Planning Commission — Burlington, VT
Date: 2026-02-10
Time: 18:30

Burlington Planning Commission
 Tuesday, February 10, 2026, 6:30 PM

Remote & Virtual Meeting via Zoom
In person option available:
Bushor Conference Room (Room 102), 1st Floor of City Hall, 149 Church St.
To Join the Meeting on a Computer
Link:https://zoom.us/j/97941883790?pwd=bGZBNzNyV1liL3p5NkhIL2dqUFIzdz09
Passcode: 658929
To Join the Meeting on a Phone
Number:+1 646 931 3860 US Meeting ID: 979 4188 3790



1. Agenda

2. Public Forum

3. Chair's Report

4. Director's Report

5. planBTV 2050: Consultant Introductions & Q+A (30 minutes)
  Subject 5.1. City Planning staff will facilitate a discussion between the Planning
 Commission and planBTV 2050 consultant team, who are in town for a site
 visit.
  Meeting February 10, 2026 - Planning Commission Agenda - Tuesday, February 10, 2026, 6:30
 PM, Burlington Planning Commission


  Category 5. planBTV 2050: Consultant Introductions & Q+A (30 minutes)

  Department Planning


  Type

  Recommended Action

6. CCRPC: Preapplication review of 2026 ECOS Regional Plan by Land Use
Review Board (30 min)
  Subject 6.1. CCRPC to discuss comments from the LURB related to the preapplication
 review of the 2026 ECOS Regional Plan
  Meeting February 10, 2026 - Planning Commission Agenda - Tuesday, February 10, 2026, 6:30
 PM, Burlington Planning Commission


  Category 6. CCRPC: Preapplication review of 2026 ECOS Regional Plan by Land Use Review Board
 (30 min)
  Department Planning


  Type

  Recommended Action

7. 2026 Meeting Schedule (30 minutes)
  Subject 7.1. Commission to discuss and approve upcoming meeting schedule
 framework for the next 6 months.
  Meeting February 10, 2026 - Planning Commission Agenda - Tuesday, February 10, 2026, 6:30
 PM, Burlington Planning Commission


  Category 7. 2026 Meeting Schedule (30 minutes)

  Department Planning


  Type

  Recommended Action

8. Commissioner Items

9. Adopt Minutes & Accept Communications
  Subject 9.1. Commission to accept any communications and adopt 1/13/26 draft
 minutes.
  Meeting February 10, 2026 - Planning Commission Agenda - Tuesday, February 10, 2026, 6:30
 PM, Burlington Planning Commission
  Category 9. Adopt Minutes & Accept Communications
  Department Planning


  Type

10. Adjournment

Burlington Planning Commission
 Tuesday, February 10, 2026, 6:30 PM

Remote & Virtual Meeting via Zoom
In person option available:
Bushor Conference Room (Room 102), 1st Floor of City Hall, 149 Church St.
To Join the Meeting on a Computer
Link:https://zoom.us/j/97941883790?pwd=bGZBNzNyV1liL3p5NkhIL2dqUFIzdz09
Passcode: 658929
To Join the Meeting on a Phone
Number:+1 646 931 3860 US Meeting ID: 979 4188 3790



1. Agenda

2. Public Forum

3. Chair's Report

4. Director's Report

5. planBTV 2050: Consultant Introductions & Q+A (30 minutes)
  Subject 5.1. City Planning staff will facilitate a discussion between the Planning
 Commission and planBTV 2050 consultant team, who are in town for a site
 visit.
  Meeting February 10, 2026 - Planning Commission Agenda - Tuesday, February 10, 2026, 6:30
 PM, Burlington Planning Commission


  Category 5. planBTV 2050: Consultant Introductions & Q+A (30 minutes)

  Department Planning


  Type

  Recommended Action

6. CCRPC: Preapplication review of 2026 ECOS Regional Plan by Land Use
Review Board (30 min)
  Subject 6.1. CCRPC to discuss comments from the LURB related to the preapplication
 review of the 2026 ECOS Regional Plan
  Meeting February 10, 2026 - Planning Commission Agenda - Tuesday, February 10, 2026, 6:30
 PM, Burlington Planning Commission


  Category 6. CCRPC: Preapplication review of 2026 ECOS Regional Plan by Land Use Review Board
 (30 min)


 Page 1 of 77
  Department Planning


  Type

  Recommended Action

7. 2026 Meeting Schedule (30 minutes)
  Subject 7.1. Commission to discuss and approve upcoming meeting schedule
 framework for the next 6 months.
  Meeting February 10, 2026 - Planning Commission Agenda - Tuesday, February 10, 2026, 6:30
 PM, Burlington Planning Commission


  Category 7. 2026 Meeting Schedule (30 minutes)

  Department Planning


  Type

  Recommended Action

8. Commissioner Items

9. Adopt Minutes & Accept Communications
  Subject 9.1. Commission to accept any communications and adopt 1/13/26 draft
 minutes.
  Meeting February 10, 2026 - Planning Commission Agenda - Tuesday, February 10, 2026, 6:30
 PM, Burlington Planning Commission
  Category 9. Adopt Minutes & Accept Communications
  Department Planning


  Type

10. Adjournment




 Page 2 of 77
planBTV 2050 Scope for the City Contract
covering the Comprehensive Economic Development Plan in full plus
substantial portions of the Municipal Plan; the Parks, Recreation &
Waterfront Plan; and the Scenario Planning tasks, which will inform all final
deliverables

Interface Studio // January 2025

This revised scope document presents the tasks that will be billed to the City of Burlington
contract for planBTV 2050. The City contract scope covers the Comprehensive Economic
Development Plan in full as well as the majority of the consultant team’s time allocated for the
Municipal Plan and the Parks, Recreation & Waterfront Plan. The City Contract also covers
portions of the scenario planning, community engagement, and project management tasks,
which will inform all final deliverables for planBTV 2050.

Ninigret Partners will lead the Economic Development Plan element for the consultant team,
working in close collaboration with the Department of Community and Economic Development
(CEDO). Ninigret’s full scope of planBTV 2050 work is included in the City contract.

The majority of Interface Studio’s and Buro Happold’s work on planBTV 2050 will also be billed
to the City Contract.

 • Interface Studio will lead the consultant team’s work on the Municipal Plan and the
 Parks, Recreation & Waterfront Plan, both of which will require coordination and
 integration with the Transportation Plan that will be developed under a separate contract
 held by the Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission (CCRPC). As the
 Municipal Plan update must be adopted by City Council by March 25, 2027, a final draft
 must be completed and ready to work through the City’s adoption process by the end of
 2026.
 • Buro Happold will lead the consultant team’s work on Scenario Planning, which will
 support all of the plan deliverables (Municipal Plan; Transportation Plan; Parks,
 Recreation & Waterfront Plan; and Comprehensive Economic Development Plan).
 • As consultant team lead for planBTV 2050, Interface Studio will provide project
 management and coordination support for all of the interrelated end products, working in
 close collaboration with the City of Burlington Office of City Planning.




 Page 3 of 77
PHASE 1: LAYING THE GROUNDWORK

Task 1.1: Project Kick-off
This internal project kick off meeting with project representatives from the City and consultant
team will discuss the project goals, existing values framework, roles and responsibilities,
schedule, and high-level goals for community engagement strategy. The meeting will also be
used to determine internal communications protocols including project contact list, file sharing
and communications platform for the project. We anticipate this meeting to occur at the outset of
the project and provide the team to do on-the-ground reconnaissance.

Task 1.2: Exploratory Site Visit and Tours
Our team’s success will hinge on seeing Burlington through the eyes of those who know it best.
At the kick-off of the project, we will work with the City to arrange tours of key areas in the city.
If possible, tours could be led by local residents, employees, business owners, and stakeholders
- potentially members of the Plan Advisory Committee (PAC), which would provide an
opportunity for involved residents to spend time with us as the project starts.

Task 1.3: Work Plan, Including Review of Engagement Plan
Interface Studio will develop a detailed project schedule that outlines major tasks, deliverables,
engagement activities and trips. We will work with the City to integrate its engagement plan into
the Work Plan, so the team will have one comprehensive document that represents all elements
of the planning process. Additionally, we will integrate marketing and communications strategies
into the plan to ensure a strong, coordinated communications strategy at every project state.
Strategies could include a range of outlets to get out the word, including social media, print
media, the City website, and any other locally important outlets.

Task 1.4: Establish Graphic Standards
It is extremely important for the Plan to have a world-class, professional brand that conveys
vision and unity. Interface Studio will establish a set of graphic standards that all team members
will use to produce their work. These graphic standards will build on Burlington’s existing
preferred fonts and colors and help to establish an identity for the work.

Task 1.5: Data Transfer
The following tasks in this phase will depend on transfer of authoritative datasets from the City
to the consultant team. Working from the list of analyses included in the RFQ, we will work with
the City to ensure that we have the latest, best versions of all datasets needed, and wherever
publicly-available data will be used, we will discuss the client’s preferred data sources prior to
our analysis.

Task 1.6: Engagement Plan Review and Finalization
Interface Studio will review and discuss the draft Engagement Plan with the City staff and the
Plan Advisory Committee to finalize and schedule out the first stage of public engagement. The
final engagement plan will include a schedule, tasks and responsibilities.



 Page 4 of 77
Task 1.7: Plan Advisory Committee (PAC) Meetings
The PAC plays a central role in reviewing the work of the team, advocating for the plan and
assisting in encouraging participation in public events. Our team expects to meet with the PAC
6 times during the process. These meetings include an introductory meeting describing the plan
and planning process, meetings to review findings and meetings to workshop strategies and
review implementation pathways.

Task 1.8: Project Management Meetings
We look forward to collaborating closely with a day-to-day working group of City staff. To
ensure we remain coordinated during each step of the process, we expect bi-weekly calls at the
outset, which may be scaled back as we move through the process. Interface Studio will
prepare draft agendas and take notes during these discussions which we will make available on
a City / Planning Team shared drive. As we get underway, we expect that each month, one of
the bi-weekly calls will be an all-hands call, with representatives from the full team and all
members of the client group, while the other bi-weekly meeting each month will be specific to
the individual plan elements. Mindy Watts will attend all meetings for coordination purposes and
will work with OCP to lead the all-hands meetings; the individual plan element meetings will be
led by the members of the consultant team and client group leading that particular portion of the
project, as noted below:
 ● planBTV 2050 “All-Hands” coordination meetings - Mindy Watts (Interface), Charles
 Dillard (OCP)
 ● Municipal Plan - Sarah Morgan (OCP), Mindy Watts (Interface)
 ● Parks, Recreation & Waterfront Plan - Chris DiStasi (Interface), Sophie Sauvé
 (BPRW)
 ● Transportation Plan - Catrina Meyer (Toole), Philip Peterson (DPW), Jason Charest
 (CCRPC)
 ● Comprehensive Economic Development Plan - Kevin Hively (Ninigret), Will Clavelle
 (CEDO)

Task 1.9: Engage City Leadership and Relevant Boards and
Commissions
Our team expects presentations and close coordination with the approving bodies for each plan
element. As is often the case, adoption can be complicated with multiple voices, Commissions
and interest groups engaging with City leadership. Our role is to help respond to questions and
clearly guide the process to move the adoption process forward as seamlessly as possible.
This is precisely why early and ongoing engagement with Boards, Commissions and City
Council is necessary such as when the final plans arrive, they know what is contained in the
documents.

Each of these decision-making bodies likely requires a different approach which we will identify
and execute with City staff. As noted in the RFQ, this process will encompass coordination with
the Planning Commission, TEUC, DPW, Parks Commission & PACC and the Church Street
Marketplace in addition to others. If selected, our team will work with you to determine the right
frequency and touch points with these important stakeholders.




 Page 5 of 77
PHASE 2: ASSESSMENT

Task 2.1: Municipal Plan Existing Conditions Assessment
The team will review the baseline data and existing conditions analysis provided by the City,
and we will then focus our work on this task to fill in key gaps in the Municipal Plan assessment.
Together with the City’s assessment, the team will aim to understand key trends and on-the-
ground conditions. This portion of the analysis will afford visualization of the following variables:
 ● Context maps illustrating regional connections and economic drivers;
 ● Demographics and social trends;
 ● Current land use and zoning;
 ● Historic and cultural resources;
 ● Recent revitalization, investments, and proposed developments;
 ● Urban Design features including views, gathering places, and noteworthy buildings /
 spaces;
 ● Community assets such as institutions, employment centers, and open space;
 ● Economic conditions and trends that will supplement our team’s economic analysis;
 ● Infrastructure including water, sewer, stormwater, energy;
 ● Natural features and an environmental report card based on the City’s tree canopy,
 parks and environmental factors such as impervious surfaces and stormwater runoff;
 ● Flood resilience and hazard mitigation
 ● Commercial corridors and districts;
 ● Crime statistics if made available by the Burlington Police;
 ● Quality of Life Issues including trash, vandalism, panhandling or other concerns.

Task 2.2: Policy & Plan Review
Our team will undertake an analysis of previous plans - in particular PlanBTV, recent district
plans and the last mobility and parks plans - to understand what items have been implemented,
which items remain outstanding and if those items are still relevant. We will also seek to review
local policies with an eye toward accomplishing key comprehensive planning goals and
alignment with the values framework being developed through the Comprehensive Plan. We will
ask: what policies of the City currently assist or impede: creating healthy environments;
ensuring community equity; providing safe, affordable housing; and addressing climate change?

Task 2.4: Parks, Recreation and Waterfront Assessment
Building from the 2015 Parks, Recreation and Waterfront Plan and more recent baseline data
and analyses provided by BPRW staff, Interface Studio will update department data and
assessments related to parks and facilities, programs and events, maintenance, and operations
to support a forward-looking Park Needs Assessment. In particular, we will complete at least the
following tasks under the City contract for planBTV 2050, with additional research and mapping
related to access and mobility billed to the CCRPC contract:

2.4.1. Staff and Leadership Engagement
Interface will review the PRW organizational chart and plan a mix of interviews and focus
groups with staff and leadership representing all parts of the department. These discussions will
provide a platform for filling in much of the data and perspectives required for the analyses and
assessments outlined below. We will discuss the strengths or weaknesses of previous planning

 Page 6 of 77
efforts, challenges of recent years, and conduct a quick-planning exercise to assess top internal
priorities for this effort.

In addition, we will assess departmental goals and alignment with CAPRA standards. If the
department plans to seek accreditation under the new CAPRA standards in or after 2027, we
will aim to craft a plan that will explicitly fulfill the required number of standards. The team will
maintain an internal report card on CAPRA standards that indicates whether standards are met,
in progress, or will not be met.

2.4.2. Authoritative Database of Existing Sites And Facilities
Interface will work with PRW to compile an authoritative database of publicly-owned and/or -
managed parks and recreation sites, including those that fall under another department’s
jurisdiction. We will compile available data on other important geographic information, such as
public school properties, sensitive environmental zones, key landmarks and destinations, and
more.

We will work with staff to add new or missing data, which could include site types/subtypes, year
built, ownership, managing entities, acreage/square footage, facility rooms and sizes, hours of
operation, environmental concerns, utilization, and more.

2.4.3. Inventory of Park Assets and Amenities
Interface will work with staff to update site-by-site amenity records to the extent useful for this
project, with an eye towards establishing data collection & management practices that the
department can continue into the future. If desired, the consultant team can help design and
manage a data collection methodology, to be carried out by staff on site.

2.4.4. Budget Analysis
Interface will work with PRW to compile data on capital and operating expenditures and
revenues for between five and twenty years, depending on available data. We will obtain or
develop a CIP database of all capital projects implemented over the analysis period, with
projects linked to the site-by-site database by a unique site ID. We will analyze trends over time,
including the breakdown in spending across capital and operations sub-categories, geographic
distribution and types of sites that have received funding, and demographics of communities
where investments have been made.

2.4.5. Previous Plans and Studies Assessment
Our team will review previous City and internal department plans, and inventory all
recommendations and projects relevant to PRW (and their current status) in a comprehensive
database. We will develop a report card on past plans that indicates which strategies have been
completed, which are still relevant, and which are no longer a priority. This data will be
considered in combination with the existing CIP and with priorities that come out of public/staff
engagement when producing recommendations for the future.

2.4.6. Level of Service (LOS) Analysis
Using the inventories of parks, facilities and amenities, Interface will calculate current levels of
service for the Burlington PRW system. These LOS figures will feed into the Needs Assessment
in combination with data from the benchmarking analysis (below), population projections, and


 Page 7 of 77
the statistically-valid survey, which will indicate the public’s need for and satisfaction with the
amount of each facility and amenity type.

2.4.8. Equitable Access Assessment, Part 2: Produce community profiles for each
site and for areas outside a 10-minute walk (or other standards) to a park, facility
or amenity
Interface will work with the department to determine what data points to analyze for areas within
and outside of a 10-minute walk (or other distance/mode standards) of a park, recreation facility,
and/or amenity. We are able to estimate a wide range of demographic, economic,
environmental, health, and other factors for these areas. Our team will produce community
profiles and analyze differences in access by the factors chosen: who has access to parks and
amenities of different types? Are there differences in capital spending history by areas of
different types? Do site or amenity conditions differ by community?

2.4.10. Climate Resilience and Environmental Systems Assessment
Our team will analyze the intersection between the PRW system and key resilience and
ecological concerns including but not limited to flood hazard areas, water quality, extreme heat,
and sensitive environmental areas. Building from the Open Space Plan, we will aim to map
networks of parks and natural lands that serve a current or potential role in management of the
issues above and assess current PRW policies and practices related to climate change,
resilience, and environmental preservation.

2.4.12. Programming and Special Events Assessment
Interface will complete a Program and Special Events Assessment in partnership with PRW
programming staff. Since staff know their own programs better than anyone else, it is important
that they provide much of the assessment data - especially where there is insufficient
quantitative data to assess conditions. There will be multiple data-collection steps in this
assessment process:

First, we will work with staff and leadership to develop databases of the previous and current
year's programs, activities and events. This should include at least:
 ● Program/event name
 ● Provider (staff or outside operator)
 ● Core Program Area (see next step in this task)
 ● Program/event description
 ● Date(s) held/planned
 ● Attendance/participation

Second, we will work with the department to obtain or develop a list of “Core Program Areas”
and a program classification system (indicating each program’s importance to the department’s
overall mission and its level of public benefit) to guide program/event planning and revenue
generation goals within each Core Program Area.

Third, the consultant team will hold at least one workshop with programming staff to guide them
through the process of assessing their programs. Staff will be asked to fill out a general survey
about PRW programming and their particular programs to evaluate a range of factors.
 ● Ages served
 ● Core Program Area


 Page 8 of 77
 ● Program Classification (using the system designed in the previous task)
 ● Lifecycle stage (indicating level of participation and trend towards growth, saturation,
 stagnation, or decline)
 ● Facility and equipment needs and utilization
 ● Staffing
 ● Pricing strategies and cost recovery goals
 ● Program evaluation / public feedback practices
 ● Marketing and communication
 ● Practices for evaluating local competition / similar providers

Lastly, the consultant team will undertake a scan of private and nonprofit recreation service
providers to understand local competition and key gaps or services that the Department fills or
provides for the community.

Using this information, we will produce a Program Assessment Report that analyses PRW’s
overarching programming landscape and each Core Program Area in relation to the metrics
assessed (e.g. ages served, lifecycle, etc.). The report will detail areas of strength, weakness,
and opportunity. This analysis will be integrated with data from the statistically-valid survey to
provide recommendations for each Core Program Area and for the programming and special
events team as a whole.

2.4.13. Maintenance Assessment
Interface will review and discuss day-to-day maintenance practices and procedures with staff
and leadership, including but not limited to maintenance crew organization: maintenance
facilities, their condition, layout, and location(s); equipment and vehicle inventory, conditions,
and needs; work order system; use of technology; and any existing plans and/or guides. We will
work with PRW to obtain or develop current level of service definitions for each maintenance
task and, if possible, a database indicating which sites or site sections those standards apply to.
Using this information, we will produce a Maintenance Assessment Report that details current
practices and the perspectives of staff and leadership about key elements of the PRW
maintenance landscape.

2.4.14. Revenue Generation Analysis
Interface Studio will work with PRW to obtain or develop a database of department revenue by
source. Working with Ninigret Partners and in coordination with the Economic Development plan
element, we will evaluate the application of a wide variety of revenue generation strategies with
PRW. This information will feed into revenue generation recommendations in combination with
information from the Programming and Special Event Assessment, along with considerations for
opportunities to retain and reinvest earned revenue within the BPRW system through the use of
an Enterprise Fund or other mechanisms.

2.4.15. Waterfront Focus Area Assessment
Interface will produce a Focus Area Assessment of Burlington's waterfront public spaces,
connections, programs/events, and opportunities. Interface will also work with Ninigret Partners
to understand the Harbor’s business model, services compared to private offerings, as well as
the Harbor’s role in the tourism economy. We will assess the interrelationship between
waterfront parks, facilities, and undeveloped properties, including but not limited to:
 ● The overall array of amenity, facility, program and event offerings


 Page 9 of 77
 ● Management of the harbor and other facilities and their role in revenue generation
 ● 10-minute walk access to pedestrian accessible entrances and major amenities by type
 ● Transportation infrastructure for access by foot, bicycle, car, and transit
 ● Usership and community characteristics
 ● Lifecycle stage of each site and special facility, including the future boathouse project
 (Qualitative determination indicating current level of use and trend towards growth,
 saturation, stagnation, or decline)
 ● Communications, promotions, and overall identity
 ● Design features and limitations
 ● Climate and environmental factors
 ● Access and development potential of un- or under-utilized land.

2.4.16. System Benchmarking Analysis
In the course of the previous assessment tasks, our team will compile data on Burlington and
PRW related to as many NRPA benchmarking metrics as possible, and produce a
benchmarking analysis that compares Burlington/PRW to cities and systems of similar
population, density, region, budget, number of full time employees, acres of parkland, and
number of parks.

In addition, we will assess the relevance of TPL park metrics and utilize them to the extent that
they are useful. Since Burlington is not one of the 100 largest US cities, the Trust for Public
Land does not maintain detailed data on its system characteristics, amenity levels of service,
public and private spending, and volunteer activities. Likewise, there are no cities of comparable
size to Burlington in TPL’s detailed database. The team will assess whether there are any peer
or aspirational cities within the TPL database. If so, we will aim to compile comparable data for
Burlington to produce city-by-city comparisons.

2.4.17. National and Regional Recreation Trends Analysis
Our team will evaluate recent parks, recreation and waterfront plans for regional and national
comparison municipalities, which will be selected in consultation with PRW staff and leadership.
Additionally, we will review recent national literature, webinars, and conference presentations on
parks and recreation capital, programming, maintenance, and administration, and we will
summarize and discuss unique projects and relevant trends in the field that may impact
strategies.

2.4.18. Existing Conditions Executive Summary Report and Parks Needs
Assessment
Interface will compile existing conditions data and analyses into a graphics-heavy Executive
Summary report that covers all major topics. This will include a formatted report for print and a
slideshow.

In addition, we will compile a Parks Needs Assessment, which will combine data from each
assessment above with information from the project’s overall demographic trends analysis,
public input (See Phase 3 for more details), the System Benchmarking Analysis, and the
National and Regional Recreation Trends Analysis. The report will assess current strengths and
current & future gaps related to all topics assessed in Phase 2.




 Page 10 of 77
Task 2.5: Economic Assessment and Market Analysis
After reviewing baseline data and analyses prepared by Burlington’s Community & Economic
Development Office (CEDO), NP will use a multi-faceted approach to round out a baseline
understanding of the key economic opportunities and challenges in Burlington, which will drive
goal setting and the identification of key strategies. A range of data sources will be utilized
including public sources such as federal LEHD, OntheMap, BLS & BEA among others, state
and local tax and assessors data as well as 3rd party data sets such as ESRI,
Youreconomy.org, LinkedIn as appropriate.

For each of the following topics, we will produce a range of analyses as needed to fill in any
gaps in the City’s preliminary assessment work.

Economic Activity:
 ● Trends for wages, establishment growth, county GDP.
 ● Sector assessment will include conventional industries e.g, hospitality, manufacturing,
 etc., but also key verticals such as green economy because of their potential
 implications for talent needs and facilities.
 ● Identify innovation activity, emerging businesses, entrepreneurial economy indicators
 using a variety of tools and indicators like Kickstarter / ETSY, start up programs, and
 self-employment statistics.
 ● Track tourism trends using a variety of stats including room tax payments, room counts
 (including AirBNB-type availability), availability, seasonality and other data that is readily
 available as well as transportation stats such as ferry usage, enplanements.

Workforce & Talent:
 ● Evaluate changes in commuting patterns including work from home and the labor shed,
 occupational distribution.
 ● Age/race/sex composition of the workforce in key industries.
 ● Wage levels across key industries and occupations
 ● Local community college / 4 year college pipeline by degrees.
 ● Inventory other existing training programs (union, certificates, for profit providers) and
 understand present enrollment levels / capacity to the degree possible.

Development Capacity / Economic Infrastructure:
 ● Understand existing land and infrastructure options and opportunities for development /
 redevelopment based on existing build-out analysis.
 ● Discuss with commercial brokers / industrial brokers / economic development officials
 state of market activity, actual lead streams including industry types, and other relevant
 information such as target information;
 ● Evaluate current employment locations for their present status including existing
 buildings, parcel size, age of utility infrastructure, transportation access, vacancy and
 quality indicators;
 ● Availability of “incubators”, “launch pads”, flexible facilities to accommodate
 entrepreneurial ventures.
 ● Lakeside infrastructure and dredging / berths/ management issues.

Fiscal Considerations:
 ● Understand how economic development impacts Burlington revenue generation through
 the tax mix and key underlying drivers and revenue performance trends.

 Page 11 of 77
Economic Resiliency:
 ● Identify current plans and activities related to economic resilience
 ● Utilize existing risk tools like the FEMA Risk Index to consider physical risk factors and
 recovery capabilities
 ● Map locations of key industries and infrastructure needed for recovery
 ● Understand economic concentrations in jobs or occupations subject to substantial
 change over the next decade

Organizational Capacity:
 ● Hold a workshop with development officials to real-time map the formal and informal
 economic development ecosystem to identify gaps in programs, and markets served
 ● NP will provide a summary of findings workshop (workshop 1) will be held to present
 data findings and hold a discussion re: implications

Input:
NP will conduct 7 to 10 key business sector / key employer / key property owner, state
development officials one-on-one interviews (virtual and/or in-person) - and 3 to 5 focus groups
- to be arranged by the Burlington project team. Examples of potential interviews include:
 ● Start ups
 ● HR executives involved in recruiting staff to region
 ● Agricultural economy & consumer food businesses
 ● Local small businesses
 ● Tourism-related
 ● Economic development entities including workforce training, SBDCs or other important
 ● Young professionals, tech talent

NP will create a summary of relevant comments for the Project team and for the final
deliverable.

Task 2.6: Assessment of Planned Projects and Initiatives
New and planned projects will impact the City in the coming months and years. Our team will
undertake a thorough analysis of initiatives and investments that promise to impact
transportation networks, parks and other services in the coming years. This step will be a key
input to the scenario planning work in the next phase.

Task 2.7: Projections
The team will utilize a combination of forecasting methodologies including if present trends
continue (including existing density relationships for jobs/space), as well as population
projection tools including State Planning Population Projections, third party sources such as
Woods Poole & ATERIO and county level economic projections from sources like Moody’s
Economics. We recognize that the State has stipulated 7,000 new units in Burlington as a
critical input. These other projections will help to fine tune the inputs to the scenario planning
tasks.




 Page 12 of 77
Task 2.8: Budget Review
Our team will work with the City to frame the potential impacts to revenues and expenditures
based upon current land use and policy practices. Our intent is to understand how City
resources are related to decisions in land use, density and other codes. The team will create
metrics such as revenue per acre and revenue per acre by development typology. A correlation
analysis will be used to look at city staffing implications for different development types.

Deliverables
Summary of themes from past plans and studies

Memo to Supplement OCP’s Municipal Plan Existing Conditions Report, documenting additional
research and analysis by the team

Parks, Recreation & Waterfront Existing Conditions Summary Report, Parks Needs Assessment

Comprehensive Economic Development Existing Conditions Summary Report


PHASE 3: PLAN VISION & ENGAGEMENT ACTIVITIES
Interface Studio has won multiple national awards for our creative and innovative outreach. We
have refined and developed new tools to reach people of all backgrounds and emphasize our
graphic approach to planning as a way to welcome people into the process who typically avoid
planning meetings. We understand that we will be working closely with the City for the
engagement which is a role in which we are very familiar and comfortable. The tasks below
represent a mix of potential tools and activities for which we would lead or support by
developing materials for City staff and partners to take out to the public. Interface Studio will be
designing engagement materials and collaborating closely with City staff to fully execute each
wave of engagement activities throughout the project.

Task 3.1: Public Visioning Activities
The first round of engagement will focus on broader City themes, visioning and helping
participants to understand the City’s challenges and potential trade-offs related to each of the
planBTV 2050 end deliverables, the Municipal Plan; Transportation Plan; Parks, Recreation &
Waterfront Plan; and Comprehensive Economic Development Plan. Not changing is not an
option. As such it is important to work with you to design materials that carry the right message
and clearly communicate the importance of this work. We expect this work to potentially
include:
 ● Study Area Tours - with City staff, residents and business owners.
 ● One-on-One Stakeholder Interviews - to understand the City through a diverse range of
 perspectives.
 ● Open Houses & Public Events - to bring materials that visually show Burlington today
 and engage with residents about what they would like to see in their City.
 ○ Our Open Houses include multiple games and tools designed to elicit public
 response and discussion. Many of the exhibits and games are easily
 transportable to other locations for use in public meetings and other events. The
 exhibits will be designed to share some of the trends and issues facing the City
 while encouraging different methods for people to tell us what they would like to
 see in the future and what they see as City values. The tools potentially include

 Page 13 of 77
 everything from City ‘Mad Libs’, our ‘Photo-Suggestion Booth’, ‘Postcards from
 the Future’ and collaborative mapping designed to capture people’s vision and
 big ideas as well as interactive games designed to educate and discuss trade-
 offs about the specific policies and places.
 ● Pop Up Events - to reach people that would normally be less inclined to attend an open
 house but also to get the word out about the plan.
 ○ We anticipate multiple pop-up events facilitated by City staff and partners with
 materials designed by Interface Studio. As an example in Durham, NC, Interface
 Studio designed a 10’ vinyl collaborative map and two other simple activities that
 went on a 9 stop tour across the City to broaden the engagement.
 ● Social Media and Web Material - to act as a digital twin to in-person engagement.
 ● Documentation - Public engagement is a critical source of data. To maximize its impact
 on the process, we carefully cull through the responses and feedback along the way.
 We will create info-graphics and share them back with the public to reinforce the
 transparency of the process. This rigorous approach to not just engaging the public but
 also in capturing and illustrating the findings is essential in moving ideas and policies
 forward while also identifying the key barriers and issues that need to be addressed
 before completion of the draft Plan.

Task 3.2. Draft Vision Framework
This initial outreach should provide clear guidance on a vision for Burlington starting with the
vision expressed in PlanBTV. Edits and changes will update that vision as necessary to provide
a framework that will help to guide the strategies developed for this effort, again, for all of the
planBTV 2050 end deliverables, the Municipal Plan; Transportation Plan; Parks, Recreation &
Waterfront Plan; and Comprehensive Economic Development Plan.

Task 3.3: Develop Draft Goals and Objectives
To support the vision, our team will develop a series of draft goals and objectives for each of the
planBTV 2050 end deliverables that reflect the feedback from our engagement as well as the
results from the existing conditions assessments. These are drafts only and will be used to help
organize strategies in a clear narrative that welcomes feedback and discussion throughout our
engagement.

Task 3.4 Statistically-Valid Survey and Public Survey of Burlington
Residents
Interface Studio will subcontract with a frequent partner, ETC Institute, to develop and complete
a Statistically-Valid Survey of Burlington Residents as well as a Public Survey of Burlington
Residents, open to all interested in participating.
 ● Survey design will require the full consultant team (and all participating City
 departments) to collaborate on questions, so the survey gathers the data needed for
 each area of inquiry.
 ● The statistically-valid survey will reach out to a random sample of Burlington households
 via direct mail. The survey team will reach out to non-responding households by text
 message, postcard, and a second mailing (if needed) to ensure the highest possible
 response rate from low-engagement populations. To take the survey in a language of




 Page 14 of 77
 their choice, respondents will have the option of calling a live translation service or taking
 a translated version of the survey online.
 ● To ensure not only that a representative cross-section of Burlington residents participate,
 but that a sufficient number of key harder-to-reach subgroups identified by the City
 respond, the consultant team has set aside a portion of the survey fee to be used by
 Burlington’s Trusted Community Voices leaders as stipends or incentives for survey
 participation.
 ● The public survey will be identical to the statistically-valid survey; however, it will be
 available for any resident to take. The data from this survey will be kept separate from
 the statistically-valid data, since public surveys tend to draw more affluent, whiter
 respondent groups that do not represent the overall population. Data from both surveys
 will be analyzed for insights; however the statistically-valid survey will provide the most
 reliable information.


ADDITIONAL SERVICES

Interpretation at Public Events
As with the translation of materials, interpreters at public events can be organized as needed.
In Lewiston (ME), we worked with the City to have translators at public events in four languages
- French, Portuguese, Spanish and Somali.

Deliverables
Draft vision framework, Summary of community engagement results


PHASE 4: SCENARIO PLANNING

Task 4.1: Scenario Development
What is most important to scenario planning are the inputs. Here, careful work will be done
across team members to fully understand the key data to guide scenario development but also
the expected outcomes for the work. Scenario planning is best deployed as a tool for
discussion and understanding trade-offs.

Our team will develop a methodology to run multiple growth and preservation/conservation
scenarios, including identifying the tools of analysis, number of scenarios, scenario parameters,
and establishing the evaluation framework. We understand that the housing expectation from
the State will drive a lot of the discussion but our team brings expertise in both scenario
development and impact modeling across sectors from transportation to parks to economic
development. With Smart Mobility working with Toole on the team and transportation a key input
to the future scenarios, a portion of the Scenario Development task will be billed under the
Transportation Plan contract held by CCRPC.

A few key aspects of our process:
 ● Our team expects the scenarios to be structured as three different scenarios for
 reaching a goal of 7,000 new homes by 2050 that thoughtfully integrate sustainable
 transportation, recreation, economic development, and climate resilience priorities.



 Page 15 of 77
 ● Scenarios will be designed to illustrate how different combinations of comprehensive
 plan actions and strategies generate alternative futures and impacts on communities and
 highlight trade-offs, allowing for a comprehensive exploration of potential pathways.
 ● The scenarios will build from the existing conditions data analysis conducted in
 earlier tasks, population forecasts, potential economic changes, and any additional data
 sets to inform parameters/priorities surfaced during the engagement process.
 ● Each scenario is driven by a core set of land use or policy objectives (e.g.
 concentrating increased development in existing urban centers, ensuring all
 Burlingtonians are within a 10-minute walk to green space, prioritizing mobility
 connectivity to urban core) that informs the approach to allocating/encouraging 7,000
 new homes by 2050 and the growth and conditions of the city’s transportation systems,
 park infrastructure and programming, economic development, and climate resiliency.
 These policy objectives should come from close collaboration with City staff as our team
 begins the process to design the scenarios.

To support this work, our team will use a combination of spatial mapping tools (e.g., GIS) to
visualize land use and infrastructure conditions, and quantitative analysis tools (e.g., Excel, R,
or other data platforms) to model impacts and evaluate performance across scenarios.
Specifically for transportation, we will incorporate demand modeling to assess how different
growth patterns affect travel behavior, transit ridership, and multimodal connectivity so that
housing growth is aligned with sustainable mobility outcomes. Traffic and parking metrics for the
scenarios will be developed using the Regional Travel Demand Model maintained by the
Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission (CCRPC).

We will assess the impacts of each scenario, including:
  ● Fiscal impacts: estimating rough-order-of-magnitude costs and implications for City
 revenue and capital investment
  ● Equity impacts: evaluating the distribution of benefits and burdens across communities,
 with attention to historically underserved or vulnerable populations
 ● Resilience benefits: analyzing how each scenario exacerbates or reduces vulnerability
 to climate hazards such as flooding, heat, and air quality
 ● Transportation impacts: where and how much multimodal travel demand results from
 each scenario, including non-drive mode share, demand on specific roads and transit
 routes, parking needs, and transportation cost burden.

Buro Happold will work closely with Interface Studio to translate the findings from this analysis
into accessible, compelling insights for engagement.

Buro Happold brings direct experience applying scenario planning and infrastructure modeling
to complex urban challenges. In Pittsburgh, we are currently using a similar approach to model
the impacts of climate hazards (e.g. landslides, riverine flooding, pluvial flooding) on future land
use decisions and infrastructure investments as part of the city’s first ever climate justice-driven
Comprehensive Plan. This work includes assessing the impacts on the City’s capital budget by
modeling how changing population patterns through 2050 will affect infrastructure demand,
service needs, and investment priorities. For Detroit Future City, Buro Happold led similar
infrastructure scenario modeling to inform the city’s capital investment strategy, helping to right-
size infrastructure systems in response to significant population decline. While this work informs
our approach, we are excited to work with the City of Burlington to co-develop a scenario
modeling process that is responsive to local context, priorities, and goals.




 Page 16 of 77
Task 4.2: Public Workshops & Engagement
Following the initial scenario planning work, our team will design a series of games to help
engage the public around different choices and trade-offs for the future of Burlington that
influence each of the plan deliverables (Municipal Plan; Parks, Recreation & Waterfront Plan;
Transportation Plan; and Comprehensive Economic Development Plan). Our challenge here is
simple: To clearly communicate the need to accommodate growth; how scenario planning
works; and the trade-offs associated with different options. This is about graphic storytelling to
make sure everyone feels welcome to engage with the information. As with the 1st wave of
engagement, we expect this to encompass a mix of public open houses, pop up meetings and
targeted meetings with community organizations the exact mix of which will be determined with
the day-to-day working team from the City.

Task 4.3: Stakeholder Focus Groups
Interface Studio will work with the City to organize focus groups to discuss the analysis, findings
and scenarios for future growth. Each focus group will be facilitated by our team with an agenda
of previewing existing conditions data and generating discussion about specific strategies for
the City. We ask that the City be responsible for inviting focus group participants, securing
meeting space and providing light refreshments. We typically organize focus groups targeted to
specific interests, however they can also be a good way to facilitate small group discussions for
targeted populations that may be hard to reach through other methods. We initially recommend
5-7 focus groups which could include:
 ● Neighborhood organizations to discuss quality of life issues and integrated land use
 particularly for Downtown and the East End which have yet to engage in a recent district
 planning process.
 ● Organizations and partners engaged in climate resilience in Burlington.
 ● Unhoused and vulnerable populations such as low-income households seeking services
 or organizations focused on providing services.
 ● Youth to discuss their concerns and hopes for the future of Burlington.
 ● Seniors to discuss challenges and opportunities related to “aging in place” and the
 AARP Livable Communities Initiative.
 ● Economic development to discuss Burlington’s economic climate, resiliency, and
 competitiveness, with a focus on local jobs and diversity of businesses across all
 sectors.
 ● Developers to discuss the local market and City policies and procedures. This could be
 split into multiple focus groups where one is focused on residential developers and the
 other commercial.

Deliverables
Scenario Planning Work Plan, summary report, final scenario planning framework

Summary of key themes and take-aways from community engagement re. Scenario Planning




 Page 17 of 77
PHASE 5: PLAN DEVELOPMENT

Task 5.1: Draft Municipal Plan Strategies
Our team is fully aware of State regulations regarding comprehensive planning through
experience in Vermont. Following the scenario planning, our team will support OCP in the
development of draft strategies that address all aspects of State comprehensive plan
regulations including:
 ● Land Use and plans for growth;
 ● Natural Resources;
 ● Recreation and Open Spaces;
 ● Historical and Cultural Resources;
 ● Housing;
 ● Economic Development;
 ● Utilities, Services and Facilities;
 ● Transportation;
 ● Energy;
 ● Hazard Mitigation and Flood Resilience;
 ● Community Safety; and
 ● Public Health.

These will be graphically illustrated and clearly connected to other plan elements described
below. It is critical that when these strategies are presented, the public understands the
concepts clearly.

Climate resilience must be a foundational lens for planBTV 2050 to ensure that long-term
investments and land use decisions are responsive to the realities of a changing climate.
Integrating resilience into planning supports a future-looking vision for the city: one that protects
residents’ quality of life, safeguards public assets, and strengthens community well-being. From
rising temperatures and severe flooding events to increasing air and water quality concerns,
Burlingtonians are already experiencing the impacts of climate change on their communities,
natural environment, and built infrastructure.

Climate change also has widespread effects across several of the topics explored through the
comprehensive plan: economic development, transportation and mobility, public health, energy,
natural resources, and more. Our team sees a need for planBTV 2050 to put forth clear and
integrated recommendations to address the impacts of climate change, including:
 ● Mitigating urban heat island effect;
 ● Building resilience to extreme precipitation events;
 ● Protecting vulnerable populations from climate-related health risks;
 ● Supporting energy-efficient building retrofits;
 ● Integrating climate risk into land use and development decisions to guide future
 development away from high-risk areas;
 ● Ensuring future density is supported by sufficient infrastructure improvements; and
 ● Enhancing emergency preparedness and communications systems to manage climate-
 related disruptions.




 Page 18 of 77
Task 5.3: Draft Parks, Recreation and Waterfront Element Strategies
Building from the parks evaluation, the Parks, Recreation and Waterfront element will make
clear recommendations to address local needs and opportunities. All of this work will be
organized in a clear, prioritized work plan for discussion and refinement with staff, the Parks
Commission and others. The plan will include:

 ● Target levels-of-service for overall park acreage, individual amenity types, and
 particular types of facilities
 ○ These will be based on existing LOS figures, NRPA average LOS figures for
 similar municipalities, scenario planning, the Priority Investment Rating produced
 from statistically-valid survey data indicating the PRW elements for which there is
 current unmet demand, and input from PRW staff and leadership

 ● Capital strategies for new and improved parks and facilities, including:
 ○ Prioritized list of areas without park access for new sites or expanded
 transportation options, based on metrics designed in partnership with staff and
 leadership
 ○ Opportunity sites to expand access and provide for unmet needs
 ○ Prioritized list of existing sites for capital improvement based on metrics designed
 in partnership with staff and leadership
 ○ Strategies for prioritizing projects in future CIPs
 ○ Concepts and prioritization for signature projects to provide new one-of-a-kind
 facilities/amenities
 ○ Strategies for ensuring regular, scheduled rehabilitation of all amenities and
 facility systems, to extend their life and ensure safety

 ● Strategies to improve access to existing and future sites, including improvements to
 pedestrian and bicycle access, greenways, trails, and other strategies

 ● Programming and event planning and management, including:
 ○ Recommendations by Core Program Area for new, refreshed, or continued
 programs and events, based on the Program Assessment, statistically-valid
 survey data indicating the programs/events for which there is unmet demand,
 and input from PRW staff and leadership
 ○ Program and event planning and evaluation practices
 ○ Facility and equipment needs
 ○ Staffing

 ● Maintenance planning and practices, including:
 ○ Refined or new levels of service for each maintenance activity (to be assigned to
 sites/site sections by PRW staff and leadership) based on the Maintenance
 Assessment, statistically-valid survey data indicating maintenance activities for
 which there is low satisfaction, and input from PRW staff and leadership
 ○ Facility and equipment needs
 ○ Work order system
 ○ Use of technology
 ○ Staffing

 ● Waterfront and harbor investment and management, including:
 ○ Coordinated recommendations for capital investment and programming to
 produce a unified and complete waterfront experience


 Page 19 of 77
 ○ Management, partnerships, revenue generation and capture opportunities, and
 coordination
 ○ Access to sites and connections between sites
 ○ Opportunity sites to expand access and provide for unmet needs

 ● Revenue generation and capture strategies prioritized by feasibility and potential
 impact

 ● Organizational structure and policies

Task 5.4: Draft Economic Development Element Strategies
The economic development plan will be structured to provide Burlington with a line of sight
between issues and opportunities in the local economy with strategies and potential projects
that can help to foster a growing, equitable economy and tax base. The economic development
element will work closely with the municipal plan, transportation element and resiliency work to
make sure that Burlington has the physical capacity to capture the opportunities identified in this
effort. In addition, the economic development plan will carefully examine existing district plans
and align key strategies to support and expand existing businesses while attracting new
businesses.

After the base assessment has been completed and the input portion has been substantially
completed there will be a workshop with staff and advisors. Below is a proposed agenda of that
workshop:

Hypothetical Workshop 1 Agenda
 ● Report on the baseline assessment and summarized input
 ● Key Implications, potential examples include:
 ● Existing physical infrastructure including buildings & utilities;
 ● Organizational capacity to execute programs and projects;
 ● Workforce recruitment / retention issues (Plus 1 dilemma?)
 ● Two brainstorming exercises
 ● Which identified issues/opportunities are a priority to address?
 ● Brainstorm potential initiatives to address issues

The initiatives identified in Workshop 2 will be turned into an electronic survey. The electronic
survey will be sent to:
 ● Members of the advisory committee;
 ● Participants in the discussion groups;
 ● Members of key business groups;
 ● Political leadership across the county;
 ● Others TBD

They will be asked to rank each of the identified issues as priorities to address. There are
several different tools that can be used to identify real priorities.

Workshop 2:
The consulting team will create a “strawman” set of key strategic themes and initiatives. A
workshop with staff will sort and filter these initiatives across a variety of discussion tools
including the following:



 Page 20 of 77
Discussion Tool 1: Impact vs Cost/Effort
What are the resources required (people, time, money) versus impact on the community. Which
projects based on this are long term investments requiring community leadership buy in versus
can be done in a legislative cycle

Discussion Tool 2: Just Do it, Partner Up, Advocate model:
Starts the conversation on how recommendations would get implemented and by whom.
 ● Just Do It: Can be done directly by city staff without outside support because they
 control the key action items;
 ● Partner Up: Needs to be done through partnership with other entities such as the private
 companies, philanthropy, state, the feds because of resource issues, control of key
 action items, etc.,
 ● Highlight: Largely out of control of the local community but needs to be highlighted and
 potentially part of an advocacy strategy. An example would be state tax policies.

OPTIONAL: The post staff work product could be presented to the steering committee and other
key stakeholders for their feedback and input including potentially engaging them with the two
discussion tools.

Recommendation & Measurement Structure
The consulting team will create a report with executive summary, graphical depictions of key
data elements, benchmarks and metrics, and recommendations. NP typically follows this format:
 ● Key Strategic Area of Focus
 ● Rationale
 ● Action Items / Next Steps
 ● Metrics as appropriate or milestones (next steps provide the key initial milestones)
 ● Example/Precedent if needed

The key is to create line-of-sight between the recommendations and the key issues and
opportunities.

The consulting team will work with the staff project team to determine what is the appropriate
way to frame the strategies, action items, and critical next steps for a stand-alone economic
development strategic plan but fit with the comprehensive plan approach.

Task 5.5: Action Framework Open House Roadshow
All of the strategies will be organized into a roadshow for public review. Working with City staff,
we will design a series of activities to graphically present and encourage interaction with plan
strategies. Open houses, targeted neighborhood meetings, pop-ups and focus groups are all
on the table to ensure that this work is properly shared. On-line materials including a storymap
will provide a clear story about Burlington today and potentially tomorrow through the plan’s
goals and strategies. Video and other mediums are also possible if appropriate. In
Philadelphia, Interface Studio helped to produce a 4 minute video about industrial land to help
explain and generate interest in local economic development and manufacturing.




 Page 21 of 77
Task 5.6: Develop a Coordinated Implementation Plan
Each planning element will include a specific work plan that guides decision making and
budgeting for each department. The prioritization and identification of critical projects will be
determined through our engagement and critically through close collaboration with City staff and
affiliated Boards and Commissions.

The implementation plan specifies the sequencing, coordination of activities, and identification
of various implementation “paths” that show how results can make subsequent projects easier
to complete and/or more successful. We will also consider implementation issues that arise from
policies and practices, particularly those relating to transportation agency norms, and discuss as
solutions leading industry design standards for urban areas. Working with the PAC we will
organize all recommendations into a spreadsheet that aligns the goals with the
recommendations and identifies the necessary partners and funding sources to turn the ideas
into reality. A clear list of priority projects and timeframes will be included to help local
organizations and funders plan for the upcoming 5 years of work ahead.

For equity, affordability, sustainability and accessibility to effectively inform and guide the City’s
planning and investment, strategies need to include specified objectives and measurable
indicators of progress. In this way, any recommendations would be evaluable by outcomes and
not simply intent. The Interface team will work with the City and the PAC to develop the
necessary metrics and outcomes to measure as the recommendations of the Plan are
implemented. This is a process we have been recognized for including the 59 metrics
developed for the Reimagining the Civic Commons initiative that works across 20+cities.

Deliverables
Goals, objectives, strategies, draft work plan, and a draft implementation matrix with
measurement indicators

Summary of key themes and take-aways from community engagement re. Draft Strategies


PHASE 6: FINAL PLAN PRODUCTION

Task 6.1: Plan Document Production
All of the analysis and recommendations will be organized into well-tailored, place-specific,
graphically sophisticated documents that describe in detail the set of policies, goals and action
steps developed during the planning process. We are open in how the plan itself will be
designed. We want to ensure the plan will reach diverse audiences and graphically
communicate Burlington’s vision in a way that resonates as well as meet State regulations for
approval. The design will be determined with City staff to ensure it achieves your goals for the
effort. With input from the client group and the consultant team, Interface Studio will develop an
InDesign template and graphic styles to be used in the Municipal Plan and across all plan
elements for consistency.

As noted in the RFQ, the Municipal Plan as well as the transportation, economic development
and parks, recreation and waterfront elements will all be designed as stand alone documents to
serve as guides for the respective departments.




 Page 22 of 77
Draft copies suitable for print and digital distribution will be provided to the PAC as well as to the
relevant Commissions for review. Following the review, we will provide revisions for the
Planning Commission to review and recommend to Council adoption of the draft plan.

Deliverables
Final plan document templates including executive summary and individual documents for each
of the plan elements


ADDITIONAL SERVICES

Translation of Documents
Our team brings in-house translation abilities but has also hired translation services which can
be more cost effective depending on the lift for the project. We look forward to discussing with
you the translation expectations including any potential translation of final documents.

Plan Printing
Our scope typically assumes a delivery of a web-ready version of the deliverables as well as a
print-ready version for easy delivery to a printer. Should the City expect us to fully coordinate
the printing of a specific number of deliverables, we would prefer to use a local printer and
coordinate on a potential cost for this task.




 Page 23 of 77
To: City of Burlington Planning Commission
From: Kate McCarthy, Senior Planner and Taylor Newton, Planning Program Director
Date: February 5, 2026
Re: Preapplication review of 2026 ECOS Regional Plan by Land Use Review Board



Thank you for the opportunity to attend the Burlington Planning Commission’s meeting. The purposes of
the meeting are: a) for CCRPC staff to share feedback received from the Land Use Review Board on our
draft 2026 ECOS Plan Future Land Use Map (FLU); and b) review possible changes to the FLU Map with
the Planning Commission. After working together to develop this map in 2025, we want to continue our
collaboration with municipalities as we finalize the ECOS Plan.


LURB COMMENTS: GENERAL
The letter outlined several required changes, and some advisory recommendations, for CCRPC to
consider. Following is a brief summary of key changes requested (this is not exhaustive):

 • Goals
 The LURB has requested more information to demonstrate conformance with two (out of 15)
 state planning goals: Educational and Vocational Training Opportunities, and Natural and
 Historic Features.

 • Plan Elements
 The LURB found that the draft ECOS plan includes all elements required of regional plans.

 • Regional Future Land Use Map
 The LURB indicated agreement with the mapped future land use categories in most of CCRPC’s
 communities – both those areas planned for growth (centers, planned growth areas, and
 village area) and rural areas. In several communities proposing newer or nontraditional centers,
 the LURB either requested more justification or requested that a different land use category be
 used. Similarly, in several communities with expansive areas proposed as neighborhoods
 (Planned Growth Areas or Village Areas) – typically due to the presence of infrastructure and the
 opportunity for additional housing to be built – the LURB requested additional information or a
 different land use category.


LURB COMMENTS: BURLINGTON IN THE REGIONAL FUTURE LAND USE MAP
The LURB also provided feedback on how future land use areas were mapped in individual
municipalities. They provided both required changes and advisory recommendations. The following

 1


 Page 24 of 77
summarizes the recommendations; we have provided page numbers so that Planning Commission
members can review the additional context the memo provides.

 • Downtown Centers, (p. 22 of memo)
 o Core: The area proposed meets the requirements.
 o South End: The area proposed is not consistent with the statutory description of a
 downtown center.
 o Cambrian Rise: The area proposed is not consistent with the statutory description of a
 downtown center.
 o Advisory recommendations:
 ▪ Merge the South downtown center with the Core downtown center or map as
 Planned Growth Area instead.
 ▪ Eliminate the Cambrian Rise downtown center and map as Transition/Infill or
 Planned Growth Area instead.

 • Village Centers (p. 25)
 o New North End: The area proposed meets the requirements of a village center.
 o Shelburne Road: The Board cannot determine whether the area proposed meets the
 requirements of a village center.
 ▪ Advisory recommendation: Provide additional information supporting the
 proposed Shelburne Road village center. Consider including the city park near
 the corner of Pine Street and Home Avenue.

 • Planned Growth Areas – pp. 32-33– PGAs meet the requirements
 o Advisory recommendation: The map should be cleaned up to remove slivers and snap
 areas to parcels wherever possible. Provide additional information on the south end
 zoning or consider enterprise area instead. The northern most portion of the planned
 growth area (near the Winooski River in the New North End) is surrounded by rural
 conservation should be considered for transition or rural.

ADDRESSING LURB PREAPPLICATION COMMENTS
CCRPC staff have been meeting with planning staff in municipalities where the LURB requested or
advised changes. Similar to when we developed the draft future land use map, CCRPC staff will also be
meeting as needed/requested with Planning Commissions and Selectboards and City Councils to review
any changes. The proposed changes will be reviewed by CCRPC’s Long Range Planning Committee
before an updated draft plan is advanced to CCRPC’s Board in March. We expect that the CCRPC Board
will adopt the plan in May, after which it will be submitted to the LURB for final review.


CONTACT
For more information, contact Taylor Newton, CCRPC Planning Program
Director: tnewton@ccrpcvt.org | (802) 846-4490 x 115




 2


 Page 25 of 77
 PREAPPLICATION RESPONSE LETTER

State of Vermont
Land Use Review Board
10 Baldwin Street
Montpelier, VT 05633-3201
https://act250.vermont.gov/

SENT VIA EMAIL ONLY

December 22, 2025

Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission
Attn: Charlie Baker, Executive Director, cbaker@ccrpcvt.org
 Taylor Newton, Planning Program Director, tnewton@ccrpcvt.org

Re: Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission Preapplication Response

Dear Charlie and Taylor:
The Land Use Review Board has completed its preapplication review of the Chittenden
County Regional Planning Commission’s (CCRPC) preapplication that was deemed
complete on 10/21/2025. The Board held a preapplication review meeting on
12/01/2025. Separately, the Board requested comments from our state partners and the
public. Copies of those comments can be found on the database:
https://anrweb.vt.gov/ANR/Act250/RPDetail.aspx?AppNum=RPC04-0001

The Board’s preapplication review does not encompass or reflect its position with
respect to comments received. The comments received are provided for CCRPC’s
information and consideration for potential revisions of its draft plan, as it may elect.
When the plan is finalized and submitted for Board approval, the Board will consider
“objector” comments if any, during the adopted plan review process.

I. BOARD REVIEW

The purpose of the preapplication process is for the Board to review whether the
CCRPC’s draft regional plan, known as the ECOS (Environment, Community,
Opportunity, and Sustainability) Plan, is in conformance with 24 V.S.A. §§ 4302, 4348a,
5803, and 5804. 24 V.S.A § 4348(b). Additionally, the Board must find that the plan is
consistent with the purposes enumerated in 24 V.S.A. § 4347. 24 V.S.A. §
4348(h)(4)(B). The Board has also reviewed the Commission’s Tier 1B status request
and future land use map to see if they meet the requirements of 10 V.S.A. § 6033(c)
and 24 V.S.A. § 4348a(a)(12)(A)-(C). This preapplication response addresses the
statutory standard and identifies areas where the Board has determined that the draft
plan is deficient and needs revision to conform. If the CCRPC disagrees, the Board will
need additional information about why the CCRPC believes the statutory standard is
met. This information should be included with the adopted regional plan. This response




 Page 26 of 77
RPC04-0001
Preapplication Response Letter
Page 2 of 46


letter also includes optional recommendations of the Board that the CCRPC may
choose to address within the adopted regional plan. This preapplication response is
advisory only and does not guarantee an affirmative determination when the adopted
plan or Tier 1B status request is submitted pursuant to Section 1.200 of the Board’s
Regional Planning Commission Application Guidelines.

 A. Further the State Planning Goals 24 V.S.A. § 4302

The Board has reviewed the draft regional plan to determine if the plan furthers the
goals of 24 V.S.A. § 4302.

 1. Conformance with 24 V.S.A. § 4302(a)

The draft plan reflects appropriate development of land in a manner to promote public
health, safety, welfare, comfort, and prosperity. It posits the importance of mitigating
property tax burden on agricultural, forested, and other open lands. The plan
encourages appropriate architectural design and renewable energy resource
development. It addresses traffic congestion, encourages growth in communities to
create an optimum natural, built, and cultural environment, and plans for the prevention
of negative impacts of growth. The draft regional plan adequately considers and
reflects the general purposes of 24 V.S.A. § 4302(a).

 2. Conformance with 24 V.S.A. § 4302(b)

The draft plan presents a framework for organized planning across the CCRPC region
for municipalities, the regional commission, and state agencies and services, the goal of
which includes the efficient and most beneficial deployment of the region's resources.
The CCRPC conducted a public outreach effort that encouraged citizen participation in
the development of the plan, and the plan encourages local decision-making for issues
of local impact. The plan includes mechanisms that encourage municipalities to work
collaboratively to implement the regional plan and individual municipal plans. The draft
plan reflects the goals listed in 24 V.S.A. § 4302(b).

 3. Conformance with 24 V.S.A. § 4302(c)

The draft regional plan must further the fifteen goals of 24 V.S.A. 4302(c).

Goal 1:
The first goal is to plan development that maintains the historic settlement pattern of
compact village and urban centers separated by rural countryside. 24 V.S.A. §
4302(c)(1).

The plan consistently encourages residential development and economic growth to
primarily occur in growth areas consisting of downtown and village center future land
use areas (FLUA) surrounded by planned growth and village area FLUA. Transition/Infill




 Page 27 of 77
RPC04-0001
Preapplication Response Letter
Page 3 of 46


and Enterprise FLUA are also designated for specialized growth or redevelopment. The
plan encourages infrastructure investment in these growth areas as well. The plan
makes numerous references to the importance of following smart growth principles for
new development in the region. This concentration of development in growth areas
works in concert with maintaining rural working lands and conservation of forests and
wildlife habitat and other natural resources outside of concentrated growth centers.

“Smart growth,” as defined in 24 V.S.A., Chapter 76A, § 2791(13), is put forward as a
tool to accomplish these aims. The draft regional plan reflects a commitment to the
Smart Growth principles articulated in statute. The CCRPC regional plan’s land use
goal, as enumerated on page 12 of the draft plan, provides: “Focus 90% of development
in areas planned for growth (Downtown Centers, Village Centers, Planned Growth
Areas, Village Areas, and Transition), in order to maintain a settlement pattern of
compact centers separated by rural countryside.” The draft plan is consistent with
Goal 1.

Advisory Recommendation:
 • Public outreach revealed concerns about lack of affordable places to live in rural
 communities (page 58). Consider more discussion of this issue.

Goal 2:
The second goal requires the plan “[t]o provide a strong and diverse economy that
provides satisfying and rewarding job opportunities and that maintains high
environmental standards, and to expand economic opportunities in areas with high
unemployment or low per capita incomes.” 24 V.S.A. § 4302(c)(2).

The Economy chapter’s 17 actions align the plan to the West Central Vermont
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy and “build capacity and guide the
economic prosperity, resilience, and well-being of all the region’s residents.” The draft
plan is consistent with Goal 2.

Advisory Recommendation:
 • Arts are recognized as part of the economy “Even businesses rely on arts and
 culture as part of their retention strategies.” (See draft plan, page 139) Consider
 drawing an arts linkage to the Economy chapter more directly. Consider
 highlighting 2021 Create Vermont Action Plan projects.

Goal 3:
The third goal requires the plan to “[t[o broaden access to educational and vocational
training opportunities sufficient to ensure the full realization of the abilities of all
Vermonters.” 24 V.S.A. § 4302(c)(3).

Schools are addressed in just two paragraphs in the "Infrastructure and Facilities"
chapter (Chapter 13, page 134). General instructional education is addressed under




 Page 28 of 77
RPC04-0001
Preapplication Response Letter
Page 4 of 46


Goal 10 (Economy) of the Implementation Matrix (see 10.9 and 1010) and civics
education is called out under Goal 16 (Civic Engagement, see 16.5). Vocational
education is not addressed, although reference is made to meeting workforce
development needs. This cursory treatment of educational facilities and programs does
not provide a strategy to address the county’s educational and vocational training needs
and opportunities. The draft plan is inconsistent with Goal 3.

Required Revisions: Acknowledge the region’s vocational schools (e.g., Center
for Technology Essex, Burlington Technical Center) and private schools. Provide
additional data on how both vocational and private schools provide educational
and vocational training opportunities. Add at least one education specific action
item in Chapter 13 addressing educational and vocational training.

Advisory Recommendations: Add in reference to higher educational institutions such
as UVM, St. Michael’s College, Champlain College, and Vermont State University.

Goal 4:
The fourth goal requires the plan “[t]o provide for safe, convenient, economic, and
energy efficient transportation systems that respect the integrity of the natural
environment, including public transit options and paths for pedestrians and bicyclers.”
24 V.S.A. § 4302(c)(4). As well as “[h]ighways, air, rail, and other means of
transportation should be mutually supportive, balanced, and integrated.” 24 V.S.A. §
4302(c)(4)(A).

Goal 7 of the plan as expressed in the Transportation chapter, is to “provide a
transportation system that is safe, efficient, reliable, and resilient; provides
interconnected and sustainable mobility choices for livable, equitable, and healthy
communities; supports regional and municipal land use goals; addresses the climate
crisis; and strengthens the economy of the region.” (See draft plan page 82.) This
chapter details plans for all elements of the transportation system and incorporates the
Metropolitan Transportation Plan, Supplement 5 of the plan, that provides additional
detail. The draft plan is consistent with Goal 4.

See comments on the Transportation element in Section I(D)(4) of this
preapplication response concerning transportation impacts of growth in Tier 1A
and 1B areas.

Advisory Recommendations:
 • Include the new CHIP financing program in the list under Action 10 on page 89.
 • Consider Transit Oriented Design and connection to land use under Action 8.
 • Consider showing the Lake Champlain Scenic Byway on transportation maps.
 • Action 7.7 calls for the Regional Transportation Model to be updated as a part of
 the next Metropolitan Transportation Plan to incorporate the future land use map




 Page 29 of 77
RPC04-0001
Preapplication Response Letter
Page 5 of 46


 and municipal housing targets to facilitate alignment of land use, housing, and
 transportation planning efforts. Elaborate on this.

Goal 5:
The fifth goal requires the plan “[t]o identify, protect, and preserve important natural and
historic features of the Vermont landscape, including:
 (A) significant natural and fragile areas;
 (B) outstanding water resources, including lakes, rivers, aquifers, shorelands, and
 wetlands;
 (C) significant scenic roads, waterways, and views;
 (D) important historic structures, sites, or districts, archaeological sites, and
 archaeologically sensitive areas.”
24 V.S.A. § 4302(c)(5).

The plan does not adequately identify existing historic resources or address significant
scenic roads, waterways, and views. The need for additional identification of and
respect for indigenous artifacts and areas is identified; however, the draft plan does not
adequately address historic districts or the importance of historic structures that help
define the Vermont landscape, particularly in certain downtown and village center areas
(e.g., Winooski, Essex Junction, Burlington, Richmond, etc.). This is an especially
important topic given the more urban landscape in Chittenden County, and the need to
balance architectural innovation in new construction with historic buildings and
streetscapes. The draft plan is inconsistent with Goal 5.

Required Revisions:
 • Chapter 15 must be bolstered to better address Goal 5, specifically the first
 six sentences in the Historic Resources section of Chapter 15.
 • Revise Actions (page 142) to include Historic Resources and descriptions
 of historic villages, national register sites, history of the land, and historic
 societies (e.g., National Register of Historic Places and National Historic
 Landmarks) possibly in a tabular form.
 • Expand the discussion on page 142 of the need for municipalities to
 address “misalignment between municipal plan recommendations for
 natural and scenic resources, and the implementation of those
 recommendations through development regulations.” Provide examples of
 scenic resource recognition such as municipal scenic viewshed regulatory
 standards (e.g., Williston, Charlotte).
Advisory Recommendations:
 • Consider adding to Chapter 15 (Scenic, Recreational and Historic Resources)
 mention of scenic gravel roads in rural Chittenden County communities: e.g.,
 Westford (Brookside Road, Maple Tree Lane, Manley Road); Charlotte (Bean




 Page 30 of 77
RPC04-0001
Preapplication Response Letter
Page 6 of 46


 Road, Prindle Road, Roscoe Road); Milton-Essex (Duffy Road, Brigham Hill
 Road, Colonel Page Road, Chapin Road). There are also scenic waterways
 (e.g., Lake Champlain, Winooski River, Bolton Potholes, etc.) and significant
 views (both of Mount Mansfield and Camel’s Hump to the east and Lake
 Champlain and the Adirondacks to the west) that should be referenced.
 • “Scenic, Recreational and Historic Resources” actions should reference the
 Community Investment Board program steps for designated areas (page 142).
 • In the “Historic Resources” section on pages 141 and 142 consider including
 references to museums in the county (e.g., Shelburne Museum and ECHO) as
 well as historical societies (e.g., Chittenden County Historical Society). Some
 historical societies have museums. Also, the non-profit Vermont Historical
 Society runs a statewide “Legue of Local Historical Societies and Museums”
 program that could also serve as a resource.

Goal 6:
The sixth goal requires the plan “[t]o maintain and improve the quality of air, water,
wildlife, forests, and other land resources.
 (A) Vermont’s air, water, wildlife, mineral, and land resources should be planned
 for use and development according to the principles set forth in 10 V.S.A. §
 6086(a).
 (B) Vermont’s water quality should be maintained and improved according to the
 policies and actions developed in the basin plans established by the
 Secretary of Natural Resources under 10 V.S.A. § 1253.
 (C) Vermont’s forestlands should be managed so as to maintain and improve
 forest blocks and habitat connectors.
24 V.S.A. § 4302(c)(6).

Chapters 2, 3, and 4 of the plan address Ecological Systems, Watershed Health, and
Working Lands and meet this requirement in the stated goals of these chapters as
enumerated on pages 39, 45, and 52. The draft plan is consistent with Goal 6.

Advisory Recommendations:
 • Within the “Community Resilience and Biodiversity Protection Act” (Act 59)
 paragraph, clarify whether the total of conserved land is 17% recreation and 24%
 conserved or if the 17% available for recreation is contained within the 24%
 conserved (page 41).
 • In the Ecological Systems chapter discussion of conserved land, it would be
 helpful to have percent of forest habitat conserved by easement vs. protected by
 government ownership. There are 67,210 acres of forestland enrolled in current
 use.




 Page 31 of 77
RPC04-0001
Preapplication Response Letter
Page 7 of 46


 • The “Revise Bridge/Culvert Design” action (1b on page 50) should include not
 only work with municipalities on revising standards but also to help them prioritize
 projects that implement these designs.
 • The “Hazard Protection” action on page 50 includes protecting river corridors
 through regulation but does not address shoreline or riparian buffers. Include
 shoreline and riparian buffer tools for Water Resource hazard protection.
 • On page 55 note that there is a Clarendon Springs formation that runs south to
 north that has naturally occurring radioactive properties.
 • The “State and Local Development Constraints” map (page 62) appears to
 include many important natural resources, but it is difficult to discern the location
 of any particular resource type on a combined map of this sort. Although this map
 is certainly helpful, consider additional resource maps that clarify the locations of
 specific natural resources and rare/irreplaceable natural areas such as rare
 significant natural communities.
 • Act 59 (2023) and the 30x30, 50x50 initiative is mentioned on page 41. Consider
 including more detailed information about how much land is conserved based on
 the Protected Lands GIS dataset, and how it breaks down by biophysical
 region. Consider including a map clearly showing how these conserved lands are
 distributed across the county.
 • Rare and irreplaceable natural areas (RINAs) and significant natural and fragile
 areas are not mentioned in the plan. Many RINAs are mapped as significant
 natural communities on the ANR atlas and could be considered for inclusion in
 one of the natural resources maps or referenced in the text of the plan.
 • The ANR Wetlands Program is in the process of updating the Vermont Significant
 Wetlands Inventory Maps. Much of the mapping for the region is in final draft
 form and available for viewing here:
 https://experience.arcgis.com/experience/c76d18185ede4acb8068fa352ea73c1e
 To better understand the extent of mapped wetlands, the CCRPC may want to
 consult the draft maps prior to finalizing the regional FLU map.

Goal 7:
The seventh goal requires the plan “[t}o make efficient use of energy, provide for the
development of renewable energy resources, and reduce emissions of greenhouse
gases.
 (A) General strategies for achieving these goals include increasing the energy
 efficiency of new and existing buildings; identifying areas suitable for
 renewable energy generation; encouraging the use and development of
 renewable or lower emission energy sources for electricity, heat, and
 transportation; and reducing transportation energy demand and single
 occupancy vehicle use.




 Page 32 of 77
RPC04-0001
Preapplication Response Letter
Page 8 of 46


 (B) Specific strategies and recommendations for achieving these goals are
 identified in the State energy plans prepared under 30 V.S.A. §§ 202 and
 202b.”
24 V.S.A. § 4302(c)(7).

Chapter 6, Energy, provides for general strategies for achieving these goals and
incorporates the county’s Enhanced Energy Plan as Supplement 6 of the plan. The
draft plan is consistent with Goal 7.

Goal 8
The eighth goal requires the plan “[t]o maintain and enhance recreational opportunities
for Vermont residents and visitors.
 (A) Growth should not significantly diminish the value and availability of outdoor
 recreational activities.
 (B) Public access to noncommercial outdoor recreational opportunities, such as
 lakes and hiking trails, should be identified, provided, and protected wherever
 appropriate.”
24 V.S.A. § 4302(c)(8).

Chapter 2, Ecological Systems, and Chapter 15, Scenic, Recreational, and Historic
Resources address outdoor recreation with actions 15.2, 15.5, and 15.6 specifically
addressing these goals. The draft plan is consistent with Goal 8.

Advisory Recommendation:
 • The section on Recreational Resources (page 141) does not identify parks as
 recreational resources in the region. Consider identifying parks that are present
 in the region.

Goal 9:
The ninth goal requires the plan “[t]o encourage and strengthen agricultural and forest
industries.
 (A) Strategies to protect long-term viability of agricultural and forestlands should
 be encouraged and should include maintaining low overall density.
 (B) The manufacture and marketing of value-added agricultural and forest
 products should be encouraged.
 (C) The use of locally-grown food products should be encouraged.
 (D) Sound forest and agricultural management practices should be encouraged.
 (E) Public investment should be planned so as to minimize development pressure
 on agricultural and forest land.
24 V.S.A. § 4302(c)(9).




 Page 33 of 77
RPC04-0001
Preapplication Response Letter
Page 9 of 46



These strategies to bolster the regional agricultural and forest industries are addressed
in Chapter 4, Working Lands. The draft plan is consistent with Goal 9.

Advisory Recommendations:
 • The “Regenerative Economy” section indicates that working lands have been
 seen through the lens of maximizing resource extraction without regard to
 outcomes for long-term ecological health. Consider adding context to
 recognize farmers as stewards of the land that often struggle with the
 economics of production (page 54).
 • The “Agricultural Lands” section asserts that the food system is becoming
 less resilient. Use this as an opportunity to discuss diversified agriculture in
 addressing changing markets and climate conditions (page 55).
 • The “Farm to Plate” section in the Economy chapter could benefit from
 discussion of accessory on farm businesses (page 120).
 • Expand discussion of forest management practices to describe “sound forestry
 practices” that should be employed to protect forest resources and the
 environment. For example, the plan could refer to the Agency of Natural
 Resources “Acceptable Management Practices for Maintaining Water Quality on
 Logging Jobs in Vermont” and/or other suitable practices.

Goal 10:
The tenth goal requires the plan “[t]o provide for the wise and efficient use of Vermont’s
natural resources and to facilitate the appropriate extraction of earth resources and the
proper restoration and preservation of the aesthetic qualities of the area.” 24 V.S.A. §
4302(c)(10).

The Working Lands chapter addresses earth resources and their extraction under
Action 2. The draft plan is consistent with Goal 10.

Advisory Recommendation:
 • The plan could say more about earth resources and existing extraction
 operations. This could include discussing the importance of sand and gravel
 resources for flood recovery and bridge and highway repairs and could include
 surficial geology mapping. The plan could support ensuring that these valuable
 and finite earth resources don’t become inaccessible due to development.

Goal 11:
The eleventh goal requires the plan “[t]o ensure the availability of safe and affordable
housing for all Vermonters.
 (A) Housing should be encouraged to meet the needs of a diversity of social and
 income groups in each Vermont community, particularly for those citizens of




 Page 34 of 77
RPC04-0001
Preapplication Response Letter
Page 10 of 46


 low and moderate income, and consistent with housing targets provided for in
 subdivision 4348a(a)(9) of this title.
 (B) New and rehabilitated housing should be safe, sanitary, located conveniently
 to employment and commercial centers, and coordinated with the provision of
 necessary public facilities and utilities.
 (C) Sites for multifamily and manufactured housing should be readily available in
 locations similar to those generally used for single-family dwellings.
 (D) Accessory dwelling units (ADU) within or attached to single-family residences
 that provide affordable housing in close proximity to cost-effective care and
 supervision for relatives, elders, or persons who have a disability should be
 allowed.”
24 V.S.A. § 4302(c)(11).

Chapter 8, Housing, and Chapter 13, Infrastructure and Facilities, address the
availability of safe and affordable housing for Vermonters. Supplement 7 of the plan,
Housing Targets, documents the methodology used to disaggregate regional housing
targets by municipality and provides a breakdown of housing type, affordability, and size
estimates. The draft plan is consistent with Goal 11.

Advisory Recommendations:
 • The “Housing Affordability and Availability” discussion (page 91) may benefit from
 including additional discussion of decreasing household size (e.g., the impact of
 household formation).
 • The “Policy and Regulatory Changes” section (page 101) could specifically
 mention Tier 1A and 1B areas.
 • The “Create Capital for Safe, Accessibly and Resilient Affordable Housing” action
 item (page 101) could include pursuit of weatherization improvements to poor
 quality units.
 • The “Housing Preservation” action item (page 102) includes steps to preserve
 existing affordable housing and encourage shared equity for new-owner homes.
 Permanently affordable efforts could be further detailed in the supporting
 narrative.
 • The Housing chapter does not include analysis or discussion of assisted living or
 age-restricted units. Needs for this type of housing should be addressed and an
 account of how these contribute to existing stock or planned units should be
 provided.

Goal 12:
The twelfth goal requires the draft plan:
 To plan for, finance, and provide an efficient system of public facilities and
 services to meet future needs.




 Page 35 of 77
RPC04-0001
Preapplication Response Letter
Page 11 of 46


 (A) Public facilities and services should include fire and police protection,
 emergency medical services, schools, water supply, and sewage and
 solid waste disposal.
 (B) The rate of growth should not exceed the ability of the community and
 the area to provide facilities and services.
24 V.S.A. § 4302(c)(12).

Chapter 13, Emergency Management, and Chapter 14, Infrastructure & Facilities,
address public facilities and services and this goal specifically in Actions 13.1, 13.2,
14.1, 14.2, and 14.5. The draft plan is consistent with Goal 12.

Advisory Recommendations:
 • Discuss source water protection areas in the Drinking Water paragraph on page
 132.
 • The Wastewater paragraph on page 132 should note existing development in the
 region served by decentralized or community septic systems.
 • The Wastewater action in the Watershed Health chapter discusses treatment
 plants but does not address decentralized solutions. Include community systems
 in wastewater solutions discussed (page 51).
 • The Emergency Services paragraph on page 134 should note St. Michael’s
 College and the Vermont National Guard as emergency response providers.
 • The Medical Facilities section on page 135 should mention that the region is also
 served by private surgery rooms.
 • The Infrastructure Planning and Construction action items on page 137 should
 include mention of CHIP.
 • The plan acknowledges that most fire and EMS services in the county are
 volunteer and there is a lack of volunteers as well as staffing shortages for police
 departments. Consider discussing possible solutions.

Goal 13:
The thirteenth goal requires the plan”[t]o ensure the availability of safe and affordable
child care and to integrate child care issues into the planning process, including child
care financing, infrastructure, business assistance for child care providers, and child
care work force development.” 24 V.S.A. § 4302(c)(13).

Chapter 11, Household Finance, and Chapter 10, Economy, address childcare
specifically in actions 11.3 and 10.4. The draft plan is consistent with Goal 13.

Goal 14:
The fourteenth goal requires the plan to encourage flood resilient communities. 24
V.S.A. § 4302(c)(14).




 Page 36 of 77
RPC04-0001
Preapplication Response Letter
Page 12 of 46



Chapter 3, Watershed Health, and Chapter 12, Emergency Management, address
planning for flood resilient communities specifically in actions 3.1 and 12.1. The draft
plan is consistent with Goal 14.

Goal 15:
The fifteenth goal requires the plan “[t]o equitably distribute environmental benefits and
burdens as described in 3 V.S.A. chapter 72.” The referenced chapter is titled:
“Environmental Justice.” The State of Vermont has explained:
 It is further the policy of the State of Vermont to provide the opportunity for the
 meaningful participation of all individuals, with particular attention to
 environmental justice focus populations, in the development, implementation, or
 enforcement of any law, regulation, or policy.
3 V.S.A. § 6003.
 “Meaningful participation” means that all individuals have the opportunity to
 participate in energy, climate change, and environmental decision making.
 Examples include needs assessments, planning, implementation, permitting,
 compliance and enforcement, and evaluation. Meaningful participation also
 integrates diverse knowledge systems, histories, traditions, languages, and
 cultures of Indigenous communities in decision- making processes. It requires
 that communities are enabled and administratively assisted to participate fully
 through education and training. Meaningful participation requires the State to
 operate in a transparent manner with regard to opportunities for community input
 and also encourages the development of environmental, energy, and climate
 change stewardship.
3 V.S.A. § 6002(6).

Chapter 1, Equitable Planning Practices, and Supplement 3, Environmental Benefits &
Burdens Analysis, address environmental justice and detail how the plan advances
equitable distribution of environmental benefits and burdens. The benefits and burdens
analysis can function as a model to other regional planning commissions working to
comply with this new regional plan requirement. As the topic of the first chapter,
equitable planning is a foundational element that resonates throughout the plan. The
draft plan is consistent with Goal 15.

Advisory Recommendations:
 • The “Brownfields” section (page 60) could provide a short description to
 recognize the disproportionate burden historically born by BIPOC and
 economically disadvantaged populations and the positive impact of addressing
 brownfields in an environmental justice context.
 • The Social Connectedness chapter could benefit from including mention of how
 social service and charitable groups serving the area (such as supper clubs,




 Page 37 of 77
RPC04-0001
Preapplication Response Letter
Page 13 of 46


 VFW, Lions, etc.) can help increase engagement across communities (page
 148).

 B. Consistency with the Purposes of a Regional Plan 24 V.S.A. § 4347
As part of the Board’s review of the draft regional plan, the Board must determine
whether the plan is consistent with the purposes of the regional plan found in 24 V.S.A.
§ 4347. 24 V.S.A. § 4348(h)(4)(B). Section 4347 states:
 A regional plan shall be made with the general purpose of guiding and
 accomplishing a coordinated, efficient, equitable, and economic development of
 the region that will, in accordance with the present and future needs and
 resources, best promote the health, safety, order, convenience, prosperity, and
 welfare of current and future inhabitants as well as efficiency and economy in the
 process of development. This general purpose includes recommending a
 distribution of population and of the uses of the land for urbanization, trade,
 industry, habitation, recreation, agriculture, forestry, and other uses as will tend
 to:
 (1) create conditions favorable to transportation, health, safety, civic activities,
 and educational and cultural opportunities;
 (2) reduce the wastes of financial, energy, and human resources that result from
 either excessive congestion or excessive scattering of population;
 (3) promote an efficient and economic utilization of drainage, energy, sanitary,
 and other facilities and resources;
 (4) promote the conservation of the supply of food, water, energy, and minerals;
 (5) promote the production of food and fiber resources and the reasonable use of
 mineral, water, and renewable energy resources;
 (6) promote the development of housing suitable to the needs of the region and
 its communities; and
 (7) help communities equitably build resilience to address the effects of climate
 change through mitigation and adaptation consistent with the Vermont
 Climate Action Plan adopted pursuant to 10 V.S.A. § 592 and 3 V.S.A. chapter
 72.
As the draft plan addresses the separate goals enumerated in Part A of this
preapplication response (above) and through the various required elements as
enumerated in Part D (below), the draft plan as a whole is consistent with these 24
V.S.A. § 4347 purposes. The framework for the CCRPC plan is outlined in the
Introduction & Plan Overview and clear actions are provided throughout the plan
detailing how the plan will be implemented. The draft plan is consistent with the
purposes of 24 V.S.A. § 4347.

 C. Conformance with Outreach Requirements of 24 V.S.A. § 4348(a)
As part of the development of the regional plan,




 Page 38 of 77
RPC04-0001
Preapplication Response Letter
Page 14 of 46


 ... regional planning commissions shall solicit the participation of each of their
 member municipalities, local citizens, and organizations by holding informal
 working sessions that suit the needs of local people. The purpose of these
 working sessions is to allow for meaningful participation as defined in 3 V.S.A. §
 6002, provide consistent information about new statutory requirements related to
 the regional plan, explain the reasons for new requirements, and gather
 information to be used in the development of the regional plan and future land
 use element.
24 V.S.A. § 4348(a).
The Plan Methodology (page 32) specifically details community engagement with more
substantial additional detail provided in Supplement 1: Public Process. Comprehensive
and inclusive outreach efforts were included in the development of the plan. The Board
concludes that the plan was developed with the involvement of its member
municipalities, local citizens, and organizations which allowed for meaningful
participation.

 D. Conformance with 24 V.S.A. § 4348a
The Board has reviewed the draft regional plan and has determined whether it conforms
with the required elements of 24 V.S.A. § 4348a(a). The subsections below match the
subsections of 24 V.S.A. § 4348a(a). Subsection 6 was repealed by the legislature but is
listed as a placeholder below and is intentionally left blank.
 1. Statement of Basic Policies
A regional plan must contain: “[a] statement of basic policies of the region to guide the
future growth and development of land and of public services and facilities, and to
protect the environment.” 24 V.S.A. § 4348a(a)(1).
The draft plan includes actions at the end of each chapter, including those pertaining to
land use, economic development, future growth and development of land and of public
services and facilities, and environmental protection. The draft plan meets this
requirement.

 2. Natural Resources and Working Lands
A regional plan must contain:
 A natural resources and working lands element, which shall consist of a map or
 maps and policies, based on ecosystem function, consistent with Vermont
 Conservation Design, support compact centers surrounded by rural and working
 lands, and that:
 (A) Indicates those areas of significant natural resources, including
 existing and proposed for forests, wetlands, vernal pools, rare and
 irreplaceable natural areas, floodplains, river corridors, recreation,
 agriculture using the agricultural lands identification process
 established in 6 V.S.A. § 8, residence, commerce, industry, public, and




 Page 39 of 77
RPC04-0001
Preapplication Response Letter
Page 15 of 46


 semipublic uses, open spaces, areas reserved for flood plain, forest
 blocks, habitat connectors, recreation areas and recreational trails, and
 areas identified by the State, regional planning commissions, or
 municipalities that require special consideration for aquifer protection;
 for wetland protection; for the maintenance of forest blocks, wildlife
 habitat, and habitat connectors; or for other conservation purposes.
 (B) Indicates those areas that have the potential to sustain agriculture and
 recommendations for maintaining them that may include transfer of
 development rights, acquisition of development rights, or farmer
 assistance programs.
 (C) Indicates those areas that are important as forest blocks and habitat
 connectors and plans for land development in those areas to minimize
 forest fragmentation and promote the health, viability, and ecological
 function of forests. A plan may include specific policies to encourage
 the active management of those areas for wildlife habitat, water quality,
 timber production, recreation, or other values or functions identified by
 the regional planning commission.
 (D) Encourages preservation of rare and irreplaceable natural areas,
 scenic and historic features and resources.
 (E) Encourages protection and improvement of the quality of waters of the
 State to be used in the development and furtherance of the applicable
 basin plans established by the Secretary of Natural Resources under
 10 V.S.A. § 1253.
24 V.S.A. § 4348a(a)(2).

Chapter 2, Ecological Systems, Chapter 3, Watershed Health, Chapter 4, Working
Lands, and Chapter 15, Scenic, Recreational, and Historic Resources address the
requirements of this element. The goals of these chapters (provided on pages 39, 45,
52, and 140) and actions 2.1, 2.3, 3.1, 3.2, 4.1, and 15.3 specifically fulfill the intent of
this element. The draft plan meets this requirement.

 3. Energy
The draft regional plan must contain:
 An energy element, including an analysis of resources, needs, scarcities, costs,
 and problems within the region across all energy sectors, including electric,
 thermal, and transportation; a statement of policy on the conservation and
 efficient use of energy and the development and siting of renewable energy
 resources; a statement of policy on patterns and densities of land use likely to
 result in conservation of energy; and an identification of potential areas for the
 development and siting of renewable energy resources and areas that are
 unsuitable for siting those resources or particular categories or sizes of those
 resources.




 Page 40 of 77
RPC04-0001
Preapplication Response Letter
Page 16 of 46


24 V.S.A. § 4348a(3).
Chapter 6, Energy, and Supplement 6, CCRPC’s Enhanced Energy Plan, fulfill the
requirements of this element. The draft plan meets this requirement.

 4. Transportation
A regional plan must include the following:
 A transportation element consisting of a statement of present and prospective
 transportation and circulation facilities, and a map showing existing and proposed
 highways, including limited access highways, and streets by type and character
 of improvement, and where pertinent, anticipated points of congestion, parking
 facilities, transit routes, terminals, bicycle paths and trails, scenic roads, airports,
 railroads and port facilities, and other similar facilities or uses, and
 recommendations to meet future needs for such facilities, with indications of
 priorities of need, costs, and method of financing.
24 V.S.A. § 4348a(a)(4).
Chapter 7, Transportation, and Supplement 5, Metropolitan Transportation Plan, fulfill
the requirements of this element. The draft plan meets this requirement.

Advisory Recommendation: To address the potentially significant traffic impacts
resulting from development in Tier 1A and 1B areas that will no longer be subject to Act
250 review, consider revising the plan to: (1) add detail about how to address the
anticipated need for increased transportation infrastructure planning, and (2) support
alternative new or leveraged local or state regulatory review processes to address
mitigation of traffic from development that will no longer be subject to Act 250 review.

 5. Utility and Facility

The Draft Regional Plan must contain:
 A utility and facility element, consisting of a map and statement of present and
 prospective local and regional community facilities and public utilities, whether
 publicly or privately owned, showing existing and proposed educational,
 recreational and other public sites, buildings and facilities, including public
 schools, State office buildings, hospitals, libraries, power generating plants and
 transmission lines, wireless telecommunications facilities and ancillary
 improvements, water supply, sewage disposal, refuse disposal, storm drainage,
 and other similar facilities and activities, and recommendations to meet future
 needs for those facilities, with indications of priority of need.
24 V.S.A. § 4348a(a)(5).




 Page 41 of 77
RPC04-0001
Preapplication Response Letter
Page 17 of 46


Chapter 13, Infrastructure and Facilities, contains a utility and facility element and map
that details existing conditions and advances infrastructure planning for the region. The
draft plan meets this requirement.

 6. (repealed)

 7. Implementation

A draft regional plan must contain “[a] program for the implementation of the regional
plan’s objectives, including a recommended investment strategy for regional facilities
and services based on a capacity study of the elements in this section.” 24 V.S.A. §
4348a(a)(7).
Each chapter of the plan includes specific actions for implementation and Chapter 18,
Stewardship, Implementation, and Monitoring, provides for annual progress reports for
the plan and other measures to assist with implementation. The draft plan meets this
requirement.

 8. Compatibility with Other Plans
The draft regional plan must contain: “[a] statement indicating how the regional plan
relates to development trends, needs, and plans and regional plans for adjacent
municipalities and regions.” 24 V.S.A. § 4348a(a)(8).

Chapter 5, Land Use, provides a statement on the plan’s compatibility with adjacent
regional plans on page 69. Potential conflicts are noted as to be monitored including an
area between Charlotte and Ferrisburgh that is less intense in CCRPC and more
intense in the Addison County Regional Plan and vice versa between Milton and
Georgia in Northwest Regional Plan. The draft plan meets this requirement.

 9. Housing
The draft regional plan must include:

 A housing element that identifies the regional and community-level need for
 housing that will result in an adequate supply of building code and energy code
 compliant homes where most households spend not more than 30 percent of
 their income on housing and not more than 15 percent on transportation. To
 establish housing needs, the Department of Housing and Community
 Development shall publish statewide and regional housing targets or ranges as
 part of the Statewide Housing Needs Assessment. The regional planning
 commission shall consult the Statewide Housing Needs Assessment; current and
 expected demographic data; the current location, quality, types, and cost of
 housing; other local studies related to housing needs; and data gathered
 pursuant to subsection 4382(c) of this title. If no such data has been gathered,
 the regional planning commission shall gather it. The regional planning
 commission’s assessment shall estimate the total needed housing investments in




 Page 42 of 77
RPC04-0001
Preapplication Response Letter
Page 18 of 46


 terms of price, quality, unit size or type, and zoning district as applicable and shall
 disaggregate regional housing targets or ranges by municipality. The housing
 element shall include a set of recommended actions to satisfy the established
 needs.

24 V.S.A. § 4348a(a)(9).

Chapter 8, Housing, and Supplement 7, Housing Data, identify the region’s housing
needs and actionable steps toward addressing it. The supplement provides a
comprehensive analysis of types of housing including affordable, that exceeds the
metrics of the Statewide Housing Needs Assessment. The draft plan meets this
requirement.

Advisory Recommendation: The upper targets for Chittenden County both in the
statewide and regional housing targets are substantially higher than the current rate of
housing growth. Consequently, additional discussion of planned actions to enable
attainment of the targets is advisable.

 10. Economic Development
The draft regional plan must include “[a]n economic development element that
describes present economic conditions and the location, type, and scale of desired
economic development, and identifies policies, projects, and programs necessary to
foster economic growth.” 24 V.S.A. § 4348a(a)(10).
Chapter 10, Economy, Chapter 13, Infrastructure and Facilities, and Supplement 4,
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy, assess economic conditions and
provide action items to promote economic growth for the region. The draft plan meets
this requirement.

 11. Flood Resilience
The draft regional plan must include:
 (A) A flood resilience element that:
 (i) identifies flood hazard and fluvial erosion hazard areas, based on river
 corridor maps provided by the Secretary of Natural Resources pursuant
 to 10 V.S.A. § 1428(a) or maps recommended by the Secretary, and
 designates those areas to be protected, including floodplains, river
 corridors, land adjacent to streams, wetlands, and upland forests, to
 reduce the risk of flood damage to infrastructure and improved property;
 and
 (ii) recommends policies and strategies to protect the areas identified and
 designated under this subdivision (A) and to mitigate risks to public
 safety, critical infrastructure, historic structures, and public investments.
 (B) A flood resilience element may reference an existing regional hazard
 mitigation plan approved under 44 C.F.R. § 201.6.




 Page 43 of 77
RPC04-0001
Preapplication Response Letter
Page 19 of 46


24 V.S.A. § 4348a(a)(11).
Chapter 3, Watershed Health, Chapter 5, Land Use, and Chapter 12, Emergency
Management, address flood resilience through goals and actions to mitigate risk. The
approved Chittenden County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazards Mitigation Plan is referenced
in Chapter 3. The plan includes maps that show flood hazard and fluvial erosion (river
corridor) areas. The draft plan meets this requirement.

 12. Future Land Use
The draft plan must include:
 A future land use element…that sets forth the present and prospective location,
 amount, intensity, and character of such land uses in relation to the provision of
 necessary community facilities and services and that consists of a map
 delineating future land use area boundaries for the land uses in subdivisions (A)–
 (J) of this subdivision (12) as appropriate and any other special land use
 category the regional planning commission deems necessary; descriptions of
 intended future land uses; and policies intended to support the implementation of
 the future land use element…
24 V.S.A. § 4348a(a)(12).
The plan includes a Land Use chapter that reflects smart growth principles and provides
analysis of both current and future land use opportunities. The Future Land Use (FLU)
Map and narrative address the proposed configuration of each of the Act 181 future land
use categories and includes a special use category for the Burlington International
Airport, Camp Johnson, and Ethan Allen Firing Range.
The Board reviewed the FLU map to determine whether it delineates boundaries that
are consistent with the future land use categories described in statute. See 24 V.S.A. §
4348a(a)(12)(A)-(J). In its review of the mapped boundaries of the FLU categories, the
Board referenced the Vermont Association of Planning and Development Agencies
(VAPDA): Future Land Use Methodology and Process, Version 3.0, Revised April 18,
2025 (https://act250.vermont.gov/sites/acttwofifty/files/documents/2025-04-
21%20Act%20181%20Statewide%20FLU%20Methodology%20v%203.0%20Final.pdf).
The VAPDA methodology is used by Vermont’s eleven regional planning commissions
to develop the FLU mapping, thus providing a consistent approach throughout the state.
Below is a summary of the Board’s determinations with respect to the CCRPC FLU
map.
Advisory Recommendations:
 • The suburban nature of various portions of Chittenden County can be hard to
 place within the prescribed twelve Future Land Use Areas. Some Planned
 Growth Areas and Village Areas are proportionally large compared to their
 related Downtowns and Village Centers. In these cases, consider expanding the
 centers or decreasing or downgrading the Planned Growth Areas and Village
 Areas to address proportionality and walkability. Some Planned Growth and




 Page 44 of 77
RPC04-0001
Preapplication Response Letter
Page 20 of 46


 Village Areas, especially those along highways in more linear forms, may be
 better represented as Transition/Infill Areas. Where pedestrian amenities exist,
 walkable areas may exceed the quarter to a half mile VAPDA methodology
 standard.
 • River corridors and shorelines should be uniformly mapped, wherever possible,
 as Rural - Conservation or Rural - General.
 • The CCRPC should continue to work with the State to update the Future Land
 Use and Tier 1A/B Map Viewer prior to final submission. Water and wastewater
 infrastructure mapping is obsolete or insufficient. Several municipalities are in the
 process of updating municipal plans and zoning bylaws. Consequent zoning and
 confirmed plan updates to the map viewer and Vermont Planning Data Center
 should be made. While updates will improve data for water and wastewater
 service areas, large community systems, like that of Marble Island, may be
 included. Decentralized wastewater systems may continue to be unrepresented
 in the map viewer. Consider developing an additional data layer of community
 systems in coordination with the Department of Environmental Conservation
 (DEC).
 • Consider elimination of isolated small pockets of Rural – General that are
 surrounded by Rural – Agriculture and Forestry or Rural – Conservation by
 subsuming them in the surrounding larger FLU area. Consider this even for
 parcels that are not enrolled in the Current Use program (e.g., along Lincoln Hill
 Road and Burritt Road in Hinesburg).
 • Map roads consistent with the predominant FLU around them, rather than
 defaulting to Rural – General.
 • Eliminate sliver polygons (e.g., Rural – General slivers west of the Hinesburg
 Village Center FLU near the town wastewater treatment facility and Rural –
 General slivers along the road near 1246 Osgood Hill Road and to the east).

 (A) Downtown Centers and Village Centers

The FLU map contains downtown and village centers, which are defined as:
 Downtown or village centers. These areas are the mixed-use centers bringing
 together community economic activity and civic assets. They include downtowns,
 villages, and new town centers previously designated under chapter 76A and
 downtowns and village centers seeking benefits under the Community
 Investment Program under section 5804 of this title. The downtown or village
 centers are the traditional and historic central business and civic centers within
 planned growth areas, village areas, or may stand alone. Village centers are not
 required to have public water, wastewater, zoning, or subdivision bylaws.
24 V.S.A § 4348a(a)(12)(A). The reference to section 5804 appears to be a typo, as it is
titled “Designated neighborhood” whereas section 5803 is titled “Designation of




 Page 45 of 77
RPC04-0001
Preapplication Response Letter
Page 21 of 46


downtown and village centers.” For the Board’s review of downtown and village centers,
section 5803 has been incorporated.
 A regional planning commission may apply to the LURB for approval and
 designation of all centers by submitting the regional plan future land use map
 adopted by the regional planning commission. The regional plan future land use
 map shall identify downtown centers and village centers as the downtown and
 village areas eligible for designation as centers. The Department and State
 Board shall provide comments to the LURB on areas eligible for center
 designation as provided under this chapter.
24 V.S.A. 5403(a).
The statute directs the Board to “allow for the designation of preexisting, designated
downtowns, village centers and new town centers in existence on or before December
31, 2025.” 24 V.S.A. § 5803(b). For all other areas mapped as downtown centers, the
Board used the following parameters. First, whether the mapped area reflects a
traditional and historic central business and civic center. Id. Second, whether the
mapped area is consistent with the VAPDA mapping process and standards. Finally, the
Board evaluated whether areas mapped as downtown or village center include
development that is disconnected from a center and that lack pedestrian connections to
the center via a complete street. 24 V.S.A. § 5803(c).
 With the exception for preexisting, nonconforming designations approved prior to
 the establishment of the program under this chapter or areas included in the
 municipal plan for the purposes of relocating a municipality’s center for flood
 resiliency purposes, the areas eligible for designation benefits upon the LURB’s
 approval of the regional plan future land use map for designation as a Center
 shall not include development that is disconnected from a Center and that lacks a
 pedestrian connection to the Center via a complete street.
24 V.S.A. § 5803(c).
Additionally, the Community Investment Program defines a “State Designated
Downtown or Village Center” or “Center” as:
 …a contiguous downtown or village a portion of which is listed or eligible for
 listing in the national register of historic places area approved as part of the
 LURB review of regional plan future land use maps, which may include an
 approved preexisting designated downtown, village center, or designated new
 town center established prior to the approval of the regional plan future land use
 maps.
24 V.S.A. 5801(12) see also 24 V.S.A. § 5803(b).
 • Downtown Centers
The downtown centers depicted on the FLU Map must meet the requirements of 24
V.S.A. § 4348a(a)(12)(A). Downtown centers are required to have zoning and




 Page 46 of 77
RPC04-0001
Preapplication Response Letter
Page 22 of 46


subdivision bylaws and public water or sewer services. 24 V.S.A. § 4348a(a)(12)(A) see
also 24 V.S.A. § 5803(f)(3).
The FLU map depicts the following downtown centers: Burlington Core, Burlington
Cambrian Rise, Burlington South, Colchester, Essex, Essex Junction, Milton,
Shelburne, South Burlington, Williston, and Winooski.
 Burlington: The City of Burlington has public water, wastewater, zoning, and
 subdivision bylaws and is served by transit. There are three proposed downtown
 centers: Core, South, and Cambrian Rise.

 The Core downtown center includes a legacy downtown designation with minor
 expansions to include various parcels that are part of a previously designated
 neighborhood development area. An extension along the waterfront on the north
 end of the legacy downtown is also proposed. The presence of a rare,
 threatened, or endangered species is mapped here. Another waterfront parcel
 that falls in the legacy downtown at the south end is mapped Rural –
 Conservation instead. The area proposed meets the requirements for a
 downtown center.

 The proposed South downtown center closely mirrors a legacy neighborhood
 development area with a minor expansion to include whole parcels. This
 proposed center falls in the enterprise zoning district and is part of the South End
 Innovation Area. This area is not a traditional or historic central business district
 on its own but could be incorporated into the Core downtown center by an
 extension along Pine Street. The area proposed is not consistent with the
 statutory description of a downtown center.

 The proposed Cambrian Rise downtown center is within a legacy neighborhood
 development area. The area encompasses the redevelopment of the former
 Catholic Diocese and orphanage into high density residential use with space for
 commercial use on some first floors. It is not a traditional or historic central
 business district and does not contain civic assets. The area proposed is not
 consistent with the statutory description of a downtown center.

 Advisory Recommendations:
 • Merge the South downtown center with the Core downtown center or map as
 Planned Growth Area instead.
 • Eliminate the Cambrian Rise downtown center and map as Transition/Infill or
 Planned Growth Area instead.

 Colchester: The proposed downtown center is coincident with the Severance
 Corners legacy growth center and new town center areas. The municipality has
 public water, wastewater, zoning, and subdivision bylaws. The area proposed
 meets the requirements for a downtown center.




 Page 47 of 77
RPC04-0001
Preapplication Response Letter
Page 23 of 46



 Essex: A downtown center is proposed in the vicinity of Old Stage Road, Route
 15 and Route 289 that incorporates the Essex Experience as a mixed-use center.
 The area is not a traditional or historic central business district and does not
 include historic sites. The only civic asset appears to be the post office. The
 Board cannot determine that the area proposed meets the requirements for
 a downtown center.

 Advisory Recommendation: Provide additional information or consider for
 another future land use category.

 Essex Junction: The proposed downtown center incorporates a legacy village
 center with a state register historic district. The area is expanded slightly to the
 east and south with a more significant expansion west along Pearl Street to the
 edge of the fairgrounds. This expansion incorporates a legacy neighborhood
 development area into the downtown center. The municipality has public water,
 wastewater, zoning, and subdivision bylaws. The area proposed meets the
 requirements for a downtown center.

 Milton: A downtown center is proposed at the intersection of Main Street, Middle
 Road, Railroad Street, and Bombardier Road, to include Centre Drive and
 parcels along Haydenberry Drive. The area includes the municipal complex and
 schools and large commercial sites. The area contains both civic and business
 assets. Much development in this proposed downtown center is not pedestrian
 scaled (i.e., it consists of large buildings surrounded by large parking lots). A
 municipal park to the south of the proposed downtown center may be suited for
 incorporation . The area is served by municipal water and sewer, and Milton has
 zoning and subdivision bylaws. The area proposed meets the requirements
 for a downtown center.

 Shelburne: The proposed downtown follows a legacy village center designation
 at the intersection of Harbor Road and Shelburne Road (Route 7) with two
 expansion areas to the north and south. The northern expansion includes a
 housing development and Shelburnewood mobile home park. These are
 accessed from the proposed downtown center and separated from the proposed
 village area by a stream that provides a defined edge for the area. The southern
 expansion includes Shelburne Museum and a residence on the corner of
 Bostwick Road and Shelburne Road (Route 7). Shelburne Museum is a fully
 fenced fee area of restricted public access and therefore not conducive to
 incorporation in a downtown center. The municipality has public water,
 wastewater, zoning, and subdivision bylaws. The area proposed is not
 consistent with the statutory description of a downtown center.

 Required Revision: Exclude Shelburne Museum from the downtown center.




 Page 48 of 77
RPC04-0001
Preapplication Response Letter
Page 24 of 46



 Advisory Recommendation: Consider including two planned growth area
 parcels adjacent to the northern expansion in the downtown center.

 South Burlington: The proposed downtown center incorporates a legacy new
 town center with expansions along Williston Road, Dorset Street and Hinesburg
 Road, providing a more balanced edge area. The northeastern corner of the
 downtown center includes the post office and a mixed-use area. The downtown
 area excludes the High School, school district offices, and Fire Department as
 well as a municipally-owned park parcel at 30 Iby Street. The area proposed
 meets the requirements for a downtown center.

 Advisory Recommendation: Consider expansion along Dorset Street to
 Kennedy Drive to include the high school, district offices, and fire station, as well
 as the City Center Park parcel on Iby Street.

 Williston: A downtown center is proposed within a legacy growth center at the
 intersection of Williston Road (Route 2) and Essex Road (Route 2A). The
 proposed downtown center does not include the entirety of the legacy growth
 center. Only partial parcels are included on the south side of Marshall Avenue.
 The area is comprised largely of big box retail and other large buildings
 surrounded by large parking lots. The municipality has public water, wastewater,
 zoning, and subdivision bylaws. As indicated at the Board review meeting for this
 preapplication, Williston has master planned this area to guide its transformation
 into a more pedestrian oriented and traditional central business and civic center.
 The area proposed meets the requirements for a downtown center.

 Advisory Recommendation: Consider increasing the proposed downtown
 center o add depth to the area and assist with proportionality of planned growth
 area to the downtown area (PGA area is very large compared to downtown).
 Consider including whole parcels along Marshall Avenue to assist transformation
 to pedestrian oriented center with interconnected streets.

 Winooski: The proposed downtown center largely follows the legacy downtown
 designation with the addition of the legacy neighborhood development area
 designation. One exception is the addition of one parcel at 276 East Allen Street.
 This addition is appropriate as the parcel is adjacent to and accessed from the
 legacy downtown and physically separated from other areas by the railroad and
 Interstate. The area along East and West Spring Streets should be considered
 for inclusion in the downtown center. This would make the downtown center more
 cohesive, and less tied to main roads and the underlying form-based code areas.
 The municipality has public water, wastewater, zoning, and subdivision bylaws.
 The area proposed meets the requirements for a downtown center.




 Page 49 of 77
RPC04-0001
Preapplication Response Letter
Page 25 of 46


 Advisory Recommendation: Either eliminate the legs and consolidate to a
 broader core or include nearly the whole city in the downtown center. The area
 along East Spring Street and West Spring Street should be considered for
 inclusion in the downtown center.

 • Village Centers
The village centers depicted on the FLU map must meet 24 V.S.A. § 4348a(a)(12)(A).
Also see 24 V.S.A. § 5803(c), 24 V.S.A. 5801(12), and 24 V.S.A. § 5803(b) referenced
The Community Investment Program defines a “State Designated Downtown or Village
Center” or “Center” as, emphasis added:
…a contiguous downtown or village a portion of which is listed or eligible for listing in
the national register of historic places area approved as part of the LURB review of
regional plan future land use maps, which may include an approved preexisting
designated downtown, village center, or designated new town center established prior to
the approval of the regional plan future land use maps.
The following reply to each village center is provided: The village centers depicted
on the FLU map must meet 24 V.S.A. § 4348a(a)(12)(A).
 Bolton: The proposed village center is centered on a historic district and closely
 aligns with the existing village zoning district for the town. The edges align with
 most parcel boundaries including parcels located in a Flood Hazard Area (FHA)
 in the northern and southern portion that will allow for infill. The proposed village
 center includes several parcels not in the village zoning district at the base of the
 mountain road up to Bolton Valley Resort however the river corridor for the
 Winooski River does provide a logical defined edge for this area. There is one
 odd corner of the boundary that seems to jut out into the Interstate 89 parcel.
 This corner of the proposed village center is not within the existing village zoning
 district. The area proposed meets the requirements for a village center.

 Advisory Recommendation: Consider removing the corner that encompasses
 Interstate 89.

 Burlington: Two new village centers are proposed: Shelburne Road and the
 New North End.

 The Shelburne Road village center proposed at the intersection of Shelburne
 Road and Farrell Street has a matching FLU area across the municipal boundary
 into South Burlington. This proposed village center is currently identified as a
 Neighborhood Activity Area for the city. This area directly abuts Potash Brook
 with floodplain and river corridor excluded from the village center. This is a multi-
 use area with access to transit, transportation, grocery stores, residences and
 commercial activity. It is served by municipal water and sewer and is covered by
 zoning and subdivision regulations. However, much of the area is not pedestrian




 Page 50 of 77
RPC04-0001
Preapplication Response Letter
Page 26 of 46


 oriented featuring large buildings surrounded by large parking lots. The area
 does not appear to include historic features or civic assets. Some parcels along
 Pine Street and Home Avenue that could provide more depth and opportunities
 for interconnections are excluded from the proposed village center. The Board
 cannot determine that the area proposed meets the requirements for a
 village center.

 Advisory Recommendation: Provide additional information supporting the
 proposed Shelburne Road village center. Consider including the city park near
 the corner of Pine Street and Home Avenue.

 The New North End village center is currently zoned as Neighborhood Activity
 Center. The New North End village center extends beyond the Neighborhood
 Activity Center zoning district to include residential parcels (including the North
 Avenue Mobile Home Cooperative). This is a multi-use area with access to
 transit, post office, library, fire station, supermarket and other commercial activity
 surrounded by residential use. A significant portion of the area is not pedestrian
 scaled with large buildings surrounded by large parking lots. However, this
 portion of the area is served by sidewalks that break up the large parking area.
 The proposed village center does not include any historic elements. It is fully
 served by municipal water and sewer and is covered by municipal zoning and
 subdivision regulations. The area proposed meets the requirements for a
 village center.

 Charlotte: There are two proposed village centers in Charlotte: West and East.

 The West Charlotte village center largely incorporates a legacy village center and
 historic district. The proposed area expands to include several parcels on the
 northern side of Ferry Road to the west of Route 7 and on the southern side of
 Church Hill Road to the east of Route 7. Some larger parcels are bisected by the
 proposed boundary including the parcel at 244 Church Hill Road. These lots are
 adjacent to Rural – General and Rural – Conservation and largely undeveloped
 currently. These bisected lots follow the Village Commercial zoning boundary.
 The area proposed meets the requirements for a village center.

 The East Charlotte village center incorporates a legacy village center and
 includes a historic district. The proposed area is entirely within the legacy village
 center and includes smaller portions of parcels than fall in the East Charlotte
 Village Zoning district. Four carve outs for areas mapped Rural – Conservation
 might be worth including in the village center to avoid bisecting parcels. The area
 proposed meets the requirements for a village center.

 Advisory Recommendations:
 • Consider amending the West village center to include whole parcels.
 • Consider amending the East village area to avoid bisecting parcels.




 Page 51 of 77
RPC04-0001
Preapplication Response Letter
Page 27 of 46



 Colchester: Five village centers are proposed: Fort Ethan Allen, Main Street,
 Warners Corner, Blakely Road, and West Lakeshore Drive.

 The Fort Ethan Allen village center along Route 15 includes a national register
 historic district and a mix of businesses, residences, and civic properties
 including a state complex. The area proposed meets the requirements for a
 village center.

 The Main Street village center incorporates the historic village of Colchester
 which includes an elementary school, the library, and a mix of businesses and
 residences with historic properties scattered throughout. The area proposed
 meets the requirements for a village center.

 The Warners Corners village center is centered around the intersection of Prim
 Road, Heineberg Road, MaCrae Road, and Porters Point Road. This village area
 includes an elementary school, a drive-in theater, shopping complex, UVM
 offices, and several residences. This area lacks historic properties but is a
 traditional center for commerce for this area of Colchester and the zoning is
 conducive to village center. The area proposed meets the requirements for a
 village center.

 The proposed Blakely Road village center is limited to the municipal complex and
 several residences and does not contain commercial or historic properties.
 The area proposed does not meet the requirements for a village center.

 The proposed West Lakeshore Drive village center is also very limited in size
 containing thirteen parcels ranging from a restaurant to boat launch and marina
 as well as including several businesses. The area proposed does not meet the
 requirements for a village center.

 Advisory Recommendation: Provide additional information supporting the
 proposed Blakely Road and West Lakeshore Drive village centers.

 Essex: A village center is proposed around the legacy village designation at the
 intersection of Center Road (Route 15), Browns River Road, Jericho Road, and
 Towers Road. This area includes a historic district, municipal civic assets
 including offices and the library, and mixed use. The area is expanded slightly at
 the periphery to include entire parcels and two or three additional parcels. The
 village center is constrained and could be further enlarged to include additional
 surrounding mixed-use area that is shown currently as planned growth. The area
 proposed meets the requirements for a village center.

 Advisory Recommendations:




 Page 52 of 77
RPC04-0001
Preapplication Response Letter
Page 28 of 46


 • Consider adding depth to the village center by including the parcels between
 the two easterly legs.
 • Consider downtown center for this area instead of village.

 Hinesburg: The proposed village center follows the bounds of the legacy village
 center that is inclusive of a historic district. The area proposed meets the
 requirements for a village center.

 Huntington: There are two proposed village centers that are both formed around
 legacy village centers: Southern and Northern.

 The Southern village center contains a historic district and has been expanded to
 include the school to the east and south to Trapp Road. The area proposed
 meets the requirements for a village center.

 The Northern village center includes a substantial expansion that more than
 doubles the size of the legacy area. The new area includes smaller residential
 lots in proximity to the legacy area as well as a few businesses. The area
 proposed meets the requirements for a village center.

 Jericho: There are three village centers proposed for Jericho: East, West, and
 South. Each of these areas are centered on legacy village centers.

 The East village center is expanded slightly to include whole parcels. The area
 proposed meets the requirements for a village center.

 The West village center is expanded to include whole parcels and has the largest
 expansion to the south to include an historic property. The area proposed meets
 the requirements for a village center.

 The South village center is almost entirely coincident with the legacy village
 center. The area proposed meets the requirements for a village center.

 Milton: The proposed village center follows the boundaries of the existing legacy
 village center. The area is at the intersection of Main Street and Westford Road
 and includes a historic district that is served by municipal sewer and water. The
 area proposed meets the requirements for a village center.

 Richmond: The proposed village center follows the boundaries of the legacy
 center that is based on a historic district. The area proposed meets the
 requirements for a village center.




 Page 53 of 77
RPC04-0001
Preapplication Response Letter
Page 29 of 46


 Shelburne: There are two proposed village centers in Shelburne: North and
 South along Route 7.

 The proposed North village center includes four parcels: two on the east side of
 Shelburne Road and two on the west side. The east side parcels contain a
 furniture store and shopping center with front parking lots. The west side parcels
 include a small parcel with new multiunit residential use and a large undeveloped
 wooded lot. This does not appear to contain any civic assets and isn’t it large
 enough to offer a future cohesive center. Transit is available along Shelburne
 Road. The area proposed does not meet the requirements of a village
 center.

 The proposed South village center consisting of 17 parcels includes dispersed
 retail and residential parcels along with some large undeveloped properties. This
 area includes historic properties but is not the historic center of Shelburne and
 does not appear to include any civic assets. Both of the proposed village centers
 appear to only serve the purpose of providing focal points within a large
 proposed planned growth area. The area proposed does not meet the
 requirements of a village center.

 Advisory Recommendation: Provide additional information on the South village
 center.

 South Burlington: There are three village centers proposed in South Burlington
 with one at the intersection of Kimball Avenue and Kennedy Drive and two on
 Shelburne Road split by 189 into North and South Shelburne Road village
 centers.

 The proposed Kimball and Kennedy village center is limited, including
 approximately 25 parcels. This area is mixed use but lacks historic features and
 civic amenities and does not function as a traditional center. The southern edge
 of the area appears undeveloped along Poor Farm Road. The lack of features
 common to a traditional or historic central business or civic center for this area is
 problematic. The area proposed does not meet the requirements of a village
 center.

 The proposed South Shelburne Road village center includes an elementary
 school and humane society as well as mixed use, but also contains a Lowes,
 Hannaford’s Supermarket, and multiple car dealerships. As such, it lacks features
 of a traditional or historic central business or civic center. However, the historic
 Allenwood Inn site at 1195 Shelburne Road runs adjacent to the proposed
 southern village center along the waterfront. It is also adjacent to the historic
 Queen City Park neighborhood. Queen City Park is recognized on a historic
 register and could enhance the proposed village center. The area could also be
 expanded to the east of Shelburne Road to include Szymanski Park and




 Page 54 of 77
RPC04-0001
Preapplication Response Letter
Page 30 of 46


 surrounding neighborhoods. The proposed village center excludes the river
 corridor and floodplain of Potash Brook. The Board cannot determine that the
 area proposed meets the requirements for a village center.

 The proposed North Shelburne Road village center mirrors the Burlington village
 center across Shelburne Road. The northern village center contains mixed use
 but also contains large buildings surrounded by expansive parking lots. This
 proposed village center does not appear to have historic features. Expansion to
 the east could provide depth and missing features. The Board cannot
 determine that the area proposed meets the requirements for a village
 center.

 Advisory Recommendations:
 • Consider expanding the northern village center to include Rice Memorial High
 School, WCAX, and other uses along Joy Drive.
 • Consider expanding the southern village center to include Queen City Park
 and other potential historic sites, as well as to include Szymanski Park.

 St. George: The village center contains approximately 27 parcels and is
 centered on the municipal center along Route 2A. The center includes the
 municipal offices and a mix of commercial and residential. The proposed village
 center includes village zoning on the west but also rural on the eastern side of
 Route 2A. The area proposed meets the requirements for a village center.

 Advisory Recommendation: The mobile home park is within the rural zoning
 district and additional information is requested on the inclusion of this area in the
 village center. Parcels proposed to be rural general surrounding the village may
 give depth to the proposed village and should be included if appropriate.

 Underhill: There are two village centers: West and East.

 The West village center spans the border with Jericho and follows the boundaries
 of a legacy village designation with only minor expansion to include whole
 parcels. The area proposed meets the requirements for a village center.

 The East village center also follows the boundaries of a legacy village
 designation with only minor expansion to include whole parcels. The area
 proposed meets the requirements for a village center.

 Westford: The proposed village center incorporates a legacy village center. The
 area is expanded to include the entirety of parcels and four new parcels to the
 north and eight new parcels to the south along Brookside Road. The extension
 along Brookside Road includes four parcels along the western side of the road
 that appear to have residences tightly clustered to the road. The eastern side of




 Page 55 of 77
RPC04-0001
Preapplication Response Letter
Page 31 of 46


 the road does not match the context of the western side. However, the area is
 entirely within the Westford Common zoning district and therefore suitable for
 inclusion. The southeast corner of the proposed village center along the Browns
 River should be considered for Rural - Conservation instead of village center
 since this area is undeveloped and impacted by both flood hazard and river
 corridor areas. Westford has flood hazard and river corridor bylaws. The area
 proposed meets the requirements for a village center.

 Advisory Recommendation: Remove the undeveloped flood hazard and river
 corridor areas from the village center.

 Williston: The proposed village center incorporates a legacy village center with a
 historic district. The village center has been enlarged to the north and the south
 to include school and civic sites. The expansion helps the village to be less linear
 with a defined edge of Allen Brook to the north and the interstate to the south. A
 municipally owned site in the village center is proposed to be rural conservation
 and may be best included in the village as a civic amenity even if a park or other
 conservation area. The area proposed meets the requirements for a village
 center.

 Advisory Recommendation: Consider including the Rural – Conservation
 parcel in the village center.

 (B) Planned Growth Areas
The statute describes “planned growth areas” as:
 …high-density existing settlement and future growth areas with high
 concentrations of population, housing, and employment in each region and town,
 as appropriate. They include a mix of historic and nonhistoric commercial,
 residential, and civic or cultural sites with active streetscapes, supported by land
 development regulations; public water or wastewater, or both; and multimodal
 transportation systems. These areas include new town centers, downtowns,
 village centers, growth centers, and neighborhood development areas previously
 designated under chapter 76A of this title. These areas should generally meet the
 smart growth principles definition in chapter 139 of this title and the following
 criteria:
 (i) The municipality has a duly adopted and approved plan and a planning
 process that is confirmed in accordance with section 4350 of this title and
 has adopted bylaws and regulations in accordance with sections 4414,
 4418, and 4442 of this title.
 (ii) This area is served by public water or wastewater infrastructure.
 (iii) The area is generally within walking distance from the municipality’s or an
 adjacent municipality’s downtown, village center, new town center, or
 growth center.




 Page 56 of 77
RPC04-0001
Preapplication Response Letter
Page 32 of 46


 (iv) The area excludes identified flood hazard and river corridor areas, except
 those areas containing preexisting development in areas suitable for infill
 development as defined in section 29-201 of the Vermont Flood Hazard
 Area and River Corridor Rule.
 (v) The municipal plan indicates that this area is intended for higher-density
 residential and mixed-use development.
 (vi) The area provides for housing that meets the needs of a diversity of social
 and income groups in the community.
 (vii) The area is served by planned or existing transportation infrastructure that
 conforms with “complete streets” principles as described under 19 V.S.A.
 chapter 24 and establishes pedestrian access directly to the downtown,
 village center, or new town center. Planned transportation infrastructure
 includes those investments included in the municipality’s capital
 improvement program pursuant to section 4430 of this title.
24 V.S.A. § 4348a(a)(12)(B).
A regional planning commission may request that the Board approve designation of
areas on the FLU map as designated neighborhoods. Areas eligible for neighborhood
designation include planned growth areas. 24 V.S.A. § 5804(a)(1). For the purposes
designation, a “designated neighborhood” “…means a contiguous geographic area
approved as part of the Land Use Review Board review of regional plan future land use
maps that is compact and adjacent and contiguous to a center.” 24 V.S.A. 5801(13).
The mapped planned growth areas must meet the requirements of 24 V.S.A. §
4348a(a)(12)(B). The neighborhood designation recognizes that “the vitality of
downtowns and villages is supported by adjacent and walkable neighborhoods and that
the benefits structure must ensure that investments for sprawl repair or infill
development within a neighborhood is secondary to a primary purpose to maintain the
vitality and livability and maximize the climate resilience and infill potential of centers.”
24 V.S.A. § 5804(a)(1).
The FLU map proposes planned growth areas in the following 11 municipalities.
Specific review of each planned growth area is provided below as well as required
revisions or advisory recommendations.

 Burlington: The proposed planned growth area includes a legacy neighborhood
 development area and surrounds the three proposed downtown centers and two
 proposed village centers. The planned growth area does extend more than a
 mile, and in the north end up to two miles, from the centers. The University of
 Vermont is contained within the planned growth area and could also be a special
 use area given its specialized use and size. The boundaries of the planned
 growth area often don’t align with parcel boundaries due to flood hazard area and
 river corridor exclusions. The eastern side of the city, along the Winooski River,
 has instances where the planned growth area matches up with the boundary for
 the flood hazard or river corridor area However, in other cases, parcel slivers are
 included in the planned growth area with the remainder in Rural – Conservation.




 Page 57 of 77
RPC04-0001
Preapplication Response Letter
Page 33 of 46


 An example is along Riverside Avenue where the planned growth area does not
 capture the existing development at the City Wastewater Facility.

 The residential parcels by Oakledge Park, Oak Beach Drive and Harbor Watch,
 adjacent to the lake, are zoned low density residential. Within the south end of
 Burlington, the enterprise area (Rhino, GMT, etc.) is planned growth area
 however the zoning seems to conflict with the dense residential expected in
 planned growth areas. Both proposed PGAs meet the requirements for a
 planned growth area.

 Advisory Recommendation: The map should be cleaned up to remove slivers
 and snap areas to parcels wherever possible. Provide additional information on
 the south end zoning or consider enterprise area instead. The northern most
 portion of the planned growth area (near the Winooski River in the New North
 End) is surrounded by rural conservation should be considered for transition or
 rural.

 Colchester: A planned growth area is proposed extending from Fort Ethan Allen
 along Route 15 to the Winooski town line. The area is served by municipal water
 and sewer and transit and is within half a mile of the Winooski downtown and the
 Fort Ethan Allen village center. The proposed PGA is conducive to infill and
 contains a mix of residences, businesses, and St. Michaels College and is
 served by transit. The proposed PGA meets the requirements for a planned
 growth area.

 Essex: The planned growth area surrounds both the proposed downtown and
 village centers. The northern and western planned growth areas are generally
 within half a mile of the downtown and village center areas The municipality has
 a confirmed planned, municipal water and sewer, and adopted zoning and
 subdivision regulations. The eastern and southern planned growth areas extend
 up to two miles from the downtown and village center and possibly include
 unserved areas for water and wastewater along Jericho Road / Route 15. The
 area is served by transit. The proposed PGA meets the requirements for a
 planned growth area.

 Advisory Recommendation: Additional information on water and wastewater
 service areas in Essex.

 Essex Junction: The portion of the city that is not downtown area or rural
 conservation around water bodies is planned growth area. The planned growth
 area incorporates the remainder of the legacy neighborhood development area
 and is generally within half a miles of the downtown future land use. The City has
 a confirmed planned, municipal water and sewer, and adopted zoning and




 Page 58 of 77
RPC04-0001
Preapplication Response Letter
Page 34 of 46


 subdivision regulations. The area is served by transit. The proposed PGA
 meets the requirements for a planned growth area.

 Hinesburg: The planned growth area surrounds the village center and is
 inclusive of a legacy neighborhood development area. The planned growth area
 is slightly expanded to include whole parcels that were previously bisected by the
 legacy area. The municipality has municipal water and sewer and adopted
 zoning and subdivision regulations. The area is served by transit. The Board
 cannot determine that the area proposed meets the requirements for a
 planned growth area.

 Required Revision: The expired municipal plan will require readoption,
 regional approval, and confirmation prior to submission of the adopted
 regional plan or the area mapped as another future land use area.

 Milton: The planned growth area is centered on the proposed downtown and
 village center areas. The northern and eastern planned growth areas are
 generally within half a mile of the downtown and village center. The southern
 planned growth area is closer to a mile from the downtown area. The municipality
 has a confirmed plan and the area is served by municipal water and sewer. The
 area is served by transit. The proposed PGA meets the requirements for a
 planned growth area.

 Advisory Recommendation: Additional information on the walkability of the
 outer edges of this area is requested.

 Richmond: The planned growth area is generally located within half a mile of the
 village center and is served by municipal water and sewer. The municipality has a
 confirmed plan but does not appear to be served by transit. The southern
 planned growth area is removed from the village center by a substantial rural
 conservation area. The proposed PGA meets the requirements for a planned
 growth area except that the Board cannot find that the eastern edge of the
 PGA on Cochran Road meets the requirements for a planned growth area.

 Advisory Recommendation: Additional information is requested on walkability
 of the proposed eastern area on Cochran Road or consider mapping this as
 Infill/Transition Area.

 Shelburne: Two planned growth areas proposed in Shelburne are separated by
 the LaPlatte River. The northern PGA encompasses the two proposed village
 areas. The Southern PGA encompasses the proposed downtown center. The
 proposed planned growth areas are served by transit.




 Page 59 of 77
RPC04-0001
Preapplication Response Letter
Page 35 of 46


 The Southern planned growth area includes two small sections that are
 separated from the rest by river corridor. The proposed PGA meets the
 requirements for a planned growth area.

 The Northern planned growth area extends west to east from Shelburne Bay to
 Spear Street and north to south from South Burlington to the LaPlatte Rive
 corridor. It is not clear that the southeastern portions of this PGA are connected
 to the closest proposed center on the other side of the LaPlatte River Reportedly
 an extension of this planned growth area is contemplated in a municipal plan
 update. In some areas, the planned growth area overlaps with significant natural
 resources such as rare, threatened, and endangered species areas or significant
 natural communities (e.g. the area where Bay Road crosses the LaPlatte)
 however most of this area is excluded from the planned growth area and shown
 as rural conservation instead. The proposed planned growth area along Bay
 Road contains flood hazard area, 886 Bay Road particularly, and should be
 removed from the PGA area. The Board cannot determine that the proposed
 PGA meets the requirements for a planned growth area.

 Required Revision: Remove 886 Bay Road from the PGA area due to the
 flood hazard area present. Provide additional information on walkability of
 the proposed Northern PGA area.

 Advisory Recommendations:
 • Provide additional information on walkability of the western most portion of
 the planned growth area (west of the Village in the vicinity of Harbor Road
 and Depot Road) or re-examine the mapping of this area that is surrounded
 by rural areas.
 • Similarly, the portion of planned growth area along Falls Road that is bisected
 from the village by a stream and Rural - Conservation may be best
 categorized as Transition/Infill instead.

 South Burlington: Outside of the proposed downtown and village centers, the
 majority of the city is proposed Planned Growth Area. Pockets of Rural – General
 and Rural – Conservation occur throughout the southeast quadrant of the city. A
 few pockets of Rural – Agriculture & Forestry also occur throughout the proposed
 PGA. A Special Use area encompassing the airport and adjacent Enterprise and
 Transition/Infill areas isolate a small northern tip of the PGA that may be more
 connected to the Colchester PGA than the rest of South Burlington. The entire
 area is served by transit, municipal water and sewer, and a confirmed plan. River
 corridor and floodplain are excluded from the proposed PGA.

 Proposed PGA in the city’s southeast quadrant is removed from the downtown
 and village centers. The north end of this quadrant contains Dorset Park and an
 industrial park and includes residential subdivisions that surround the Vermont




 Page 60 of 77
RPC04-0001
Preapplication Response Letter
Page 36 of 46


 National Country Club golf course (mapped as Rural – General). The southern
 end exhibits similar suburban style development patterns.

 The Shelburne Road corridor, south of the proposed village center, could be
 considered for transition area instead of planned growth area.

 The intersection of Williston Road east of Kennedy Drive also should be
 considered as best meeting the definition of transition area.

 The Board cannot determine that the following portions of the proposed
 South Burlington PGA meet the requirements for a Planned Growth Area:
 1) southern Shelburne Road corridor; 2) Williston Rd/Kennedy Rd eastern
 area; and 3) the area south of I89 on Hinesburg Rd. The Board finds that
 the remaining PGA meets the requirements for a planned growth area.

 Required Revisions: Additional information is requested to substantiate the
 suitability of the three referenced portions of the proposed PGA.

 Williston: The planned growth area surrounds the village center and downtown
 areas. The area is served by municipal water and sewer and is generally within
 walking distance of the village center and downtown. The western and northern
 most planned growth areas are up to a mile from the downtown and expansion of
 the downtown area may improve the proximity requirement of the planned growth
 area to the downtown area. Given the underlying zoning, the Marshall Ave and
 Shunpike Road areas may be better suited for enterprise area than planned
 growth. The area is served by transit. The Board cannot determine that the
 following portions of the proposed PGA areas meet the requirements for a
 planned Growth Area: Marshall/Shunpike Road area. The Board finds that
 the remaining PGA meets the requirements for a planned growth area.

 Advisory Recommendations: Provide additional information on how the
 municipal plan addresses requirements for higher-density housing and mixed use
 in the Marshall Avenue / Shunpike Road area.

 Winooski: The planned growth area encompasses most of the city outside of the
 proposed downtown center except the river corridor and natural area mapped
 Rural – Conservation, a parcel between the natural area and St. Michaels
 College mapped Transition/Infill, and less than 20 parcels that are designated as
 enterprise and encompass industrial properties. The entire area is served by
 municipal water and sewer and transit. The proposed PGA areas meet the
 requirements for a planned Growth Area.

 (C) Village Areas
The statute describes “village areas” and requires the following:




 Page 61 of 77
RPC04-0001
Preapplication Response Letter
Page 37 of 46


 These areas include the traditional settlement area or a proposed new settlement
 area, typically composed of a cohesive mix of residential, civic, religious,
 commercial, and mixed-use buildings, arranged along a main street and
 intersecting streets that are within walking distance for residents who live within
 and surrounding the core. These areas include existing village center
 designations and similar areas statewide, but this area is larger than the village
 center designation. Village areas shall meet the following criteria:
 (i) The municipality has a duly adopted and approved plan and a planning
 process that is confirmed in accordance with section 4350 of this title.
 (ii) The municipality has adopted bylaws and regulations in accordance with
 sections 4414, 4418, and 4442 of this title.
 (iii) Unless the municipality has adopted flood hazard and river corridor bylaws,
 applicable to the entire municipality, that are consistent with the standards
 established pursuant to 10 V.S.A. § 755b (flood hazard) and 10 V.S.A. §
 1428(b) (river corridor), the area excludes identified flood hazard and river
 corridors, except those areas containing preexisting development in areas
 suitable for infill development as defined in 29-201 of the Vermont Flood
 Hazard Area and River Corridor Rule.
 (iv) The municipality has either municipal water or wastewater. If no public
 wastewater is available, the area must have soils that are adequate for
 wastewater disposal.
 (v) The area has some opportunity for infill development or new development
 areas where the village can grow and be flood resilient.
24 V.S.A. 4348a(a)(12)(C).
A regional planning commission may request that the Board approve designation of
areas on the FLU map as designated neighborhoods. Areas eligible for neighborhood
designation include village areas. 24 V.S.A. § 5804(a)(1). For the purposes designation,
a “designated neighborhood” “…means a contiguous geographic area approved as part
of the Land Use Review Board review of regional plan future land use maps that is
compact and adjacent and contiguous to a center.” 24 V.S.A. 5801(13). The mapped
village areas must meet the requirements of 24 V.S.A. § 4348a(a)(12)(C). The
neighborhood designation recognizes that “the vitality of downtowns and villages is
supported by adjacent and walkable neighborhoods and that the benefits structure must
ensure that investments for sprawl repair or infill development within a neighborhood is
secondary to a primary purpose to maintain the vitality and livability and maximize the
climate resilience and infill potential of centers.” 24 V.S.A. § 5804(a)(1).
The FLU map proposes a total of 16 village areas (“VA”s) in 9 municipalities.
 Charlotte: The western village area largely follows the current West Charlotte
 village zoning district. The village area mostly follows parcel boundaries and
 does not cut around Charlotte conservation areas, as the existing village zoning
 district does. The proposed village area excludes several large parcels off of
 Greenbrush Road that were included in the village zoning but are proposed to be
 rural conservation area and instead includes several other parcels that are




 Page 62 of 77
RPC04-0001
Preapplication Response Letter
Page 38 of 46


 currently part of the Town village commercial zoning. This includes a larger parcel
 off of Rt. 7, which has sections that are proposed to be included in the village
 center area.

 The eastern village area closely aligns with the boundaries of the municipality’s
 existing East Charlotte village zoning district. These proposed boundaries bisect
 several large parcels and do not surround or abut the proposed village center on
 all sides, and do not follow parcel boundaries on several parcels south of Spear
 Street. There are several parcels designated as rural conservation that are
 surrounded by proposed village parcels, although they are in the current village
 zoning, this impacts continuity and connection within this village area. Each of
 the areas proposed meets the requirements for a Village Area.

 Advisory recommendation: Additional justification for these boundaries is
 requested as to why the area bisects the conservation area. Consistency in
 mapping for both areas is recommended.

 Colchester: There is expansive village area in Colchester that can be separated
 perhaps into three general areas: Severance Corner, the Village, and the Bay.
 The village area surrounding Severance Corners is within half a mile of the
 downtown or village center at the Fort and is appropriate for infill surrounding
 these centers. The village area surrounding the Village Center is expansive
 including a stretch of a mile and a half from the village to the Essex line. The
 village center for this area should be considered for an increase in size or some
 of the village area changed to transition as the expansive size of the village area
 is generally not within walking distance of the village center. The Bay area,
 similarly, is too expansive in relation to the three small village areas within it. The
 village centers should be evaluated for an increase in size or the area partially
 changed to transition. The Board cannot determine that the following
 portions of the areas proposed meet the requirements for a Village Area: 1)
 Marble Island; and 2) Route 2A east of the village center. The Board finds
 that the remaining area meets the requirements of village area.

 Advisory recommendation: Additional information should be provided for the
 Marble Island and Route 2A area east of the village center addressing walkability
 and cohesive mix of uses. Additionally, periphery areas could be considered for
 Transition/Infill or Rural General.

 Essex: Village area is proposed to the north of the planned growth area
 surrounding the village center along Bixby Hill Road and a parcel along Browns
 River Road. The spot demarcation of the Browns River Road is unusual and
 additional justification is requested to substantiate this as village area and not
 planned growth. The area along Bixby Hill Road also requires additional
 justification as to why the isolated area along the periphery of the planned growth




 Page 63 of 77
RPC04-0001
Preapplication Response Letter
Page 39 of 46


 area is not included in the planned growth or rural areas. The area proposed
 meets the requirements for a Village Area.

 Advisory recommendation: Consider changing the area along Browns River
 Road to planned growth or provide supplemental information and consider
 providing additional information on the Bixby Hill Road area or consider changing
 it to planned growth or rural to address concerns that the village area contributes
 to sprawl of the growth area into the rural area.

 Hinesburg: A limited village area is proposed to the south of the village center in
 the legacy neighborhood designation area with an additional six parcels. This
 area appears to be partially served by municipal water or sewer and perhaps
 more appropriate for planned growth area. The area proposed meets the
 requirements for a Village Area.

 Advisory recommendation: Provide additional information as to why the area is
 best suited to village area and not planned growth or rural area.

 Huntington: The proposed village areas are centered around the two village
 centers. The southern village area is tightly clustered to the village center and
 extends no more than half a mile from the boundary. The northern village area
 contains only nine parcels and is located to the north and east of the village
 center. These parcels are also within less than half a mile of the village. Each of
 the areas proposed meets the requirements for a Village Area.

 Advisory recommendation: It is recommended though that the linear nature of
 the southern village center be examined to perhaps expand from the road
 corridor.

 Jericho: The proposed village areas surround each of the three village centers
 and are generally within half a mile of the periphery of the centers with the
 exception of the area between the eastern and western centers that is closer to a
 mile from each. There are several residential subdivisions within the village
 area’s outer edge, along Packard Road, that may be best as transition areas.
 Each of the areas proposed meets the requirements for a Village Area.

 Advisory recommendation: Provide additional information on walkability or
 consider transition/infill or rural general for the periphery of the centers.

 Saint George: The proposed village area extends south of the proposed center
 to the town line with Hinesburg. The area is within half a mile of the center and is
 suitable for infill and incorporates the junction of Hinesburg Road but excludes
 the golf course. The area proposed meets the requirements for a Village
 Area.




 Page 64 of 77
RPC04-0001
Preapplication Response Letter
Page 40 of 46



 Underhill: There are two village areas that are each clustered around the
 proposed village centers. Both village areas are within half a mile of the village
 center boundaries. Each of the areas meets the requirements for a Village
 Area.

 Westford: The village area surrounds the proposed village center and is
 generally within half a mile of the outer edge of the center. The area contains
 several agricultural operations, however, is zoned village center by Westford. The
 post office is also included in the village area. The area meets the requirements
 for a Village Area.

 (D) Transition or Infill Area
The statute describes “transition or infill areas” as:
 …of existing or planned commercial, office, mixed-use development, or residential
 uses either adjacent to a planned growth or village area or a new stand-alone
 transition or infill area and served by, or planned for, public water or wastewater, or
 both. The intent of this land use category is to transform these areas into higher-
 density, mixed-use settlements, or residential neighborhoods through infill and
 redevelopment or new development. New commercial linear strip development is not
 allowed as to prevent it negatively impacting the economic vitality of commercial
 areas in the adjacent or nearby planned growth or village area. This area could also
 include adjacent greenfields safer from flooding and planned for future growth.
24 V.S.A. § 4348a(a)(12)(D).
Transition/Infill areas are proposed in Colchester, Jericho, Hinesburg, Huntington,
Milton, Richmond, Saint George, Shelburne, and South Burlington. The plan
indicates that the intent of this land use category is to transform these areas into higher
density, mixed-use settlements, or residential neighborhoods through infill and
redevelopment or new development. The areas proposed meet the statutory
standards for Transition or Infill Areas.
Advisory Recommendation: In Hinesburg, the high school and surrounding area are
proposed to be transition and not planned growth; yet, are also within a served area and
suitable distance of the village center. The transition area may be appropriate for
planned growth.

 (E) Resource-Based Recreation Area
The statute describes “resource-based recreation area as “…large-scale resource-
based recreational facilities, often concentrated around ski resorts, lakeshores, or
concentrated trail networks, that may provide infrastructure, jobs, or housing to support
recreational activities.” 24 V.S.A. § 4348a(a)(12)(E).




 Page 65 of 77
RPC04-0001
Preapplication Response Letter
Page 41 of 46


Resource-based recreation areas have been identified around ski areas. The areas
proposed meet the statutory standards for Resource-Based Recreation Areas.

Advisory Recommendation:
 • Consider a resource-based recreation area around the Essex Tree Farm facility
 on Old Colchester Road.

 (F) Enterprise Areas

The statute describes “enterprise areas” as:
 …locations of high economic activity and employment that are not adjacent to
 planned growth areas. These include industrial parks, areas of natural resource
 extraction, or other commercial uses that involve larger land areas. Enterprise
 areas typically have ready access to water supply, sewage disposal, electricity,
 and freight transportation networks.
24 V.S.A. § 4348a(a)(12)(F).
Enterprise Areas are proposed in Burlington, Charlotte, Colchester, Essex,
Hinesburg, Milton, Richmond, Shelburne, South Burlington, Williston, and
Winooski. There are three cases in which Enterprise Areas are adjacent to Planned
Growth Areas: Burlington, Winooski, and South Burlington. These areas include
industrial parks, areas of resource extraction, or other commercial uses that involve
larger land areas and do not need to be included in the Planned Growth Areas. The
areas proposed meet the statutory standards for Enterprise Areas.
Advisory Recommendation:
 • Consider expanding the enterprise area on Sand Hill Road to include more of
 the industrially zoned and developed area (e.g., Blodgett Ovens, Twincraft,
 Catamount, etc.).

 (G) Hamlets

The statute describes “hamlets” as:
 small historic clusters of homes and may include a school, place of worship,
 store, or other public buildings not planned for significant growth; no public water
 supply or wastewater systems; and mostly focused along one or two roads.
 These may be depicted as points on the future land use map.
24 V.S.A. § 4348a(a)(12)(G).
Two Hamlets are identified in the region recognizing "historic settlement clusters where
no growth is currently planned." They include Huntington and Richmond. The areas
proposed meet the statutory description for Hamlets.

 (H) – (J) Rural Areas




 Page 66 of 77
RPC04-0001
Preapplication Response Letter
Page 42 of 46


The statute has three categories of rural: Rural - General, Rural - Agricultural and
Forestry, and Rural - Conservation. 24 V.S.A. § 4348a(a)(12)(H)-(J). They are described
as follows:
 Rural - General. These areas include areas that promote the preservation of
 Vermont’s traditional working landscape and natural area features. They allow for
 low-density residential and some limited commercial development that is
 compatible with productive lands and natural areas. This may also include an
 area that a municipality is planning to make more rural than it is currently. 24
 V.S.A. § 4348a(a)(12)(H).
 Rural - Agricultural and Forestry. These areas include blocks of forest or
 farmland that sustain resource industries, provide critical wildlife habitat and
 movement, outdoor recreation, flood storage, aquifer recharge, and scenic
 beauty, and contribute to economic well-being and quality of life. Development in
 these areas should be carefully managed to promote the working landscape and
 rural economy, and address regional goals, while protecting the agricultural and
 forest resource value. 24 V.S.A. § 4348a(a)(12)(I).
 Rural - Conservation. These are areas of significant natural resources,
 identified by regional planning commissions or municipalities based upon existing
 Agency of Natural Resources mapping that require special consideration for
 aquifer protection; for wetland protection; for the maintenance of forest blocks,
 wildlife habitat, and habitat connectors; or for other conservation purposes. The
 mapping of these areas and accompanying policies are intended to help meet
 requirements of 10 V.S.A. chapter 89. 24 V.S.A. § 4348a(a)(12)(J).
Flood hazard areas may be mapped as Rural Conservation in accordance with 24
V.S.A. § 4348a(a)(12). Per the VAPDA methodology, wetlands over five acres in size
should be mapped as Rural - Conservation. Smaller wetlands should be mapped the
same as the surrounding future land use area.
Rural General is used extensively especially in the more rural communities of the
county (23.15% of the county) and could be further refined as Rural Ag/Forest or Rural
Conservation. These areas met the statutory definition of Rural – General, Rural-
Agricultural and Forestry, and Rural - Conservation.
Requested Revisions:
 • Map roads consistent with the predominant FLU around them, rather than
 defaulting to Rural General.
 • The river corridor and shoreline should be uniformly mapped, wherever
 possible, as rural conservation or rural general.
Advisory Recommendation:
 • There is an abundance of rural general in the region that might more logically
 belong in a rural agriculture/forest area (e.g., Hinesburg, Charlotte, Milton, or
 Williston).




 Page 67 of 77
RPC04-0001
Preapplication Response Letter
Page 43 of 46


 • Shelburne Farms should be considered for rural agricultural forest area instead
 of rural general area.
 • Consider elimination of small Rural General designations around houses that are
 surrounded by Rural Ag/Forest or Rural Conservation and instead more Rural
 Ag/Forest in some rural areas, even for parcels that are not enrolled in the Current
 Use program (e.g., Lincoln Hill Road (forest) and Burritt Road (agriculture) in
 Hinesburg).

 E. Tier 1B Area Status
With Tier 1B Status Requests, the Board’s review has two parts: first, whether each
municipality with proposed Tier 1B status areas meets the six requirements of 10 V.S.A.
§ 6033(c), and, second, whether the underlying proposed Tier 1B area/s as designated
in the Future Land Use Map met the requirements for a “downtown or village centers”,
“planned growth areas”, and “village areas” as described in 24 V.S.A. § 4348a(12)(A)-
(C). Below details whether the Tier 1B is consistent with six subsections of 10 V.S.A. §
6033(c). The Commission will also need to reference back to Section I(D)(12)(A)-(C) of
this preapplication response related to the land use categories and make any necessary
changes to conform with the requirements of 24 V.S.A. § 4348a(a)(12)(A)-(C).

For Tier 1B status requests, the Commission must demonstrate the following:
 (1) The municipality has requested to have the area mapped for Tier 1B.
 (2) The municipality has a duly adopted and approved plan and a planning
 process that is confirmed in accordance with 24 V.S.A. § 4350.
 (3) The municipality has adopted permanent zoning and subdivision bylaws in
 accordance with 24 V.S.A. §§ 4414, 4418, and 4442.
 (4) The area excludes identified flood hazard and fluvial erosion areas, except
 those areas containing preexisting development in areas suitable for infill
 development as defined in Section 29-201 of the Vermont Flood Hazard Area
 and River Corridor Rule unless the municipality has adopted flood hazard and
 river corridor bylaws applicable to the entire municipality that are consistent
 with the standards established pursuant to subsection 755(b) of this title
 (flood hazard) and subsection 1428(b) of this title (river corridor).
 (5) The municipality has water supply, wastewater infrastructure, or soils that can
 accommodate a community system for compact housing development in the
 area proposed for Tier 1B.
 (6) The municipality has municipal staff, municipal officials, or contracted
 capacity adequate to support development review and zoning administration
 in the Tier 1B area.
10 V.S.A. § 6033(c)
The Commission requested Tier 1B status 12 municipalities: Bolton, Burlington,
Essex Junction, Hinesburg, Jericho, Milton, Richmond, Shelburne, South
Burlington, Westford, Williston, and Winooski. Municipal resolutions were provided
for each of 12 of these municipalities, documenting various municipal-specific




 Page 68 of 77
RPC04-0001
Preapplication Response Letter
Page 44 of 46


information relevant to its Tier 1B area request, in particular its plan to ensure adequate
staffing. The 12 municipalities meet the requirements for Tier 1B status as
enumerated in 10 V.SA. 6033(c) with the following revisions.

Required Revisions:
 • To the extent, that the underlying future land use areas did not meet the
 requirements of 24 V.S.A. § 4348a(a)(12)(A)-(C) as described in Section
 I(D)(12)(A)-(C) of this preapplication response, additional revision may be
 necessary before Tier 1B status can be conferred. Required revisions are
 detailed accordingly by municipality for these Downtown and Village
 Centers, Planned Growth Areas, and Village Areas.
 • The Town of Hinesburg’s expired municipal plan will require readoption
 and confirmation for the city to be considered for Tier 1B status.
 • The proposed Tier 1B area for Westford does not appear to follow parcel
 lines and includes perhaps only seven parcels one of which is the
 municipal complex. The area is severally limited in size and constrains the
 ability to accommodate housing infill. The adopted Regional Planning
 Commission Application Guidelines of the Land Use Review Board provide:
 “If Tier 1B status is sought for an area that does not include the entirety of
 a downtown center, village center, planned growth area, or village area, the
 Tier 1B memorandum must explain the reason that the entire FLU area is
 not proposed for Tier 1B status.” This explanation has not been provided
 and must be provided as part of the final application.
 • For municipalities that have provided resolutions that do not address
 municipal capacity per the model VAPDA resolution, supplemental
 confirmation from the municipalities shall be provided as part of the final
 application.

 II. CONCLUSION

To the extent that a statutory standard is indicated above as not met, the Board
requests the Commission revise the plan to address the deficiency or provide additional
information with the adopted regional plan application that addresses the deficiency.
Other recommendations for revision indicated above are optional. This preapplication
response is advisory only and does not guarantee an affirmative determination when
the adopted plan or Tier 1B status request is submitted pursuant to Section 1.200 of the
Board’s Regional Planning Commission Application Guidelines.

Please contact the Board via email at Act250.Board@vermont.gov with any questions
about this regional plan and Tier 1B request preapplication response.




 Page 69 of 77
RPC04-0001
Preapplication Response Letter
Page 45 of 46


Dated this December 22, 2025


Sincerely, Digitally signed by Sarah Hadd
 Date: 2025.12.22 10:05:41

___________________________ -05'00'



Sarah Hadd

Adopted by the Board at the December 19, 2025 meeting.




 Page 70 of 77
RPC04-0001
Preapplication Response Letter
Page 46 of 46

 RECIPIENT LIST
A copy of the foregoing Preapplication Response Letter for RPC04-0001 has been sent on
December 22, 2025, to the following individuals by electronic mail:


APPLICANT Vermont Agency of Transportation
 AOT.Act250@vermont.gov
Chittenden County Regional Planning
Commission
Attn: Charles Baker FOR INFORMATION ONLY
Attn: Taylor Newton
cbaker@ccrpcvt.org Vermont Natural Resources Council
tnewton@ccrpcvt.org Attn: Jon Groveman
 info@vnrc.org
PARTNER AGENCIES
Vermont Agency of Agriculture, Food and Dated December 22, 2025,
Markets
agr.act250@vermont.gov /s/ Madeline Cotter
 Madeline Cotter
Department of Housing & Community Legal Technician
Development Act250.Board@vermont.gov
Agency of Commerce and Community
Development
Alex.Farrell@vermont.gov
Nate.Formalarie@vermont.gov
Grace.Vinson@vermont.gov

Agency of Natural Resources
anr.act250@vermont.gov

Community Investment Board
Jacob.Hemmerick@vermont.gov

Department of Public Service
PSD.PlanningStandards@vermont.gov
Anne.Margolis@vermont.gov
Claire.McIlvennie@vermont.gov

Vermont Emergency Management
Department of Public Safety
psd.vtdps@vermont.gov
Eric.Forand@vermont.gov
Mark.Bosma@vermont.gov
Stephanie.A.Smith@vermont.gov




 Page 71 of 77
 City of Burlington, VT
 149 Church Street, 3rd Floor
 Burlington, VT 05401
 Phone: (802) 865-7194
 www.burlingtonvt.gov/plan


TO: Burlington Planning Commission
FROM: Sarah Morgan, AICP, Principal Planner
 Charles Dillard, AICP, Director of City Planning
 Stella Jordan, Senior Planner
DATE: February 10, 2026
RE: Proposed 2026 Commission Meeting Schedule

Over the next six months, the Office of City Planning will be managing a significant workload that
includes launching the planBTV 2050 Comprehensive Plan as well as advancing two major zoning
amendment packages related to Inclusionary Zoning and Transportation Demand Management (TDM).
To ensure the Planning Commission has adequate time to engage meaningfully with both the
Comprehensive Plan and the forthcoming zoning amendments, staff is proposing the following
workplan, structured around the Commission’s two regular monthly meetings.
Meeting #1 (First Tuesday of each month):
The first half of this meeting will focus on planBTV 2050, including project updates and Commission
discussion. The second half will be reserved for work on the upcoming TDM amendment, along with
other zoning amendments as needed.
Meeting #2 (Second Tuesday of each month, with special meetings as needed): Joint Committee
on Inclusionary Zoning
The Office of City Planning staff is proposing a Joint Committee of the Planning Commission and the
City Council Ordinance Committee to review and ultimately recommend changes associated with the
forthcoming Inclusionary Zoning amendment. To support this effort, a cross-departmental working
group has been formed, including staff from the Office of City Planning, CEDO, the Department of
Finance and Administration, and the Department of Permitting and Inspections.
This working group is currently synthesizing prior research, analyses, and recommendations related to
Inclusionary Zoning developed over the past several years, along with exploring new strategies that
were not previously contemplated. This work will result in a draft amendment package addressing a
range of issues, from minor technical updates to more substantial policy questions that will require
deeper discussion.
Overview of Upcoming FY26 Amendments
ZA-26-03: Affordable Housing & TDM Requirements, Under Development by Staff
 Note: This amendment has been requested by the City Council Ordinance Committee and is a
 precursor to the amendment packages related to the forthcoming Inclusionary Zoning and
 Transportation Demand Management.
ZA-26-04: Inclusionary Zoning, Under Development by Staff Working Group
ZA-26-05: Transportation Demand Management, Under Development by Staff




 Page 72 of 77
Planning Commission 6-Month Outlook

 Feb. 10 Regular Planning Commission Meeting May 12 Regular Planning Commission Meeting
 - planBTV 2050 Update w/ Consultants planBTV Updates & Discussion
 - CRPC discussion on Act 181 & Tier 1A
 Feb. 24 Regular Planning Commission Meeting May 26 Joint Committee on Inclusionary Zoning
 - planBTV Updates & Discussion
 - ZA-26-03: TDM & IZ
 Mar. 10 Regular Planning Commission Meeting June 9 Regular Planning Commission Meeting
 - planBTV Updates & Discussion - planBTV Updates & Discussion
 - ZA-26-03: TDM & Affordable Housing
 Mar. 24 Joint Committee on Inclusionary Zoning June 23 Joint Committee on Inclusionary Zoning
 - Committee Kick-off, Introduce ZA-26-04
 Apr. 14 Regular Planning Commission Meeting July 14 Regular Planning Commission Meeting
 - planBTV Updates & Discussion - Commission Organization Day!
 - Potential PH for ZA-26-03 - planBTV Updates & Discussion
 Apr. 29 Joint Committee on Inclusionary Zoning July 28 Joint Committee on Inclusionary Zoning




 Page 73 of 77
 Burlington Planning Commission Andy Montroll, Chair
 Michael Gaughan, Vice Chair
 149 Church Street Alexander Friend
 Burlington, VT 05401 Erhard Mahnke
 www.burlingtonvt.gov/cityplanning Erin Malone
 Ryan Nick
 Julia Randall


 Burlington Planning Commission
 Tuesday, January 13, 2025, 6:30 P.M.
 Hybrid Meeting via Zoom and in City Hall’s Bushor Conference Room
 Draft Minutes

 Commissioners Present: City Staff Present:
 ☒ Andy Montroll ☒ Michael Gaughan ☒ Charles Dillard, Director
 ☒ Erhard Mahnke ☒ Erin Malone ☒ Sarah Morgan, Principal Planner
 ☒ Ryan Nick ☒ Julia Randall ☒ Scott Gustin, Principal Planner
 ☒ Alexander Friend ☒ Stella Jordan, Senior Planner
 ☒ Kim Sturtevant, City Attorney’s
 Office

 Public Attendance: Sharon Bushor, Kelly Devine,


 1. Agenda
 Call to Order: 6:30pm
 Changes to Agenda: Addition of a memo (posted) and slides related to Item 7, Update on
 planBTV 2050.

 2. Public Forum
 There were no public comments.

 3. Chair’s Report
 A. Montroll did not give a Chair’s Report.

 4. Director’s Report
 • C. Dillard shared information about an upcoming press conference held by the Mayor to
 discuss housing, scheduled for 9:30AM in the Bushor Room in City Hall on Wednesday,
 January 14, and invited Commissioners to attend.
 • C. Dillard noted that the first Planning Commission meeting in February will include an
 update from CCRPC staff on the Chittenden County Future Land Use Map report
 prepared by the state Land Use Review Board. The Future Land Use Map designates
 planned growth centers and confers Act 250 exemptions.
 • Staff offered technical support to Commissioners having trouble accessing their City of
 Burlington emails.

 5. Downtown Transportation Fund Grant Application
 Staff summarized a request from the Church Street Marketplace for Planning Commission
 approval to submit an application to the Downtown Transportation Fund Grant Program for
 replacement bollards for the Church Street Marketplace pedestrian area.


The City of Burlington will not tolerate unlawful harassment or discrimination on the basis of political or religious affiliation, race, color, national origin,
place of birth, ancestry, age, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, marital status, veteran status, disability, HIV positive status, crime victim status or
  genetic information. The City is also committed to providing proper access to services, facilities, and employment opportunities. For accessibility
 information or alternative formats, please contact Human Resources Department at (802) 540-2505.


 Page 74 of 77
Burlington Planning Commission Minutes p. 2

 Action: Approve draft resolution for Church Street Marketplace’s Downtown
 Transportation Fund Grant Application on behalf of the Planning Commission and the
 Chair of the Planning Commission
 Vote: 1 recusal, 6
 Motion by: A. Friend Seconded by: R. Nick
 yes

6. Public Hearing for Proposed CDO Amendment: ZA-26-02: Downtown Fences
 Staff provided an overview of the proposed amendment, which would allow fences in the
 Downtown Form District up to six feet in height within alleyways or loading docks enclosed
 within alleyways, and allow chain-link fencing within the same specified areas. The warned
 amendment also included allowance of fences enclosing recessed entries in the First Lot
 Layer. Staff recapped previous discussions of the Planning Commission and Planning
 Commission Ordinance Committee on this amendment, including the PCOC’s recent
 recommendation that language about recessed entries be removed. See recording for full
 discussion (Timestamp 00:09:32).

 Public Forum
 Thanked the Planning Commission for considering this topic, and
 discussed the importance of safety in the downtown area and her
 experiences witnessing criminal behavior in alleyways. Discussed
 Kelly Devine: the idea of crime prevention through environmental design and
 expressed support for allowing building owners to address safety
 concerns through fencing.
 Stated that she had not heard concerns from the business
 community about recessed entries, and discussed her
 understanding of the intent of this amendment to focus on security
 Sharon Bushor: needs in loading docks and alleyways. Expressed support for the
 discussion at the last Planning Commission Ordinance Committee,
 and the Committee’s recommendations, and expressed opposition
 for allowing fencing in recessed entries.

 Action: Approve updated language for ZA-26-02 as recommended by the PCOC but
 remove modifications to section B (to strike the allowance of chain-link fences in
 alleyways and loading docks within alleyways) and refer the Amendment to City
 Council
 Vote: 1 recusal,
 Motion by: J. Randall Seconded by: A. Friend 1 yes, 5 no

 Action: Approve updated language for ZA-26-02 as recommended by the PCOC and
 refer the Amendment to City Council
 Vote: 1 recusal, 6
 Motion by: E. Mahnke Seconded by: A. Friend
 yes
 Discussion Notes:
 • R. Nick recused himself from this item.
 • E. Malone and A. Friend expressed support for the language recommended by the
 PCOC, and discussed whether the business community had expressed a need for
 action on recessed entries. S. Morgan shared that through engagement with the
 business community staff have heard a variety of opinions and experiences but not
 consensus on an approach, highlighting a need for further study.
 • J. Randall discussed the PCOC’s recommendations and the negative aesthetic and
 safety impacts of fencing downtown, and expressed opposition for allowing chain-link
 fencing in the First Lot Layer.




 Page 75 of 77
Burlington Planning Commission Minutes p. 3

 • J. Randall moved to amend E. Mahnke’s motion to strike the allowance of chain-link
 fencing in alleyways and loading docks within alleyways. This motion was not
 accepted as a friendly amendment by E. Mahnke, but was seconded by A. Friend.
 • A. Friend expressed opposition to J. Randall’s amended motion and highlighted the
 numerous discussions the Planning Commission and PCOC have had to reach
 consensus on this topic. Commissioners discussed balancing the unpleasant aesthetics
 of chain-link fencing with the need to support businesses in addressing safety
 concerns, and expressed support for moving the Amendment forward.
 • J. Randall requested that the memo accompanying the Planning Commission’s referral
 of this Amendment to City Council note that Commissioners had discussed (and not
 reached consensus on) the allowance of chain-link fencing.
 • E. Mahnke suggested that Office of City Planning staff work on a design manual to help
 the Planning Commission consider ordinance-related design questions like this topic in
 the future.
 • M. Gaughan requested that the Planning Commission be kept updated on concerns
 from the business community related to safety in recessed entries.

7. Update on planBTV 2050
  Staff provided an update on the planBTV 2050 Unified Comprehensive Plan project. See
  recording for full discussion (Timestamp 00:53:05).
  Discussion Notes:
 • Commissioners and staff discussed the Existing Conditions Assessment, the different
 roles of staff and the planBTV 2050 consultant team in compiling and analyzing data and
 illuminating trends, and the importance of accurately documenting the City’s
 homelessness crisis.
 • Commissioners and staff discussed the budget for the project. C. Dillard noted that the
 Board of Finance will be discussing the planBTV 2050 budget at its meeting on Tuesday,
 January 20.
 • Commissioners discussed the role of the Long Range Planning Committee in the
 planBTV 2050 planning process. The Planning Commission also has a representative on
 the planBTV 2050 Project Advisory Committee.
 • Commissioners discussed the primary consultant for the project, Interface Studios.

8. 2026 Meeting Schedule
  Staff and Commissioners discussed the schedule of Planning Commission meetings throughout
  CY 2026, including potential rescheduling needs. See recording for full discussion (Timestamp
  01:19:55).
  Discussion Notes:
 • Commissioners will share scheduling conflicts with staff and a final schedule will be
 approved at the next Planning Commission meeting.


9. Commissioner Items
 Expressed interest in attending future planning conferences with Office
 E. Malone: of City Planning staff.
 Discussed engagement with the Burlington School District regarding
 E. Malone: housing needs and goals.

10. Adopt Minutes and Accept Communications
 Action: Review and approve the November 13, 2025 and December 9, 2025 Planning
 Commission meeting minutes and review and accept any communications




 Page 76 of 77
Burlington Planning Commission Minutes p. 4

 Motion by: E. Mahnke Seconded by: A. Friend Vote: Unanimous
 Notes or Corrections: N/A

11. Adjournment
 Action: Motion to Adjourn Time of Adjournment: 8:01 pm
 Motion by: R. Nick Seconded by: A. Friend Vote: Unanimous




 Page 77 of 77