Transportation, Energy, and Utilities Committee — Burlington, VT
Date: 2026-05-26
Time: 17:30

City Council - Transportation, Energy and Utilities Committee

 Tuesday, May 26, 2026, 5:30 PM,

Join in Person: Front Conference Room, 645 Pine St. Burlington, VT 05401

Join via Zoom: https://zoom.us/j/84603122855
To call into the meeting, including to speak during public comment:
Phone: 312-626-6799, Webinar ID: 846 0312 2855
1. Agenda
 1.1. Motion to adopt/amend

2. Adopt Minutes
 2.1. Minutes of 4/28/26

3. Public Forum

4. Deliberative Agenda
 4.1. GMT Updates: Route 1/Route 11 Downtown Routing - 15 Min
 4.2. Unaccepted Streets Briefing - 40 Min
 4.3. Champlain Parkway - Post Construction Monitoring - 30 min

5. Director's Report

6. Councilor Items

7. Next Meeting
 7.1. Tentative, 6/23/26, 5:30PM

8. Adjournment

City Council - Transportation, Energy and Utilities Committee

 Tuesday, May 26, 2026, 5:30 PM,

Join in Person: Front Conference Room, 645 Pine St. Burlington, VT 05401

Join via Zoom: https://zoom.us/j/84603122855
To call into the meeting, including to speak during public comment:
Phone: 312-626-6799, Webinar ID: 846 0312 2855
1. Agenda
 1.1. Motion to adopt/amend

2. Adopt Minutes
 2.1. Minutes of 4/28/26

3. Public Forum

4. Deliberative Agenda
 4.1. GMT Updates: Route 1/Route 11 Downtown Routing - 15 Min
 4.2. Unaccepted Streets Briefing - 40 Min
 4.3. Champlain Parkway - Post Construction Monitoring - 30 min

5. Director's Report

6. Councilor Items

7. Next Meeting
 7.1. Tentative, 6/23/26, 5:30PM

8. Adjournment




 Page 1 of 11
 CITY OF BURLINGTON, VERMONT

 CITY COUNCIL TRANSPORTATION, ENERGY &
 UTILITIES COMMITTEE
 c/o Department of Public Works 802.863.9094 VOX
 645 Pine Street, Suite A 802.863.0466 FAX
 Burlington, VT 05401 www.burlingtonvt.gov/dpw


 Councilor Mark Barlow, Chair, North District
 Inquiries:
 Councilor Gene Bergman, Ward 2
 Rob Goulding
 Councilor Becca McKnight, Ward 6 802.881-2278
 Councilor Marek Broderick, Ward 8 rgoulding@burlingtonvt.gov




 Transportation, Energy and Utilities Committee of the City Council
 Tuesday, April 28, 2026 – 5:30 PM
 --DRAFT MINUTES—
 See video for full meeting: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r87gFTzsnXg

Councilors absent: None
Councilors present: Chair Barlow, Councilor Bergman, Councilor Broderick, and
Councilor McKnight
Chair Barlow calls the meeting to order at 5:34 pm
1. Agenda
Councilor Bergman moves to adopt the agenda as posted.
Councilor McKnight seconds.
All in favor, Unanimous approval

2. Minutes of 3/24/26
Councilor Bergman moves to adopt the minutes.
Councilor McKnight seconds.
All in favor, Unanimous approval

3. Public Forum
Nick Persampier – Ward 3 – Talked about Thermal Energy System Carbon Impact Fee
Ordinance that was passed in 2023 – looking for documentation. B.E.D. reports Greenhouse
gas submissions down 17 percent in 2025 - asking for how calculation was figured.
Stu Lindsay - Ward 5 – Walk to Shop - goal to get people to walk. Goal to log a million steps
in the month of May. Pedestrian scrambles workshop.
Sharon Bushor (Zoom) – Glad more steps taken for the pedestrian. Solid Waste Generation
Tax – Charge every house – affordability concern.

4. Deliberative Agenda
 4.1 Burlington Walk/Bike Council & City Council Collaboration Framework
Phillip Peterson, Senior Transportation Planner DPW & Gordon Dragoun Walk/Bike
Council presented information.

 Page 2 of 11
Councilor McKnight wants to make sure that we are set up for success. Have info online on
DPW Website. Like to have a spot on the agenda periodically. Councilor Broderick - make
sure its successful and use email lists to keep people up to date. Supports this. Councilor
Bergman – thinks this is a good step. scheduling is important. Supports this. Chair Barlow
very supportive, over communication is better. How many people are part of the Walk/bike
council now?

AI generated minutes w/ slight staff revisions: The group discussed plans to establish
regular meetings between the Walk Bike Council and neighborhood representatives. DPW
expressed support for the initiative, suggesting they start with existing communication
infrastructure like MPAs and steering committees rather than formalizing processes
immediately. The conversation ended with a motion to refer the proposal to City Council for
information, with plans to draft a memo outlining the initiative's goals and securing Council
President's support for agenda placement.

Councilor McKnight made a motion to refer this to the City Council agenda. Councilor
Bergman seconds. Councilor Bergman amends to have a revised memo from WalkBike
council.

All in favor, Unanimous approval

 4.2 VT 127 SUP Connection Study
Bryan Davis Senior Transportation Planner, CCRPC & Maddy Suender, Associate
Engineer presented information.

Councilor Bergman stated it is a pain to get from the homestead to North Ave. what would be
the estimated construction time? Councilor McKnight - most people are not using this as a
commuter path – exciting but what happens next, how do we build it? Councilor Broderick –
on the script. Chair Barlow - this is my neighborhood, welcomes the improvement.

AI generated minutes w/ slight staff revisions: The meeting focused on discussing safety
improvements for the 127 corridor, with DPW presenting options and funding opportunities,
including a $5 million VTRANS bike peg grant program. The group discussed potential
construction impacts and traffic disruptions, with DPW suggesting that traffic could be
managed in phases to minimize disruption. The meeting focused on discussing the 127 path
connection to North Avenue, with Brian Davis presenting a project overview and alternatives.
The team reviewed public engagement efforts, including advisory committee meetings and
surveys that gathered feedback from over 150 participants. The discussion covered safety
concerns, maintenance issues, and opportunities to improve path separation and accessibility.
The presentation detailed crash data showing 56 crashes over a 5-year period with no fatalities
or injuries, and outlined Alternative 1 which involves reallocating space on the existing bridge
by reducing lanes to 11 feet and creating a 14-foot path. The conversation ended with a
unanimous decision to refer the proposal back to the City Council for approval, with a
recommendation to proceed with the project.

Councilor Bergman makes the motion that this be referred back to the council for the
approval indicated in this memo with TEUC recommending it. Councilor McKnight seconds.

All in favor, Unanimous approval

 Page 3 of 11
 4.3 SWGT Policy Options (Who pays the SWGT in FY 27)
Lee Perry, Assistant Director of Maintenance & Chapin Spencer, DPW Director presented
information.

Councilor McKnight - Offer Option D- why are we not charging everyone? Sliding volume
scale? Where does composting fit in? Councilor Bergman – Memo is confusing. How
would different plans relate to different populations? Make sure we are caring about income
sensitivity. Councilor Broderick Agrees it should be affordable. What would option C look
like? Chair Barlow where would the 1.45 be assed? Tax bill?

AI generated minutes w/ slight staff revisions: The Transportation, Energy, and Utilities
Committee discussed solid waste generation tax policy options, focusing on whether the city
should implement flow control for residential recycling collection and whether all residents
should pay for base solid waste services through a solid waste generation tax. The committee
reviewed three options: maintaining the current structure limited to recycling service recipients,
implementing flow control with expanded services, or implementing a two-tiered system with a
base fee for all residents receiving trash service. While committee members expressed
support for expanding the tax to all residents as a fair approach given the broader scope of
services funded by the tax, they requested more detailed information about different population
segments and impacts before making a final decision.

 4.4 Cherry Street Condemnation Request

Laura Wheelock Assistant Director of Technical Services & City Engineer & Corey Mims
DPW Senior Engineer presented information.

Councilor Bergman - all but one is for temporary construction easements? Chair Barlow -
same process as Winooski Bridge?

AI generated minutes w/ slight staff revisions: The committee also approved moving
forward with the Cherry Street/Bank Street Reconnection Project condemnation process, with
plans to seek City Council approval at the May 11th meeting to meet federal funding deadlines.

Councilor Bergman moves to approve the requested motion and to send this back to the
Council for the May 11th City Council meeting. Councilor McKnight seconds.

All in favor, Unanimous approval

 5. Director’s Report
.
Director Spencer spoke about:
 • Fully underway with construction season
 • Engineering successfully advancing the completion of the Champlain Parkway & Great
 Streets Main St
 • Underway with paving program

 6. Councilor Items
None.

 Page 4 of 11
 7. Next Meeting
May 26, 2026, 5:30 pm at 645 Pine St.

 8. Adjournment
Chair Barlow adjourns meeting at 7:53 pm.




 Page 5 of 11
 City of Burlington
 Department of Public Works

 Technical Services Engineering Division
 645 Pine Street, Suite A
 Burlington, VT 05402
 P 802-863-9094 / F 802-863-0466 / TTY 802-863-0450
 www.burlingtonvt.gov/DPW




 Memo
Date: May 26th, 2026

To: Transportation, Energy, and Utilities Committee (TEUC)

From: Chapin Spencer, Director of Public Works
 Laura Wheelock, PE, City Engineer/Division Director – Technical Services
 Phillip Peterson, PE, Senior Transportation Engineer & Planner
 Calvin Wuthrich, Associate Public Works Engineer

CC: Darren Springer, Director, Burlington Electric Department
 Chief Curtin, Burlington Fire Department
 Megan Moir, Division Director – Water Resources

Subject: Unaccepted/Private Streets in Burlington



Summary:
DPW is providing TEUC with an update on the draft phasing and prioritization framework for
evaluating unaccepted and private streets. This effort responds to longstanding uncertainty around street
ownership, maintenance responsibility, capital improvements, and the pathway toward potential
acceptance. The framework is intentionally high-level and will continue to evolve as additional data is
collected, particularly through coordination with Water Resources, Burlington Electric Department (BED),
and ongoing land records research.

The goal of this phase is to:
  Establish a clear, flexible structure for sequencing work
  Communicate how streets are being prioritized
  Outline the decision-making pathway from research to potential Council action

No formal action is requested at this time.




 Page 1 of 5


 Page 6 of 11
Background: Draft Phasing Framework:
DPW will be categorizing streets into four groupings to create a balanced and manageable workload
over time:

  Documentation/Ownership Review
 o Streets that are generally part of condominium developments and/or homeowners’
 associations, where the right-of-way is likely privately owned and maintained through a
 homeowner's association or similar private arrangement. DPW Staff will address these
 streets separately and look to confirm their status as private.
  Phase 1 - Near-Term Implementation
 o Streets with lower infrastructure acceptance risk that have been built and maintained in a
 way that matches the general character of City-owned streets.
  Phase 2 - Intermediate Priority
 o Streets requiring additional coordination, more detailed record review, or moderate
 infrastructure acceptance risk.
  Phase 3 & Beyond - Long-Term / Complex
 o Streets with unclear ownership, significant legal or physical challenges, or where
 acceptance may ultimately not be feasible without significant infrastructure investment or
 additional policy direction.

This categorization is preliminary and expected to change as DPW gathers new information about
individual streets and receives feedback from City Council, the TEUC, and residents. As research
progresses, streets may move between categories. Phase designation does not correspond to a specific
construction year or timeline, nor does it imply that work will be completed within a single year. Inclusion
in a given category does not guarantee acceptance but rather reflects when a street is expected to
advance through evaluation.

Key Considerations Affecting Recommended Phasing:

 Roadway Surface Material & Condition
 o Streets that are not currently paved require less maintenance over time to maintain their
 current condition. Once paved street begins to fail, patching and other street maintenance
 generally will not effectively maintain a street’s current condition over time. Additionally, any
 required upgrades to buried infrastructure are generally more cost and labor-intensive within
 the right-of-way of a paved street, when compared to an unpaved street.
 Public Utility Considerations
 o Many areas of the City lack existing inventory data; these data gaps will need to be addressed
 prior to any final recommendations for street acceptance, and doing so may be time and
 resource intensive. The cost implications of water resources infrastructure acceptance are likely
 to be significant. That said, the rate payers on these streets do pay the same rates as the rest
 of the rate payers but do not receive the same level of service.
 o There are several additional stormwater implications related to adopting new roads that
 include but are not limited to the following cases. First, adopting private roads may lead to

 Page 2 of 5


 Page 7 of 11
 the Water Resources Division inheriting outfalls that extend well beyond the public right-of-
 way. Secondly, new City-owned impervious surfaces would increase the City’s phosphorus
 reduction targets. Additionally, private roads are currently considered billable impervious
 surfaces, while public roads are not. As roads are accepted into the public right-of-way, the
 stormwater program will lose revenue and stormwater rates will need to be increased for all
 stormwater rate payers to offset the loss. This does not include the additional rate increases
 that would be necessary to steward the additional stormwater assets.
 Constructability
 o Streets will be assessed not just on their current condition but on the feasibility of making any
 necessary changes to infrastructure on the street. Key factors include but are not limited to
 the proximity of houses to the roadway, steep slopes adjacent to the roadway, and utility
 constraints.
 Achieving a Balanced Workload
 o The intent is to maintain a steady, achievable pace of work across the span of implementation
 efforts rather than overloading a single phase.
 Street Length & Number of Properties
 o The length of a given street and the number of property owners along the street will
 significantly affect the staff time required to conduct research on property histories, assess
 existing infrastructure, and complete any designs. Staff will look to phase the street
 assessment work such that street lengths are varied within the same phase.
 Projected Impacts of Street Acceptance on the Broader Community
 o There may be some cases where acceptance of a given street provides a significant benefit to
 the broader community, such as enhancing connectivity, or providing a utility-related benefit
 beyond the scope of the street itself. Staff will consider these more expansive impacts within
 the street assessment process.

Evaluation & Decision-Making Framework:
DPW is developing a clear, repeatable process to move each street from initial research through potential
Council action. The approach is grounded in legal status, technical conditions, and cost, with final
decisions guided by City Council policy direction.

The attached flow chart (See Attachment-1) is intended to provide a high-level overview of the proposed
street-by-street evaluation framework. The process is designed to guide streets through initial land
records research, infrastructure review, utility coordination, feasibility assessment, and policy direction
prior to any potential Council action. The framework is intentionally flexible and is intended to support
informed decision-making, recognizing that some streets may ultimately advance toward acceptance
while others may be confirmed as private based on legal, technical, financial, or policy considerations.




 Page 3 of 5


 Page 8 of 11
 1. Initial Research
 a. Land records review and ownership verification
 i. Clarify ownership for many streets
 ii. Identify previously undocumented acceptances or dedications
 iii. Reduce uncertainty before advancing recommendations
 b. High-level assessment of existing conditions and known infrastructure
 c. Identification of preliminary constraints and data gaps
 d. This phase requires City resources, including staff time and, in some cases, funding for
 supporting technical work
 2. Initial Condition Assessments (as needed)
 a. Survey work
 b. Subsurface utility verification
 c. Potholing and exploratory excavation
 d. Camera inspection of underground utilities
 e. These activities require dedicated funding and may involve consultants or specialized
 services. They are necessary to reduce uncertainty and inform subsequent decision-
 making.
 3. Preliminary Cost & Feasibility (High-Level)
 a. Order-of-magnitude cost estimates based on available data
 b. Identification of major design, legal, and utility constraints
 c. Integration of field findings and infrastructure information
 d. Refinement of feasibility based on observed conditions
 4. Policy Direction Checkpoint (TEUC / Council)
 a. DPW Staff will present recommendations to the TEUC and City Council based on the
 research and technical analyses listed above in order to prepare the TEUC and City Council
 to make informed decisions in determining an approach for each street.
 b. At this stage, the TEUC and City Council determine whether pursuing potential acceptance
 aligns with City priorities. This step is informed by legal status, technical analysis provided
 by DPW staff, and associated early-stage investigation costs.
 5. If Advancing Toward Acceptance
 a. Detailed design and cost development
 b. Identification of required upgrades to meet City standards
 c. Coordination with utilities and abutting property owners
 d. Capital planning for construction and long-term maintenance obligations
 6. Council Action
 a. Formal decision on street acceptance or confirmation of private status
 b. Establishment of long-term ownership and maintenance responsibility

It is important to note that if City Council accepts a given street into the City right-of-way, the timeline
for any capital improvements to infrastructure on that street will be dependent on available funding for
capital improvements and will not be immediate.




 Page 4 of 5


 Page 9 of 11
Ongoing Work:
 o DPW Staff has begun initial land records review.
 o DPW Staff has completed initial surface-level condition assessments on many of the
 private & unaccepted streets in the City and has begun review of street characteristics and
 key constraints.
 o DPW Water Resources has begun performing a desktop assessment of potable water
 infrastructure, sewer and stormwater collection system infrastructure, and stormwater
 permitting considerations for all private and unaccepted streets.
 o Infrastructure data quality is a critical driver of cost estimating and construction feasibility,
 particularly where water, sewer, stormwater, or BED infrastructure may not meet current
 City standards or where no formal infrastructure exists. DPW Technical Services has begun
 coordination with DPW Water Resources and BED in order to help identify system
 constraints, upgrade needs, and long-term implications of potential street acceptance. In
 many cases, utility conditions will impact acceptance timing and may determine whether
 acceptance is feasible.


Taxation & Ownership Clarification:
There is often confusion about how street ownership status relates to property taxes and maintenance
responsibilities. To clarify:
  Property taxes are assessed regardless of whether a street is public, private, or unaccepted
  Street ownership and maintenance responsibility are separate from tax obligations
  In Burlington, there are existing private streets where property owners are part of a
 homeowners’ association (HOA) and contribute additional fees for ongoing street maintenance,
 while still paying full property taxes



Attachments:

 1. Street Evaluation Flow Chart




 Page 5 of 5


 Page 10 of 11
Private & Unaccepted Streets Evaluation Framework
Prepared for the Transportation, Energy & Utilities Committee (TEUC) May 26, 2026



 Technical Services Preliminary cost & Water Resources
 infrastructure assessments feasibility estimates infrastructure assessments


 Initial land records
 research Burlington Electric Department
 infrastructure assessments
 Staff pursues
 acceptance?
 Public outreach to residents
 & property owners
 Yes No


 Interdepartmental
 coordination


 Identification of upgrades
 needed to accept


 Initial cost & feasibility
 determination


 DPW Staff presents initial
 recommendation to City Council

 Yes
 City Council
 pursues No
 Coordination with utilities acceptance?
 and property owners


 Detailed design and cost
 development

 City Council
 DPW Staff presents final
 accepts
 recommendation to City Council
 street?



STREET Yes No STREET NOT
ACCEPTED ACCEPTED

 Legal process for Confirm status as
 acceptance private




  Formally record City ownership of street and Formally record ownership of street and
 clarify maintenance responsibilities clarify maintenance responsibilities
 Page 11 of 11

CITY OF BURLINGTON, VERMONT

 CITY COUNCIL TRANSPORTATION, ENERGY &
 UTILITIES COMMITTEE
 c/o Department of Public Works 802.863.9094 VOX
 645 Pine Street, Suite A 802.863.0466 FAX
 Burlington, VT 05401 www.burlingtonvt.gov/dpw


 Councilor Mark Barlow, Chair, North District
 Inquiries:
 Councilor Gene Bergman, Ward 2
 Rob Goulding
 Councilor Becca McKnight, Ward 6 802.881-2278
 Councilor Marek Broderick, Ward 8 rgoulding@burlingtonvt.gov




 Transportation, Energy and Utilities Committee of the City Council
 Tuesday, May 26, 2026 – 5:30 PM
 --DRAFT MINUTES—
 See video for full meeting: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uymws3oxw-k

Councilors absent: None
Councilors present: Chair Barlow, Councilor Bergman (joined via zoom at 6:45 pm),
Councilor Broderick, and Councilor McKnight
Chair Barlow calls the meeting to order at 5:33pm?
1. Agenda
Chair Barlow makes recommendation to change the order of the agenda to:
4.3 as 4.1 - Champlain Parkway – Post Construction Monitoring
4.1 as 4.2 - GMT Updates: Route 1/ Route 11 Downtown Routing
4.2 as 4.3 – Unaccepted Streets Briefing
Councilor Broderick moves to adopt the agenda as changed.
Councilor McKnight seconds.
All in favor, Unanimous approval

2. Minutes of 4/28/26
Councilor Broderick moves to adopt the minutes.
Councilor McKnight seconds.
All in favor, Unanimous approval

3. Public Forum
Cara Simone – Ward 6 – Talked about concerns about unaccepted streets – lives on
Chittenden Dr.

4. Deliberative Agenda
 4.1 Champlain Parkway – Post Construction Monitoring
Corey Mims, Senior Public Works Engineer presented information.
Councilor McKnight asked about tracking accidents while getting used to the new road.
Chair Barlow asked questions about current data collections – have you been monitoring the
intersection at Maple St & Pine St?

AI generated minutes w/ slight staff revisions: Corey Mims from Public Works presented
the Champlain Parkway monitoring plan, which includes traffic counts at specific intersections,
signal operations monitoring using MileVision technology, and incident reporting for two years
post-construction.

 4.2 GMT Updates: Route 1/Route 11 Downtown Routing.
Clayton Clark, General Manager of GMT & Chris Damiani, Director of Planning at GMT
provided information.

Councilor Broderick asked if GMT had been to the other areas for updates? Would there be
consideration of studying what it would take to extend a route to Tilley Dr? Chair Barlow
asked if the federal funding approves like it might when would we have to make decisions
about local & state match? Will it be the hospital or a GMT function to do the study for Tilley
Dr?

AI generated minutes w/ slight staff revisions: GMT discussed funding updates, noting
that while some members may contribute additional funding, most areas are feeling stretched
financially. He explained that if the federal funding bill passes this year, local fiscal year 28
assessments would need to be sent out in November. Clay provided an update on funding,
noting positive developments with the State T bill and potential increased federal funding
through stick factors, though additional state and local match funds would still be needed to
address a $3 million funding gap. Chris then presented updates on bi-directional travel
implementation on routes 1 and 11 in Burlington, scheduled for June 29th, which will include
two new stops and improved service spacing along Main Street. He noted that any new
service expansion would require financial clarity, likely in the fall, before considering
implementation. Clarifying that GMT could only provide recommendations using their fixed
route transit due to labor contract restrictions.

 4.3 Unaccepted Streets Briefing
Philip Peterson, Senior Transportation Engineer, Calvin Wuthrich, Associate Public Works
Engineer & Laura Wheelock Assistant Director of Technical Services & City Engineer presented
information.

Councilor McKnight suggested starting with streets the city plans to accept to build trust and
momentum in the process. Feels there should be a call for submission for public documents.
Councilor Broderick curious how you would subdivide the different phases? How is it
measured to get it up to standards? Chair Barlow asked if the process will be shared before a
recommendation is made? Outsource research?

Public comment - Cara Simone made a comment about costs being absorbed over time.

AI generated minutes w/ slight staff revisions: DPW presented an overview of the
unaccepted streets project, highlighting ongoing legal reviews and plans for a deep dive into
land ownership records. Calvin Wuthrich discussed the development of a grading system for
surface conditions and a draft phasing framework to assess streets based on infrastructure
acceptance risk. The team plans to continue land records and legal reviews, coordinate with
other utilities, and produce a phased list of streets by August. The legal complexities of
accepting streets were emphasized, with challenges in determining ownership and the
necessary research required for condemnation processes.

5. Director’s Report

Director Spencer spoke about:
 • Finishing up Spring NPA tour
 • Champlain Parkways Special Events
 • Main St Special Events – June 3rd and July 17-18

 6. Councilor Items
Councilor Broderick & Councilor McKnight– South Willard St & College St – finally have
pedestrian lights – thank you all for your work. Chair Barlow talked about meeting with
Councilor Bergman about planning future meetings for project updates for Burlington Electric
& Department of Permitting & Inspections and other meetings about Passive Home & Building
Code Standards, Efficiency Utilities, Airport & others.

 7. Next Meeting
June 23, 2026, 5:30 pm at 645 Pine St.

 8. Adjournment
Chair Barlow adjourns meeting at 6:59 pm.