been giving it a check saying the parcel is really our sampling unit So, you know, there may be some issues that come into play there With you know half A parcel that could be protected through regulations and half that might be eligible to for development. So Anyway, I think the last one This is sort of what we're kind of looking at as our timeline We're we've got the committees on on deadline for five more days to get their final parcel assessments in We've got a meeting. I think the 13th of august And I think we probably really need to get together and and really sort of run through what our final decisions look like as a committee, but I just sort of put out there Without asking my dear colleagues You know roughly around mid september and you know, so that does not really quite make the The nine month interim zoning timeline So I don't think we're quite going to be able to make You know sort of a late august deadline. We'll be close, but we won't quite be there So but that's sort of where we stand in terms of our timeline I think that was all I had Are there some questions? I have one in terms of um With your timeline and extensions so that you know, so maybe we give you until the end of september um Will that And you have your report and the parcels and some of the mapping and how that Gets translated into some of the work that the planning commission does and the specifics of a land use regulation or a designation or Um It seems that's going to take longer than The end of september So it I I'm I'm just um Asking I guess if The or we can discuss this or talk about it may be really helpful to have the committee Be willing to continue And meet with the planning commission To work on those things and I I'm not trying to make this a lifetime commitment But you've done a lot of work But then what has happened in the past is we've never really quite gotten to the translation of oh these are you know the Forest regions that we really need to think about Um Preserving for a whole host of reasons and they cross 17 property owners kind of things So how do you tease that out in terms of regulations and it just seems like that would be a an important conversation With the kind of expertise that I mean your committee is loaded with expertise and you've had really good And and a report doesn't necessarily Um share that adequately so that the planning commission can say oh, yeah We get this right. Yeah. Yeah. That's a it's a it's a great point and um, you know, I also think you know, perhaps some You know some some additional Collaboration with the you know regional planning commission or you know gis expertise on on the city staff because You know right now there is One of the layers On the natural resource map is conserved land in south berlington And it actually goes through the reasons why it's conserved publicly owned, you know regulatory that sort of thing And it might be really interesting to look at You know, what happens if you were to suggest implementing certain scenarios How might that affect, you know, what becomes conserved land in south berlington? I think that could be a really interesting exercise and there probably are some Gis folks who could do some of that fairly quickly for us It seems like there's also the opportunity to work with specific landowners If they are educated in terms of This little 10 acre swath Of part of your larger property is really key to The health of lake champlain. Yep, how do we? You know encourage you to put it in You know conservation or What's that conversation look like and how do you support that? With with the homeowner without sort of Necessarily buying it as a city or just telling them rezoning it so they can't do anything with it. Yeah. Yeah My question might be segueing to the planning commission What do you expect the planning commission to do with this list of 10 to 20 parcels? And also, will you be giving a prioritization like first priority second priority? And if you do plan to do that, I wonder if it might be best to not have the prioritization be publicly known Just to if the city does engage in any land negotiations It would put us at a disadvantage if we knew where if the owners of the land knew where it ranked So two-part question. What do you expect the planning commission to do with these 10 to 20 parcels? Incorporate them into the ldr's In some way or another do you expect zoning changes to occur based on what you prioritize? Yeah, not not necessarily. I mean, I think what we're Probably going to have in there and it'll be very short because I think it's a little bit You know, it sort of falls a little bit out of our charge our You know potential strategies for Conservation slash protection. So, you know, what would be the opportunities for Purchase for conservation easement for, you know, putting in an offer of, you know, offer a first refusal You know, if there was a if there was a sale or something along those lines I I mean I think, you know, like a change in zoning to me feels like that's beyond what we were, you know What we were charged to do. So, I mean, we'd love to, you know, we'd love to see these recommendations Not sit on a coffee table somewhere and actually be, you know, incorporated in some long-term planning But I'm not I'm not really sure, you know, for us it's I feel like that's kind of out of our hands at that point You know at that point, I think it's You know more in in lines of What are the city, you know, what kind of resources does the city have? In order to conserve some of this open space I mean, I think, I mean, you're you're actually going to be presenting Kevin on some of the trade-offs with, you know, development and conservation So, I mean, there might also be some sort of alternative ways of looking at, you know What are those ecosystem services that, you know, this is providing? How is it helping, you know, reach some of our, you know, climate commitments, you know, that sort of thing But I at this point, we actually hadn't really thought much about Ranking like one through 20. I'm, you know, happy not to do that. I don't you don't necessarily think that's Something we have to do. So I think it's a good cautionary note Any other just So I guess two kind of bigger pictures and I think this is something maybe to circle back after We do our presentation, but you know, the planning commission has done a lot of work on natural resource protection standards that will be part of the LDRs And many of the I think all like all the resources maybe not to find the same way But at least the categories of resources that they've been using Are in those LDRs and We have like a separate little mini working group after the planning commission worked many meetings Now there's a small group of us including myself and Alan who've been working to kind of work on some of the nitty gritty on this there has been some collaboration But that's kind of the LDR piece Which we've been working on and I I think with your permission and maybe some guidance Maybe that's something that would then Go to get comments from this great committee because they've also been looking at the same resources before Maybe it's ready for public comment. Maybe something like that would be helpful and then I think with Um, their list and deliverables. I'm not super clear if it's coming to us or coming to you Um, and the only reason I say that is because I think a lot of their Um Their recommendations are specific to like land acquisition and conservation programs That may not completely fall within Our jurisdiction, so I guess if you would feedback on where you think their work should come first that would also be helpful to us I don't know what you have been thinking We haven't had that conversation as a counsel. So Um, I haven't totally thought that through If it just doesn't have a clear path to the planning commission for LDR changes, I'm not seeing why interim zoning is necessary For you to finalize the report, but that's my disconnect Or an extension like because you could still continue to work Producing the result without high-term zoning still being extended. Yeah, I mean, I guess the I mean the challenge would be you know, let's say, you know Whatever our our top, you know 10 parcels, um, you know, three of them, you know immediately come up for uh, you know To the development review board or something like that and we're still, you know, sort of working I mean, there's there's the there's nothing that has necessarily changed in terms of saying Where you know, where are these really, you know, high priority natural resources in the city? Um, I mean, they they've been in Open space reports and open space strategies and they haven't really been used in, you know, sort of longer range planning I think that's true. Yes. I'm sorry. Just one quick note and that's that um, you know, um, from my perspective It's really interesting that this committee Its work can have um at this At the same time two or three different Paths and avenues towards implementation. So one may be that there are Elements of the report that makes sense to dovetail with the PUD work that the planning commission has been working on where there's blocks of resources that are Majorities of parcels things like that A second tool in the toolbox Can be could be the official map, which is essentially a right of first refusal for the city council for acquisition um, and then a third element could be Actively working towards conservation whether that's acquisition by the city whether that's donation whether it's some combination of those things And so all three of those could be Implementation tasks on a parallel track to one another Depending on the individual parcels one through, you know One seven and eight maybe option maybe best for one tool and three other parcels may be better for a different tool depending on The the size of the parcel the location of the parcel how much resources the location of the resources on So just to just a thought on that So I would I in no way was trying to pass the buck on to you I just wanted to kind of ask To be clear like, you know, and it sounds like because a lot of the tools are kind of in our toolbox Maybe it makes sense to come to us first and if there's a piece to do with Conservation programs or land acquisition. We can make a recommendation that comes to you right away to think about The pieces that would kind of fall under your jurisdiction Would that I think that sounds reasonable tim I think they're deliverable is a is a resource for the city to use in the future in many different dimensions, right? because it it adds a new transparency to The parcels of land and which ones we think are more important than others for various reasons, right? And it categorizes those those parcels in a way that we haven't done before So and it makes that information freely available to anybody in this room or anybody with internet connection Or the other committees and the city council So that will be invaluable in the future because we haven't had that before So I appreciate it. I think it's going to be great I think that one of the interesting parts to me Is that um, I mean we use parcels in different ways Here's a big parcel of Contiguous forests that's important to maintain And there are lots of privately owned or maybe just two Or maybe just one ownership parcel that encompasses that and that's where I think the harder policy development and LDRs or or Zoning or whatever tools we use are Is challenging to implement but to me that would be the most Important way to use the information for our community in the larger sense really looking at Um parts of our natural resources and landscape that Are important to conserve Not just so that we have open space or undeveloped property in our community But rather it has real ecological Advantages that are important to a lot more than just south burlington The lake the air the whatever it is the water resources And that to me is a real value too That's sort of different parcel, but that's the more challenging one in my mind about how do you kind of Get some rules around that or um address that in a way where you're not just taking people's property or Right. Yeah. No, and I think it's um there there's you know, I don't know How risky it is but I certainly you know, certainly have read a lot of studies of Conservation planning where a map kind of prematurely goes public Somebody sees their land is like, you know, high priority for conservation and they immediately assume It's going to be condemned by the government or something like that. So I also think, you know, it it has to be You know, essentially, you know sort of Marketed it in a way that's really clear So I put that caveat in there what we are not Right, because I think it's our work's been misinterpreted in some of the public forums And that continues to be it will be a challenge for us. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, but I think it's really valuable information that as tim said We haven't had before Any other questions sour? I just wanted to say I really agree with everything that's been expressed and This isn't all going to be implemented in a new way overnight or all the co-driving lbrs immediately or any of that Get that but somehow we should have in mind avoiding Scenarios of the past Where we do a block of work and this is really new work as tim said that's never been done before Gives us a resource we never had before but anyway now we have that new information That could be used in some way to make future decisions But we don't get it far enough down the field to be codified or common knowledge or new systems or new Protocols within the city so that that information can actually be utilized You know the next development project that comes forward, but instead Once again, you know, there's no New lbr and the developer comes in the day after interim zoning is done and it's ready to Build on the places with one of the top 10 Bob did you become I went to the last izzie meeting and It appeared to me that they were ready There was a lot of questions that were raised They were leveling they use had their list of things to judge the land of its importance But they're all level weighted and the discussions were in the meeting They were thinking gee some things are more important than other things and then maybe they shouldn't just level weight everything So and then also we brought up the fact that some of the land in previous studies like the South Burlington plan in 2016 have already been designated as no building areas restricted areas And they said they would consider that also if they hadn't looked at that and then one of our Neighbors pointed out that like for example riparian and what and wetlands is an important factor that shouldn't be equally weighted with a view or whatever um and take dorsen Meadows for example, it's happening riparian and his wetlands and if they're equal weighting it with all the other items And it's also and designated as a place where you shouldn't build in certain parts of dorsen meadows in the previous studies So it didn't seem like they were even close to being ready So what's the rush to get this thing pushed out? Is it sort of seems like the rush sort of seems to me like as a homeowner that the builders want to get going again And you know where this iz study is important and we want to get it right And and not just push it through and move on so Okay, thank you Yes, right I can't see the point really Of the work first of all I want to commend the committee on the systematic approach to his work Uh What it laid out as this criteria were co-invented me perhaps it's flawed. I don't know. I haven't been followed it It certainly sounded good and it sounded Like the result should be respected I mean everyone should be reminded that we all we have attached to a comprehensive plan On that that's supposed to describe Conservation areas important conservation areas and a section of the comprehensive plan that says you can't build on these and a section of the ldr that says the The conservation areas Designated on the map in the comprehensive plan will be protected. That's already in the ldrs now I think it sounds to me again, it depends on your ultimate judgment of the quality of the work because You all know you have to make the call that if this work is as systematic and as thorough as it sounds like it is that You skip the comprehensive plan and go right to the ldrs and and it's within the plan's commission ambit to say The at certainly with encouragement for so for the city council to say These areas are important conservation areas and won't be developed the argument that they should take into account Wetlands runs if I understood the gentleman correctly entirely counter to what I thought was the intelligent premise of what the committee's doing Which is to say look that's already protected. There are other important conservation areas uh, I think In short, sorry, it's been long That to think of this in any other way than primarily a zoning tool When the instigation for it was your interim zoning decision Is to be diverted in exactly the way that sarah has complained of I don't think she's complained commenting on about past initiatives Hey, rosanne and then well Yeah, and I'm gonna echo with sarah what frank said And and a little bit of pushback on tim if we have 11 studies that we've done over the decades about natural resources land wildlife etc All of them identified certain parts of land All of them said these are lands that should not be built on we have had that for decades But just like sarah says we get to the point where we know a lot and then do nothing And writing in the comprehensive plan which we have with the maps as frank said we've identified them They're on a map There's verbiage. It says why we want to protect them But if the ldr's don't protect them, they are not protected So we have to do the doing Now that we've known this for years, but unless we codify it It's pretty much meaningless I don't disagree Okay, last one and then we'll Just a comment. I think maybe some people underestimate the challenge of writing ldr's. Yes, our community has Worked for over a year on on the product that we have provided and it's It's challenging here. So there's limited resources to do it. I I do agree that follows through is absolutely important But we have to recognize The challenge of that work Megan you wanted to Thank you, and I apologize um For being late, but I did follow the conversation on my on my phone um What I wanted to say specifically about the open space um iz discussion that I've heard is um One I would recommend and the committee has yet to discuss this as alan said, but I would recommend that we have kind of our you know Categories maybe not one two three four five down to 20 number one being the top Parcel but actually have categories top priority You know We had had high medium and low Not to you know yet accept those terms is kind of the final language But all of them identified for conservation But yet kind of Put into different categories of priority and I see that as an advantage For planning purposes. I also think what's important is when we're looking at the tdr committee And the recommendation to have sending areas throughout the city And the planning commission reports stated that they wanted to look At our report specifically and and the parcels that we would recommend For conservation in order to put you know that those two committees work together and see What potential sending areas there could be throughout the city? I find that to be worthy Of us giving it a few more months. So I I just wanted to put that out there I don't know if that's what it's going to take but according to planning commission by the end of the year And then having it to the council by january that seems reasonable to me. So I just wanted to make those two comments. Thank you Thank you very much. Thanks. That was a great presentation Um, so now we'll move on to transfer of development rights Interim zoning committee and michael Metag is the chair I guess Good evening and thank you for organizing this I don't have a huge team to support me like alan, but I do have I do have three members of the committee Yeah Tim kelly and john so I will count on their silent moral support Um, I also decided to make a power point Make a power point for ease of presentation and For people who behind me who haven't seen Our 34 page report So, um, I'll I'll go go through it as quickly as I can But we should note that, uh The committee's focus has been on the conservation value of tdr's not necessarily the planning tool That's the team As you could you go back to that pool? If you know any of the people on that on that list You will understand that they represent a wide Very wide range of opinions And they're they're quite opinionated Perspectives and preferences About the conservation value of tdr's However, I have to say it's a tribute to their commitment to this task That we've nevertheless been able to reach A consensus on the report as it stands today, which has been submitted to I'm assuming it's submitted to the planning commission of the council and it'll be up on the city's Website There I haven't seen that report yet. I don't think we got it. Okay. Well, it was Yeah, I mean, I would have Michael said it to me yesterday. Um, so And um, we've not had a chance to coordinate on whether You're in the same boat as everybody else Okay, so this is new to all of us. So that is the charge that the council gave us to undertake an analysis of the program for transfer rights established in and by the ldr's and recommend options for its implementation The bylaw resolution As I read it as we read it focused on preserving open space And an effort to maintain a balance between community values for natural Spaces and developed spaces which would be a more commercial ones um And there was a concern that uh, the rate at which development is moving in in south militant could cause Cross to outstrip our revenues and then the net result could be An increased tax burden for us all That's the state enabling legislation that we work with It's obviously a lot longer than that But the main points are to encourage and assist them in the maintenance Of present uses of a months agricultural forests and other undeveloped lands Encourage the use of conservation and preservation tools and enable us To plan an orderly growth in the face of increasing development pressures And uh title 24 4 2 3 is the statute which Which controls The transfers of the We also Referred to the Vermont natural resources council tdr guidance document Um Which notes that the intent of the strategy scheme is to help shift development away from sensitive Open space areas and into downtowns and villages and areas where we want dense development It also mentions that Transfer of development rights Is a municipal planning tool that could help reconcile community and landowner Interests which are always going to be an issue Briefly the history. I don't have to go through it all but in 1992 LDRs were assigned a density of 1.2 units per acre and within the s eq and the idea of transfers was introduced at that time In 2001 an open strategy open space strategy was developed and published And identified the most important s eq lands from a habitat and natural resource perspective And in 2004 The city commissioned arrow would environmental to conduct an ecological assessment of the s eq That arrow would report gave us some general principles for the stewardship of our ecological resources and if you want I can List them or mention them Um Yes, on the previous slide if you could speak to the 1.2 back in 1990 Yeah, that was a granted across the board regardless of land types So if there was swamp there or a forest it was just one whole s eq Back to that in the planning What's developable and what's not at that point Um in 2006 the uh s eq chapters of Of the comp plan and the ldrs were rewritten and established the five sub districts that we find In the s eq today and introduced the transfer of developed rights program South Burlington's program Um at that time There were an estimated 2066 tdr available for transfer however, that is a We've used estimated for a good reason and there's not no easy way To find that number However staff Has helped us a lot. They did an analysis the best they could And that's as close as we could get So we had 584 tdrs used Of which 114 were severed and transferred under the tdr program and that um that Translates into 95 acres of conserved land permanently conserved land in perpetuity 470 approximately were used within Developments or I call it we call them intraparsal And that's roughly 370 acres of open space whether it's Served in perpetuity or not is an open question which we would like to investigate Um There's an estimate in 1357 the remaining Of which 116 Are owned by the city I think those come from Underwood and the scott property mainly And about 1241 are held by landowners and that's What it looks like That's a question. I'm sorry to jump in. I'm really trying to understand tdrs So the 470 inter parcel were really one big land block where they just moved the housing into one's corner And then they can serve the rest Not necessarily it may have been a development that had land in the nrp and land in another seq zone and they were able to use the Inherent tdrs in the nrp section of their property Build extra density in the other part of their property An example of that just so that everybody can picture it the south point neighborhood Off spear street the property goes Quite a while probably a quarter mile back All of the housing is in the first Few hundred feet from spear street And then the property goes all the way back, but they use the density Which is in as michael described the natural resource protection district They shifted it all through a pud to the front part of the property So it is similar to a tdr program But not a formal transfer of tdrs Last question. I won't ask any questions later the 114 All right, you got it 114 that were severed and transferred was there any common characteristics about that? What type of landowner was more likely to transfer and sell off the property? I don't think so I think it's a pretty small sample set at this point. Uh, the bulk of it has come from one property owner From from the two Um, and then there's been a number of individual ones beyond that of the 114 I believe 30 odd were one property owner and 70 Something were another and so that only leaves you with about 14 others I guess if there's a common characteristics It's that those who have been through it then understood how to legally go through the process And so we're apt to do it again So if that might be a common characteristic Paul will attest to find those 114 took a former member of the the tdr committee Here this evening, uh, many many hours Searching through the land records that In in uh, Donahue Campbell's office and so it's a laborious task We don't know whether he got all of them, but uh, he did a pretty comprehensive job So the challenges for the program are that them They're limited receiving areas if we want to expand the market those Because they're restricted to the seq at this at this time An absence of a mechanism to connect tdr holders with potential buyers and that absence hasn't supported the development of a robust marketplace for tdrs And uh, there's as I said a moment ago. There's no reliable database or registry of tdrs available Or sent and severed and we're used in receiving areas this way it makes the program Not very transparent and not very effective or not as effective as it could be Our tdr program was established with receiving and sending areas Both in the seq And the seq is we're almost all of our remaining open spaces located An unintended perhaps unintended consequence of that is that We we could have dense development in the same areas where our ldrs and comprehensive plan encourage open space preservation And natural resource protection wildlife habitat preservation and continued agriculture. So that's a big issue with the current With the current program there are several surveys that one can look at but Southport and residents have expressed a great concern about the pace of development in the city And the importance of conserving open space And precious natural resources. It's probably Why we have interim zoning today because members of the committee and hundreds of them Came to the council and expressed their concern with With development and the loss of open space Um So It's it's a it's an issue. We have included those surveys in our report. So they can be seen But it's enough for now for me to say what I said evaluation um We looked Or we boiled it down To four options to to evaluate One eliminate the tdr program all together and adopt conventional zoning or cons or conservation zoning Retain the current zoning but purchase and retire all the tdrs That's 1241 of them Retain the tdr program substantially as is or revise it Quite extensively Option one was not considered biased to be viable And the main reason is that future changes in zoning Could undermine the conservation intent of of such an option We didn't consider this viable because the purchase of all outstanding tdrs would present significant fiscal challenges to the city Which we felt would be difficult to overcome Do you have a dollar figure to attach to that? Assertion the average of the sales that we do know about Is about 9,800 per tdr So 1241 is a big About 12 to 18 million It's a chump change Rec center With a pool with a pool What Tim said The range was from 15,000 to 9,800 to There was a the high point was 15,000 Option three was to retain the program Substantially as is with changes that have recently been proposed in a new draft of the LDR However, leaving it as is does not further the city's open space goals as articulated in the interim bylaws on the comprehensive plan and as I've And it doesn't expand the marketplace for tdrs and leaves sending and receiving areas In the acq doesn't make any move The one we recommend Option four Which is Significantly revise and amend of the tdr program One to support the community's conservation goals as articulated in the bylaws and comprehensive plan And to retain the density and conservation benefits of A tdr program in in a meaningful form That will work for us So the recommendations which were in my summary are Uh Expand the tdr mark placed to to receiving areas outside the acq Which means the transit overlay district mainly Add new sending areas in the acq and outside the acq which are identified as High priority for conservation Maybe appearing on the open space committee's listing Um Define a dwelling unit by area that means uh Establish a a maximum square footage for a dwelling and Use A request for a waiver In other words a built an owner or a developer couldn't say I want to build bigger than that Uh, you could do so, but you have to buy a requisite number of tdrs Right now you don't have to Right now it's not it's not defined that way a home isn't a dwelling unit isn't defined by areas There are communities that define That that define Density by land by area of dwelling unit and so I don't know if the tdr programs has done that But that's just an extension of communities defining development density by Metrics other than just a dwelling unit straight up Redesignate sensitive areas receiving areas in the acq That would mean Retain them as as receiving areas but To restrict their Their access to additional tdr Bonus in other words restrict them to their base density And the city could purchase and retire tdrs from some or from select passes which um Have the highest conservation values as indicated by the open space committee Or highest priority Work to develop a balance between the capacity for tdr usage And the supply in order to create a fair and well functioning market We don't know what that capacity is because We don't know how many Receiving areas we might be able to expand outside the seq And establish it but this is important to establish a tdr clearinghouse or registry or bank Where holders of tdrs could list or de-list their tdrs Nothing like that at the moment um a requirement of The statute is that the city should develop and maintain a map of areas from which Development rights have been severed And we believe this map should also show The areas to which the tdrs have been transferred or in or where they've been used intraparsal or internally Developing this map would allow the city to determine the impact of the tdr program to date And it could become a reliable database of tdrs Severed and and those that are remaining which we don't have it present What's next well Depending on How many of the recommendations that we have made are Accepted and will be acted upon Will will tell us How much drafting Of new ldr language will be required and it could be Significant because The plan this would involve zoning and the change to the significant change to the tdr ordinance and on and on and on So how long that will take uh is difficult to assist, but it could be many many months judging by the experience of the affordable housing committee and others and even after that there would have to be Approved by the planning commission the planning commission would have to have a public hearing Go to the city councils the council will have to have a public hearing so it's it will be a very long process Again depending on how many of these recommendations are adopted or approved Although at this point they're not flying off the I mean people aren't buying tdrs right and left at this point No, right. I mean you don't even know where they are Well, we know where some of them are because they are I think there are yes, but but they're not being sold They're only being sold. They are pending sales. Well, there isn't a demand at this point at this time. Yeah Well, it's not they are pending sales for Spear meta they're pending sales for dorset meta and there's the whole Eau Claire Project which I don't know how many tdrs, but it involves a conservation of over 300 acres of land so the next Developable areas in the secu that are Candidates for tdrs are the next projects that would then be that would create demand for tdrs Right So but we don't know what those unless we go outside Unless we go outside the secu Unless well, I'm just saying today that's the way it is though the likelihood of tdrs being used in the secu goes down every development that goes by because Uh, the community clearly doesn't want the density that's being proposed You'd look at the dorset meadows, right? Look at the number of units that started that and look at what happened So as long as developments that are being proposed as they go through the review process Are being built out at less than the developable maximum there won't be A market for tdrs in the southeast quadrant Fair enough for Which we might hear about Right because of possible changes to the tdr program, right? And also just because of the I wouldn't say dwindling, but you know every project reduces the amount of developable land that's left in the southeast quadrant There isn't a lot of leftist developable in the southeast quadrant. We are late to the party, but there is some But but the the idea of a robust market Really does need to be a separate discussion Well, I I I don't know that the city ever promised that there would be a robust market for tdrs in 2006 when this Change happened to the zoning, right? The tdr program was a way probably to compensate people who had Instantly had a bunch of nrp acreage on their hands Where they could then sell some of that development right to somebody who wanted to increase the density somewhere else And they had been used, right? They've been used on link roads saty lane across from the cider mill, right? Within cider mill 2, right? And then we have a lot of like proposed developments that are on hold right now You've got dorset meadows spear meadows And there are probably some other ones that are going to come up in the same situation. So You know it's we can sit here and discuss all night whether the market is fair Not all markets are fair, but they're usually pretty efficient at some point, right? Okay Yeah, any other questions or not real specific Let me make a statement and not a question I just want to say I didn't vote for interim zoning But I I just truly believe that the tdr program could be better and I really love what you're proposing about Expanding the the sending and receiving areas. I think that makes sense So I'm really excited about the direction you're going in because I see other areas of of south burlington that this could really benefit Also, hopefully may be creating more of a fair marketplace There could be benefits in increasing the density in The areas that we might involve changing zoning But it's the right direction to go There were a lot of great ideas for how to use tdrs elsewhere in the city in other ways But they just weren't viable because they didn't relate to area or units Right, so really if you're going to go outside the secu it has to translate to increases in density in other areas Where you can use it, but there are some areas where you can't use it So you can't stick it in city center because you already have form-based codes and it has its own entity and governance, right? So really monica did a great job looking for areas where there was potential for increasing density in So that's why we have this battle Although nothing's forever things can be changed Okay, we could go to 12 stories in city center instead of just five 14 No, I like that comment, but then we would have a big hole Yeah, that was a question I had actually so I wanted to explore that with you tim and michael Anybody else here who'd like to Jump in Because the tdr is a way for you to make an investment in a future Return, right? That's what a tdr is Right you purchase a right to invest for a future return And and so it doesn't necessarily sell your development rights That's it, but I'm trying to think of it in a you know, kind of a A larger kind of more abstract Yeah, right. I mean that's when we're talking about investments capital investments. That's what we do right we invest to make money, right? So um This is something that I'm curious if you discussed Is there another way to use that capital investment to make money other than to do simply more units We're a little bit of because building another unit there's of course you have more plumbing you have more electricity You know electrical costs you have you have you have more costs But the payback is so much higher, right for that little addition of costs so that the tdr becomes worthwhile Right, so is there some kind? I'm I didn't have this discussion. I'm just kind of throwing this out there But is there Some way to have something that has a low cost Let's say an upgrade in building materials That would give you a higher payback. I I Is there something that would just be I don't know. I mean, I'm not saying granite countertops. It's a solution But that's what I'm I'm just You know I'm giving you an example that may not have any real application Aspect of of the tdr or tdr's We were very focused on the conservation Yeah, yeah, so for instance when we look at the puds I guess something now is coming to me The puds and I noted that in the agricultural pud there was no commercial and I was like no farm stands No, no kind of store to sell your you know your goods and that was kind of striking to me But could we you buy a tdr and you can open a store? For instance, right you didn't hear what I said earlier I'm sorry. I apologize to tdr in the sense of a unit or some area related to a unit You can't translate it into a parking way. You can't translate it into Having a commercial entity inside of a pd. You can't do that according to vermont law that you doesn't allow Yeah, but you just can't you could use a tdr to increase the density on a lot From x to y For the right number of tdr's Right, but So like a store a store is is that an increase of density or no not a dwelling. All right Okay, tom bailey. Yeah I'd recommend starting with a statue. It's pretty brief in title 24 And it's laser right out what I are isn't actually a On the ascending end. It's a conservation It's the receiving end that I think you're referring to It spells out what you can do and what you you know Or just a few sentences. Yeah, I recommend it Oh In the report that I sent you yesterday that statute is included Yes, you think you could find it if people are interested Well, I don't know if we need to discuss that This moment, I think we need to move on but so what I understand is your recommendation or the committee's recommendation is to really redesign the program and and Maybe trying to change the statute is part of that redesign I don't know It could be statute would be part of it. Well, we have a legislator here I don't think we might have the longevity to do that This is too I went to a plan Had made a interesting conversation with I think it was the south perlton attorney came to the meeting and The question was how can you use land that could never be developed To get tdrs to develop land So, I mean, has that ever been addressed people are selling land tdrs on land that you can never build on So you can put more concentrated building in development. So that doesn't seem right at all The other question I have is with the vermont supreme court decision pending on tdrs How can any decisions be made on development until that's resolved? Well, true. They'll make a decision What the time frame is that are Here strictly to the terms of the statute I agree completely with your question and that's what I want to understand the 2006 if there was a flaw in how It was implemented and if we are allowing those tdrs from undevelopable lands is that something for us to look at but that's Come up a couple of different times and I'm trying to understand it better Okay, I didn't hear that as a question just to see Yes If the change of circumstances, I think you are all kind of already aware that Of course, you're on the verge of having no tdr provision in the ldr. You know that, correct? Well Our tdr provisions have been found Unconstitutional We don't want to get into a large legal discussion here about that One my point is you're about to have no tdrs and I'm saying this in support Of mr. Mittag suggested that you need to revise the whole thing anyway Yes and press and no and I'm just speaking for myself right but the the tdr regulation in our ldrs We have a proposed we have a draft change to make them amenable to the statute All right, and and that is being reviewed now and I don't know where we are exactly with it, but we've seen it and It needs to move forward. It's on the planning commission's agenda right the planning commission has a public hearing two weeks now It's also included in our report that draft, okay Okay, sandy. Let's make this the last one because we still have you know, it's we're a little bit behind schedule Good conversation, but this is just a question. Did the committee? explore the rationale for the 1.2 units per acre that was Established in 2006 and if And if it did which I hope it did Did it propose to maintain that or a different Level of overall density for the southeast part We don't know what the rationale was Did you look for it? No We read the section chapter nine of our Is a few ldrs And it's not evident I think there are people around that are very much involved in the development of those regulations So it would involve more research than just Looking at the ldrs I think it's an important thing to find out the rationale for the 1.2 acre density Yeah, it might be worthwhile looking ahead but And one of the one of the proposals might be to that represents 0.83 acres TDR One of the rational one of the ideas might be to match the available TDRs with What we think the market is change that ratio Instead of 0.83 make it 1.83 or two or three Holders of TDRs I would have a problem with that but It might be viable And to sandy's point Was an underpinning of the whole structure Um We're talking market forces. It is surprising that if people are not really selling TDR So we and we're not sure that we have enough land to really have enough receiving areas for TDRs that the cost is not being driven down Right. I mean I took economics 101 Okay, well, thank you very much There's no other comments. All right The planning commission on The PUD subdivision master plan Jessica you're going to get the Yes, this is a appropriate spot I should stay here Yeah, you can stay there. Yes. Is that okay charlie or do you want her to go to the table? Is it Yeah I Is that your good side? You can all tell me Thank you Megan Um Well, thank you And um, thank you to all of the contributors to our work Um, so as you know, we've been working on revising the PUD and master plan standards for quite a while where We've continued as our main work item um, and I have a Big chart here that shows how many work items that really is it sounds like three little letters, but it's actually And this is clearly not readable, but this is our work chart And I'll hand these to over to you too just as an overview of What we're doing and and because this hasn't been completely updated But this we put together with the help of staff to try to coordinate all of our work for the last many months So this gets us out to where we're at today The idea being that we've worked on subdivisions and under subdivisions. There's like a hundred items Under master plans. Similarly. There's many many items Underlaying zoning PUDs specifically Titying up the land development regulations So that as we're implementing new things there are Not issues with the existing ones and then the public outreach and adoption which we've been working on a little bit as we go but You know, clearly there's a lot of items in here And I'm going to touch on some of the specific ones and show some some work products as we go but You know a big piece of this is also meshing with other committees And multiple consultants and experts at the state who have been helping us along the way So I know it sounds like three letters, but it's actually quite a bit of work and We're getting close. We have quite a few pieces done Um, I know that this timeline doesn't go out to the very end but in general We anticipate wrapping up by the PUD subdivision project work by the end of the year Um, I know that there are lots of other pieces that the other committees have been talking about here tonight And we do know that that's coming to us and we're hoping that we'll still kind of Work within that time frame You know as we tie those work products together with what we we've been working on So I guess a few specifics And I guess on the side of that I generally alluded to it earlier But we there's some things that we we haven't been able to completely drop Because they're important. So there are some other things we've kind of shoehorned into our schedule as well and one of those is um Keeping up with some of the city center form-based code Items which we've had a separate subcommittee working on So that those haven't fallen off the radar And with that I think paul did you have the um this thing because I think this we could put up I actually included this in the packet. So some of you have seen it already and and this is still a draft but this is gives a general overview of Kind of what it might mean to be a PUD PUD right now our PUDs have lots of flexibility, but Maybe don't encourage as much smartness and innovation um And priority of what we really want. So, you know, the big a big piece of this revamp is that, you know, if we're giving flexibility we want to be able to specify What our priorities really are so so paul's focused in on two of these up there and these are um Being set up. So there's a general framework So we have a few types that we're flushing all the details out completely at this point And then some additional details that are additional types. We would be able to add um over time so if the city decided we wanted a um A slightly different type of PUD, you know, we have this really nice framework And we have I think four that we've been working on all the details, but then all the elements that you could put together for additional ones that might be slightly different So the idea with these is that Right now these PUDs would be required for any parcel greater than four acres except in city center area And within them as you can see by the charts There's allocations of certain types of land use that would be required as well as a little bit of flexibility with the unallocated percentage. So Like the examples that are up there you can see there's You know the neighborhood commercial has about half residential and half other uses Whereas the traditional neighborhood development has 70 percent residential And the other uses are kind of a smaller piece of the pie So paul if you could scroll up to the top one The conservation one I wanted to point that one out specifically So the conservation one is one of the ones that we're flushing out completely and This would be one that would be allowed in all areas of the city and If 50 percent of The property has the natural resources that we've considered to be Important a lot of them are the same ones that the open space committee has been focusing on Then the property would be required to go through this conservation PUD type That would concern or you know would not develop, you know, 70 percent of the price of the property so you can see there's 70 percent of that pie is green up there, which would be the open space areas Do you say that 10 to 20 parcels identified by the open space committee would likely have this PUD applied to it? Well, it's I'm not I I don't know if I can say that because one of the things that alan said was he wasn't sure if More than a certain percent of a parcel would have those resources what I'm saying is that So some of the resources we're looking at as Like important, you know, there's a whole list of them, but you know wetlands So say a property had more than half of the property was made up of wetlands and flood plain So it's now triggered this Checkbox that says more than half of the property is a natural resource area and because of that now the property needs to go through this conservation PUD And those resources need to be part of that 70 percent of the property that remains as open space So it's a it is a tool That we're looking at that would kind of couple with the work of the open space committee to Put in your example that property owner is not going to be surprised by that because they have wetlands on their property They know that you can't You know, right I guess my larger concerns the things like the view sheds But that's where I'm interested to see your full report and where you come in from because the view sheds could drastically Down zone if I'm understanding this correctly if that would identify it as a conservation target At this point View sheds are not Triggering that in our list We don't have them well enough to find to have them So our work is very separate from the open space committee work. Um, this is just a related piece so um Let's see So the other types of PUDs like, you know, if pulse scrolls back down to the bottom where we were um would be designated as Acceptable in different areas of the city and we just started at our last meeting to look at some maps of where Like specifically where in the city these different PUD types would be appropriate So those are in draft form and I don't have them up here today, but in general You know the way that we've been looking at that is that it kind of matches our existing zoning So something that has a lot of commercial Would make sense in areas where right now we allow commercial But as you see almost eat almost all of the PUDs do have some percentage of Um a commercial use or a you know, not basically a non-residential use allowed um Paul if you could scroll the other way to see those other charts There's also information about how those uses are broken down And you know if you look specifically in one of those like green columns Each of the PUD types has a certain percentage of land that would be required to be park or civic space Um, you know to make sure that we're kind of getting that whole mix of uses that really makes up a whole Like a whole neighborhood You know versus our existing zoning, which really does do a lot of Or traditional zoning, which kind of separates out uses quite a bit So I think those were um Some of the specifics on those um, we're also having kind of parallel updates to the subdivision master plan regulations and How could you Well, I guess maybe I should talk about the natural resource protection standards next I don't have a great handout for these but um So we started with we also as the open space committee did started with the 2014 open space report as well as the recommendations that are in the comprehensive plan about um recommendations to Beefing up our natural resource protection standards And I think the first thing that I should really say about these is that these would apply across the city. This would be a new Um new updates to chapter 12 of the land development regulations. So the natural resource protection standard changes are Not specific to just puds, but to any development across the city And you know, what we've done there is through multiple meetings and having help from the ccrpc The pud consultant as well as some specialists from the state come and help us Work through kind of what are our existing natural resource resource protection standards and where could we make improvements? And incorporate some of the recommendations for new natural resource protections that are you know in those Other reports in the comp plan. So some of the new Some of the new protections that we're looking at are for forested areas river corridors steep slopes and agriculture And views and we haven't gotten through views quite yet, but we're definitely reserving a space for that It's kind of a big topic that we haven't done A lot of specific work and there's been some parallel work done Kind of by some other groups see so The river corridors you'll actually be seeing really soon. That's one that is in this first round of Of ldr changes that we have warned for the public hearing. So that's coming soon Some of the other things specific to the natural resource protection standard is Where possible we're trying to use the same definitions that the state uses to kind of streamline some of the review So that you know for instance For river corridors that's something we were interested in in Protecting we are using the state line for that So we wouldn't have like a separate definition for for that resource and kind of across the board. We've done the same thing So Paul, do you have that guidebook the pud guidebook that So I have some draft images This would be a very draft version of one of the work products that will be coming out In parallel to the land development regulations This would be referenced by the land development regulations, but a separate guidance document that has a lot of specific so like So in here, there's a few different things that apply to um PUDs that are defined So this is a table that defines different open space types So different open space types are listed across the upper Kind of part of the table and then for each of those there's really specifics on Exactly what that would need to look like and then as well as what types of puds Those are appropriate within And then as you go down There's a few few that have some blank spots, but paul if you go down I think the pocket park one was had the nice. Yeah, this one. So this this is an example of what each type of open space would have Information on so so those kind of letters with the checkboxes across the top are What type of pud it's appropriate in and then there's really specifics about what exactly does it look like Both with pictures As well as Things like sizes requirements for benches and seating or shade or whatever the important pieces that really make it a pocket park You know, so there's some visuals for For people to have an understanding of what what it would be So similar to this so we have something So a lot of these open space types were developed originally for the form-based code Area of the city and they apply there. So what we've done is kind of flush those out added more And assigned them to specific puds as well So similar to that their street types So in the same document paul if you go down further their street types and similarly some of them are already being used in the form-based code area Specifically, but this is Kind of looking at where they might be appropriate in other areas of the city and and kind of getting them in this kind of accessible format with the You know, so that little picture there actually gives quite a bit of information about The layout the standards and what the typical road cross-section would look like and then the tables below have a lot of information about Specifically what the design is and requires for each of those And what we've added new Which does not exist right now for the form-based code area But we now have as part of this document is Building types so similar to the open space and street types There's kind of a master table on what types of building types are appropriate And Then some specifics on what those look like So one of the things that we've heard a lot is that people don't always have a good understanding of what a development might look like Or what they might expect in different areas And this gives a little bit of I don't know. I don't know if assurance is the right word, but It gives us a little more control over what types of Kind of forms you might expect in different areas So so we can also have some control over kind of the distribution of these different things within the different PUDs So this is one of the big work products And I mean, I think that that those were kind of the main things today And just inject one quick thing on that on the building types, which is that Part of it is also to establish better transitions Which is something that the commission has been hearing from the community of Take allen road with the four story buildings in the single family homes next to one another create Use the building types through PUDs to create better transitions and to Invite different ways of looking at density That there are lots of models out there of say a four plex that Looks and acts a lot like a single family home. Maybe that's a good transition From single family home neighborhoods towards something that is larger things like that Okay, so I mean, I think those were the main things. There's some other things in the report as well That's the overview And then as for interactions I think our natural resource protection standards as we go through them could as I mentioned earlier benefit from a feedback and comments from the open space committee and to see what their Work product is before those are finalized. I think would be helpful And then also all of the other work products from the other committees, you know, kind of fitting them all together in here So your time frame then you think by the end of the year That's what Optimistic but It might be optimistic is one of the I'll just know the one of the Great opportunities, but also challenges on a time frame perspective is Michael spoke a few minutes ago about how There may be some areas of the city that should see some increased density That might mean that a different pud type is then appropriate for that area So there's a little bit of an iterativeness to it That I think the commission's been making some to get the ball rolling has made some sort of placeholders But may have to revisit or may want to revisit based on as the products become more finalized in all the areas here I'll see you'd add more than the four that you have or five or or different applicability or Yeah, so maybe the map of where the traditional neighborhood development applies actually might change a little bit if we're Really targeting different densities in a spot like maybe some areas of the city might switch what type of appeal is most appropriate Questions or comments Yes, Megan first one's about whether that you can have a farm stand or a store if you and the agricultural PUD These commercials prohibited and I was curious does that exclude selling your own goods? Okay, isn't aren't farm stands exempt to and that's actually one we haven't been super focused on right now Uh farm stands selling product from the farm are considered an agricultural activity in vermont There's been some and so therefore exempt from local regulation entirely There's been some work in the last couple of years about refining at the state level about what it means to be sort of a value-added farm As that's sort of where a lot of agriculture has been going in the state Um, as Jessica said that we haven't really honed in on that one too much. Although a year ago the city did pass a Zoning amendment creating a Kathy. What's the name of the the use category? for the agricultural No, no, but there was a new one created a farm It was a food hub food hub Which is which is intended to somewhat address that and that's allowed in most it's in the city already and and in the draft in this draft that we handed out the Ag enterprises are actually a minimum of 20 and that would include something like a farm stand as well as the growing Of the crops and I guess yeah, I just didn't know what ag enterprises was so I think that would include the selling as well as the growing Okay, all right. That's what we were intending Okay The other thing I had with regard to ag and then I'll move on to another Another category and you can stop me when you need to Okay, Helen is for residential uses Shouldn't farmers and their workers have a place to live is this something That would be allowable or is it fallen or the prohibited? Is it a conditional use? For so she's looking at this chart specifically so I think that It says draft for a reason. Okay. All right. Okay, so Yes It definitely makes sense to have people working there living there. So I think Okay, and then I'm just thinking you know um also about the Neighborhood park center as well as the commercial center Um, you know, we have south village which has common roots there with a farm stand Here you have ag enterprises prohibited under both of those Pudies so again, I just throw it out there. Is that something That was discussed Yeah, so There within the open space types there are agriculture related open space types. Um, so I think It seems like some of those ag things you're talking about might actually like community gardens and and those kinds of things actually Are open space types that would apply Okay, so Yeah, I don't see it, but it's there. Okay and then On page two of your report to us Just definitions of civic uses I saw parks that is an example of what a civic use might be five percent or Needs to be civic uses at a park specifically or is that I think we talked about Do we have a better definition? Because I don't I don't know if I want to talk off We had talked about something like a community building Kind of counting is that like a like a separate meeting space Like um like that O'Brien building up in the park Near me For getting a jc park had like a community building like something like that would count under there It wouldn't just be like open park Is that And I'm yeah, just I heard rosanne say earlier that if we have our maybe was michael Something in our And I don't know which which document they were referring to it was the ldr's or the comprehensive plan or our map But if we have something marked protected is that strong enough to protect it? I just am looking at your second Black bullet point there natural resource protection standards On the second page of your report. It's right in the middle of that paragraph New protections are recommended for forested areas river corridor steep slopes and agriculture. So as the open space iz committee is you know Fielding questions about how it's going to be protected. I was just curious Including it on a map. Is that sufficient? Because that goes back to the question that I had raised or the comment I had raised when I first walked in here is If there were areas that we highlighted out of the open space iz committee as areas to be Prioritized for conservation including it on a map. Is that sufficient? Is that then protected? as that paragraph suggests this is a really good point so In here it also says they're protected at different levels depending on the function and priority so so that we have kind of a system set up where A lot of the resources kind of have two different levels And we have this in our regulations already. So in I guess a good example would be like a class 2 wetland Had would be like an absolute no build zone And as well as its buffer. So the whereas a class 3 wetland Maybe with appropriate Maybe there's an appropriate way to do something within its buffer You know so and there there's really clear language that we've been working on on exactly what those are And and where those designations are As well So those go into the ldr's those so in the so in the ldr's there'd be those would be amendments though or changes They're not they're now Right That's one of our work products. Okay And then The fourth black bullet point Adjust parking standards. I was curious about parking minimums for commercial developments Those would be eliminated And finally the last bullet point the solar ready roofs Which is great. I'd also like us to think about green roofs when we think about the warming and we're looking at two to five Story buildings in in these puds. I think we have to really think about how we are Absorbing all of that additional heat that's being you know reflected off of our building surfaces and our road surfaces So I just wanted to Put that out there There are open space types. Do you include some roof open space? Some of which is green So and we can maybe You can or we can look at specifically what's in there and if it's just green roof for storm water or green roof for like Like um pocket park Exactly how it's worded. So I'll I'll take a look back at that Other comments or questions from the council or commission. All right. Yes. Yeah Procurement parks committees had a concern about how development was going to happen in neighborhoods and we passed our first resolution back in december of 2012 To make sure that you just didn't have solid houses from one end of a development to another And uh, it was a practice before the first interim zoning went into effect That developers would bring their Proposals to our committee for us to study to make sure that there was some open space and connected the other and then Interim zoning happened and then in the time between the two interim zoning Um Developers also brought their plans to us for us to make comments on and my question is our is it still the intent in terms of process? for the developers to bring their plans to Reckon parks bike and pad natural resources So that we can do some preliminary study and preliminary work And make some recommendations to drb. Is that still part of the process that you have? Is that the clarman pole? I mean sometimes it happens, right? But the current the current practice and policy is that um Committees are welcome to weigh in at any time A developer may choose to go to the to an applicant or the drb. Sorry to a committee or the drb can direct them to do that Those are the those are the policies in place today. So could possibly not happen It's because the drb might say I don't need to do this and the developer could say I don't want to It's possible that it would not happen many applications are so small as to not Implicate others. I guess in terms of the future What I'd say is that a lot of the work of the puds as Jessica just shown with those graphic illustrations Is to give much more clear guidance in terms of the amount Of say open space That is required because in many cases there isn't a statement today on that The types of streets that are expected which include the characteristics of Of non vehicular Um Modes of transportation Such that the conversations with the committees can really be about placement And less sort of of a general what do we want? So it's a much more guided conversation So I think we would expect it, but the subject areas become much more focused on where should it be not how much should it be So is your question do you want it a requirement? Well, I would suggest that it it has worked in the past I think we have provided valuable oversight and input to drb on on the you know the o'brien center and A couple of eric ferrell's properties and and so on. I think it's been valuable But I think that it would be good to have Bike and pad and natural resources and recreation and parks study these And we can do a lot of that clearinghouse stuff before it goes to drb for You know we can we can look for our specific interests on Any kind of and and the larger project we haven't been so much Looking at the smaller projects. It's been more like the larger projects And and another point I would like to make is I I see natural resources concerns in there But our committee has had groups coming to us saying We've got a you know, we've got an established neighborhood But we don't have any playgrounds and can you create some playgrounds for us nearby or within our our neighborhood And so I think the recreation component Is also one that would be should be included in When you're looking at PUDs, it's not just civic space the natural resources, but also rather than just a lot of playgrounds And other things like that Grass doesn't happen. Yeah Okay, thank you unless you live next to Roseanne and then Frank and I would really echo what Jennifer just said I think that's a really valuable component to know You know, how does it affect how does this development even the small ones because we have now Wall to wall small ones, you know, nine houses nine houses nine houses, which becomes being You know becomes a huge spot of land without any consideration for Other gathering spaces other playgrounds. Is there a life path? I think So I would really recommend that that become a requirement because right now as you heard I think it's sort of haphazard I mean, it's up to the developer. They want to do it. There's if there is no requirement to do it Then you're left at whoever wants to do it or not do it So I think there's valuable input, you know to hear from the various committees Whose job it is is to look out at those things and how can they do that if they don't know when you're not involved When new developments are put in place So I just would echo that and encourage you to and just a quick question What does campus mean from here when you get a chance just I didn't know what about So campus would be something like tech park where you know, you're trying something more industrial or where you're trying to cluster Kind of non residential. So, you know, you can kind of see in the picture There's a lot of kind of it looks a lot like tech park There's a kind of a lot of bigger buildings of kind of courtyard in between and but the parking winds have run the outside Which is usually not the way that we want things like residential or normal commercial. So it's different layout And then as for the park space I know I was trying to cover a lot very quickly and definitely didn't describe this very well So if you go over to the green part of the chart there, see how it says open space needs to be a minimum of 60 percent Or you know, this one 40 percent Um, it specifically says that the park slash civic space needs to be a minimum of 20 percent Of the entire development and and for each of those it's it's different depending on which which PUD type but For these two which are um Up on the screen right now There that's the traditional neighborhood development. I think it's five percent of the land area Um Needs to be and and this is actually not just the land area. Didn't we take out the so I'm not even talking about this correctly, right? So the those natural resource which is Natural resources which get designated as being the highest level ones get taken out of the equation before we talk about the pie chart So the five percent open space makes represents land that otherwise could be developed So it's not one of the one of the things that the commission had said early on is We don't want the only open space to be the whetland in the corner We want it to actually be land that can be played on or be used for farming or be Used in some People focused way. So that was a big point. I missed sorry So that open space it says minimum of 10 percent any resources that are no build resources Already got taken out and this is in addition So the idea being that we're using developable space to create Developed usable open space and then they need to pick from our chart exactly what it is and what it looks like So, um, you know, we're really building park and usable spaces. So I know that wasn't clear And this is for four acres or greater So the little nine house Development is probably four acres. It's about usually about five acres. You'll see that those that's what's happening there Okay, so so then what if this gets adopted then The bike path or the park or um, the playground would get included Yes, one of the one of the capture that right one of the tricky elements of this that the commission is working through Is that typically PUDs apply to 30 acres or more in other parts of the country as you shrink down to being say five acres It may be that a single pd represents a component of lands around it and so it may be that it's uh that the not every single four acres has 20 square feet as being a park because that's not necessarily a useful amount of land So it it may be that you are working with the Folks around you and that each presents a component of it or if you've got an existing component of Say housing, then you might be able to be the little commercial piece next to housing that already exists That kind of thing. So it's um, it's tricky because it's um, this is not the scale at which PUDs typically happen around the country But it's what we're seeing in south burlington and the commission and the public have Made it clear that these sort of five-watt subdivit or five-acre subdivisions are an important one to capture So this is uh, this new calculation of the percentages based on Developable land is that a departure from our current practice? So that has implications for the total development capabilities of existing properties out there Which has financial impacts to owners as well as to our grand list and houses But only for the PUDs So it wouldn't apply to small parcels before acres are larger, which yes likely the new development properties But you could increase demand for TDRs, right? That and just go we have a down zone, right? It's still 1.2 acres They still have the underlying rights to build the units even though there's less property for them to use But I thought you said that you couldn't count the non-developable property as part of the base Is that I just maybe I don't understand that's not you you don't use it for the pie chart purposes So if you go back over to the pie chart number units day and TDRs day, but but you have to be able to Allocate the land according to the Okay, right and within the amount that you can build on it needs to be designated This way so maybe that will help with affordability I don't know. I mean We need to get one of these things built and see really hard But I mean if you want to build out to your maximum and they have to be Many houses then many houses are going to sell less for less. I assume then You know Butler Farms home or something. I don't know These are representatives of smart development smart her development, right keeping in mind all of these different It's a negotiation of those objectives and it's the it's it's how you try to apply And and save this and save that and create this and make a community and so they're it's very logical I think this is a good start to highlight a little bit I bike through Butler Farms all the time and I keep looking at these lots There's probably three or four of them that are back to back But that was part of the open space of that original project totally worthless except for the people that are right next to it as opposed to maybe Having those lots together in the center of that whole project. So I think the whole The possibilities here are enormous of having creativity I think we can all point to developments to we those nine houses right in the row of doors and street maybe that Is that really the the best use? So I think there's a lot of creativity that could be happening here. All right So you need a little more. Oh, I'm sorry Frank. I was going to give you a chance. Thank you. I'd like to address Uh Something Megan mentioned but only in passing which is the elimination but proposed elimination of minimum parking standards for commercial uses which personally I find astonishing From the DRB right now under the LDR as the DRB has discretion to waive I think up to 25 let me get to my bottom line I think that this provision should be thrown out altogether And if there's a concern that maybe there's two months parking demanded for commercial use Uses let that be decided on a case-by-case basis by the DRB Give us broader discretion Uh to grant waivers But don't throw out the parking standards For I give you the only rationale if there's another rationale I'm willing to hear it the only rationale I've heard For eliminating the commercial parking standards as well The developers know What they need and they're not going to do anything that's bad for them commercially Well, presumably they won't but they're they're also not going to take into account what's good for anybody else around them either That's an unrealistic fantasy expectation example One that stares me in the face as I think about this look at the neighborhood commercial center I'm developing something in the commercial park I say Look at that. Well, they're keeping parking to minimum parking standards for all those houses the development Because they're all going to be parking in the driveway the streets are going to be open except for these tiny little streets Not all of which they're going to be So my customer and I figured out with the streets empty my customers can load up the side streets and I need Virtually no parking terrific You don't leave that you don't leave the discretion for that decision with the developer. It's not a reasonable proposition Please Please give the committee commission a signal to go back and change that give us the discretion Argue it out on a case-by-case basis. I would make a different recommendation Probably offensive to those with aesthetic concerns But the rigid requirement that there's no parking in front of a commercial building Is a silly requirement There are a zillion possible land configurations Where when that is a there are land configurations that I've seen in the last three years Where the only sensible resolution of a parking issue goes to park some cars in the front Leave that to the discretion of the drb get rid of the absolute No no front parking and absolutely tell the planning commission. Please Don't send us an elimination of parking stands for commercial uses If you make an argument about reducing About enlarging the waiver capacity of the drb instead decided in a case-by-case basis. Thank you I actually was pleased with her response and so I just will present a different point of view. Um, I think that And I've stated this before so I'm not saying anything new from from my colleagues here, but for the public that In order for us to be Weaned from our car culture. I think that we need to Not just expect it to happen I think we have to take proactive steps for it to happen and you know, it's very interesting My husband forwarded me an article um in the atlantic That was how so much of our regulations have been in fact Determined by our car industry So the minimum for parking requirement that that's a huge thing that was Developed with regard to to that industry We know that that industry is having to You know innovate in order to respond to our current climate crisis and I think that in addition to looking at a change in the vehicles We have to think about a change in our behavior And you know, I'll say poor me, you know, I'm bad on me I arrived by greyhound at the airport and I said, I'll just walk home and get my car Well, guess who got here at the same time as me driving into this parking lot. It was the purple line Of gmt and I said shame on me If I had known no, but I'm just saying all right, I drive my daughter to the library Right, and then oh, I want to go grocery shopping Let me get in that car and go all the way over to hanniford or to healthy living and I'm like shame on me I'm sorry. Well, but you know, if this board if this body had the power and the will To create actual efficient public transportation In this area, there might be some logic to what you're talking about Well, the logic comes from making it so that I don't take my car and then I have to look at that thing And I'm not the only one doing it looking at that schedule and seeing when I can take the bus There are going to be 18,000 of us doing that, right? And then we'll have more regular bus service and it will become much more and it perhaps trams and perhaps all kinds of things Right, but we have to nothing has been It's been shown that nothing will change unless we make it difficult to use a very convenient thing Which we don't have it's just a horse, but a car, right? So we have to I understand I am a cowgirl too But I have to put my horse in the stable and I have to learn to get on that bus Well, not before there's a bus Sometimes you can't get to agreement I couldn't disagree with you I hope to God that a majority of the council does not agree with you I still I still in favor of handicapped parking spaces Are there any more Comments or questions for jessef and the planning commission? Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't see your little hand. Oh, oh, Bob. Okay And you don't know But you don't know the wetlands, okay? Well, I hear about variances So we discovered various ways around the rules. Can you explain that? Oh Locally you're talking about an hour Jessica I think you might be talking about mitigation like how you can maybe you want to explain how mitigation works Well, you know I don't want to quote all of our wetland regulations because they're a little different from the state They're a little different in every town and um But there there are some mitigation options Um in our current regulations. So what? Which we aren't we aren't changing that piece. So what we are changing is um for wetlands Some of the ways they're used so in the case of puds They would become a no build zone and they would be outside of the calculations here and They would also um kind of factor into that calculation of deciding like when the pud type needs to be the conservation zone so the specifics of Doing mitigation to a wetland to impact it isn't changing in this. So that's already in our um our regulations You may want to just Uh define what mitigation is some people may not understand the term that we use like we understand to mitigate the wetland You can actually move a wetland from one place to the other But there's specific rules you have to follow In order to move it and it has to be constructed in a certain way so that it provides the same sort of habitat That existed and it's called mitigation and there's all sorts of army core of engineer requirements for how you go through that process and Yeah, you physically build one someplace else that replicates what was there. There's uh, it's crazy There's a whole series of well, you have the right period everything else Any other comments Thank you. I mean I thought that was oh, I'm sorry. Well, I have a question before we leave the planning commission And I'm confused about we have it's outgoing and has signed on to the paris climate agreement And the new england climate coalition and greenhouse gas initiative How do we as a planning how do we integrate that The city's requirement or commitment into the work That the planning commission does You know at at our level at the town or city level mitigation is about the only effective Tool that we can deploy And we have to use it at the fullest extent possible if we want to come if we want to comply with the council's Commitment under the paris climate agreement and the new england coalition Is there some guidance that the council can give us? Well, no just in general in general, I mean I think smart growth to use that term which is I guess defined I'm not going to define it, but it's sort of I think we have taken the approach that there are better places for density Which might cut down on the use of cars encourage the use of buses allow for walking to work or to the supermarket or the Bank if you still actually walk to a bank Active 50 stretch codes for energy efficiency energy efficiency stormwater rules Yeah, so I think we have a number of those tools and directions that you I mean just through the recommendations, it seems to me you've taken them to heart to have more open space for I don't know runoff to get You know absorbed by land and cleans before it I'm thinking more of the preservation of natural resources, which would mean expanding buffers To protect our surface waters and repair and buffers and and forest blocks as no development no encroachment zones But expand them because what obviously what we have now hasn't worked We're getting hot Bike lanes are important, right? So when you see these things, right? I mean The grid the grid is very American. I understand it But boy, you know getting from that top right hand corner down to you know, the bottom left hand corner You're looking at a long walk. So your point about transportation is because it's having some kind of bike Green roofs and green roofs very important as well, right? And that's a really good question Michael though I would suggest that we have a lot on our plate and that's a good thing to tackle But for tonight's conversation and the kind of work that we have we should get through interim zoning before we But I was I was looking to the council for some kind of guidance Well, I mean, I think we've considered it and given some guidance, but led lights So if you have something else we should include let us know But I think there are quite a few things like you're saying that are already working in that direction So but that's I would like to see more bike and pet infrastructure in addition to the playing fields I think that's part of You know smart design as well So I guess just to respond to that the each of our street types Does designate those facilities specifically and they are required in all these areas. So although it might not factor into the The chart there that talks about open space It is actually part of the street like a required port part of the street for each of the street types It's designated and I'm thinking of you know, how people can bike from right There's a bike from a bike path from butler farms to cider mill, right if you cut through the golf course That's genius. That's what we need. I'm thinking more of what's on the ground, which is We have standards for our buffers, but maybe they aren't Stringing enough or they aren't stretched enough. Maybe they should be enlarged. I mean, we need forests crosslands wetlands as habitats for the survival of all kinds of Organisms including us In the long term or maybe that's why I think the the work of the open space committee to I just wanted to make to Ventilate about it and inform that bring it To the falls All the time every decision we make needs to have that Thought in the in the forefront and I think we should also think about pesticides, right? I was doing a little hippie dance last week when I saw fireflies in our backyard Right because I haven't seen them for a long time and I grew up with fireflies Yeah, love to collect them and you get hardly any bugs on your yes, so Paul did you have a comment a clarifying? No, okay all right Roseanne, I really were running a little bit. We are going to have a time for a facilitated conversation So I think I probably shouldn't have let everyone weigh in throughout the meeting, but we've probably had half of that conversation already But we have one more presentation from kevin on economics of land conservation and development and that certainly was a piece of our izi work that Has been a challenge. Yes. They'll be quick We view this as two components One component. We're making good progress on the other component. We are not Um, we have retained john steward who is the former cfo of the school district and a former senior Financial officer in the city of berlington to work with us on the purely financial component of this So the cost of providing services To various properties and the the revenue associated with that John I think is uniquely qualified to do this because he understands the school district side and the school funding formula and how it works And that's pretty hard to come by Since about 72 cents on the dollar Go to funding our schools. That is a critical component of this study So john is working on that Whether or not he would be able to meet the august 25th deadline We had to pull him off to do some other things Around our payroll work. John is a consultant for us now. It does work once a day every week for us so He's in the office, but I don't know if we can make the august 25th deadline for that second part of the study was the one Was the component that tries to evaluate or tries to create Values around things like the value of open space the value of wildlife habitat The value of view sheds and so on and we've consulted various sources Locally including folks from the Gund Institute Who came up with a general and genuine progress indicator some years back and some of you may be familiar with that But we have been unable to figure out a Rational way to quantify the values of these these issues Totally open to anybody's suggestion on how to go about doing it in a rational way, but We just have not been able to figure that out. So I can deliver to you. I think A good report on the financial The direct financial component of this But the other values that you wanted us to try to quantify and add to the overall value to create an overall value We have not been able to figure out The first parts of an extreme interest to me because one of the big concerns I have with constricting too much development Though I want to save open space. I just want to save it by acquiring it I'm concerned about the long-term effect on our grand list So as we look at a new high school and do so on so as you work with john stewart I'm really interested to hear what he comes up with with his implications of possible restrictions and changes to our zoning okay But there are some interesting studies that talk about how The way we develop now Is Leading us in the wrong direction and we will never be able to sustain the infrastructure That the current Development housing businesses Require right now because it will break down and need to be replaced and look at burlington Ripped up all over the place and that's expensive And if you continue with the kind of development we have It doesn't matter how many more homes we build it will be unsustainable So it's you know, there's a lot of studies that are asking communities to look at it very differently So I appreciate your concern about growing the grand list to support everything but You know, maybe some more study or thought or consideration needs to be if that Really how we go about Creating um A sustainable community long term It'll be good enough for our lifetimes probably but maybe not our children's or grandchildren Anyway, I That's where we are on these two components Like I said, I think we're moving in a good direction on the component one Appreciate paul's help on that and justin's help on that as well The other part of this Kevin Maybe one of the ways you can approach the the value valuation of those Intangibles is in terms of public health Because The loss of open space May be tied in to increased Costs of health in general or and there may be a way to Um To Calculate what it is I know there's a court case Going on in the united states called the I thought I had it written down somewhere, but it's a court case brought by 25 or 21 young people And they're suing the federal government Under the as a as a as a health issue that The environmental Rolling back environmental protections and so on is a is a threat to the health of the of the public and Maybe that looking at that court as they have may have figured out a way To calculate the cost Um, so I know that the gun is a great place to start But if they don't have anything we partnered with earth economics, they're out of oregon And they've done Quantification of ecosystem services. So with us we were working on floodplains and trying to figure out like the value I think of exactly what you're talking about floodplains specifically But they've I think they've worked on other ones as well And then I know that it was vetted enough that fema actually is using those values for Quantifying ecosystem services They've now added that into their cost benefit analysis. So I think fema's ecosystem services put specific values on specific resources and then Also earth economics. So and they're broken down into like for a floodplain Like there's this many Dollars per acre that is a benefit for storm water water quality and this many dollars per acre for Recreational uses and this many dollars per acre for wildlife habitat and it's kind of broken down Specifically, it's a pretty neat. This is earth economics. It's the name of the company And they worked with the planning commission or with your my company. So yeah, we had done a economic study of floodplains Well, that's really the kind of thing we were looking for any other comments on Yes, Rosanne. I'll make it quick But talking about what Kevin was saying just coincidentally today I read an article up from the Harvard Medical School about the very thing Michael just said That they are actually have done studies about the health effects And this is about the healing power of nature and they've done studies that if you live close to open space I mean it does it includes better sleep reduced depression increased social connection improves recovery from Surgery surgery of reduced obesity better survival after cancer reduced cardiovascular disease So Harvard Medical School Is putting the the connection with and they're just I just read it today just coincidentally On the benefits of of nature in Well, then we were really interested in that Yeah, lots of us Also, Williston did a cost of development study So you might want to call them. I mean, I still probably I have their cost of development study And I forget which firm they used but you know, so Oh, yes When it comes to Long-term effects of the city For obligating themselves for infrastructure She started researching that within the last week for the connection of housing But so just as a sideline since you raised that question, right But the question I had for Kevin is is john Stewart does he work here at city hall once a week every Thursday. Thank you And there's an organization called strong Strong towns strong. Oh, no, that's right. I understand and I've already spoken with I mean chase them down They have a lot of Articles, but I haven't been able to get any good data out of them yet But we'll see yeah John might not be here Thursday after next but Generally every Thursday if you can give me contact information or that would be great I'm the case it's called the juliana 21 Juliana what? Juliana 21 is the name of this case that we brought against the federal government So the next item on the agenda is really a facilitated discussion among the council and commission and committee leadership of key themes Significant decision points and overall schedule of completion We certainly have Touched on a number of those, but if there's some I wasn't going to facilitate this Kathy ann was going to write stuff on a A board or something of our Key findings If there's still energy to do that Yeah, I mean and I do I mean the council needs to decide whether we are going to we need to extend IZ Well that that is a key question No, no, we can't make that decision, but we need to have that conversation We need to hear from the committees and some have said we need a little bit more time It sounds like the planning commission has said, you know, maybe through december So that's another three months, right? Well four months um So I'm I'm The question I had and which I had said I would come back to Sandy's presentation is For the planning commission, do you see it as feasible in your puds to include affordable housing some kind of provision for affordable housing To ours and this receiving sending area Expansion is that something that seems impossible right off the bat or is that something I'm not seeing something easy, but you don't see any roadblocks right off the bat Paul just Help out here, but isn't the affordable housing piece if we choose to go through with the recommendations that john and sandy outlined That's going to apply to housing across the board In the community so that would automatically apply. It'd be an overlay on top of the puds. So the neighborhood Right It would be so if we went citywide with Inclusionary housing I took it one step further than you guys are proposing We're happy because Overlay district. Yeah So for those that'd be okay for those were good. Yeah, even if they become receiving areas because that's the recommendation Michael said it to send Some tdrs to that transit overlay district Yeah I mean we haven't Taken the underlying zoning and added tdrs and added 15 that they're talking about and then looked at what it looks like I mean so that has not been You don't see the immediate. Yeah. I mean what you're doing is you're you're adding two additional factors onto That underlying zoning density. So I mean I think we'd have to make sure that that's appropriate Does the transit overlay district include those nodes that we created along shelver? Yeah, so really it becomes a tool to facilitate some of the development of those nodes In a way if you're providing that extra density even if some of it is Allocated towards affordable housing So which is a good thing I guess no big flags I mean the idea is that we'd like to have more of our development in those Those transit in the transit overlay district. I mean that was kind of the point of Creating it in the first place Right. I think it was part of the point for IZ where how best to increase housing opportunities In our community In a thoughtful systematic way close to services bus lines Existing roads and and commerce and not Just have this stuff that's kind of all over the southeast quadrant for example Yes, just as jessica said the the key question there is going to be If something becomes an additional receiving area and there's An inclusionary 15 bump the implication of that is that it's increasing density, which is Largely a good thing, but the commission has not yet vetted to see Exactly where that is and what the implications of it are in terms of nearby neighborhoods and things like that And then the other half of it is Whether the market is interested in that We could say 50 units an acre But if the market is saying we don't want to build more than 10 Then it's It's it's an allowance, but it doesn't mean that people will do it Would it be Would it present an an extra impediment for a developer? Based on the traditional development types here Relative to cost We can't support high-rise construction. So buildings that are made out of steel They become very expensive anything over five or six stories. Just Arizona doesn't allow that So traditionally you're going to have maybe first floor of concrete or steel And then everything else is going to be wood-framed anyway So there's limits that are built in just economically in terms of what we're going to build In this community right now The way that it's set up Which works with what paul's describing In those nodes that we've created in the transit overlay district It's it is the one thing that we haven't done is we haven't gone back and looked at what the application of the affordable housing bonus would would mean but Functionally it's not going to change a whole lot because developers aren't going to go Higher than what they can build out of wood anyways right now. There's just the economics don't support that and that's four stores It's six depending on where you're at. It's either five or six stories of wood over some version of a commercial space. So You know, they're not kind of that's pretty high given Lots of places in our Seven stories is about as high as you're going to be able to get right now I mean that as you all know you referenced the hole in the ground earlier That's one of the struggles they're having is that steel construction is very expensive and Yeah, well, it's not just a terrace but building in general anyways and trying to then recover those costs is It's a struggle That project Did you cut the mall hole? It's a public common name. I just wanted to talk about the right hole And I did not go officially on record as calling that. Thank you very much. Was that a question or a comment? Okay, a couple a couple points is that um The deadline with regard to interim zoning I I haven't heard now. Maybe I'm in a cocoon, but I haven't heard That it is just totally decimated any development I mean, are we really holding back development because interim zoning is is in place right now? That's one question. No one needs to answer it, but it's in my mind The other question is we've had a lot of people doing a lot of work And the planning commission is doing a lot of work And i'm figuring suddenly august 28th comes by Interim zoning is gone So as john said or sort of intimated that that there's a bit of a race That another development goes in and there's no affordable housing component or That could be the same thing with the open space So we're doing all this business for an arbitrary date The thing is it should be the committee should we have the work complete then it has to go to the planning commission Then it has to go to public hearing But if we're going to have august 28th, why have us to go through the the exercise? I don't want to waste my time doing it. I have a business to run So, you know either tell us to get our business done and Listen to these great committee the committee work and then Go on or tell us this has been great. It's been really fun I mean really I mean what are we doing? I feel like Why don't we ever made a decision? Okay, well, I'm sorry This was the meeting to get the update So we could make a thoughtful decision about do we need to extend right? I'm just wondering on a committee That just has an opinion that I don't want to have the feel like all my work It's been wasted. So anyway, that's my point And I don't want it to I mean I don't know if anyone is interested in well two of the IZ committees have have indicated that an x or three that an extension is needed at least to december And I think in the res in the bylaw There was uh, you could extend it by x By three months and we could do it three times Oh, so just a couple of clarifications one It's uh, august 13th is the date I know we've thrown a lot of dates around but august 13th the day is the day that expires unless action is taken to Continue it and then thereafter it is Three months and then another public hearing and then you may choose to extend it three months up to two years So that's the that's the function of that your public hearing is next friday the ninth at four 30 And you have a discussion item on your monday agenda. We do have a discussion on correct um Yeah, so what I am hearing or I think what I have heard from almost every committee is they do need some time and the sort of the real fulcrum of Action is the planning commission and they're saying December if Things go well and we all work really hard We're saying we're going to be back to you in three months with an update And then at that point there'll be another decision that will be needed. Yes, and and I think that's appropriate Because again, I mean I agree with Ted. There's it's Makes no sense to have all these talented people work so hard on these different committees and then Not have enough time to complete it. So it's a useful document and we can get somewhere So to add to art's important point that he just made We haven't seen the output from the committees yet. So it's you know, I said the end of the year, but Because we don't even know exactly what's coming in exactly what kind of policy Discussions and vetting needs to happen You know It's an optimistic estimate, but yes. No, I gathered that I sense that One quick question and then just one quick note There were a bunch of potential questions for a facilitated discussion. I think you largely had them during your discussion I think the the the one Key question that I would ask council, maybe either tonight or monday to respond to is Is there anything that you were looking additionally or different as a deliverable from any of the committees? As they're wrapping up their work. So you heard What they each said that they were providing if your expectation is different about what they're giving Before they wrap up would be it would be helpful to hear that and then just an observation that at the end of the whole thing The commission and council will need to determine how How all of this work balances across the entire comprehensive plan and and whether The bylaws are consistent with the comprehensive plan or whether if you decide that you want to go something very different from the comprehensive plan whether you want to be Adjusting that but that's you know, that's the overall charge of anything that's happening here So well certainly one piece that we don't have Didn't have addressed Is really the second piece That we identified around the values around All the intangibles and we got a couple ideas or other Opportunities maybe to get that information But I for me that was a really critical piece me too John I just wanted to reiterate something. I said when I had the microphone and that is that We have submitted Our work Paul has it It can go to the planning commission. I mean We're done and so in terms of Priorities and moving the needle other than all the work the planning commission has and I recognize that if they could find some time in upcoming meetings to address Inclusionary housing in the overlay districts It would move it out and like I say, we're ready to come and Talk about it and we'd love to see it go right through in a couple months And I just Through your generosity, we've had great support from Regina Mahoney from the regional planning commission So she's ready, you know wouldn't take staff time to present To the planning and she's going to stay with us until we get it done so we'd like to Your endorsement for the planning commission to Look at our work. I just want to remind you you do need to keep talking about how we develop An ongoing funding. Yes To support more affordable housing It's in our allocation. It's in our work plan. Yes. No, no. Well, we've got our allocation. I was just thinking of some kind of Way to generate Revenue on a mandal basis Not just the $50,000 The reason I wanted to ask the question about So they have more work to do it's my point. Yeah That's the reason why I asked the question about any potential roadblocks for having TDRs and the affordable housing inclusionary zoning Together in the transit overlay and you said no, it's just a matter of doing some math That tells me that it could move forward Even before the other committee's work Is concluded. I don't know how Yeah, and we've had this conversation at the planning commission level a little bit and um It's important to recognize that like you're saying Certain things can move forward, right? The TDR is a method, right? It's not intended to be this complete environmental rewrite It's a tool for conservation. No different than a conservation easement or any of the own other tools It's just making sure that it's right-sized and it meets the needs And the goals that we're trying to accomplish here as a city so it can move forward Independently just as affordable housing can move forward independently because it's an overlay So many percent if it's 15 percent or haven't really seen the final we've seen the draft And we need to go through that as commission and jessica will guide us through that But there are pieces that we can start to break off It's finding the right time to do that and we need to talk about how what that plan looks like Going forward and that's probably one of the things paul and capiano put on our to-do list very shortly is how to incorporate The review and the feedback on on the report and the work that the committees have done Any other thoughts? All right. Well again, thank you very much Can I just say yeah, I was just reading through paul's list of questions And so I just wanted to say that the last questions under counselors and commissioners Talking about the balance of conservation and development that I I feel that the work to date has really Served Our comprehensive plan, you know that I I feel That it was a really Um solid affirmation Of the comprehensive plan what I heard here tonight But also the second question I think is important implementation, especially for conservation efforts can take many forms Only some of which are regulatory in nature. Who should be assigned to look at which recommendations should be implemented through non regulatory tools I don't have an answer to that I just it was on your list, so I didn't want us to overlook I I pointed that at you and I saw a lot of head nodding But but we're gonna we're gonna look at it first and if you know, maybe we'll have a recommendation of a different group Because it sounds like that's what we decided their work would come to us and then we would look at it and Make a recommendation. Does that still make sense? Yes, I think it does All right Well, I think um, thank you, um public for coming and the different committees. I'm Continue to be impressed with the people in our community and the expertise that they bring to our conversations, and I Sincerely thank you Okay I Work to do and they don't well way they have a lot of work to do Sue why don't you take the five minute break? Thank you. I'm sorry Hey, someone in your committee would like this A lot of good stuff Okay, so I would like to convene Is this a special meeting? Yes, the city council special meeting for august 1st 2019 And we have to let's see We have um Consider and possibly approve an addendum to the agreement with the school district for the exchange of rights and interests in real property Yay So do you want to discuss it before we go forward with the motion? Um, no, you can make I'm only making a motion that we approve. I have a motion to read Oh, yeah, so I moved that the council approve and authorize helen really to execute on the city's behalf The addendum to the agreement for the exchange of rights and interests in real property with the south brillington school district a second Is there any discussion? I just want to say one thing. I support this because it seems to make sense I just still would love to get an idea of what the cost implications of these new roads are that's not going to happen tonight But at some point I'd love to get an idea of how the budget for this total project is looking because the concerns have been raised about unexpected expenditures What I wanted to know is how far 54 feet is Will there be any parking on the east side of that road? No, it'll be very limited. There may be a few a couple One or two Yeah It'll be extremely safe. Okay, and also, um When I'm looking at page five of the agreement under c the very end and it says Moreover to the extent the reconstruction and reconfiguration of the markot school parking lots is not complete by august 24th 2020 or the first day of classes for mark out school students, whichever shall first occur The city shall provide at least the same number of temporary parking replacement parking spaces for staff Okay, first of all, the at least that kind of struck stood out at me. I wasn't sure why there was at least but um You know, why not the same number but what I was Also curious about is we begin building the building that fall As I understand right and the parking lot will be completed when well right now the way we're looking at is the way we're looking at the Sequencing is that we will begin to build the road the new road this fall With the access to their parking lot this fall But that the parking lot project itself would not occur until school gets out In uh, june of 2020 so it would be completed by august 24th Okay, and then the building goes after that. Well, no, we'll start the building as soon as we get the The stormwater permits, so we'll be on our property building that but we'll delay The um parking lot component until next summer, but the road component will go in this fall so Let's just say that Business can open up and part of that building before august 24th right and The business and the new municipal building municipal building can start up before august 24th Right, let's say that the city clerk can open her office or let's say the library's done and the library's functioning, right? It won't No, okay No, the sequence is We have to build a new road For them to get into there to the school, right? And it won't be the finalized road, but I mean it won't have all the curbs and And everything perfect, but they will be able to get people and buses into And then we'll have to build a new sort of connector To their current parking lot because the new parking lot will be bigger That will be done this summer by Next summer. No this summer. We're hopeful. Well, I don't know if we can get there now, but sometime We hope to break ground on that soon It'll probably be early fall when we can get that complete We had hoped to be done with at least that component But you seem to suggest that the building would be well, and then we have to build the new ramp or access to Allard square and then this winter sometimes when that's done We can start the foundation for the library, but that's going to take a year, right? Yeah, it's going to take more than that, but we need our storm water permits And then next summer we do all the stuff underneath the parking lot for the Storm water and build the new parking lot in the permanent road The road we can start because it doesn't require the same storm water the storm water It's already permitted for storm water. Oh, it is already permanent. Yeah that just the road Okay, so that we can start You know, there's some risk associated with all this but that we can start But we would start the built the construction of the community center What's the risk as soon as we get the if the risk you just mentioned Um, well, you really want to have all your permits in place for everything Before you do begin construction, but this is a road. This is a public road that is going to exist regardless So the risk is kind of minimal, but But we'd really like to have all the storm water permits and every other permit in place Before we start construction and it has to be for the building Okay, when is the First move into the building potentially possible spring of 2021 That was just I just wanted to make sure that we weren't Making impossible for seniors to get in for a lunch or something. Okay um Okay any other Discussion Okay, we have a motion that's been made in second Be ready for the vote all in favor signified by saying aye. Aye. Aye any opposed great hallelujah Yes, indeed to court our esteemed One That didn't take too long let's see now we have An entertainment I moved to approve the consent agenda as presented second Any discussion looks like a rowdy bunch That was a joke. Oh, yeah What did he say? He said it looks like a rowdy bunch. Yeah Okay, okay, if there's no discussion to approve the women's international league of peace and freedom um gathering with musicians and speakers um We signify your approval with an aye. Aye. Aye. Any post great Okay, so anything else we need to do By the way, but let me just thank the council Publicly for your patience throughout this process of getting to this addendum um It's taken a while Had some challenging Discussions and issues, but thank you to the council for your steadfast support for the project and for your patience. Thank you And I just is 54 feet Based on this Kind of standard length of a parking It's it translates into the number of parking Yeah, and there's a little there's always a little excess It's two parking space each as I understand each parking space is 22 feet So there's 44 feet of parking space And then you never park right to the edge of a road So there's a setback of 10 feet, right? Something. Yeah So when you are 12 so when you add both sides you get to 54 feet Um So I don't is there any more discussion on the deadline in our zoning any other thoughts we'll we'll have that I think we need to extend it and we'll do it We have to duly warn that with a note with a public hearing. So we will have that Next friday at 4 30. I I don't imagine it's four o'clock. Okay four o'clock four, okay And I don't anticipate a long debate Yes Conversation Great, so we'll find out if anyone in the public has um concerns Obviously my husband doesn't Um, all right, so I would um entertain a motion to adjourn Second all in favor Thank you very much Um Yeah, nothing significant, it's just a Yeah