Planning Commission — Burlington, VT
Date: 2026-03-10
Time: 18:30

Burlington Planning Commission
 Tuesday, March 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. ZA-26-03: TDM Exemptions for Affordable Housing
  Subject 5.1. Staff to present on ZA-26-03: TDM Exemptions for Affordable Housing.
 This amendment originated from City Council Ordinance Committee, and has
 been referred to the Planning Commission for review and comment.
  Meeting March 10, 2026 - Planning Commission Agenda - Tuesday, March 10, 2026, 6:30 PM,
 Burlington Planning Commission


  Category 5. ZA-26-03: TDM Exemptions for Affordable Housing

  Department Planning


  Type

  Recommended Action

6. Updates related to ZA-26-04: Inclusionary Zoning & Joint Committee
  Subject 6.1. Staff will provide an update to Planning Commissioners about the status of
 ZA-26-04: Inclusionary Zoning and the related Joint Committee meeting
 schedule.
  Meeting March 10, 2026 - Planning Commission Agenda - Tuesday, March 10, 2026, 6:30 PM,
 Burlington Planning Commission


  Category 6. Updates related to ZA-26-04: Inclusionary Zoning & Joint Committee
  Department Planning


  Type

  Recommended Action

7. Planning Project Updates: New North End & Historic Preservation

8. planBTV 2050: Existing Conditions
  Subject 8.1. Staff will present findings from Demographics, Housing, and Land Use
 sections of the draft planBTV 2050 Existing Conditions Analysis report. These
 sections of the report are included in this packet for Commission comment and
 discussion.
  Meeting March 10, 2026 - Planning Commission Agenda - Tuesday, March 10, 2026, 6:30 PM,
 Burlington Planning Commission


  Category 8. planBTV 2050: Existing Conditions

  Department Planning


  Type

  Recommended Action

9. Commissioner Items

10. Adopt Minutes & Accept Communications
  Subject 10.1. Commissioners to review and approve to adopt minutes and accept any
 communications.
  Meeting March 10, 2026 - Planning Commission Agenda - Tuesday, March 10, 2026, 6:30 PM,
 Burlington Planning Commission
  Category 10. Adopt Minutes & Accept Communications
  Department Planning


  Type

11. Adjournment

Burlington Planning Commission
 Tuesday, March 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. ZA-26-03: TDM Exemptions for Affordable Housing
  Subject 5.1. Staff to present on ZA-26-03: TDM Exemptions for Affordable Housing.
 This amendment originated from City Council Ordinance Committee, and has
 been referred to the Planning Commission for review and comment.
  Meeting March 10, 2026 - Planning Commission Agenda - Tuesday, March 10, 2026, 6:30 PM,
 Burlington Planning Commission


  Category 5. ZA-26-03: TDM Exemptions for Affordable Housing

  Department Planning


  Type

  Recommended Action

6. Updates related to ZA-26-04: Inclusionary Zoning & Joint Committee
  Subject 6.1. Staff will provide an update to Planning Commissioners about the status of
 ZA-26-04: Inclusionary Zoning and the related Joint Committee meeting
 schedule.
  Meeting March 10, 2026 - Planning Commission Agenda - Tuesday, March 10, 2026, 6:30 PM,
 Burlington Planning Commission


  Category 6. Updates related to ZA-26-04: Inclusionary Zoning & Joint Committee



 Page 1 of 52
  Department Planning


  Type

  Recommended Action

7. Planning Project Updates: New North End & Historic Preservation

8. planBTV 2050: Existing Conditions
  Subject 8.1. Staff will present findings from Demographics, Housing, and Land Use
 sections of the draft planBTV 2050 Existing Conditions Analysis report. These
 sections of the report are included in this packet for Commission comment and
 discussion.
  Meeting March 10, 2026 - Planning Commission Agenda - Tuesday, March 10, 2026, 6:30 PM,
 Burlington Planning Commission


  Category 8. planBTV 2050: Existing Conditions

  Department Planning


  Type

  Recommended Action

9. Commissioner Items

10. Adopt Minutes & Accept Communications
  Subject 10.1. Commissioners to review and approve to adopt minutes and accept any
 communications.
  Meeting March 10, 2026 - Planning Commission Agenda - Tuesday, March 10, 2026, 6:30 PM,
 Burlington Planning Commission
  Category 10. Adopt Minutes & Accept Communications
  Department Planning


  Type

11. Adjournment




 Page 2 of 52
 CITY OF BURLINGTON
 ORDINANCE ___________
 Sponsor: Office of City Planning,

 Public Hearing Dates: ___________
 In the Year Two Thousand Twenty-Six ___________________________
 First reading: _________________
 Referred to: ___________________
 An Ordinance in Relation to Rules suspended and placed in all
 stages of passage: ______________
 Second reading:
 CDO—TDM ________________
 Exemptions for  Affordable Housing
 Action:
 ZA-26-03 ______________________
 Date: ________________________
 Signed by Mayor: ______________
 Published: ____________________
 Effective: _____________________

 It is hereby Ordained by the City Council of the City of Burlington as follows:
 1 That Appendix A, Comprehensive Development Ordinance of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Burlington be and
 2 hereby is amended by amending Article 8, Parking; Part 1, General Requirements; Sec. 8.1.9-1, Maximum Off-Street
 3 Parking Requirements; and Table 8.1.16-1, Transportation Demand Management Program Required; to clarify the
 4 definition of affordable housing projects to include buildings within a Planned Unit Development, and to clarify
 5 that Affordable Projects are only required to meet a subset of Transportation Demand Management requirements even
 6 in the case of a Waiver of Maximum Parking Limitations applying TDM requirements to a project. As such, the
 7 ordinance is amended to read as follows:
 8 ***
 9 ARTICLE 8: PARKING
10 ***
11 PART 1: GENERAL REQUIREMENTS
12 ***
13 Sec. 8.1.9 Maximum On-Site Parking Spaces
14 The total number of off-street parking spaces provided in any parking district shall not be more than as
15 allowed in Table 8.1.9-1 below:
16 (a) Where a use is not listed, the maximum parking requirements shall be determined by the
17 administrative officer based upon a determination that the use is substantially equivalent in use,
18 nature, and impact to a listed use.
19 (b) When the calculation yields a fractional number of maximum spaces, the number of spaces shall be
20 rounded to the nearest whole.
21
22 Table 8.1.9-1 Maximum Off-Street Parking Requirements—As written.
23 (a) Exemptions: The following shall not be included in the maximum number of allowable spaces
24 required by this section:
25
26 1. – 6. As written.
27
28 7. Waiver of Maximum Parking Limitations. Parking in excess of the maximum parking limitation
29 of this section, may be waived by the DRB pursuant to the following requirements:


 Page 3 of 52
 Page 2
 An Ordinance in Relation to ZA-26-03 TDM Exemptions for Affordable Housing

30
31
32
33 A. The applicant requesting the waiver shall also provide:
34 (i) a peak demand parking study for two similar uses in the area; and,
35 (ii) a TDM Plan pursuant to the requirements of Sec. 8.1.16,. provided that Affordable
36 Projects shall only be required to comply with Sections 8.1.16(c) 1 and 8.1.16(c) 4,
37 as stated in Table 8.1.16-1.
38
39 B. As written.
40
41 ***
42
43 Section 8.1.16 Transportation Demand Management
44 (a) Purpose: As written.
45 (b) Applicability:
46 (1) A Transportation Demand Management Program shall be required for all projects in any Parking
47 District involving any one or more of the following:
48
 Table 8.1.16-1 Transportation Demand Management Program Required
 Applicable Projects Affordable Projects Small
 Project Projects
 Type • Creation of 10 or more Projects involving one or more Creation of five
 dwelling units “Applicable Projects” and that (5) to nine (9)
 • A non-residential also contain at least 75% of dwelling units
 or Mixed dwelling units meeting or exceeding
 Use development with a the affordability criteria of Article
 building footprint of 9, Inclusionary & Replacement
 eight thousand Housing, or housing rented to
 (8,000) sq.ft. or more; or tenants receiving federal or state
 the creation of fifteen rental assistance including buildings
 thousand (15,000) sq.ft. within a Planned Unit
 or more of gross floor Development that meet or exceed
 area the above criteria
 Applicable All provisions of Sec. 8.1.16 Sec. 8.1.16 (c) 1. and Sec. 8.1.16 (c) Sec. 8.1.16 (c)
 TDM (c) 4. only 3. b. only
 Sections
49
50 For projects that were issued permits with TDM requirements prior to January 31, 2023, an
51 administrative permit amendment may be requested to align the permit with the TDM requirements
52 set forth herein.
53 (c) Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Program: A TDM Program shall include each of
54 the following elements at a minimum:
 Page 2


 Page 4 of 52
 Page 3
 An Ordinance in Relation to ZA-26-03 TDM Exemptions for Affordable Housing

55 (1) Outreach and Education:
56 a. Designation of a Transportation Coordinator who directly, or indirectly through
57 membership in a Transportation Management Association, shall be responsible for each of
58 the following:
59 1. Prepare and always make available to all residents and employees informational and
60 educational materials regarding available TDM strategies and opportunities for
61 increased use and participation;
62 2. Preparation and dissemination of an annual travel survey of all residents and
63 employees; and,
64 3. Record-keeping and reporting to City upon request of all TDM activities offered and
65 rates of participation (including parking utilization if applicable).
66 (2) TDM Strategies: In addition to compliance with the on-site Bicycle Parking requirements
67 found in Article 8, Part 2, each TDM Program must incorporate TDM strategies to minimize
68 the amount of parking demand associated with the project. At a minimum, a TDM Program
69 shall select no less than two (2) of the following TDM strategies, which shall be selected and
70 filed with the Administrative Officer on an annual basis: Article 8: Parking Article Last
71 Updated: January 25, 2023 Comprehensive Development Ordinance p. 8-18 City of
72 Burlington, VT
73 a. Maintain an ongoing and active membership in a Transportation Management Association
74 (TMA);
75 b. Provide GMT Transit passes to all residents and employees at a minimum discount of
76 50%;
77 c. Provide a free car share membership to all residents and employees;
78 d. Provide a free bike share membership to all residents and employees;
79 e. If not already provided through a TMA membership, provide residents and employees with
80 a shuttle service, guaranteed ride home program, or ride to a nearby transit center.
81 (3) Parking Management: Where on-site or off-site parking is also made available:
82 a. Conduct parking utilization studies at least annually for a period of 7 years from receipt of
83 a Certificate of Occupancy;
84 b. With the exception of permanently affordable housing units, the cost of parking shall be un-
85 bundled from all residential and nonresidential leases and deeds and made available at a
86 market rate;
87 c. Where parking spaces are made available to off-site users, parking spaces may be made
88 available by a renewable lease, provided the term of any lease does not exceed one (1)
89 year; and,
90 d. Priority parking spaces: when on-site parking is provided, the following must be located in
91 closest proximity to a primary building entrance and/or public street frontage:
92 1. ADA Accessible spaces;
93 2. Bicycles, scooters, and motorcycles spaces;
 Page 3


 Page 5 of 52
 Page 4
 An Ordinance in Relation to ZA-26-03 TDM Exemptions for Affordable Housing

 94 3. Car-share: where 1 space must be offered for projects with 20 or more residential
 95 units, subject to an agreement with a car-share provider; and,
 96 4. Carpool and/or Vanpool vehicles: where more than 20 spaces are available for non-
 97 residential uses. In such cases, 5 spaces or 5% of the parking spaces on site, whichever
 98 is less, must be reserved for carpool/vanpool use before 9:00 AM on weekdays.
 99 (4) TDM Agreement: Each TDM Plan shall include a signed commitment to and
100 acknowledgement of each of the following on a form provided by the Administrative Officer:
101 a. Commitment to ongoing implementation of the TDM requirements as set forth above;
102 Article 8: Parking Article Last Updated: January 25, 2023 Comprehensive Development
103 Ordinance p. 8-19 City of Burlington, VT
104 b. Acknowledgement that the project has no claim to the ongoing availability of nearby on-
105 street public parking, and that, as is the case with other on-street public parking, the City
106 retains the right to charge for, restrict or remove such on-street parking at any time;
107 c. Acknowledgement that failure to maintain transportation demand management as required
108 above is a violation of this ordinance, and understanding that, pursuant to Sec. 2.7.8 of this
109 ordinance, no zoning permit or certificate of occupancy may be granted until any such
110 violation has been remedied; and,
111 d. Commitment to notify any subsequent owners and tenants in writing of their obligations
112 under this section as part of any purchase and sale and/or lease agreements.
113 Review and Enforcement: The Administrative Officer shall be responsible for determining
114 compliance with the TDM Program requirements as set forth above, and ongoing implementation
115 shall be included as a condition of any discretionary or administrative permit required for
116 development subject to the conditions of this Section.
117 Failure to maintain a TDM Program as required above shall be a violation of this ordinance, and
118 pursuant to Sec. 2.7.8 of this ordinance no zoning permit or certificate of occupancy may be
119 granted without a TDM Program in effect.
120 Guidelines regarding compliance with these TDM requirements shall be developed and provided
121 to applicants by the Administrative Officer.
122
123
124 * Material stricken out deleted.
125 ** Material underlined added.
126
127 Planning/KS/ Ordinances 2026/ZA-26-03TDM Exemptions for Affordable Housing
128 CDO Sections 8.1.9 and Table 8.1.16-1
129
130 CCOC 3/4/26




 Page 4


 Page 6 of 52
ZA-26-03
TDM Exemptions for
Affordable Housing
PLANNING COMMISSION
2026.03.10



 Page 7 of 52
TDM and Affordable Housing
 Table 8.1.16-1 Transportation Demand Management Program Required
 Applicable Projects Affordable Projects Small Projects
 Project Type • Creation of 10 or Projects involving one Creation of five
 more dwelling units or more “Applicable (5) to nine (9)
 • A non-residential or Projects” and that also dwelling units
 Mixed Use contain at least 75% of
 development with a dwelling units meeting
 building footprint  or exceeding the
 of eight thousand affordability criteria of
 (8,000) sq.ft. or Article 9, Inclusionary
 more; or the & Replacement
 creation of fifteen Housing, or housing
 thousand (15,000) rented to tenants
 sq.ft. or more of receiving federal or
 gross floor area state rental assistance
 Applicable All provisions of Sec. Sec. 8.1.16 (c) 1. and Sec. 8.1.16 (c) 3.
 TDM Sections 8.1.16 (c) Sec. 8.1.16 (c) 4. only b. only

 Page 8 of 52
TDM and Affordable Housing
• The Affordable Projects standards would apply to the
  CHT and Cathedral Square buildings at Cambrian Rise if
  not for the Waiver of Maximum Parking Limitations that
  was approved for the entirety of the Planned Unit
  Development in April 2022.




 Page 9 of 52
TDM and Affordable Housing
Topics to address in an amendment:
• Amend Sec. 8.1.9(c) 7 Waiver of Maximum Parking
  Limitations to state explicitly that Affordable Projects
  shall only comply with the education and outreach
  requirement (Sec. 8.1.16(c) 1) and TDM agreement (Sec.
  8.1.16(c) 4)
• Clarify via explicit language that “Affordable Projects”
  within a Planned Unit Development shall only comply
  with the education and outreach requirement (Sec.
  8.1.16(c) 1) and TDM agreement (Sec. 8.1.16(c) 4)

 Page 10 of 52
ZA-26-03
Amends Sec. 8.1.9-1, Maximum Off-Street Parking
Requirements:
A. The applicant requesting the waiver shall also provide:
(i) a peak demand parking study for two similar uses in the
area; and,
(ii) a TDM Plan pursuant to the requirements of Sec. 8.1.16,
provided that Affordable Projects shall only be required to
comply with Sections 8.1.16(c) 1 and 8.1.16(c) 4, as stated in
Table 8.1.16-1.



 Page 11 of 52
 ZA-26-03
 Amends Table 8.1.16-1 Transportation Demand Management Program Required:
Project Type Applicable Projects Affordable Projects Small Projects
 • Creation of 10 or more Projects involving one or more Creation of five
 dwelling units "Applicable Projects" and that also (5) to nine (9)
 • A non-residential or contain at least 75% of dwelling units dwelling units
 Mixed Use development meeting or exceeding the
 with a building footprint affordability criteria of Article 9,
 of eight thousand (8,000) Inclusionary & Replacement Housing,
 sq.ft. Or more; or the or housing rented to tenants
 creation of fifteen receiving federal or state rental
 thousand (15,000) sq.ft. assistance including buildings within
 Or more of gross floor a Planned Unit Development that
 area meet or exceed the above criteria
Applicable All provisions of Sec. 8.1.16 Sec. 8.1.16 (c) 1. and Sec. 8.1.16 (c) 4. Sec. 8.1.16 (c) 3.
TDM Sections (c) only b. only
 Page 12 of 52
 City of Burlington, VT
 149 Church Street, 3rd Floor
 Burlington, VT 05401
 Phone: (802) 865-7194
 www.burlingtonvt.gov/plan


TO: Burlington City Council Ordinance Committee
FROM: Stella Jordan, Senior Planner
 Charles Dillard, AICP, Director of City Planning
DATE: March 10, 2026
RE: Proposed ZA-26-03 TDM Exemptions for Affordable Housing

This memo is intended to provide an overview about the proposed changes included in ZA-26-03. This
amendment originated with the City Council Ordinance Committee and has been forwarded to both the Planning
Commission and the City Council for review and comments.
1. Overview
This amendment originated with the City Council Ordinance Committee, who sought to address challenges raised
to them by affordable housing developers. Following a discussion with these developers at the February 6, 2026
City Council Ordinance Committee meeting, the Committee directed staff to draft ZA-26-03 to address the issues
raised, which are outlined in Section 2 of this memo. By request, staff presented this memo and draft Amendment
at the March 6, 2026 City Council Ordinance Committee, at which the Committee recommended referring the
Amendment to the Planning Commission for review, while simultaneously referring the Amendment to City
Council with the warning of a Public Hearing. The City Council Ordinance Committee is in strong support of
advancing this amendment in a timely manner.
This Amendment proposes clarifying the definition of affordable housing projects and their obligations in relation
to Transportation Demand Management (TDM) requirements. Specifically, this Amendment proposes including
affordable buildings within a Planned Unit Development (PUD) in the definition of Affordable Projects when
determining TDM requirement applicability, and further clarifying that Affordable Projects are only required to
meet a subset of TDM requirements as provided in Article 8, Section 8.1.16 of the Comprehensive Development
Ordinance, even in the case of a Waiver of Maximum Parking Limitations applying TDM requirements to a
project or a PUD.
2. Background & Past Efforts
This Amendment addresses concerns raised by the developers of buildings that contain affordable housing within
the Cambrian Rise PUD that compliance with full TDM requirements would represent an undue administrative
and cost burden for the affordable buildings in particular. The TDM requirements in question were activated by a
2022 project-wide Maximum Parking Waiver and dwelling unit count increase amendment for the entire
Cambrian Rise PUD.
Under the current CDO regulations regarding Waivers of Maximum Parking Limitations (Sec. 8.1.8 (a) 7. A.), the
Cambrian Rise project must submit a project-wide TDM Plan consistent with TDM regulations (Sec. 8.1.16)
wherein all buildings in the PUD are subject to the full suite of applicable TDM Program requirements. The
developers of the affordable buildings for Cambrian Rise sought an amendment to the project’s current TDM plan
(which was submitted with the 2022 project amendment) to exempt these buildings from elements of the existing
TDM plan and separate them from the rest of the Cambrian Rise project with respect to the implementation of
Outreach and Education strategies and TDM strategies. The Development Review Board reviewed this request on
December 16, 2025, finding that the affordable buildings in question were part of the overall Cambrian Rise
project (providing much of its required inclusionary housing) and benefit from the project-wide maximum
parking waiver; that the CDO’s definition of Affordable Projects in Section 8.1.16 does not apply to affordable




 Page 13 of 52
buildings within a PUD that are fulfilling a project’s inclusionary housing requirements; and that a project-wide
TDM plan must be inclusive of the entire development.
The Cambrian Rise project’s existing TDM plan comprises four elements, as required by Section 8.1.16: Outreach
and Education (which is being undertaken by the Cambrian Rise property manager in partnership with CATMA),
TDM Strategies (in partnership with CATMA), Parking Management, and a TDM Agreement (fulfilled by the
TDM plan). The exemption sought for affordable buildings, which this Amendment in effect provides by
clarifying that the definition of Affordable Projects includes affordable buildings within a PUD and that these
buildings may also be exempted from project-wide TDM requirements imposed by a maximum parking waiver,
limits TDM requirements to Outreach and Education and a TDM Agreement only.
The City Council Ordinance Committee discussed the possibility of an amendment to address this topic and heard
from affordable housing developers about the project and TDM requirements in question on February 6, 2026.
Staff from the Office of City Planning also provided context at this meeting about the existing CDO requirements,
and shared information about two relevant forthcoming amendments: a larger TDM amendment that is currently
being drafted to comprehensively update Burlington’s TDM requirements, which will also include updated
requirements and strategies related to affordable housing projects; and a larger Inclusionary Zoning amendment
that will update and modernize the City’s inclusionary housing development requirements. Committee members
elected to advance ZA-26-03 as a standalone amendment prior to these larger updates, specifically to address the
concerns outlined above. These broader efforts were also discussed at the March 6, 2026 Ordinance Committee
meeting, at which the Committee reviewed the draft Amendment and recommended its referral to both the
Planning Commission for review and the City Council with a Public Hearing warned. During the March 6
discussion Committee members expressed strong support for moving this Amendment forward in a timely
manner, and at least one member expressed that this Amendment clarifies the original intent of the existing TDM
ordinance.
4. Proposed Amendment: ZA-26-03
a) Amendment Type

 Text Amendment Map Amendment Text & Map Amendment

b) Purpose Statement
The proposed change in ZA-26-03 aims to clarify definitions of affordable housing projects in relation to TDM
requirements.
c) Proposed Amendment
 1. Amendments to Article 8: Parking
 • Amends Sec. 8.1.8 (a) 7. A. (ii) to clarify that Affordable Projects as defined in Table. 8.1.16-1 are only
 required to comply with two applicable sections of TDM requirements when a Waiver of Maximum
 Parking Limitations is applied to a project.
 • Amends Sec. 8.1.16 (b) Table 8.1.16-1 to clarify that the definition of Affordable Projects includes
 buildings within a Planned Unit Development that meet or exceed provided criteria.
d) Relationship to planBTV
This following discussion of conformance with the goals and policies of planBTV is prepared in accordance with
the provisions of 24 V.S.A. §4441(c).
 Theme: Dynamic Distinctive Inclusive Connected
 Land Use: Conserve Sustain Grow




 Page 14 of 52
 Compatibility with Proposed Future Land Use & Density
 The proposed amendment aligns with the land use and density policies outlined in planBTV. Its purpose is to
 support affordable housing development by balancing economic challenges and mobility needs. This change
 reflects the intent of the “Inclusive” theme, which prioritizes providing and promoting affordable housing
 choices and accessible transportation and mobility options for all residents.
 Impact on Safe & Affordable Housing
 This amendment reduces administrative and cost burdens that TDM requirements may impose on affordable
 housing development. By providing for the exemption of some TDM requirements for affordable buildings
 within a PUD that are providing required inclusionary housing for a project, this amendment may encourage
 more PUDs to separate their required inclusionary dwelling units into standalone affordable buildings rather
 than incorporating them into buildings that also contain market-rate units, resulting in increasing segregation of
 affordable housing from market-rate housing.
 Planned Community Facilities
 This amendment has no direct impact on planned community facilities.
h) Process Overview
The following chart summarizes the current stage in the zoning amendment process, and identifies any
recommended actions:
 Planning Commission Process
  Draft Amendment Presentation to & discussion Approve for Public Public Hearing Approved & forwarded to
  prepared by Staff by Commission: Hearing
 Council
 3/4/26 3/10/26

 City Council Process
 First Read & Referral Ordinance Committee Council
 Ordinance Committee Public
 to Ordinance discussion Second Read Approval &
 recommend Hearing
 Committee 2/6/26, 3/6/26 Adoption
*Discussed by the Planning Commission Ordinance Committee




 Page 15 of 52
Burlington in 2025: Assessment of Existing Conditions
The City of Burlington has experienced significant change since the adoption of its last
comprehensive plan update in 2019, although many of the goals and themes in planBTV
remain salient. Of particular note are the impacts of COVID-19 on population,
employment, housing, and travel patterns, many of which have endured through 2025 and
shaped current needs and challenges in Burlington. A deepened crisis of housing
availability and affordability has burdened residents across income levels and contributed
to a growing population of unhoused people. People experiencing homelessness, mental
health, and substance abuse challenges have become a central component of public and
political discourse, as residents and business owners increasingly cite public safety as a
major concern. Environmental trends and issues driven by climate change have also
continued to intensify.

Burlington is now planning for ambitious housing growth in the coming decades to comply
with new state policies and regional targets, requiring a rethinking of the City’s land use
and transportation priorities. At the same time, the City must balance critical climate
resilience and environmental protection priorities, foster economic opportunities that
complement growth needs and mitigate federal funding uncertainties, and collaborate
with an extremely engaged constituency, ensuring Burlington remains a vibrant and
welcoming place where people want and are able to live, work, learn, and recreate.

This assessment provides an overview of existing conditions in Burlington, with a particular
focus on significant changes and emerging areas of concern since 2019. The first four main
sections of this assessment correspond to conditions relating to each of the four plan
elements that will comprise the unified planBTV: 2050 Comprehensive Plan.

The data included and referenced in this assessment is listed by section in a Data
Reference appendix.



Table of Contents
Burlington in 2025: Assessment of Existing Conditions .................................................... 1
  1 Municipal Plan Elements Assessment ...................................................................... 3
 1.1 Demographics.................................................................................................. 3
 1.2 Economic Conditions (see section 4) ............................................................... 11
 1.3 Natural Resources and Physical Conditions ..................................................... 12




 Page 16 of 52
  1.4 Transportation (see section 2) ......................................................................... 16
  1.5 Utilities, Facilities, and Services (see 3.3) ......................................................... 16
  1.6 Energy ............................................................................................................ 16
  1.7 Historic and Cultural Resources ...................................................................... 20
  1.8 Housing ......................................................................................................... 13
  1.9 Flood Resilience ............................................................................................. 29
  1.10 Hazard Mitigation.......................................................................................... 31
  1.11 Land Use...................................................................................................... 21
  1.12 Regional Context .......................................................................................... 31
  1.13 Community Safety ........................................................................................ 38
  1.14 Public Health................................................................................................ 42
2 Transportation Assessment ................................................................................... 44
3 Parks, Recreation and Waterfront Assessment ....................................................... 46
  3.1 History of Burlington Parks, Recreation and Waterfront ..................................... 46
  3.2 Classification and Inventory ............................................................................ 48
  3.3 Programming and events assessment .............................................................. 49
  3.4 Level of service............................................................................................... 49
  3.5 Access analysis .............................................................................................. 49
4 Economic Assessment and Market Analysis ........................................................... 49
  4.1 Industries....................................................................................................... 49
  4.2 Burlington Business Landscape ....................................................................... 50
  4.3 Workforce Trends & Jobs ................................................................................. 53
  4.4 Cost of Living.................................................................................................. 53
  4.5 Neighborhood Economic Assessments ............................................................ 53
  4.6 Tourism ......................................................................................................... 58
  4.7 Airport, Air Travel, and Boating Travel ............................................................... 60
5 Planned Development, Growth, Impacts to Transportation and Parks Infrastructure
and Programming.................................................................................................... 61
  Ongoing and planned transportation projects ........................................................ 61




 Page 17 of 52
 Ongoing and planned parks projects ..................................................................... 61
 Ongoing BPRW facility projects ............................................................................. 61
 Current and future land uses ................................................................................ 61
 Current and planned developments ...................................................................... 61
 Future revenue generation .................................................................................... 61




1 Municipal Plan Elements Assessment
1.1 Demographics
Population
Burlington is a small city of 44,743. Its population has grown slightly since 2000—up 4.7%
from 2010, but down 0.7% from 2020. Burlington’s growth over the past 25 years is
approximately in line with other small cities and slower than the US as a whole. Compared
to other municipalities in Chittenden County, however, Burlington is growing much more
slowly.




 Page 18 of 52
Statewide, Vermont’s population is declining. According to 2025 Census state population
estimates, Vermont is the only state in the country that experienced a net loss in domestic
migration as well as a decline in internal population growth between 2024 and 2025,
although the state did see a small amount of positive international migration. While
Vermont’s neighbors also saw domestic out-migration (MA and NY) or death rates




 Page 19 of 52
exceeding birth rates (NH and ME) over the past year, Vermont is unique in having
experienced both trends.




The City’s population is relatively evenly distributed throughout five main neighborhoods,
with the exception of the downtown neighborhood which is geographically much smaller.
Between 2010 and 2020, the New North End, South End, and Downtown neighborhoods
experienced moderate growth. The Old North End neighborhood population remained
relatively flat. Between 2000 and 2020, the East End (Old East End and UVM) saw the
highest growth rates, adding more than 3000 residents during that 20-year period.




 Page 20 of 52
Page 21 of 52
Age
Burlington is a young city (median age 27.8) compared to both the state and country,
primarily due to the large student population. As undergraduate enrollment at UVM has
risen to 11,595—an 11% increase—since 2010 (while remaining relatively flat at
Champlain College), the student population has grown to 26.4% of the Burlington
population. Excluding students, a rough estimate of Burlington’s median age is between
35-39, slightly younger than the statewide median of around 43. However, the city is also
getting older. There are more older people, over the age of 65, living in Burlington—a 31%
increase since 2010—while the number of children has remained the about same and birth
rates have declined.




 Page 22 of 52
Page 23 of 52
Race and Ethnicity
While the city of Burlington has become slightly more diverse since 2010, it remains
overwhelmingly white (at currently 82% of the population, down 5% since 2010). The most
notable change has been in the number of people who identify with two or more races
(6.2%), which more than doubled between 2010 and 2020. This shift is due in part to actual
demographic change, as well as the Census Bureau's improved question design and
processing of responses, which made it easier for people to identify with multiple racial
backgrounds. Burlington saw a peak in the number of non-U.S. citizens residing in the City
in 2017 and 2018, potentially due to increased immigration during these years, with a
subsequent decline.




 Page 24 of 52
Page 25 of 52
Burlington’s average household size has slightly decreased over the past decade, despite a
small increase in 2020. Owner-occupied households have seen the least decrease and
remain larger on average than renter households.




 Page 26 of 52
1.3 Natural Resources and Physical Conditions
Burlington is a city rich in natural resources, from its 12 miles of Lake Champlain shoreline
to its abundant protected and conserved natural areas and open space comprising nearly
half of the City’s land area. These natural areas include both public and private open
spaces, protected habitats, natural communities (6 major forest and wetland types),
agriculture, natural resources, and geological features. They provide critical ecosystem
services, bolster Burlington's resilience to climate change and extreme weather events,
and provide access to recreational and agricultural opportunities for residents.
Recognizing the resources and value this land provides, the 2019 Comprehensive Plan
identified these parts of the community as areas the City plans to conserve in the long
term. Much of Burlington’s open space and buffer zones around natural areas are already
protected under special districts or overlays in the Comprehensive Development
Ordinance. However, Burlington also faces many competing land use challenges and
needs that must be balanced with conservation.




 Page 27 of 52
Burlington’s new Open Space Plan discusses the City’s ecological assets, conditions,
threats, and opportunities in more detail, and recommends better conserving, managing,
and connecting natural resources. In particular, the Open Space Plan recommends that
planBTV: 2050 explore strategies for land acquisition for conservation, improve multimodal
access to the Intervale and non-vehicular access to nature experiences throughout the city
in general, and plan to address environmental, public safety, and accessibility issues
related to the presence of people experiencing homelessness sheltering in City-owned
open spaces. However, Burlington’s recent and short-term financial outlook is not
conducive to supporting extensive land acquisition for conservation, and the City faces
many other competing demands for land use and investment, including to address the
housing crisis.

Burlington’s natural resources are also vulnerable to flooding, natural hazards, and
pollution (see the Flood Resilience and Hazard Mitigation sections of this assessment for
more detail). A particular concern is stormwater and impervious surface runoff, which
impact Burlington’s coastal waters and waterfront ecology as well as the health of other
wetland and floodplain areas; most of the City’s stormwater drains directly into the lake or
into the Winooski River. In Lake Champlain, average phosphorus levels and concentrations
of salts have increased each year since 2020, mostly related to runoff from roadways,
other impervious surfaces, and other developed and agricultural lands throughout the
region (BTVStat).

1.8 Housing
Housing is one of the most pressing concerns for Burlington today, as the City faces a
crisis of both availability and affordability. Growing local housing needs have far outpaced
new development, compounding challenges across income levels and contributing to
increasing economic vulnerability and a growing population of residents experiencing or at
risk of homelessness. Burlington has taken many steps to address the housing crisis over
the past several years, including development ordinance updates (discussed further in the
land use section of this assessment), affordable housing partnerships, and other initiatives
undertaken through the previous administration’s housing action plan. Costs (for land,
materials, labor, and regulatory compliance) remain a key barrier to housing development
in Burlington, however, and the City’s and the region’s ambitious new housing goals only
intensify the existing crisis. The current administration recently released a three-pillared
housing strategy to address this crisis that prioritizes reforming Burlington’s outdated
Inclusionary Zoning regulations and the Housing Trust Fund; unlocking the potential of
recent zoning reforms through the Neighborhood Code to encourage neighborhood-scale




 Page 28 of 52
infill development (see more about Neighborhood Code in the Land Use section of this
assessment); and leveraging public-private partnerships and City land and assets.

Growth
Over the past decade the number of housing units in Burlington has grown by 8%, or about
1,300 units city wide. Compared to other cities and towns in Chittenden County, Burlington
is building new housing much more slowly. However, housing targets set over the past two
years by the state (via Act 47/the HOME Act and Act 181) recommend that Burlington
double its historic rate of housing production to alleviate the current housing crisis.
According to regional targets distributed by CCRPC (revised in September of 2025) and the
state’s requirement to include mid-range housing targets in local comprehensive plans,
Burlington must add nearly 2,000 new housing units by 2030 and nearly 7,000 by 2050,
increasing the City’s total number of housing units by at least 38% over the next 25 years.




 Page 29 of 52
While housing units have been built across the city, with the Old East End/UVM and New
North End neighborhoods seeing the highest rates of growth, Burlington’s population




 Page 30 of 52
growth has been highly concentrated in the area encompassing the Old East End, Hill
Section, and UVM campus. Much of this growth is likely due to the increase in UVM’s
undergraduate enrollment over the last two decades.




Cost
The median price for a house or condo in Burlington ($515,000) is more than double the
cost in 2010; adjusting for inflation, prices have grown 41%. Rents have also increased,




 Page 31 of 52
although different data sources paint slightly different pictures about average costs and
rates of increase, making it difficult to accurately assess trends. For example, Zillow data
show a slowing in growth over the past two years while Allen, Brooks, and Minor data show
continued increases. Across these data sources, however, rental prices for all unit sizes
have increased by more than 50% in the last decade.

Vacancy rates in Burlington are low, and track closely with the regional average for
Chittenden County. Vermont’s average rental vacancy rate is one of the country’s lowest
and has been below the range considered to be a healthy market (3-5%) for several years.
In Chittenden County and Burlington, although still lower than national and northeast
averages and under the healthy market range, vacancy rates have been trending more
positively in the past few years.




 Page 32 of 52
Page 33 of 52
40% of Burlington’s population resides in owner-occupied housing, with 60% renting.
Burlington's has a slightly larger share of renters than other small cities but is fairly




 Page 34 of 52
comparable overall. In 2023, the Vermont Housing Finance Agency estimated that 43% of
all Burlington households were cost-burdened or severely cost-burdened, spending more
than 30% or 50%, respectively, of their incomes on rent. This issue is much more acute for
renters than homeowners, with over half of Burlington’s renter households considered
cost-burdened or severely cost-burdened.




 Page 35 of 52
1.11 Land Use
Current Land Use
Burlington’s total land area is 6,457 acres, or 10.3 square miles. Lake Champlain and the
Winooski river comprise the majority of the City’s boundary. The City’s land is covered by a
wide range of uses, including substantial open space and natural areas, as well as large
educational and medical institutions; about one third of the City’s land is tax-exempt,
including land owned by the public, educational and religious institutions, and nonprofits.
37% of Burlington’s land area is residential (of all types).

Burlington’s Open Space Plan (2025) outlines the City’s abundant natural resources and
land dedicated to open space and recreation, habitat conservation, agriculture, and
natural community resources—collectively covering nearly half of all land area. Much of
this land use is also critical to Burlington’s climate resilience, as the City faces increasing
flooding and stormwater management demands.

Because of Burlington’s geographic boundaries, open and recreational land area, and
mature residential settlement, only a small portion of mostly residential of land is
considered “vacant.” However, much of Burlington’s existing residential and commercial




 Page 36 of 52
land use could accommodate infill and higher density development. Burlington’s recently
adopted (2024) Neighborhood Code provided a new comprehensive zoning framework
aimed at enabling more “missing middle” housing types across the City to allow for higher
density and encourage more neighborhood-scale multifamily development.

Other examples of recent plans and actions addressing land use and residential growth
include planBTV: NNE (currently being finalized), where areas of the New North End—
including City owned land—have already been identified as having a higher propensity for
gentle infill or redevelopment to support new neighborhood-scale housing as well as
multimodal connectivity, community amenities, and commerce. In the South End, the City
recently created a new 80-acre zoning overlay district (the South End Innovation District)
within the existing Enterprise-Light Manufacturing district to allow for residential
development, paving the way for the District’s first planned redevelopment of
approximately 13 acres of underutilized land owned by the City, Champlain College, and a
local company (Ride Your Bike, LLC) into a new sustainable, walkable, mixed-income
neighborhood with more than 1,000 new homes.




 Page 37 of 52
Zoning Amendments
Burlington’s zoning is regulated by the Comprehensive Development Ordinance (CDO),
and all of Burlington’s zoning districts and overlays may be viewed on an interactive Zoning
Map. The City has made several notable amendments to the CDO over the past decade,
while other proposed zoning code changes have not been approved; these changes and




 Page 38 of 52
proposals are discussed below. Following the adoption of planBTV: 2050, Burlington plans
to undertake a comprehensive rewrite of the CDO.

BTV Neighborhood Code
Similar to other cities across the US, Burlington has recently reformed its historically
restrictive residential zoning standards in the CDO to enable more neighborhood-scale
housing types citywide. The “Neighborhood Code”, which refers to the three amendment
packages that facilitated this reform, have made the following key changes to the City’s
Residential Zoning Standards:

 • Modified and streamlined residential zoning districts and boundaries to more
 closely align with existing neighborhood development patterns.
 • Created the Residential Corridor (RC) district, which allows greater flexibility for
 housing types and intensity along transportation corridors identified in the City’s
 2019 Comprehensive Plan. The 2019 Comprehensive Plan did not directly call for
 the Residential Corridor District, but it was established based on feedback received
 during the Neighborhood Code’s extensive public engagement process. Both
 residents and policymakers are interested in expanding this district, but Planning
 staff recommend waiting to make any additional changes until after planBTV 2050’s
 completion.
 • Replaced traditional density standards with massing standards, including the
 number of units per building, updated lot coverage, standardization of rear
 setbacks, maximum building footprints, and building height.
 • Allowed two free-standing structures in the Residential – Low and Residential –
 Medium districts with up to four units per building. Essentially, all residential
 parcels are entitled up to eight units, pending ability to comply with dimensional
 standards (setback, lot coverage, etc.).
 • Allowed for Neighborhood Commercial Uses (such as cafes, bars, laundromats,
 small groceries, etc.) to be permitted in the Residential Corridor district.
 • Established standards for specific project types and uses in Residential Districts,
 including Rowhouses and Pocket Neighborhoods.
 • Created more flexibility for Planned Unit Developments to support larger
 neighborhood-scale multi-family infill on larger sites within residential areas.

A report outlining the rationale for the Neighborhood Code is available online, and includes
a brief history of Burlington’s Residential Zoning.




 Page 39 of 52
South End Innovation District
The South End Innovation District Overlay, adopted in July 2023, is intended to facilitate the
redevelopment of a core area of the South End neighborhood’s Enterprise-Light
Manufacturing (E-LM) district. The vision for this overlay is based in planBTV: South End
and calls for transforming the area’s surface parking lots and contaminated and
underutilized sites into an accessible, mixed-use hub of economic activity that draws on
both the South End’s legacy of manufacturing and arts as well as its burgeoning office and
innovation sector. The overlay enables the creation of a wide range of commercial uses,
while prioritizing those arts, manufacturing, and office uses that define the character of the
South End today. It also permits the creation of new housing. The overlay includes
provisions for the scale and massing of new buildings to guide the redevelopment of large
sites, and seeks to create an accessible and sustainable urban district.

The SEID overlay covers roughly 14 vacant underutilized parcels on the west side of Pine
Street between Howard Street and Sears Lane, including the City-owned 68 Sears Lane
parcel.

Following the adoption of the SEID, the City entered into a Memorandum of Understanding
(MOU) with the owners of land neighboring City-owned property located at 68 Sears Lane.
The purpose of the MOU is to facilitate a conceptual design and development framework
for the coordinated redevelopment of the parcels by applying the proposed regulations of
SEID, resulting in a vibrant, sustainable, and accessible mixed-use neighborhood in the
heart of the district. The MOU outlines a collaborative and efficient planning process for
multiple independently owned sites, with the goal of informing a potential Development
Agreement in the future. The City-owned parcel considered in the MOU is the undeveloped
land at 68 Sears Lane. The other parties to the MOU, are Champlain College, the owner of
175 Lakeside Avenue, and Ride Your Bike, LLC, the owner of 125 Lakeside Avenue. (Ride
Your Bike, LLC refers to the same developer as the nearby Hula Lakeside).

This development is currently known by its working name – SECORD (South End
Coordinated Redevelopment). Ride Your Bike, LLC has partnered with New York-based
developer Jonathon Rose Companies to develop the project’s first phase, the application
for which has been submitted. This phase includes 204 units and non-residential ground
floor uses in two connected single-loaded exterior corridor buildings constructed of mass
timber. The project has received substantial financial support from the City and State. A
second component of phase 1 is in design right now and will include approximately 50
affordable homes of various sizes, along with a ground floor childcare facility. Phase 2 will
likely commence via a procurement process in late 2026 and will likely include all or a
portion of the City’s property at 68 Sears Lane.




 Page 40 of 52
Inclusionary Zoning
The City of Burlington has had a mandatory inclusionary zoning ordinance since the 1990s,
which can be found in Article 9 of the CDO. Updates to this policy are managed by the
Planning Office, as a zoning amendment, in collaboration with CEDO and DPI. CEDO acts
as the program administrator for initial certification and ongoing monitoring. The IZ
ordinance was most recently updated in 2023, with a more substantial reform adopted in
2019.

Since mid-2023, CEDO & Planning have been discussing a packet of amendments that
relate to the current construction cost challenges in our market and elsewhere, and ways
to provide some flexibility without undermining the overall purpose/intent of the ordinance.
The goals of the of the upcoming IZ amendment are as follows:

 • Modernize Inclusionary Zoning in acknowledgement of current, seemingly
 structural challenges in development and construction;
 • Reform Payment-in-Lieu to help bolster the Housing Trust Fund; and,
 • Support the City's broad housing strategy to create affordable homes in
 neighborhoods, public-private partnerships and on city-owned land.

The amendment will go before a joint committee of the Planning Commission and City
Council Ordinance Committee beginning in March, with anticipated adoption in late
summer.

Institution Amendments
Over the last few years, there have been a few zoning amendments that proposed to
address the friction that exists between the Institutions’ off-campus student populations
and the City’s chronic housing shortage. The 2019 Comprehensive Plan identified the
institutions’ campuses and the major thoroughfares that function as the city’s eastern
gateways as special growth areas. planBTV also stated that these areas are an essential
focus for the growth of the institutions within their campuses, particularly to create new
and additional housing options for students.

The Burlington Comprehensive Development Ordinance (CDO) includes five Institutional
Core Campus Overlay Districts, which apply to sub-areas of the Institutional zoning
district. These overlay districts are intended to provide for growth within the core of the
institutions’ campuses, by allowing an increased development intensity than would
typically be found in the underlying zoning district and providing transitions between
sections of campus and the surrounding neighborhoods.




 Page 41 of 52
University of Vermont Trinity Campus (Timed Out)
As part of the former mayoral administration’s 2021 “10 Point Housing Plan”, a major
zoning amendment was proposed to facilitate “opening new on-campus University of
Vermont student housing opportunities by rezoning the former Trinity Campus to reduce
UVM’s pressure on the housing market.”

Reviewing the applicability of the Trinity Campus overlay zoning district for this part of
UVM’s campus has been discussed periodically in recent years. The 2019 Comprehensive
Plan identified this area of campus as being important to help “better balance on-campus
housing opportunities between the north and south of the core academic areas of
campus.”

The UVM Trinity Campus (ICC-UVMT) overlay zone applies to a parcel on UVM’s campus
along Colchester Avenue on the north side of the intersection of Colchester and East
Avenues. The parcel is currently home to a number of UVM residence halls such as
McCauley and Mercy Halls, as well as other uses for the institution. UVM intended to
create additional graduate and undergraduate beds in the vicinity of these existing
residence halls, and had identified a number of limitations under the current ICC-UVMT
overlay zone.

The requested zoning changes included allowing buildings within the existing Colchester
Avenue Buffer, and increasing allowable height and lot coverage. In reviewing the existing
ICC-UVMT standards, staff identified four additional areas to update: density limits,
allowance for non-residential uses, major impact threshold, and context on campus
planning within this area of campus. The amendment addressed both UVM and the
department’s recommended changes. Though this amendment was approved and referred
to the City Council by the Planning Commission in December 2023, it was tabled by the
Council.

University of Vermont MOU-related requests
A 2023 process to update a housing and land use MOU between the City and the University
of Vermont failed as both parties were unable to agree to proposed terms related to
sharing of housing and enrollment data, along with commitments to rezone portions of the
UVM campus to facilitate additional student housing and academic facilities. As both UVM
and the City are under new administrations, negotiations regarding this MOU will begin in
late February, 2026. The 2023 MOU called for UVM to share data on enrollment growth
projections, as well as make commitments to build additional student housing on campus.
For its part, the City was asked to commit to a zoning amendment process to allow for
greater intensity development on two UVM-owned parcels. The 2025 amendment will likely
include similar requests from both the City and UVM, along with additional topics related




 Page 42 of 52
to transportation, parks and other community facilities. The MOU is distinct from a
separate agreement on a Fee for Service that UVM pays to the City for accessing municipal
services (e.g. fire, police, parks, etc).

Champlain College Bed Counts
This amendment, requested by Champlain College, eliminated Maximum Residential Beds
standards in Section 4.5.2(g) 4 of the CDO in order to facilitate on-campus residential
conversion and the development of additional housing for Champlain college students.
Following discussion and a public hearing by the Planning Commission, this amendment
was adopted by the City Council in March 2025.

Urban Reserve
The Urban Reserve is a 45-acre parcel currently regulated by a unique zoning district
intended to temporarily preserve the area and, “reserve the right of future generations to
determine the most appropriate combination of development and conservation that
should occur at the site though a comprehensive and participatory planning process.” The
Community Sailing Center, a non-profit dedicated to access, education and recreation on
Lake Champlain, has proposed an amendment to the Urban Reserve zoning district to
allow for small boat storage to be an allowed use. The amendment has not been drafted,
as there are numerous non-zoning barriers to the proposal. As of February, 2026, the City is
committed to assisting the CSC with identifying an area for this use, but has not yet
committed to a zoning amendment.

Maximum Parking & TDM
The purpose of this amendment was to replace minimum on-site parking requirements
with maximum on-site parking limits and establish tiers for transportation demand
management requirements citywide. The amendment also addressed a number of related
standards that pertain to the provision and maintenance of parking for specific uses and
situations. The amendment was adopted by City Council and became effective February
2023.

Emergency Shelters (Timed Out)
Burlington adopted emergency shelter standards into its Comprehensive Development
Ordinance (CDO) in December 2017. The standards included a definition, permitted and
conditional use designations in the use table, and special use criteria. In July 2023, Act 47
(otherwise known as the HOME Act) was passed into law. Among other things, the act
established standards for emergency shelters that came into effect on September 1, 2023.
The statutory standards include a new definition of emergency shelter and add emergency
shelters to the list of uses subject to limited municipal review under 24 VSA, Sec. 4413.




 Page 43 of 52
This section substantially limits municipal zoning review of emergency shelters and
renders moot much of the City’s CDO standards pertaining to them. A zoning amendment
was proposed in 2025 that would have brought Burlington into compliance with Act 47, but
allowing, as-of-right, emergency shelters in at least one district. The amendment also
proposed to make the use conditionally allowed in other districts. Ultimately, the state
legislature determined that additional work was needed and thus the amendment stalled
until it officially timed out. However, state law preempts any local restrictions on
emergency shelters.

Following the adoption of Act 47, the Office of City Planning worked with the Planning
Commission and City Council Ordinance Committee to craft an amendment to the City’s
CDO, aligning emergency shelter provisions with state law.

Additional Relevant Amendments:
Performing Arts Centers
This minor amendment increased the allowable footprint of Performing Arts Centers in a
portion of the Enterprise-Light Manufacturing District and was made at the request of
Higher Ground, a South Burlington-based music venue that intends to relocate to
Burlington.

Future Land Use
As mentioned in the Housing section of this assessment, Burlington is also planning for
compliance with new state housing policies and planning frameworks, including via a Draft
Future Land Use (FLU) Map developed in coordination with CCRPC and intended to help
plan for growth and enable more efficient housing development via regulatory designations
that are compatible with state regulations. Much of Burlington’s existing non-conservation
land is designated as Planned Growth Area in the FLU map, enabling continued
development in existing mixed-use neighborhoods and adjacent land that already has
supportive planning, zoning, and infrastructure. The downtown area and South End
Innovation District are designated Downtown Centers, with the highest existing and
enabled mix of uses.




 Page 44 of 52
Page 45 of 52
1.12 Regional Context
Burlington is Vermont’s largest city and plays a critical role as an economic and cultural
hub for Chittenden County, which is also the state’s most populous county. As such, the
City’s challenges and opportunities, particularly with regard to the housing crisis, are
deeply intertwined with regional economic and demographic trends and the broader state
and federal forces impacting Chittenden County. Vermont has been experiencing long-
term housing supply and affordability issues related to slow rates of new development,
seasonal homeownership, and an aging population, among other factors. These issues
were exacerbated by a significant influx of new residents during and after the pandemic,
contributing to price increases causing severe household cost burdens as well as a large
increase in the number of Vermonters experiencing homelessness (more details on this
statewide and regional context, as well as data sources, can be found in Appendix 1 to the
2025-29 VT Housing Needs Assessment).

In Chittenden County and in Burlington, these trends are felt acutely; the county contains
31% of the state’s rental housing stock with the majority of Burlington residents renting
homes, and in 2025 nearly a third of the state’s total estimated population of people
experiencing homelessness were located in Chittenden County, many in Burlington where
services and resources are concentrated. More detail on the City’s housing trends and
homelessness crisis can also be found in the Housing and Public Health sections of this
assessment, respectively. As these issues are not limited to Burlington and are driven by
broader forces, strategies and solutions require tools and resources both within and
beyond the City and region.

Another key challenge impacting Burlington and Chittenden County and requiring regional
and inter-municipal collaboration is public transit. Green Mountain Transit (GMT), the
region’s transit agency, has faced acute funding challenges over the past several years
leading to substantial service reductions. A lack of funding and insufficient or unreliable
transit service poses a significant threat to the advancement of Burlington’s and the
region’s ambitious housing goals, as well as climate resilience, emissions, economic
development, and access and connectivity objectives. In 2025, GMT, in collaboration with
the State and several other Vermont transit agencies, began a process to shed its non-
urban routes, which is intended to bring financial security to the agency. However, GMT
continues to face structural challenges related to federal funding inconsistencies and will
likely continue to face budget shortages and service reductions. More information about
public transit can be found in the Transportation Conditions appendix of this assessment.




 Page 46 of 52
Municipal planning in neighboring cities and towns
Chittenden County residents and visitors experience life across and beyond municipal
boundaries; Burlington is impacted by plans and projects being developed in neighboring
cities and towns, and vice versa. Over a third of people working in Burlington reside in a
different municipality, and 60% of Chittenden County residents report working and residing
in different towns per VHFA analysis. Ongoing coordination between Burlington and its
three neighbors, South Burlington, Winooski, and Colchester on mobility and other border
topics is essential. Coordination between the region’s four cities, Burington, South
Burlington, Winooski, and Essex Junction is also particularly important as the region
prepares to meet its 2050 housing targets (discussed further in the Housing and Land Use
sections of this assessment), as these cities will need to collectively develop the majority
of the region’s new housing. These four cities are also currently collaborating with CCRPC
on a project to assess and address barriers to the development of infill housing.

Two of Burlington’s neighbors, Winooski and Colchester, are updating their municipal
plans on the same timeline as Burlington. This offers opportunities to find areas of overlap
and collaboration, particularly along municipal borders and through public engagement.
Housing availability and affordability are expected to be key topics for engagement in all
three cities.

The Winooski River forms the border between Burlington and Winooski, with the Main
Street Bridge forming the primary connection between the two cities (from downtown
Winooski to Burlington’s Old East End). The 1929 bridge carries approximately 25,000
vehicles per day and is nearing the end of its service life. In addition to addressing the poor
condition of the bridge, the state’s planned reconstruction project will address broader
traffic safety concerns and add pedestrian and bicycle accommodations. Public
engagement to date has highlighted resident concerns in both cities about impacts to
traffic, access for people walking and biking, and to nearby residences and businesses
associated with the construction project, which is expected to begin in 2027.

Additional engagement conducted by Winooski during other planning efforts and in
preparation for their Comprehensive Plan update has also highlighted broader public
support for improved walking and biking connections between the two cities, particularly
to connect open and recreational spaces on both sides of the river. Winooski’s 2024 Walk
Bike Plan identified a walking/biking connection between Memorial Park in Winooski and
Burlington’s Intervale Center as a priority project and recommended a scoping study to
explore possibilities.

The Winooski River also forms the border between Burlington and Colchester, in
Burlington’s New North End and with North Avenue serving as a primary connector




 Page 47 of 52
between the communities. Engagement in the New North End and the development of
planBTV: NNE found that many Colchester residents utilize the commercial corridor and
amenities along North Avenue for routine shopping trips and other needs. Colchester’s
planned housing development in early stages of their Comprehensive Plan update is more
limited than Burlington and surrounding cities, as the town currently lacks wastewater and
utilities to enable more development in many of its neighborhoods, including those that
abut Burlington. Even so, housing remains a major issue for Colchester and will be central
to their upcoming planning process.

South Burlington and Burlington share a long border and significant connective
infrastructure, including busy travel corridors (primarily Route 2/Main St and Route
7/Shelburne Road). The completion of the Champlain Parkway in summer 2026 will open
additional multimodal connections between the cities and to important destinations in
each, including Oakledge and Red Rocks parks, and is expected to expand access and
reduce congestion in Burlington’s South End. Other mobility-focused projects the two
cities are collaborating on include traffic signal coordination on Shelburne Road and
around Queen City Park Road, and a scoping study for the entire Main Street corridor from
Burlington into South Burlington, including the continued planning of a pending active
transportation connection over I-89. This study is underway, led by Burlington and CCRPC,
and will identify several complementary preferred alternatives for various sections of the
corridor.

In terms of land use, South Burlington’s most recent Comprehensive Plan update, adopted
in early 2024, focuses strongly on climate resilience as a guiding principle. As this plan is
implemented and additional planning related to state housing targets and future land use
planning proceeds, South Burlington has been encouraging dense development of its City
Center area as well as infill along the Routes 2 and 7 corridors and throughout the city,
including via updates to its zoning code. South Burlington’s planned land use and housing
development priorities are generally compatible with Burlington’s, and the cities continue
to coordinate on infill development strategies and other topics.

Regional planning impacting Burlington
CCRPC is also in the process of developing the 2026 ECOS Regional Plan, with a draft
recently submitted for preliminary review. A key component of this plan focuses on
developing future land use maps and housing targets as required by State Acts 47 and 181,
supporting Burlington and other Chittenden County municipalities in comprehensive
planning to meet state housing targets. Recently updated targets by municipality from
CCRPC are referenced in the Housing section of this assessment. CCRPC also forecasts




 Page 48 of 52
the county’s 2050 population to grow by 14% from 2015 levels, with a 25% increase in
households and a 35% increase in employment during the same time period.




 Page 49 of 52
 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, February 10, 2026, 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 ☒ Stella Jordan, Senior Planner
 ☒ Alexander Friend
 Public Attendance: Mindy Watts, Kylee Pierce, Kate McCarthy, Taylor Newton, Sharon
 Bushor



 1. Agenda
 Call to Order: 6:30pm
 Changes to Agenda: Addition of slides (posted) related to Item 5, planBTV 2050; and a memo
 (posted) related to Item 7, 2026 Meeting Schedule.

 2. Public Forum
 Discussed the proposed Joint Committee meeting format for the
 Inclusionary Zoning Amendment, noting this may eliminate some public
 input opportunities and stressing the importance of providing clarity on
 the process, timeline, and public input opportunities. Discussed the
 Scope of Work for planBTV 2050 (posted), expressing support for the
 Sharon Bushor: emphasis on climate resilience, concern for language about the need for
 change, and concern for metrics related to land use and land value that
 may not adequately account for environmental protection needs.
 Suggested that taxpayers should be included in the list of planBTV
 stakeholders to engage, and that the City and consultants take
 engagement seriously.

 3. Chair’s Report
 A. Montroll shared an update on the joint meeting of the Planning Commission, Development
 Review Board, Design Advisory Board, and Conservation Board on February 3.

 4. Director’s Report
 • C. Dillard shared additional details about the February 3 joint meeting, noting that this
 meeting is held annually as an opportunity for the DRB, DAB, and Conservation Board to
 hear about the work of the Office of City Planning and the Planning Commission. He
 shared several topics discussed: planBTV: New North End; Inclusionary Zoning and other
 amendments; the Office of City Planning’s general work plan; and strategies to develop



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 50 of 52
Burlington Planning Commission Minutes p. 2

 housing on city-owned land, as well as how the Comprehensive Plan will integrate
 sustainability and conservation priorities.
 • C. Dillard noted that consultants working on planBTV 2050 were in Burlington the week of
 February 9 for a site visit to meet with City staff and tour the City.

5. planBTV 2050: Consultant Introductions & Q+A
 Mindy Watts and Kylee Pierce from Interface Studio presented an overview of the planBTV
 2050 consultant team, project structure and timeline, key priorities for the unified planning
 process, and public engagement strategies. See recording for full discussion (Timestamp
 00:12:24).
 Discussion Notes:
 • J. Randall, M. Watts, and C. Dillard discussed the scenario planning process. M. Watts
 and C. Dillard described plans for engaging the community to explore different growth
 and development scenarios and develop a preferred vision, then test that vision
 against external trends and future uncertainties. M. Gaughan noted that the Planning
 Commission can play an important role in developing and testing scenarios.
 • E. Mahnke discussed Burlington’s housing crisis and strong legacy of affordable
 housing work, and asked about Interface’s experience working with municipalities on
 housing issues. M. Watts shared several examples from Interface’s work in other cities
 on affordable housing strategies and with challenges related to homelessness.
 • A. Montroll discussed the Planning Commission’s role and oversight in developing
 planBTV 2050. He encouraged frequent updates, collaboration, and Commission
 discussions throughout the planning process.

6. CCRPC: Preapplication Review of 2026 ECOS Regional Plan by Land Use
 Review Board
 K. McCarthy and T. Newton from the Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission
 (CCRPC) presented feedback CCRPC received from the state Land Use Review Board (LURB)
 on the draft 2026 ECOS Plan Future Land Use (FLU) Map and discussed possible changes to
 the FLU Map and the process for LURB review. See recording for full discussion (Timestamp
 00:41:10).
 Discussion Notes:
 • M. Gaughan expressed frustration about some of the LURB’s feedback, discussing the
 review process with K. McCarthy and T. Newton. T. Newton noted that this process is
 new and complex, but has helped CCRPC gain valuable insight about the type of
 evidence the LURB is looking for to demonstrate the land uses that RPCs and
 municipalities are planning for.
 • J. Randall discussed transition and infill designations, suggesting that these are not
 suited to Burlington’s land use. She and T. Newton discussed Winooski’s FLU Map,
 which centers growth downtown as well as along corridors extending out of the
 downtown core.
 • K. McCarthy, J. Randall and C. Dillard discussed Burlington’s previous planning for
 future land use.
 • E. Mahnke discussed downtown designations and inquired about Act 250 exemptions
 tied to different tiers of planned growth designation. T. Newton clarified Tier 1A Act 250
 exemption eligibility for land use designations and discussed the 3 Steps within the
 Center designations, which each confer different benefits for development. M.
 Gaughan discussed some of the financial benefits.
 • J. Randall, E. Mahnke, and K. McCarthy discussed benefits and limitations related to
 the different Tiers and Steps, options available to municipalities regarding LURB
 recommendations, and the LURB’s final decision-making process.
 • Commissioners discussed the LURB’s recommendations about Cambrian Rise,
 indicating a general preference for changing the FLU designation as recommended.




 Page 51 of 52
Burlington Planning Commission Minutes p. 3

 • Commissioners and C. Dillard discussed the South End FLU designation and one of the
 LURB’s recommended options for the South End, which involves connecting the South
 End to Downtown as one planned Downtown Center. E. Mahnke expressed concern
 about potential displacement of the artist community in the South End under
 development pressures. M. Gaughan discussed the financial, programmatic, and
 development benefits a Step 3 designation could confer, the need to support the
 SECORD project and maximize opportunities for appropriate density, and highlighted
 the distinction between the FLU designation and the existing local zoning regulations.
 Commissioners discussed what a connection could look like.
 • Commissioners and T. Newton discussed updating the designation of the proposed
 Village Center on Shelburne Road to a Planned Growth Area to address LURB
 comments.
 • Commissioners, staff, and K. McCarthy discussed LURB comments about the Planned
 Growth Area in the New North End near the mouth of the Winooski River, which is
 surrounded by conservation land. There was not unanimous agreement among
 Commissioners about how to designate this area.
 • E. Mahnke suggested staff engage the South End Arts and Businesses Association
 (SEABA) regarding the planned Downtown Center connection.

7. 2026 Meeting Schedule
  Staff and Commissioners discussed the schedule of Planning Commission meetings throughout
  CY 2026, including potential rescheduling needs and priority topics. See recording for full
  discussion (Timestamp 01:48:00).
  Discussion Notes:
 • Commissioners and staff discussed undertaking a joint committee process with the City
 Council Ordinance Committee to develop the Inclusionary Zoning amendment.


8. Commissioner Items
 A. Montroll: Noted that the next Planning Commission meeting is on February 24.
 Asked about how the ModGov restructuring process is going for the
 E. Malone: Office of City Planning, and about the CEDO Director’s role as Interim
 Chief of Staff.
 Asked about the planBTV Project Advisory Committee, and the possibility
 E. Mahnke: of the Planning Commission designating an alternate representative to
 the PAC.
 E. Malone: Requested an update on Za-26-02 Downtown Fences.

9. Adopt Minutes and Accept Communications
 Action: Review and approve the January 13, 2025 Planning Commission meeting
 minutes and review and accept any communications
 Motion by: E. Mahnke Seconded by: R. Nick Vote: Unanimous
 Notes or Corrections: N/A

10. Adjournment
 Action: Motion to Adjourn Time of Adjournment: 8:40 pm
 Motion by: R. Nick Seconded by: E. Mahnke Vote: Unanimous




 Page 52 of 52