Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Neighborhood Code topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council adopts Neighborhood Code amendments to enable ‘missing middle’ housing; ordinance clears unanimously
Summary
Council adopted zoning amendments (Neighborhood Code part 2, Ordinance 25‑02) to allow pocket neighborhoods, row houses and scaled planned-unit developments, plus technical fixes to footprint and design-review rules; planning staff and public commenters said changes will enable projects such as housing for adults with developmental disabilities.
The Burlington City Council voted unanimously to adopt a package of amendments to the city’s zoning code intended to facilitate mid-scale “missing middle” housing across residential neighborhoods.
Planning Director Charles Dillard and Principal Planner Sarah Morgan presented the Neighborhood Code part 2 package, which adds standards to allow planned-unit developments (PUDs) at smaller scales, pocket neighborhoods (cottage courts with shared common space) and fee-simple row houses (townhouses designed to enable ownership). The amendments also make technical changes related to design review, accessory structures and density-bonus language, and they add a narrowly drafted footnote to allow greater building footprint flexibility for specialized residential uses.
Members of the public and housing developers spoke in favor. Kirsten Merryman-Shapiro of Champlain Housing Trust described a prior site-selection process for housing for adults with developmental and intellectual disabilities; she said the code change would help accommodate the type and scale of additions needed to make those projects viable. Sharon Buscher, a resident who testified online, supported the code overall but urged removing parking and drive access from central common areas in pocket neighborhoods to preserve air quality and safety for children.
Planner Morgan said the ordinance committee amended pocket-neighborhood language to disallow parking orientation or vehicle circulation through common areas; that change was shown in the committee’s redlined edits. Councilors asked planning staff about fire and emergency access, universal design for aging-in-place, and minimum unit-size standards. Staff said the standards were designed to meet fire-code requirements and that broader housing forums with AARP and other partners were underway to address aging-in-place and universal-design issues.
Why it matters: The adopted code aims to loosen barriers to a range of smaller-scale housing types—cottage courts, townhouses and smaller mixed developments—so the city can add diverse housing types without requiring large-lot redevelopment or out-of-scale building forms.
What’s next: Planning staff will implement the amended standards; developers and nonprofit housing providers said they expect to bring projects forward that rely on the new footprint flexibility and PUD tiers. Councilors and staff also agreed to continue technical outreach to fire, public-safety and accessibility stakeholders as projects move into permitting.
Speakers quoted are taken verbatim from the meeting record.
