Please see the Event URL for the Agenda and Zoom links.
The agenda starts with a work session on a proposed amendment to the development agreement with the developers of Cambrian Rise on North Ave. to lift a cap on the number of housing units allowed, currently 950 units in 14 buildings. According to CEDO, 316 units are built and 251 are under construction. 2029 is the projected date of completion for all units. The developer requests the cap be lifted so the project can to build more units under the current zoning law. That law doesn't regulate the number of units; it regulates the amount of floor area that can be built based on the size of the property. It is unclear from the materials posted with the agenda what the change in the number of units will be or what the size of new units will be. We have allotted 45 minutes to discuss this and approval sought on deliberative item 8.2. If you are interested in increasing housing and affordability to moderate to low income people, ask questions of the council and CEDO at public forum and elsewhere.
The first of 5 other deliberative items is a proposed major zoning change, the Neighborhood Code, Part 1. The purpose is to increase density in the low and medium density zoning districts, allowing for duplexes, triplexes, and quads, townhouses and other small multiunit buildings. The changes would reduce setbacks between buildings and neighboring properties. Councilors have receive criticisms, particularly from Ward 1, that the proposal will exacerbate flooding and other problems associated with over-development.
The proposal comes from a joint committee of the Planning Commission and the City Council's Ordinance Committee. This joint committee held nine public meetings between Oct. 4 and Jan. 9. It is not clear what the public comments were and how they were incorporated into the proposal now before the council. 45 minutes is allotted for discussion with the proposed action being the first reading of the ordinance and the warning of a public hearing. People concerned about the balance between the need for new housing and the proper amount of density should make comments to councilors, at public forum, and any public hearings.
The next item is my proposal to put a ballot item on the March election to close a loophole in the carbon fee ordinance we just adopted. The ordinance requires voter approval to impose the fee on carbon emissions. Last year's approval did not cover all fuels that emit CO2 or other greenhouse gases (GhGs). The proposal fixes that problem, allowing us to tailor the ordinance to the state's clean heat standard. Given the climate emergency, I believe we have to act now and give the voters the chance to cover all harmful emissions.
The next item is also my proposal. It explores further changes to the carbon fee ordinance by asking our climate change committee, the TEUC, to look at the fee we are charging, the size and nature of the buildings we are charging it to, and the fuels to be covered. The proposal calls for public hearings with the range of interested stakeholders with the goal of coming back to the council with a ballot proposal in time to make it on the ballot of the August Vermont state primary election. Again, given the climate emergency, I believe we need to continue taking strong and prompt action to limit emissions as much as possible in the shortest time possible.
The last climate item is a resolution to have the Electric and the Permitting & Inspections departments review how to best improve our climate policies to reduce GhGs in buildings under 50,000 sf, the threshold set by the carbon fee ordinance. The deadline for the departments' reports with recommendations would be November 1, 2024 so it would not ready for voter approval until March 2025. While this is not necessarily in conflict with my resolutions, it would be a delaying tactic if it were used as an excuse to keep my ballot item off this town meeting agenda.
The final deliberative item is the Mayor's request for a 3 cent increase in the dedicated tax for the police and fire departments to cover inflation since the last increase 4 years ago, and increases in police and fire budgets the council made to deal with the public safety crisis. All or part of the increase can be avoided if new revenues or cuts in next year's budget are found. I think this is an important proposal to keep moving forward on having more officers and other public safety services to deal with the drug, mental health, and property and violent crime problems in the city.
If you have questions or comments regarding the agenda or other city issues, feel free to contact me at gbergman@burlingtonvt.gov. Thanks.