REGULAR MEETING AGENDA - CCRPC › wp-content › uploads › 2019 › 10 › ...43 benchmarks. Peter Keating explained MPO action is required. Last fall the CCRPC agreed with the

In accordance with provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990, the CCRPC will ensure public meeting sites are accessible to all people. Requests for free interpretive or translation services, assistive devices, or other requested accommodations, should be made to Emma Vaughn, CCRPC Title VI Coordinator, at 802-846-4490 ext. *21 or [email protected], no later than 3 business days prior to the meeting for which services are requested.

REGULAR MEETING AGENDA Wednesday, October 16, 2019 - 6:00 p.m.CCRPC Offices; 110 W. Canal Street, Suite 202

Winooski, VT 05404

TRAINING – RPC Training 5:15 – 6:00 p.m. (Light dinner will be available)

CONSENT AGENDA – DRAFT

C.1 TIP Amendments

DELIBERATIVE AGENDA

1. Call to Order; Changes to the Agenda

2. Public Comment Period on Items NOT on the Agenda

3. Action on Consent Agenda - (MPO Business) (Action; 1 minute)

4. Approve Minutes of September 18, 2019 Meeting* (Action; 1 minute)

5. Huntington Town Plan Approval, Confirmation of Planning Process, and Determination of Energy Compliance * (Action; 5 minutes)

6. Circ Alternatives Status Report, M. Boomhower & J. Devlin, VTrans (Discussion; 45 minutes)

7. FY21 Municipal Dues* (Action; 5 minutes)

8. Chair/Executive Director Report (Discussion; 15 minutes) a. Community Justice Summit b. Regional Dispatch update c. CATMA Strategic Business Plan d. Legislative Breakfast

9. Committee/Liaison Activities & Reports * (Information, 2 minutes) a. Executive Committee (draft minutes October 2, 2019) * b. Transportation Advisory Committee (draft minutes, October 1, 2019) * c. Clean Water Advisory Committee (draft minutes, October 1, 2019) * d. Planning Advisory Committee (draft minutes, October 9, 2019) *

10. Members’ Items, Other Business (Information, 5 minutes)

11. Executive Session – Motion: To go into executive session to discuss pending or probable civil litigation, to which CCRPC may be a party, based upon a finding that premature general public knowledge would clearly place CCRPC at a substantial disadvantage. No action will be taken in executive session. (Action & Discussion ; 1 minute)

12. Adjourn

The October 16th Chittenden County RPC streams LIVE on YouTube at https://www.youtube.com/Channel17TownMeetingTV. The meeting will air on Sunday, October 27, 2019 at 1 p.m. and is available on the web at https://www.cctv.org/watch-tv/series/chittenden-county-regional-planning-commission.

Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission Meeting Agenda / October 16, 2019

Page 2

In accordance with provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990, the CCRPC will ensure public meeting sites are accessible to all people. Requests for free interpretive or translation services, assistive devices, or other requested accommodations, should be made to Emma Vaughn, CCRPC Title VI Coordinator, at 802-846-4490 ext. *21 or [email protected], no later than 3 business days prior to the meeting for which services are requested.

Upcoming Meetings - Unless otherwise noted, all meetings are held at our offices:

Transportation Advisory Committee - Tuesday, November 5, 2019; 9:00 a.m.

Clean Water Advisory Committee - Tuesday, November 5, 2019; 11:00 a.m.

CWAC MS4 Subcommittee - Tuesday, November 5, 2019; 12:15 a.m.

Executive Committee - Wednesday, November 6, 2019; 5:45 p.m. CCRPC Board Meeting - Wednesday, November 20, 2019; 6:00 p.m. HAPPY THANKSGIVING! Thanks for all you do.

Tentative future Board agenda items:

November 20. 2019 RPC Training Session in advance of Meeting (5:15 p.m.), if desiredFY19 Audit – Action Legislative Breakfast/2020 Policy topics preparation VTrans Project Selection & Prioritization Process – Discussion? CATMA Strategic Business Plan?

December 10Delta Hotel, So. Burl.

Legislative Breakfast

January 15, 2020 Mid-Year Budget and UPWP Adjustment - ActionECOS Annual Report?

Other Potential Topics/Speakers: VTrans Rail? UVM-Medical Center Population Health? South Burlington City Center? E-assist Bikeshare and E-scooters?

Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission October 19, 2019 Agenda Item C.1: Consent Item

FY2019 VTrans Bicycle and Pedestrian Program Awards

Issues The projects listed below were awarded FY19 VTrans Bicycle and Pedestrian program awards. Add these awards to the CCRPC TIP.

Dorset Street Shared Use Path -- Old Cross Road to Sadie Lane, South Burlington (Project BP108, Amendment FY20-02)

Add $75,000 (fed) in FY20, $125,000 (fed) in FY21, and $231,600 (fed) in FY22, and $230,000 (fed) in FY23.

Main Street Revitalization Project – Sidewalk and Bicycle Improvements, Winooski (Project BP109, Amendment FY20-03)

Add $300,000 (fed) in FY20 and $100,000 (fed) in FY21.

Towers Road Sidewalk Improvements, Essex (Project BP086, Amendment FY20-04)

Add $91,600 (fed) in FY20.

TAC Recommendation:

Recommend that the Board approve the proposed TIP amendments.

Staff Recommendation:

Recommend that the TAC approve the proposed TIP amendments.

For more information, contact:

Christine Forde [email protected] or 846-4490 ext. *13

CHITTENDEN COUNTY REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION 1 REGULAR MEETING MINUTES 2

DRAFT 3 4

DATE: Wednesday, September 18, 2019 5 TIME: 6:00 p.m. 6 PLACE: CCRPC offices; 110 W. Canal Street, Suite 202; Winooski, VT 05404 7 PRESENT: Bolton: Absent Buel’s Gore: Absent 8 Burlington: Andy Montroll Burlington: Jenna Pugliese-Alt. 9 Charlotte: Absent Colchester: Jacki Murphy 10

Essex: Jeff Carr Essex: Elaine Haney-Alt. 11 Essex Junction: Dan Kerin Hinesburg: Mike Bissonette 12 Huntington: Absent Jericho: Catherine McMains 13 Milton: Tony Micklus Richmond: Bard Hill 14 St. George: Absent Shelburne: John Zicconi 15 South Burl: Chris Shaw Underhill: Brian Bigelow 16 Westford: Vacant Williston: Chris Roy 17 Winooski: Michael O’Brien VTrans: Amy Bell 18 Socio/Econ/Housing: Absent Bus/Ind: Tim Baechle 19 Agriculture: Tom Eaton Cons/Env: Don Meals 20 GMT: Jon Moore BIA: Larry Lackey 21 Others: Matthew Langham, VTrans Scott Moody, CCTV 22 Nic Longo, BIA Diane Carter, BIA consultant 23 24 Staff: Charlie Baker, Executive Director Regina Mahoney, Planning Program Mgr. 25 Peter Keating, Senior Planner Christine Forde, Senior Planner 26 Forest Cohen, Senior Business Mgr. Emily Nosse-Leirer, Senior Planner 27 Marshall Distel, Planner Dan Albrecht, Senior Planner 28 Amy Irvin Witham, Business Office Assoc. 29 30 1. Call to order; changes to the agenda. The meeting was called to order at 6:02 p.m. by the Chair, 31 Michael O’Brien. There were no changes 32 33 2. Public Comment Period on Items NOT on the Agenda. There were no comments. 34 35 3. Action on Consent Agenda. There were two amendments to the FY19 and FY20 TIP. The first, US7 36 Signal upgrade, Shelburne South Burlington with the addition of funds for engineering and construction 37 costs. The second, VT15 Multiuse Path – St. Mikes Crosswalk Colchester Essex, to add a crosswalk and 38 sidewalk. CHRIS SHAW MADE A MOTION, SECONDED BY DAN KERIN TO APPROVE THE CONSENT 39 AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 40 41 4. Approve Minutes of July 17, 2019 board meeting. CATHERINE MCMAINS MADE A MOTION, 42 SECONDED BY JEFF CARR, TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF JULY 17, 2019 WITH EDITS. Jeff Carr explained 43 he was present and represented both Essex as well as Essex Junction, his affirmative vote should have 44 been counted for each town. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 45 46 5. Burlington International Airport Draft Noise Compatibility Plan. Nic Longo, Deputy Director of BIA, 47 shared a presentation on the Noise Compatibility Plan. Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations part 48

CCRPC Meeting Minutes 2 | P a g e July 17, 2019

150 sets standards for airport operators to use in documenting noise exposure in nearby areas. It is a 1 voluntary process; there may be federal funding available to minimize noise related land use 2 incompatibilities. There are two parts: 3 4

• Noise Exposure Map - Provides a detailed description of airport layout, operations land use and 5 noise/land compatibility for the study year and a forecast year. 6

o The NEM is a graphical presentation of the specific aircraft noise levels (noise contours) 7 around an airport depicted over the existing land use. The noise level is expressed as 8 Day-Night Average Sound Level (DNL). The NEM provided depicted noise levels for 9 current condition (2018) and a 5 year forecast. 10

• Noise Compatibility Program - The proposed plan to reduce noise exposure and identify land use 11 mitigation measures to address existing non compatible uses and land use control measures to 12 prevent new non-compatible uses. 13

o The NCP is a land use planning study that recommends noise mitigation efforts and 14 future land use planning initiatives for areas located with the 65 DNL and higher noise 15 contour. The NCP is being updated to reflect new recommendations for noise 16 mitigation. 17

18 Member discussion ensued. Charlie mentioned a concern for public participation and if public 19 comments would be incorporated into the plan. Nic explained, yes, the plan would be open for public 20 comments and they will be responded to and incorporated into the plan. Chris Shaw voiced concerns 21 about noise mitigation for area residential homes and multi-family housing. Several maps and selected 22 sections of the maps were shown by Nic, some that compared previous noise contours with the most 23 current, also illustrating forecast conditions in the future. Noise contours are drawn at 65 DNL (Day-24 Night Average Sound Level). The noise contours are generated by a FAA computer model called AEDT. 25 Nic then provided a primer on sound terminology with DNL examples and highlighted the 10-dB penalty 26 for night sounds (between 10PM and 7AM) programmed into the AEDT. The process of updating the 27 NEM is nearly complete and about to be sent for FAA review. The NCP is still in process and will be the 28 subject of further public review over the coming months. Nic noted the following possible land use 29 measures that could be part of any NCP. Land Use Measures include: Sound insulation, Land 30 Acquisition and Relocation, Sound Buffers/Barriers, Home Sales Assistance, Purchase Assurance, 31 Easement Acquisition for New Development, and Real Estate Disclosure. Diane Carter explained the FAA 32 works with BIA to offer multiple options; owners need to decide what best fits their needs in terms of 33 Noise Mitigation. The plan is a necessary step to secure FAA grant funds. 34 35 36 6. Green Mountain Transit Asset Management Plan and Targets. Jon Moore, Interim General Manager of 37 GMT presented on the Green Mountain Transit Asset Management Plan and targets. GMT established 38 asset targets for rolling stock, equipment and facilities. The target statement from GMT-TAM states: 39 “The Authority’s annual State of Good Repair performance targets for FY2019 are that our fleet and 40 equipment will not be more than 20% past the Useful Life Benchmark, and our facilities will be at lest a 41 3.0 on the term rating scale”. Member discussion ensued regarding GMT’s audit process and meeting 42 benchmarks. Peter Keating explained MPO action is required. Last fall the CCRPC agreed with the 43 VTrans established targets for other performance measures. CCRPC Staff recommends the board 44 approve the November 2019 GMT Transit Asset Management Plan, targets for rolling stock, equipment, 45 and facilities. 46 47 48

CCRPC Meeting Minutes 3 | P a g e July 17, 2019

JEFF CARR MADE A MOTION, SECONDED BY ANDY MONTROLL, TO APPROVE THE GMT TRANSIT ASSET 1 MANAGEMENT PLAN AS PRESENTED. MPO VOTE: 2 Bolton: Absent Burlington: Yes (4) Charlotte: Absent 3 Colchester: Yes (2) Essex: Yes Essex Jct: Yes 4 Hinesburg: Yes Huntington: Absent Jericho: Yes 5 Milton: Yes Richmond: Yes St. George: Absent 6 Shelburne: Yes So. Burlington: Yes (2) Underhill: Yes 7 Westford: VACANT Williston: Yes Winooski: Yes 8 VTrans: Yes 9

MOTION CARRIED WITH 19 OF 24 VOTES; AND 13 OF 18 MUNICIPALITIES VOTING IN THE 10 AFFIRMATIVE. 11

12 7. Essex Junction Plan Approval. Emily Nosse-Leirer gave a brief overview of the Essex Junction planning 13 process. Emily Nosse-Leirer noted the Village of Essex Junction has requested CCRPC 1) approve The 14 2019 Village of Essex Jct. Comprehensive Plan and the Essex Community Enhanced Energy Plan, 2) 15 confirm its planning process, and 3) grant a determination of energy compliance to the 2019 Village of 16 Essex Junction Comprehensive Plan and Essex Community Enhanced Energy Plan. Both the Planning 17 Advisory Committee and CCRPC staff recommends approval, confirmation of the planning process and 18 grant an affirmative determination of energy compliance. DAN KERIN MADE A MOTION, SECONDED BY 19 JEFF CARR TO APPROVE THE 2019 VILLAGE OF ESSEX JUNCTION COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, CONFIRM THE 20 ESSEX JUNCTION PLANNING PROCESS AND GRANT AFFIRMATIVE DETERMINATION OF ENERGY 21 COMPLIANCE FOR THE 2019 VILLAGE OF ESSEX JUNCTION COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ESSEX 22 COMMUNITY ENHANCED ENERGY PLAN. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 23 24 8. FY2020 Committee Appointments. Mike reviewed the FY2020 Committee Appointments memo with 25 members. He also noted there is an open spot on the Board Development Committee. Mike stated 26 Wayne Howe has agreed to representing the Board on the Planning Advisory Committee. Tom Eaton 27 asked to join the Clean Water Advisory Committee. CHAIR O’BRIEN APPROVED THE APPOINTMENTS AS 28 THERE WAS NO OBJECTION FROM THE BOARD. 29 30 9. Chair/Executive Director Report. 31

a. Building Homes Together Update. Charlie stated this is basically on target. We have 32 averaged over 700 new units over last 3 years for overall production. However, we are 33 below target for affordable housing, currently coming in at 13% as opposed to the goal of 34 20%. Looking forward, there are a lot of big projects on the horizon and hope to move closer 35 to the 20% target within the next two years. 36

b. Transportation Climate Initiative. There is a lot to be determined, but we plan to explore 37 the opportunity and will host a forum in the next couple of weeks. The current regional 38 discussion is for a focus on transportation, combined effort of ANR and VTRANS. 39

c. Amtrak Storage Study. There has been public frustration expressed over a CCRPC report 40 that provided technical analysis and relative assessments on criteria provided for site 41 locations for overnight train storage. The CCRPC only provided analysis within a report. We 42 did not make a site determination or recommendation. 43

d. Clean Water Service Provider: Charlie noted that we will be participating in ANR’s process 44 as they develop regulations and guidance for clean water service providers. 45

e. Audit update Auditors completed an audit in August which appears to have gone very well. 46 For FY19 we projected a negative 100K budget, however, FY19 ended about $40K better 47 than budgeted. 48

CCRPC Meeting Minutes 4 | P a g e July 17, 2019

1 f. Compensation Study: Hickok and Boardman will conduct a compensation study this fall, to 2

be completed by the end of December. We typically have a compensation study every 5 3 years. 4

5 Regina and Charlie reminded everyone that Peter Keating is retiring at the end of the month. Mike and 6 members extended thanks for his over 30 years of service. 7 8 10. Committee/Liaison Activities & Reports. Minutes for various meeting were included in the packet 9 (Brownfields Advisory, Transportation Advisory Committee, Planning Advisory Committee, CWAC, MS4 10 Subcommittee, and Executive Committee). 11 12 11. Members’ Items, Other business. There was none. 13 14 12. Adjourn. JEFF CARR MADE A MOTION, SECONDED BY CHRIS ROY, TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 15 7:45 P.M. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 16 17 Respectfully submitted, 18 Amy Irvin Witham 19

Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission September 18, 2019

Agenda Item 5: 2019 Huntington Town Plan Approval, Confirmation of Planning Process, and Determination of Energy Compliance

Issues: The Town of Huntington has requested that the Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission (1) approve the 2019 Huntington Town Plan, (2) confirm its planning process and (3) grant a determination of energy compliance to the 2019 Huntington Town Plan. The plan was adopted by the Huntington Selectboard on October 7, 2019.

As described in the attached proposed resolution, the PAC has held the required hearing, reviewed the Plan in light of these requests, and recommends Board approval at this time. For your information, the staff report to the Planning Advisory Committee regarding approval and confirmation of the plan and the determination of energy compliance is attached.

VAPDA is keeping track of municipalities that receive a determination of energy compliance at this website: vapda.org/vermont-enhanced-town-energy-plans/

Please note that municipal planning process confirmation, plan approval and determination of energy compliance decisions shall be made by majority vote of the commissioners representing municipalities, in accordance with the bylaws of the CCRPC and Title 24 V.S.A.§ 4350(f).

Planning Advisory Committee Recommendation:

The Planning Advisory Committee recommends that the CCRPC Board approve the 2019 Huntington Town Plan, confirm Huntington’s planning process, and grant an affirmative determination of energy compliance to the 2019 Huntington Town Plan.

Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the CCRPC Board approve the 2019 Huntington Town Plan, confirm Huntington’s planning process, and grant an affirmative determination of energy compliance to the 2019 Huntington Town Plan.

Staff Contact: Contact Regina Mahony with any questions: [email protected], 846-4490 ext. *28.

CCRPC Staff & PAC Review – 2019 Huntington Town Plan (Enhanced Energy Plan Review) May 8, 2019 PAC Meeting

Page 1 of 4

Staff Review of the 2019 Huntington Town Plan, Including Enhanced Energy Plan Review Melanie Needle, Senior Planner Regina Mahony, Planning Program Manager Reviewed by the CCRPC Planning Advisory Committee on May 8, 2019 – Annotated for CCRPC Board Review at the October 16, 2019 Meeting

The Town of Huntington has requested, per 24 V.S.A §4350, that the Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission (1) approve its 2019 Huntington Town Plan; and (2) confirm its planning process.

Additionally, the Town of Huntington has requested that the Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission issue a determination of compliance with the enhanced energy planning standards set forth in 24 V.S.A. §4352 for the 2019 Huntington Town Plan.

This draft 2019 Huntington Town Plan is a full re-write of the town plan. At the time of this review the Plan is nearly a final draft. At their May 13th meeting, the Huntington Planning Commission intends to warn their public hearing for June 25th. In accordance with statute, re-adoption means that this is a fully compliant plan that will expire eight years after adoption by the Selectboard. CCRPC reviewed the 2014 plan in September 2017 as part of an informal review and consultation process. The 2019 Huntington Plan addresses the comments from that initial review (as seen in the attached annotated memo), several new required elements, provides updated data, addresses recent changes to the community and includes an enhanced energy plan. Staff have completed this formal review of the plan and review of the plan against the Vermont Department of Public Service’s Energy Planning Standards for Municipal Plans in advance of the town’s public hearing scheduled for June 25th.

Confirming and Approving the Municipal Plan Following the Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission’s (CCRPC’s) Guidelines and Standards for Confirmation of Municipal Planning Processes and Approval of Municipal Plans (2018) and the statutory requirements of 24 V.S.A. Chapter 117, I have reviewed the draft 2019 Huntington Town Plan to determine whether it is:

Consistent with the general goals of §4302; Consistent with the specific goals of §4302; Contains the required elements of §4382; Compatible with the 2018 Chittenden County Regional Plan, entitled the 2018 Chittenden County ECOS

Plan (per §4350); and Compatible with approved plans of other municipalities (per §4350).

Additionally, I have reviewed the planning process requirements of §4350.

Staff Review Findings and Comments

1. The 2019 Huntington Town Plan is consistent with the general goals of §4302. See the attached Appendix A submittal that describes how the Plan is consistent with these goals.

2. The 2019 Huntington Town Plan is consistent with the specific goals of §4302. See the attached Appendix A submittal that describes how the Plan is consistent with these goals.

CCRPC Staff & PAC Review – 2019 Huntington Town Plan (Enhanced Energy Plan Review) May 8, 2019 PAC Meeting

Page 2 of 4

3. The 2019 Huntington Town Plan contains the required elements of §4382. See the attached Appendix A submittal that describes how the Plan is consistent with these goals.

4. The 2019 Huntington Town Plan is generally compatible with the planning areas, goals and strategies of the 2018 Chittenden County Regional Plan, entitled the 2018 Chittenden County ECOS Plan.

5. The 2019 Huntington Town Plan is compatible with the municipal plans for Richmond, Bolton, Hinesburg, Starksboro, Buels Gore, Duxbury and Fayston. In addition, the identification of specific objections to work with neighboring towns to advance shared interests is great.

6. Huntington has a planning process in place that is sufficient for an approved plan. In addition, Huntington has provided information about their planning budget and CCRPC finds that Huntington is maintaining its efforts to provide local funds for municipal and regional planning.

While there are no changes needed for CCRPC approval, here are a few minor additional comments/questions: 1. Consider adding photos to break up some of the text and make it more readable, especially with most of

the data tables being in an earlier demographic section. – Completed 2. Great education section – really brings home the value the residents have in Brewster. 3. Great section on the importance of wastewater for long-term vitality in the village. 4. Legend on Map 1 needs to be adjusted down into the outline. – Completed 5. Map 2 includes a “Class A Ecological Watershed” that isn’t described in the text (unless I missed it).

What is this? – Description added 6. Map 4 should have a reference to the source for the “potential community wastewater area” and

“potential community water area” data. – Added 7. Map 5 – is the “protected land” a subset of the Use Value appraisal program? If not, perhaps adjust the

legend so that the 2017 agriculture/forestry land is the only thing from the Use Value appraisal program (maybe a separate header isn’t needed). – Edited

8. There are other minor suggestions that Staff made in the body of the text for Huntington Planning Commission to consider. – All completed

Enhanced Energy Plan Review Following the statutory requirements of 24 V.S.A. §4352 and Vermont Department of Public Service’s Energy Planning Standards for Municipal Plans, I have reviewed the draft Comprehensive Plan to determine whether:

7. The Comprehensive Plan includes an energy element that has the same components as described in 24 V.S.A. §4348a(a)(3) for a regional plan and is confirmed under the requirements of 24 V.S.A. §4350.

8. The Comprehensive Plan is consistent with following State goals: a. Vermont's greenhouse gas reduction goals under 10 V.S.A. § 578(a); b. Vermont's 25 by 25 goal for renewable energy under 10 V.S.A. § 580; c. Vermont's building efficiency goals under 10 V.S.A. § 581; d. State energy policy under 30 V.S.A. § 202a and the recommendations for regional and municipal

energy planning pertaining to the efficient use of energy and the siting and development of renewable energy resources contained in the State energy plans adopted pursuant to 30 V.S.A. §§ 202 and 202b (State energy plans); and

e. The distributed renewable generation and energy transformation categories of resources to meet the requirements of the Renewable Energy Standard under 30 V.S.A. §§ 8004 and 8005.

CCRPC Staff & PAC Review – 2019 Huntington Town Plan (Enhanced Energy Plan Review) May 8, 2019 PAC Meeting

Page 3 of 4

9. The Comprehensive Plan meets the standards for issuing a determination of energy compliance included in the State energy plans as developed by the Vermont Department of Public Service.

Staff Review Findings and Comments

Consistency with the requirements above is evaluated through the Vermont Department of Public Service’s Vermont Department of Public Service’s Energy Planning Standards for Municipal Plans, which is attached to this document and briefly summarized below.

Standard Met Not Met N/A1. Plan duly adopted and approved X2. Submit a copy of the adopted plan X3. Plan contains an energy element X4. Analysis of resources, needs, scarcities, costs and problems in the

municipality across all energy sectorsX

5.a. Report Current energy use for heating, electricity, and transportation X5.b. Report 2025, 2035 and 2050 targets for energy use X5.c. Evaluation of thermal-sector energy use changes X5.d. Evaluation of transportation-sector energy use changes X5.e. Evaluation of electric-sector energy use changes X6.a. Encourage conservation by individuals and organizations X6.b. Promote efficient buildings X6.c. Promote decreased use of fossil fuels for heat X6.d. Demonstrate municipal leadership re: efficiency of municipal buildings? X7.a. Encourage increased public transit use X7.b. Promote shift away from single-occupancy vehicle trips X7.d. Promote shift from gas/diesel to non-fossil fuel vehicles? X7.e. Demonstrate municipal leadership re: efficiency of municipal transportation? X8.a. Promote Smart growth land use policies X8.b. Strongly prioritize development in compact, mixed use centers X9.a. Report existing renewable energy generation X9.b. Analyze generation potential X9.c. Identify sufficient land to meet the 2050 generation targets X9.d. Ensure that local constraints do not prevent the generation targets from being met

X

9.e. Include policy statements on siting energy generation X9.f. Maximize potential for generation on preferred sites X9.g. Demonstrate municipal leadership re: deploying renewable energy X10. Include maps provided by CCRPC X

Staff finds that the draft 2019 Huntington Town Plan meets the requirements of the enhanced energy planning standards (“determination”) set forth in 24 V.S.A. §4352. However, staff identified that additional work in the plan is needed to demonstrate Huntington’s leadership on deploying renewable energy generation (standard 9.g.). Staff suggested revisions for achieving standard 9.g. below.

Action 32 in Appendix 1 discusses the potential to use hydroelectric turbines in conjunction with a municipal water and wastewater system. This action does not represent the planning Huntington has done for water and wastewater infrastructure. Consider rephrasing this action to capture the status of planning for water and

CCRPC Staff & PAC Review – 2019 Huntington Town Plan (Enhanced Energy Plan Review) May 8, 2019 PAC Meeting

Page 4 of 4

wastewater infrastructure. To demonstrate the town’s dedication to energy planning, the town should also consider including language that creates the basis for pairing new infrastructure with combined heat and power system technology and water use efficiency. This revision could be made to action 32 in the appendix. The town should also identify a more prominent location for this action. For example, integrating the new revision into action B of Utilities Goal 2 ties energy planning nicely into the development of water and wastewater systems. Additional actions related to standard 9.g. could also be discussed in the plan. This could include siting of a solar array to offset municipal electricity use. Adding any other energy actions related to town leadership may necessitate a new goal in the energy section.

Staff encourages the Town to consider making these changes to not only meet standard 9.g. but to create a foundation for ensuring that the town is planning for reducing its energy use. – Changes made

Proposed Motion & Next Steps:

PROPOSED MOTION: The PAC finds that the draft 2019 Huntington Town Plan, meets all statutory requirements for CCRPC approval, and that the municipality's planning process meets all statutory requirements for CCRPC confirmation.

The PAC also finds that the draft 2019 Huntington Town Plan meets the requirements of the enhanced energy planning standards (“determination”) set forth in 24 V.S.A. §4352.

Upon notification that the Plan has been adopted by the municipality, CCRPC staff will review the plan, and any information relevant to the confirmation process. If staff determines that the required data and reference have not been added, or that substantive changes have been made, the materials will be forwarded to the PAC for review. Otherwise the PAC recommends that the Plan, and the municipal planning process, should be forwarded to the CCRPC Board for approval, confirmation, and an affirmative determination of energy compliance.

Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission (CCRPC) Resolution

2019 Huntington Town Plan, Planning Process and Enhanced Energy Plan

WHEREAS, Title 24, V.S.A. §4350 in part requires that CCRPC shall review the municipal planning process of our member municipalities including review of plans; that each review shall include a public hearing which is noticed as provided in 24 V.S.A. §4350(b); and that before approving a plan the Commission shall find that it:

1. is consistent with the goals established in Section 4302 of this title;

2. is compatible with its Regional Plan;

3. is compatible with approved plans of other municipalities in the region;

4. contains all the elements included in § 4382(a)(1)-(12) of this Title;

WHEREAS, Title 24, V.S.A. §4352 in part states that a municipality that wishes to seek a Determination of Energy Compliance may submit its plan to the Regional Planning Commission, if the regional plan has an affirmative determination of energy compliance; that each review shall include a public hearing; and that the Commission shall issue an affirmative determination of energy compliance if the plan:

1. is consistent with the regional plan;

2. includes an energy element;

3. is consistent with Vermont’s energy goals and policies; and

4. meets the standards for issuing a determination of energy compliance included in the State energy plans, as described by the Vermont Department of Public Service in their Energy Planning Standards for Municipal Plans;

WHEREAS, the CCRPC’s 2018 Chittenden County Regional Plan, entitled the ECOS Plan, adopted June 20, 2018, received an affirmative determination of energy compliance on August 9, 2018;

WHEREAS, the CCRPC at its September 19, 2018 meeting approved the CCRPC Guidelines and Standards for Confirmation of Municipal Planning Processes, Approval of Municipal Plans and Granting Determination of Energy Compliance dealing with local plans and CCRPC action;

WHEREAS, The Town of Huntington, Vermont is a member municipality of this Commission;

WHEREAS, The Town of Huntington formally requested CCRPC to approve its 2019 Huntington Town Plan and confirm its planning process and grant a determination of energy compliance on April 30, 2019;

WHEREAS, the Planning Advisory Committee warned a public hearing on April 22, 2019 and held a public hearing on May 8, 2019 to review the 2019 Huntington Town Plan for approval and confirmation of the planning process and for granting a determination of energy compliance, at the CCRPC offices, located at 110 W. Canal Street, Suite 202, Winooski, Vermont;

WHEREAS, the Planning Advisory Committee reviewed the records and recommended that the Commission approve the 2019 Huntington Town Plan as meeting the requirements of 24 V.S.A.§ 4350 and the Guidelines and Standards for Confirmation of Municipal Planning Processes, Approval of Municipal Plans and Granting Determinations of Energy Compliance and confirm the community’s planning process as consistent with Title 24, Chapter 117, as described in CCRPC’s staff review and the minutes of the Planning Advisory Committee, dated May 8, 2019.

WHEREAS, the Planning Advisory Committee reviewed the records and recommended that the Commission grant an affirmative determination of energy compliance to the 2019 Huntington Town Plan as meeting the requirements of Title 24, V.S.A. §4352 and the Guidelines and Standards for Confirmation of Municipal Planning Processes, Approval of Municipal Plans and Granting Determinations of Energy Compliance, as described in CCRPC’s staff review and the minutes of the Planning Advisory Committee, dated May 8, 2019; and

WHEREAS, the Town of Huntington Selectboard adopted the 2019 Huntington Town Plan on October 7, 2019;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CHITTENDEN COUNTY REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION, that, in compliance with 24 V.S.A.§ 4350 and the Guidelines and Standards for Confirmation of Municipal Planning Processes, Approval of Municipal Plans and Granting Determinations of Energy Compliance, CCRPC approves the 2019 Huntington Town Plan and the Commission finds that said Plan:

1. is consistent with the goals established in Section 4302 of Title 24;

2. is compatible with the 2018 Chittenden County Regional Plan, entitled the ECOS Plan, adopted June 20, 2018;

3. is compatible with the approved plans from other adjacent Chittenden County municipalities; and

4. contains all the elements included in § 4382(a)(1)-(12) and/or is making substantial progress toward attainment of the elements of this subsection;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE CHITTENDEN COUNTY REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION, that, in compliance with 24 V.S.A.§ 4350 and the Guidelines and Standards for Confirmation of Municipal Planning Processes and Approval of Municipal Plans, CCRPC confirms the Town of Huntington’s municipal planning process.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE CHITTENDEN COUNTY REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION, that, in compliance with Title 24, V.S.A. §4352 and the Guidelines and Standards for Confirmation of Municipal Planning Processes, Approval of Municipal Plans and Granting Determinations of Energy Compliance, CCRPC grants an affirmative determination of energy compliance to the 2019 Huntington Town Plan.

Dated at Winooski, this 16th day of September, 2019.

CHITTENDEN COUNTY REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION

__________________________________________________

Michael O’Brien, Chair

Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission October 16, 2019 Agenda Item 7: FY21 Municipal Dues

FY2021 Municipal Dues

Background: Each year the CCRPC assesses municipal dues that are primarily used to match federal transportation dollars for municipal and regional projects in Chittenden County.

The municipal dues assessment amounts are distributed among the member municipalities based on the Equalized Education Grand List (EEGL). Even with no increase in total dues, the dues for each municipality are adjusted each year consistent with their proportion of the EEGL. The most recent EEGL issued by the State of Vermont for Chittenden County is used in the FY21 tables. The January 2019 EEGL is available on Vermont Department of Taxes website.

The CCRPC had kept municipal dues level for fiscal years 2012 through 2014 following the merger. The dues were increased by 1.8% in FY15 based on the change in the Employment Cost Index (ECI) for State and Local Government employee Compensation, which is published by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). The Commission decided to level fund the dues again for FY16, FY17, FY18, and FY19.

The increase in ECI for state and local government workers during the 12-month period ending June 2018 was 2.3%. The dues were increased by 2.3% for a total assessment of $250,400 in FY20. Increase in the ECI for State and Local Government employee Compensation for the period ending June 2019 was 3%.

Staff proposed to the Executive Committee that dues be kept level for FY21, as they were just increased for this current fiscal year (FY20). The Executive Committee agreed with the staff recommendation. Table 1, included in the packet, presents the FY21 municipal dues table with a 0% increase.

Recommendations: The Executive Committee recommends keeping municipal dues level for FY21. The Executive Committee recommends the Full Commission approve the FY21 dues as shown in Table 1 with a 0% increase.

For more information contact:

Forest Cohen [email protected], 846-449 ext. 19

FY20 to FY21 Muncipal Assessments TABLE 1

0% Increase

EEG List EEG List 1/18 - 1/19 1/18 - 1/19 CCRPC FY20 CCRPC FY21 FY20 - FY21 FY20 - FY21

Municipality January 2018 % of County January 2019 % of County $ Change % Change Assessment Assessment $ Change % Change

Bolton 1,273,400 0.58% 1,322,320 0.59% 48,920$ 1.07% $1,457 $1,472 $16 1.08%

Buels Gore 31,870 0.01% 37,250 0.02% 5,380$ 12.10% $36 $41 $5 13.77%Burlington 46,527,460 21.25% 47,853,690 21.28% 1,326,230$ 0.11% $53,219 $53,279 $60 0.11%

Charlotte 9,342,670 4.27% 9,463,700 4.21% 121,030$ -1.42% $10,686 $10,537 -$150 -1.40%

Colchester 22,907,990 10.46% 23,528,160 10.46% 620,170$ -0.03% $26,202 $26,196 -$7 -0.03%

Essex Town* 27,084,630 12.37% 27,908,190 12.41% 823,560$ 0.30% $30,980 $31,072 $92 0.30%

Hinesburg 5,936,370 2.71% 6,184,550 2.75% 248,180$ 1.39% $6,790 $6,886 $96 1.41%

Huntington 2,166,750 0.99% 2,210,710 0.98% 43,960$ -0.69% $2,478 $2,461 -$17 -0.69%

Jericho 6,439,820 2.94% 6,591,710 2.93% 151,890$ -0.37% $7,366 $7,339 -$27 -0.37%

Milton 11,801,690 5.39% 12,114,140 5.39% 312,450$ -0.08% $13,499 $13,488 -$11 -0.08%

Richmond 4,813,070 2.20% 4,972,650 2.21% 159,580$ 0.56% $5,505 $5,536 $31 0.57%

Shelburne 15,824,720 7.23% 16,105,190 7.16% 280,470$ -0.94% $18,101 $17,931 -$169 -0.94%

South Burlington 31,302,220 14.30% 32,119,390 14.28% 817,170$ -0.12% $35,804 $35,761 -$43 -0.12%

St. George 755,620 0.35% 841,670 0.37% 86,050$ 7.77% $864 $937 $73 8.42%

Underhill 3,908,840 1.79% 3,990,200 1.77% 81,360$ -0.64% $4,471 $4,443 -$28 -0.64%

Westford 2,444,790 1.12% 2,517,670 1.12% 72,880$ 0.24% $2,796 $2,803 $7 0.24%

Williston 20,256,630 9.25% 20,802,810 9.25% 546,180$ -0.04% $23,170 $23,161 -$8 -0.04%

Winooski 6,098,030 2.79% 6,337,630 2.82% 239,600$ 1.15% $6,975 $7,056 $81 1.16%

TOTAL $218,916,570 100.00% $224,901,630 100.00% 5,985,060$ 2.66% $250,400 $250,400 $0 0.00%

Each town is assessed dues using their percentage of the Equalized Education Grand List. Their amount is determined by

taking the total dues and multiplying it by the municipality's percentage of the total Grand List.

Equalized Education Grand List can be accessed at the Vermont Department of Taxes

https://tax.vermont.gov/research-and-reports/pvr-annual-report/supplemental-data-2018

*Essex Junction and Essex Town are combined for the first year this year on the EEGL. The 2018 values for each

were combined to compare to 2019 data.

VERMONT DEPARTMENT OF TAXES 37JANUARY 2019

EQUALIZATION STUDY BASED ON 2018 GRAND LISTS

2019Equalized Education Grand List

Chittenden

Effective January 1,

Town Name Education CLA

Total Equalized Education Grand List

Education Grand List COD

Total Taxable Parcel Count

Bolton 1,270,335 96.07 7.88 1,322,320756

Buels Gore 30,235 81.16 15.68 37,25026

Burlington 37,159,361 77.65 11.28 47,853,69010,429*Charlotte 9,241,785 97.66 8.45 9,463,7001,767

Colchester 21,472,411 91.26 9.38 23,528,1606,843

Essex Town 26,275,340 94.15 6.17 27,908,1907,805

Hinesburg 6,172,299 99.80 6.91 6,184,5501,977

Huntington 2,152,255 97.36 7.30 2,210,710904

Jericho 6,626,679 100.53 4.31 6,591,7102,066

Milton 11,614,832 95.88 8.48 12,114,1404,386*Richmond 4,632,154 93.15 11.04 4,972,6501,708

Shelburne 15,311,136 95.07 10.08 16,105,1902,906

South Burlington 29,961,081 93.28 7.57 32,119,3907,544*St. George 783,287 93.06 18.52 841,670346

Underhill 3,917,965 98.19 8.03 3,990,2001,318

Westford 2,417,957 96.04 11.56 2,517,670937

Williston 19,700,663 94.70 6.06 20,802,8104,126

Winooski 5,609,325 88.51 10.55 6,337,6301,777*

County Totals 204,349,100 224,901,63057,621

Municipality has active TIF district. For more information, refer to introduction preceding this report.*

CHITTENDEN COUNTY REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION 1 EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES 2

DRAFT 3 4

DATE: Wednesday, October 2, 2019 5 TIME: 5:45 p.m. 6 PLACE: CCRPC Offices, 110 W. Canal Street, Suite 202; Winooski, VT 05404 7 PRESENT: Mike O’Brien, Chair Catherine McMains, Vice Chair 8 John Zicconi, Secretary-Treasurer Barbara Elliott, At Large <5000 (via telephone) 9 Chris Shaw, At Large >5000 Chris Roy, Immediate Past Chair 10 STAFF: Charlie Baker, Executive Director Eleni Churchill, Transportation Program Mgr. 11 Forest Cohen, Senior Business Mgr. Regina Mahony, Planning Program Mgr. 12 Amy Irvin Witham, Business Office Associate 13 14 The meeting was called to order at 5:48 p.m. by the Chair, Mike O’Brien. 15 16 1. Changes to the Agenda, Members’ Items. There were no changes to the agenda. 17

There were two member comments, as follows: 18

• John Zicconi stated he will not be in attendance for the November Executive Committee 19 meeting. 20

• Chris Shaw stated he appreciated the presentation by Nic Longo from BIA on the Noise 21 Compatibility Plan; he asked that staff explore opportunities for continued sound monitoring. 22

23 2. Approval of September 4, 2019 Joint Executive & Finance Committee Minutes. JOHN ZICCONI MADE 24 A MOTION, SECONDED BY CHRIS SHAW, TO APPROVE THE MINUTES WITH EDITS. MOTION CARRIED 25 UNANIMOUSLY. Catherine McMains requested the following technical edits: 26

• page 1, line 35, add the word “stated” […] Forest stated […] 27

• page 2, lines 2 and 4, the word pension should be lower-case 28

• page 2, line 7, add the word “then” to the sentence “[…] and then to the Board […]” 29 30 3. Act 250 & Sec. 248 Applications: There were none. 31 32 4. FY21 Municipal Dues. Charlie referenced the FY21 Municipal Dues Memo included in the packet and 33 explained that the corresponding Table 1 presents FY21 dues at a 0% increase whereas Table 2 depicts a 34 3% increase. The figures are based on the same ECI information over a 12-month period, ending June 35 2019. Charlie explained that we increased the dues by 2.3% for FY20 and do not need to be increased 36 for FY21. BARBARA ELLIOTT MADE A MOTION, SECONDED BY JOHN ZICCONI TO KEEP THE DUES LEVEL 37 FOR FY21. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 38 39 5. CIRC Alternatives status report preparation. Members discussed the status of scheduled CIRC 40 Alternatives Projects. Pedestrian safety issues are of major concern, particularly in Williston at the I89 41 Exit 12 underpass. There is no safe pedestrian crossing and it is quite dangerous. Members discussed 42 ways to make the project a priority. There is also a concern that a lot of the commitments made at the 43 time the Circ Alternatives process was completed are not moving forward and there will be a point in 44 time when these commitments are completely forgotten. Charlie reminded everyone Michele 45

CCRPC Executive Committee 2 | P a g e Meeting Minutes

Boomhower, Director of Policy, Planning and Intermodal Development at VTrans will attend the next 1 Board Meeting to speak to concerns regarding the status of CIRC Alternatives projects. 2 3 6. Chair/Executive Director Report: 4 5

a. Community Justice Summit Charlie noted there are 5 Community Justice Centers in 6 Chittenden County: Winooski, Burlington, Essex, South Burlington and Williston. The municipal 7 CJCs are funded by the State and municipalities to deliver restorative justice services. Town 8 Managers and the Vermont Dept of Corrections were looking for someone to host neutral 9 facilitation. We are hosting the forum on October 30, 2019 at the Expo in Essex Jct. 10 11 b. Transportation Climate Initiative Charlie explained, northeastern states from Virginia to 12 Maine have joined together to investigate a cap and trade system for transportation emissions. 13 There remains a lot to be determined, however, we are currently exploring the opportunity. Last 14 week on September 24th, we hosted a workshop to gather input on use of these funds for rural 15 transportation improvements if and when the system gets going. ANR and VTrans are 16 continuing to gather information on the subject and eventually will present findings to the 17 Governor. There is potential to see monies as early as FY22, however, there is a lot to be 18 determined before then. 19 20 c. Regional Dispatch Charlie noted that the Chittenden County Public Safety Authority is working 21 with a consultant to work through the details to begin operations in July 2020. Some key issues 22 include employee transition from the individual municipalities (current towns included in the 23 regional dispatch are Burlington, Colchester, South Burlington, Winooski, and Williston) to the 24 regional center; developing and gaining municipal approval of the budget; and, the technology 25 and communications infrastructure needs. 26 27 d. Net Metering Preferred Sites 28 Charlie stated the Public Utilities Commission is currently taking comments on Net Metering 29 rulemaking. There is a sense that preferred sites should be more explicit in town plans. 30 However, RPC’s would like to see a little more flexibility to allow more of a criteria-based 31 decision-making system. 32 33 e. CATMA Charlie mentioned CATMA is going through a strategic business planning exercise and 34 expressed desire to work more closely with the CCRPC. They consider CCRPC to be a valuable 35 resource. He met with them today and encouraged them to also look at other organizations 36 that might be a better long-term partner. He expects we will talk more about this in November. 37 38 f. Legislative Breakfast topics 39 Charlie asked members about topics to bring to the upcoming Legislative meeting. Members 40 feel items that currently have momentum may be the best ones to push forward, for example, 41 Act 250. Chris Shaw mentioned Oregon’s single family zoning law in metropolitan transit areas; 42 and if something similar would be appropriate here. Charlie stated that the Administration is 43 considering a proposal to establish a minimum baseline of duplexes in residential districts. 44 Catherine McMains asked about zoning regulations and the effect of parking spots being 45 required, as it increases the costs and lowers the affordability, and affordability is one of the 46 major problems in Chittenden County. Member discussion ensued, and it was noted that there 47 would be more discussion on Legislative Breakfast topics next month. 48

CCRPC Executive Committee 3 | P a g e Meeting Minutes

1 2 7.Review Agenda for October 16, 2019 Board Meeting. The Board Agenda for November was included in 3 the packet. Members reviewed the proposed agenda. Charlie reminded everyone there will be 4 continued RPC Training immediately preceding the Board Meeting. The training will provide more 5 information on voting rules, the annual budget and the timeline for transportation projects. Members 6 discussed adding an agenda item for an Executive Session to the meeting to provide a status report on 7 the potential litigation regarding the Amtrak Overnight Storage and Servicing Study. 8 9 8. Other Business There was no other business. 10 11 11. Executive Session. CATHERINE MCMAINS MADE A MOTION, SECONDED BY CHRIS SHAW, TO GO 12 INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION AT 6:40 P.M. TO DISCUSS POTENTIAL LITIGATION WITH THE EXECUTIVE 13 DIRECTOR (Charlie Baker) AND THE TRANSPORTATION PLANNING MANAGER (Eleni Churchill). 14 Due to a conflict of interest, Chris Roy excused himself and left the meeting at 6:41 P.M. THE MOTION 15 TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 16 17 CATHERINE MCMAINS MADE A MOTION, SECONDED BY CHRIS SHAW, TO EXIT EXECUTIVE SESSION AT 18 6:55 P.M. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 19 20 21 12. Adjournment. CHRIS SHAW MADE A MOTION, SECONDED BY JOHN ZICCONNI, TO ADJOURN AT 6:55 22 P.M. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 23 24 25 26 Respectfully submitted, 27 Amy Irvin Witham 28

CHITTENDEN COUNTY REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION 1 TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE 2

MINUTES 3 4

DATE: Tuesday September 3, 2019 5 TIME: 9:00 a.m. 6 PLACE: CCRPC Offices, 110 West Canal St. Winooski, VT 7

8 9

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Bryan Osborne called the meeting to order at 9:00AM, calling for a round of introductions. 29 30

1. Consent Agenda: DEAN BLOCH MADE A MOTION APPROVING THE CONSENT AGENDA 31 DOCUMETING TWO TIP AMENDMENTS. THE MOTION WAS SECONDED BY DENNIS LUTZ 32 AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. 33

34 2. Approval of Minutes 35 NICOLE LOSCH MADE A MOTION, SECONDED BY BOB HENNEBERGER, TO APPROVE THE 36 MINUTES OF AUGUST 6, 2019. THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. 37

38 3. Public Comments: None. 39

40 4. VTrans Corridor Management Planning 41 Chris Clow of VTrans introduced this concept in the context of VTrans long range transportation goals. 42 Corridor planning involves a range of participants cooperatively identifying transportation issues and 43 needs, as well as possible solutions, and the opportunities to implement those solutions along a defined 44 stretch of roadway. The approach is to engage local and regional stakeholders as, well as staff from across 45 AOT divisions, in the planning process. More specifically, corridor planning’s objectives are to: 46

Incorporate local needs in a focused and effective way 47 Coordinate & Leverage Asset Management Investments 48 Identify practical, short term projects 49 Identify longer term needs 50 Integrate into maintenance, projects and permitting 51 Annual Status Meetings to monitor progress and changes 52

Using the VT RT 100 corridor from Waterbury to Morristown (including VT 108 to Smugglers Notch) as 53 a recent example, Chris described the planning steps: 54

Members Present Nicole Losch, Burlington Matt Langham, VTrans Ashley Bishop, VTrans District 5 Bob Henneberger, Seniors Dean Bloch, Charlotte Andrea Morgante, Hinesburg Bryan Osborne, Colchester, TAC Chair Josh Arneson, Richmond Mary Anne Michaels, Rail Allegra Williams, Local Motion Joss Besse, Bolton Jon Rauscher, Winooski Larry Lackey, BTV Brian Bigelow, Underhill Bruce Hoar, Williston Richard Watts, Environmental Rep.

Staff Marshall Distel, Transportation Planner Peter Keating, Senior Transportation Planner Christine Forde, Senior Transportation Planner Eleni Churchill, Transportation Program Manager Jason Charest, Senior Transportation Planning Engineer Sai Sarepalli, Transportation Planning Engineer Chris Dubin, Transportation Planner

Others Chris Clow, VTrans Nic Longo, BTV

CCRPC TAC Minutes, September 3, 2019 June 4, 2019 2

Data Gathering and Analysis 1 o Traffic, Safety, Asset Condition, Bike/Ped, Transit, natural resources, wildlife, land use 2 o Currently Planned Transportation Projects 3

Input from VTrans Staff 4 Input from Municipal and RPC Staffs 5 Corridor Stakeholder Meeting: Issues and Ideas 6 Draft Implementation Plan 7

Also included are the types of recommendations that flow from the process. He also revealed the sources 8 of ideas from the process and the planning results. One result is an implementation table showing details 9 of project descriptions, their locations and implementation projects/strategies. Another result was cross 10 section types in Village/Activity Centers as well as contrasting ones in rural highway stretches. Chris then 11 went to a story map 12 (https://vtrans.maps.arcgis.com/apps/Cascade/index.html?appid=391ff109ed994402b0646e82420f7e01)13 on the project website to illustrate how this is used to convey project information in an interactive way. 14 He then focused on project “harmonization,” using an on-line tool to align and closely coordinate project 15 types over time. Chris concluded with the Corridor Management Planning home page and his contact 16 information. 17

18 In the discussion that followed, the following topics came up: 19

When the possibility of doing a Chittenden County corridor could arise 20 Corridor plans will reside within the asset management section of VTrans 21 Walking or biking the corridor to obtain firsthand information of these alternative modes would 22

be useful 23 Consider using the municipal regulatory tool of official maps in state corridor management plans 24 The difficulties in having State highways through Village Centers that are not Class 1 and the 25

reluctance of towns to take over routes as Class 1 26 State highway rights-of-way may need to be larger to accommodate future uses 27 Water quality at stream crossings should be incorporated in these plans 28

29 5. Burlington International Airport Draft Noise Compatibility Program (NCP) 30 Nic Longo, BTV’s Deputy Director of Aviation presented this project beginning with its recent history 31 back to 2008 when the last NCP was approved by FAA. The latest effort to update the plan began in 32 2017. In the meantime, Noise Exposure Maps (NEM) were done in 2013 and 2015. Both NEMs and 33 NCPs are part of the FAA’s Part 150 Noise Study. The NEM includes: 34

A detailed description of airport layout, operations, noise exposure, land uses, and noise/land use 35 compatibility for the study year and a forecast year 36

The NCP is: 37 A proposed plan to reduce noise exposure, and identify land use mitigation measures to address 38

existing non-compatible uses and land use control measures to prevent new non-compatible uses 39 The proposed NEM has been the subject of public meetings earlier this summer. It features noise contour 40 lines drawn over land use types around the airport. Several maps and selected sections of the maps were 41 shown by Nic, some that compared previous noise contours with the most current, also illustrating 42 forecast conditions in the future. Noise contours are drawn at 65 DNL (Day-Night Average Sound 43 Level). The noise contours are generated by a FAA computer model called AEDT. Nic then provided a 44 primer on sound terminology with DNL examples and highlighted the 10-dB penalty for night sounds 45 (between 10PM and 7AM) programmed into the AEDT. The process of updating the NEM is nearly 46 complete and about to be sent for FAA review. The NCP is still in process and will be the subject of 47 further public review over the coming months. Nic noted the following possible land use measures that 48 could be part of any NCP: 49

Sounds insulation for residential and community buildings 50 Land acquisition and relocation, 51 Sound buffers/barriers, 52

CCRPC TAC Minutes, September 3, 2019 June 4, 2019 3

Sales assistance 1 Easement acquisition for new development 2 Purchase assurance, and 3 Real estate disclosure 4

Nic reported that there are 2,600 dwelling units within the 65 DNL contour line and therefore potentially 5 eligible for any sound insulation program. He anticipated that implementation of the draft NCP would 6 results in between 50 and 100 buildings being insulated each year. Building selection will need to be 7 prioritized by considering each whole number contour line – those closest to the higher DNL levels 8 having higher priority, but taking into consideration construction materials and year-built information as 9 well. 10

11 6. Status of Projects and Subcommittee Reports (Information Item): Peter noted that the project list 12 on the back of the agenda identifies new projects begun in FY20 and some older ones dropped off. 13

14 7. CCRPC August Board Meetings Report 15 Peter noted that the Board did not meet in August. 16

17 8. Chairman’s/Members’ Items: A motion was made, seconded and approved to congratulate Peter 18 Keating on his years of service to the RPC 19

20 The meeting adjourned at 10:30 AM. Respectfully submitted, Peter Keating 21

CHITTENDEN COUNTY REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION 1

CLEAN WATER ADVISORY COMMITTEE – DRAFT MINUTES 2 3 DATE: Tuesday, October 1, 2019 4 SCHEDULED TIME: 11 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. 5 PLACE: CCRPC Offices, 110 West Canal Street, Suite 202, Winooski, VT 6 DOCUMENTS: Minutes, documents, and presentations discussed accessible at: 7

http://www.ccrpcvt.org/meetings/clean-water-advisory-committee/ 8 9

Committee Members in Attendance Bolton: Hinesburg: Merrily Lovell St. George:Buels Gore: Huntington: Underhill: Brian Bigelow Burlington: James Sherrard Jericho: Westford:Charlotte: Milton: Ashley Toof Williston: Christine DoughertyColchester: Karen Adams Richmond: Winooski: Ryan Lambert, Tim GroverEssex: Annie Costandi Shelburne: Chris Robinson,

Dean Pierce (non-member)VAOT: Jennifer Callahan

Essex Junction: Chelsea Mandigo South Burlington: Tom DiPietro;

VANR: Christy Witters; Padraic Monks

Burlington Airport: University of VT: Michael Richards

CCRPC Board:

Friends of the Winooski River: Lewis Creek Assoc: Kate Kelly Winooski NRCD: Other Attendees: Jessica Louisos (Milone & MacBroom); Amy Macrelis and Peter Lazorchak (Stone Environmental); Evan Fitzgerald (Fitzgerald Environmental)CCRPC Staff: Dan Albrecht, Charlie Baker (left at 11:45pm), Regina Mahony (left at 11:45pm)

10 1. Call to Order. The meeting was called to order by Annie Costandi at 11:00 a.m. Introductions were made. 11

12 2. Changes to the Agenda and public comments on items not on the agenda None. 13 14 3. Review and action on draft minutes of August 6, 2019. 15

After a brief recap by Dan Albrecht, Jennifer Callahan made a motion, seconded by Chelsea 16 Mandigo to approve the minutes as drafted. MOTION PASSED. Abstention by Annie Costandi. 17

18 4. Presentation by Padraic Monks, DEC, Draft General Permit for 3-acre sites 19 For details see link to draft general permit here: https://dec.vermont.gov/watershed/stormwater/9050. 20 Some key points from Mr. Monks’ presentation were: 21

This general permit covers all operational stormwater permitting, including new development, 22 redevelopment, and permit renewal. Additionally, this general permit serves as the “Three-Acre 23 General Permit” as required under the Vermont Clean Water Act. This new “9050” permit will 24 supplant the old system of renewing a “9010” permit or getting a new “9015” permit. 25

General Permit is out for public comment from public notice from 9/20/19- 11/8/19. 26 DEC is holding three public meetings: October 28th in Rutland; October 29th in Montpelier; and 27

October 31st in Milton (Milton Municipal Building, Community Room, at 43 Bombardier Road, 28 Milton, 2:00 - 3:30 PM) 29

30 Questions: 31

Exemption: 400 sq.ft. This is for isolated impervious surfaces (aka roads). For example, if you have a 32 pump house surrounded by woods you just need to disconnect it and address any erosion. They are 33 still subject to the permit but have separate standards. 34

Roadways in the public roadways that won’t fall under isolated roads. Some of these fall under the 35 MRGP permit. The MRGP doesn’t expect the Town’s to acquire additional ROW. How do 36 municipalities address the areas for treatment under this permit? Padraic indicated that under the 37 feasibility analysis the municipalities don’t have to acquire additional land; however, it will need to be 38 worked out in co-permittee situations. In a Homeowners Association situation, Colchester has private 39

CCRPC Clean Water Advisory Committee Minutes, August 6, 2019

2

agreements that makes responsibilities clear in accordance with ownership, and they are now needing 1 to figure out how to deal with these situations. 2

Question about existing permits that are about to expire. Padraic stated that there are provisions in the 3 General Permit that describe how to handle existing permits that are going to expire within the first 12 4 months of the new General Permit. For expired permits they’ll have coverage under 3-9050 for the 5 first 12 months, but then they need to actually apply. 6

Question about 3-acre sites under the CSO. Padraic stated there is an exemption in statute that exempts 7 properties that are going to the wastewater treatment plant from needing to comply with the 8 stormwater permit. 9

Discussion about municipalities that have standards that are more restrictive than the 3-9050 permit. 10 Hopefully DEC can keep municipalities apprised of conversations they are having with applicants so 11 the municipalities can explain that they may have higher standards that they need to comply with (like 12 the MS4 requirements and flow restoration plans). Padraic stated that he isn’t sure how best to handle 13 this; and suggested that perhaps there should be follow-up communication to properties that are 14 subject to flow restoration plans. Padraic explained the benefits from DEC’s perspective of a 15 municipality taking over stormwater systems on 3-acre sites. 16

There was a discussion about the impact fees. Improvements will likely be more expensive than the 17 offset fee. There was a suggestion that there will be pressure to try to access the offset fee provision; 18 and it will be difficult for municipalities to actively participate on each application to comment on 19 whether they are making improvements or using the offset fee. Discussion about the potential to do 20 some larger regional solutions within a watershed. 21

Question about Phosphorus Control Plan target adjustment: If a municipality takes over SW treatment 22 for example, from a 3-acre permit site the applicable acreage would be added to the municipality’s 23 baseload 24

Cost is not an allowed, exclusionary criteria for a permittee to be forgiven his/her obligations 25 The issue of a municipality taking over a treatment for a 1-2 acre portion while at the same time the 26

municipality is already meeting road BMP standards came up. Would a municipality still be required 27 to meet the 35% reduction…? This seems unfair given its less than 3-acres that’s being taken over. 28

Derick Read asked if projects/parcels associated with the old “1-dash Watershed Improvement Permits 29 but built to 2002 permit standards would be considered to be compliant. Padraic yes they would 30 because the practice was equivalent to the 2002 standards. 31

Christy noted that these are good questions and DEC will look to answer them. 32 33

34 5. Updates/Comments 35

Neil Kamman of DEC is the head of its newly-created Water Infrastructure Finance and Development 36 Division. 37

Tom DiPietro requested more clarity from DEC regarding what is required with regards to leaf 38 sweeping and street sweeping, i.e. “what counts as a qualified program?” 39

Some members thanked Tom DiPietro for the excellent all day stormwater training he helped to 40 organize through the Green Mountain Water Environment Association in late September. 41

42 43

6. Items for November 5th meeting agenda. To be determined through staff consultation with the co-44 chairs. 45

46 7. Adjournment. The meeting adjourned at 12:15 p.m. 47

48 Respectfully submitted, Regina Mahony & Dan Albrecht 49 50

CHITTENDEN COUNTY REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION 1 PLANNING ADVISORY COMMITTEE - MINUTES 2

3 DATE: Wednesday, October 9, 2019 4 TIME: 2:30 p.m. to 4:30 p.m. 5 PLACE: CCRPC Offices, 110 West Canal Street, Suite 202, Winooski, VT 6

7

8 9

1. Welcome and Introductions 10 Joss Besse called the meeting to order at 2:35 p.m. 11

12 2. Approval of August 7, 2019 Minutes 13

14 __Eric_______________ made a motion, seconded by ___Dean__________________, to approve the August 7, 15 2019 minutes with an amendment to add Jess Draper not on attendee list for this. No further discussion. MOTION 16 PASSED. ________________ abstained. 17

18 3. Building Homes Together 19 Regina Mahony will provide an overview of the results from the first three years of the campaign. The final 2018 20 report and information is located here: http://www.ecosproject.com/building-homes-together. 21

22 Question about the affordable numbers. Is the affordable units going down or up in comparison to overall 23 construction going up? Question about affordable ADUs in Jericho – do we track rental that is affordable to 24 households that aren’t perpetually affordable. Not at the moment…discussion about that. 25

26 Melanie explained the local data. Question about what will happen at the local level if the targets aren’t met. Might 27 be helpful to see what number of affordable is happening in each Town, so that we can see how we are doing relative 28 to each other. GREAT IDEA. 29

30 Dean explained the statutory requirement. Doesn’t matter if it isn’t popular. And then statute says Communities 31 implement policies that meet that need – it is the responsibility of the CCRPC to set out these numbers. Can there be 32 a regional UPWP? Maybe if we don’t need a consultant; and we are trying to get a regional one done. RM FIGURE 33 THIS OUT FOR DECEMER UPWP DISCUSSION. 34

35 4. Census Update: PSAP and New Construction 36 Melanie Needle will provide an update on the New Construction process. The LUCA appeals have been submitted, 37 and we are waiting on those results. We are also waiting on PSAP feedback. 38

39 5. E911 Addressing 40 Melanie Needle and Tyler Hermanson Refresher on addressing, including proper addressing of ADUs. 41

42 I just spoke with Tyler from e911 on the phone about the ADU practice. He told me that if it is a standalone unit it 43 gets its own address with a different address #. If it’s an ADU within a structure it gets the same address # as the 44

Members Present: Joss Besse, Board Rep/Bolton Matt Boulanger, Williston Eric Vorwald, Winooski Meagan Tuttle, Burlington Cathyann LaRose, South Burlington Dean Pierce, Shelburne Darren Schribbler, Essex Michael Burris, Milton Sean Cannon, Colchester

Andrew Strniste, Underhill Daryl Arminius, Charlotte Wayne Howe, Board Rep/Jericho Jess Draper, Richmond

Staff: Regina Mahony, Planning Program Manager Emily Nosse-Leirer, Senior Planner Melanie Needle, Senior Planner

Planning Advisory Committee October 9, 20192

primary structure and both units should be assigned unit #s. Tyler said that many of our towns need to be 1 readdressed and are not doing this correctly. 2 Questions: should the unit numbers be numbers or letters? Also what about a detached structure on the same 3 driveway? Also what about condo units within a singular structure. 4 Towns have addressing ordinances – use this if you have it. If it is out of date, amend it. 5 Suggest in TEOC and Town Fair. 6

7 8

6. Jericho Energy Plan 9 Joss Besse opened the public hearing. No comments were heard. The hearing was closed. 10

11 Melanie Needle provided an overview of the Staff Report. Expiration is not going to change. All of the standards 12 have been met. There does need to be a bit of work to clarify that the local secondary conservation areas are treated 13 as constraints so that there isn’t any ambiguity at the PUC. Otherwise it is a really great plan and easily readable. 14

15 Question about the other amendments – explained that will follow our normal process. 16

17 Katherine – Appreciate work from Emily on this work. Agrees with comments from Melanie and has already made 18 them, however the PC is having their public hearing next week. She’ll present these changes to the PC next week and 19 expects that they will accept them. 20

21 __Dean Pierce__________made a motion, seconded by __Wayne Howe___________ that the draft Town of 22 Jericho Comprehensive Town Plan (draft 9/10/2019) meets the requirements of the enhanced energy planning 23 standards (“determination”) set forth in 24 V.S.A. §4352 with the additions of clarifying language to strategies 24 4.1.3. 25

26 Upon notification that the Plan has been adopted by the municipality, CCRPC staff will review the plan, and any 27 information relevant to the confirmation process. If staff determines that the natural resource strategies mentioned 28 above have not been revised or that substantive changes have been made, the materials will be forwarded to the PAC 29 for review. Otherwise the PAC recommends that the Plan, and the municipal planning process, should be forwarded 30 to the CCRPC Board for approval, confirmation, and an affirmative determination of energy compliance. 31

32 7. Charlotte Energy Plan 33 This is a plan amendment to include a new enhanced energy plan, and the town is seeking a Determination of Energy 34 Compliance. This document was last reviewed and recommended for approval by the PAC in November, 2018. No 35 further PAC action is needed on this Plan, but Staff will provide an update since it has almost been a year since the 36 PAC last reviewed it. 37

38 Melanie Needle provided an overview of the Plan itself and explained the “potential” preferred site map. Land 39 owners would still need to go through the joint letter process. There was a discussion about the scenic resources, 40 particularly in a flat landscape scenic issues. 41

42 8. Regional Act 250/Section 248 Projects on the Horizon 43 Underhill: A mud room triggered Act 250 permits. 44 Winooski: nothing to report. 45 Jericho: nothing to report 46 Essex: Burger King on Center Road; another bank on Carmichael; assisted living on Freeman Woods for building 47 permits – 40,000 sq.ft. final build-out of that whole complex 48 Shelburne: Garden Side nursery project would be scaled down to wetlands. Rice Lumber 50 units in multi-family 63 49 units at the Yankee Doodle motel site (most significant FBC project so far). Other potential projects on Rte. 7. 50 Kwiniaska development not appealled. Sterling Construction single family to duplex triggered Act 250 with parcel 51 across the road. 52 Hinesburg: Nothing right now. 53

Planning Advisory Committee October 9, 20193

South Burlington: FedEx proposal in Tech Park; South Village still going; new Hampton Inn next to Holiday Inn at 1 Dorset Road/Williston Road; and some changes at Meadowland Business Park; front entry expansion at Cairns 2 Arena; new convenience store/deli at beginning of Tilley Drive on Hinesburg Road; JAM Golf single family homes 3 now coming in to build. In other business, eliminated parking minimums on Monday night in a split decision by the 4 City Council. 5 Colchester: no Act 250 but there is a 197 unit Severance Corner project with commercial. 6

7 9. Other Business 8 a. Button-Up Vermont Events in the region: https://buttonupvermont.org/participating-communities. Question 9

about the home visits – how many are there? There are 500 state-wide 10 b. CCRPC is hosting APA’s Gentrification, Displacement and the Law Webinar on 10/10 from 3:30 to 5pm* 11 c. Next Housing Convening: Tuesday, October 29th on Accessory Dwelling Units 12 d. Implementing Act 171 Webinars – Oct 2nd and 22nd* 13 e. FEMA’s Risk Mapping, Assessment and Planning (Risk MAP) Discovery Meeting on Tuesday, October 29th at 14

9am at Burlington City Arts at 135 Church Street. Relevant towns can be found on this map: https://prd-wret.s3-15 us-west-2.amazonaws.com/assets/palladium/production/atoms/files/watershed_map_champlain.pdf. It would be 16 really helpful to go and draw where you’ve had consistent flood issues. International Joint Commission modeling 17 should be informing that; and in 2011 the lake flood went over. Is there a schedule for the Winooski? Or was this 18 done earlier after the DFIRMs were done? 19

f. Events mentioned: Beth Hemstone; Jeff Speck; Official Map Jam; 20 21

8. Adjourn 22 Darren, Joss motion to adjourn at 4:00p.m. 23

24 Respectfully submitted, Regina Mahony 25