Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - City Council - 03/09/2020CITY COUNCIL 9 March 2020 The South Burlington City Council held a special reorganization and business meeting on Monday, 9 March 2020, at 6:30 p.m. in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset Street. MEMBERS PRESENT: H. Riehle, Chair; M. Emery, T. Barritt, T. Chittenden, D. Kaufman ALSO PRESENT: K. Dorn, City Manager; T. Hubbard, Deputy City Manager; P. Conner, Director of Planning & Zoning; M. Mittag, M. Simoneau, J. Kochman, R. Greco, S. Dopp, A. Gill, J. Louisosn, M. Ostby, E. Langfeldt, R. Gonda, F. von Turkevich, J. Morway, A. Chalnick, J. Nick, J. Larkin, T. O’Connell, K. Lord, other members of the public Mr. Dorn presided over the meeting until a Chair was elected. Mr. Chittenden was not present at the beginning of the meeting. 1. Instructions on Leaving the Building in Case of an Emergency: Mr. Dorn provided instructions in case of an emergency. 2. Election of City Council officers: Mr. Dorn opened the floor for nominations for City Council Chair. Mr. Barritt nominated Ms. Riehle. Mr. Kaufman seconded. There were no further nominations, and Ms. Riehle was elected 4-0 and presided over the remainder of the meeting. She opened the floor for nominations for Vice Chair and Council Clerk. Mr. Kaufman nominated Ms. Emery for Vice Chair and Mr. Barritt for Clerk. Ms. Emery seconded. Motion passed 4-0. Ms. Riehle thanked the Council for its support and said she will continue to be open and respectful even though Council members come with different ideas and different skills. She noted that the Council has an enormous list of things to complete and she hoped they can continue to move forward with budgeting and bonding and also work with the School Board. 3. Set dates and time for regular meetings being held March 2020-February 2021: Members agreed to continue to meet on the first and third Mondays of the month at 6:30 p.m. 4. Annual Appointments to be made by majority vote of City Council pursuant to City Charter Chapter 13, Section 301(2): CITY COUNCIL 6 MARCH 2020 PAGE 2 Ms. Emery moved to approve the following annual appointments for a one year term: City Treasurer Tom Hubbard City Attorney Andrew Bolduc Zoning Administrator Dalila Hall Acting Assistant Zoning Administrator Paul Conner Acting Assistant Zoning Administrator Cathyann LaRose Acting Assistant Zoning Administrator Marla Keene Acting Assistant Zoning Administrator Betsy Brown First Constable Corporal Kevin Grealis Second Constable Officer Cassandra Ellison Grand Juror Kevin Dorn City Agent & Trustee of Public Funds Kevin Dorn Code Enforcement Officer Dalila Hall Acting Asst. Code Enforcement Officer Paul Conner Acting Asst. Code Enforcement Officer Cathyann LaRose Acting Asst. Code Enforcement Officer Marla Keene Acting Asst. Code Enforcement Officer Betsy Brown Telecommunications Officer Dalila Hall Acting Asst. Telecom Officer Paul Conner Acting Asst. Telecom Officer Marla Keene Emergency Management Director Terry Francis Health Officer Justin Rabidoux Mr. Kaufman seconded the motion which then passed 4-0. 5. Designate Official Paper of Record: Mr. Kaufman moved to designate The Other Paper as official paper of record. Ms. Emery seconded. Motion passed 4-0. 6. Designate Official Depositories: Mr. Barritt moved to designate TD Bank as the official depository. Ms. Emery seconded. Motion passed 4-0. CITY COUNCIL 9 MARCH 2020 PAGE 3 7. Appoint Council Representative to the Pension Advisory Committee: Ms. Emery moved to appoint Mr. Barritt as Representative to the Pension Advisory Committee. Mr. Kaufman seconded. Motion passed 4-0. 8. Comments and Questions from the public not related to the Agenda: Ms. Greco expressed concern with the amount of spending by candidates in the recent election campaign. She felt that this means only the wealthy will be able to run for office and make decisions. She asked the Council to something about this before the next election. Ms. Dopp felt this is a nationwide problem that is destroying the country. 9. Consent Agenda: a. Approve and Sign Disbursements b. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute a contract with Marathon Health to provide wellness and primary health care services to employees of the City of South Burlington With regard to item “b,” Mr. Dorn explained that several organizations are also looking at this. The obvious benefit is to address health of employees. It can operate as a primary care physician in addition to other services. The clinic will provide some primary care services in addition to wellness. From a policy standpoint, it is where the State is going. Marathon is now in 34 states. It is being fit up at the City’s expense. If other communities join, they will pay a prorated share. Marathon manages everything. A 1500 sq. ft. office will also provide health care for PC Construction and Vermont Country Store. Marathon will refer to other specialists when needed and may contract with other providers, if it is a lower cost provider. Mr. Dorn stressed that this is not a replacement for a primary care physician, and employees can keep their primary care physicians. Employees will not be docked for going in during work hours. The operation will be overseen by a physician. The rent on the office is $23,000 for the year, not including heat and cleaning. Ms. Emery moved to approve the Consent Agenda as presented. Mr. Kaufman seconded. Motion passed 4-0. CITY COUNCIL 9 MARCH 2020 PAGE 4 Mr. Chittenden arrived at this point of the meeting. 10. Convene as Liquor Control Commission to consider the following Applications: Night Flight, Inc. – request to move location of liquor license from 1710 Shelburne Road to 1712 Shelburne Cheese Traders & Wine Sellers, Second Class License Gonzo’s Indoor Golf, First Class and Third Class Restaurant/Bar License Holiday Inn (S. Burlington), First Class & Third Class Restaurant/Bar License Jiffy Mart #468, Second Class License Maplefields #52, Second Class License Shaw’s Beer & Wine, Second Class License Silver Palace, First Class & Third Class Restaurant/Bar License Sugarsnap, First Class & Third Class Commercial Kitchen License Target Store #T-3306, Second Class License Vermont Pool & Bar, First Class & Third Class Restaurant/Bar License & Outside Consumption Permit Walgreen’s #11526, Second Class License Zachary’s First Class Restaurant/Bar License Ms. Emery moved that the Council convene as Liquor Control Board. Mr. Chittenden seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Mr. Dorn noted that liquor licenses have to be renewed every year. This is the first batch. Mr. Kaufman moved to approve all of the liquor licenses presented. Ms. Emery seconded. Motion passed unanimously Mr. Barritt moved to reconvene as City Council. Mr. Chittenden seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 11. Council working session on the status of Interim Zoning and Council input regarding priorities: Ms. Riehle reviewed the history and noted that the Earth Economics report is not ready tonight and will be presented next week. CITY COUNCIL 9 MARCH 2020 PAGE 5 Mr. Conner noted that the Council had been provided with a written status report on IZ projects. Mr. Dorn said staff hopes for guidance from the Council regarding next steps to be taken. Mr. Conner said staff met with Regional Planning people to look at their resources. They responded with the limited amount of assistance they can provide, so staff is looking further afield. Mr. Dorn said there is still some funding in the consulting budget. Ms. Riehle said she had been under the impression that the PUDs need to be completed before all of the goals of IZ can be implemented. That is not necessarily true; what needs to be completed is work on Article 12. Mr. Conner said a year ago the Planning Commission was working on PUDs. One of the first questions in the PUD discussion was “what land should be removed from development?” The Commission felt a better way to look at resources, rather than when there is a PUD or subdivision is to look at the resource itself. At this point, drafts now tie together PUDs, subdivisions and Article 12. The Commission views these as a single project. The intent is for all 3 to be done at the same time. Ms. Riehle asked whether that will align with what the State is working on. Ms. Louisos said some resources are regulated by both State and local. Mr. Kaufman noted that Act 250 has changed tremendously. Mr. Conner said staff is following those changes. Ms. Emery said she wasn’t sure what “hazards” refer to. Mr. Conner said the Commission is looking at a variety of natural resources and put them I buckets as to how they are to be treated. Hazards have a long list of regulations and refer to such things as step slopes, flood plains, etc. They are largely no-build areas except for infrastructure and are generally to be removed from density calculations. Mr. Conner went on to explain that Level 1 resources are largely the forested habitat blocks. Regulation of these areas is more policy-related. The amount of land still counts in density calculation. The Commission will discuss whether there may be exceptions to this (e.g., a forest area in City Center or an exception for a very small lot). Mr. Kaufman asked how fare is all this from getting done. Mr. Conner said part of the answer come back to the City Council, settling what is the correct balance will allow the Commission to get to the finish line. Mr. Conner added that there has been feedback that additional or different things should be looked at at the same time. CITY COUNCIL 9 MARCH 2020 PAGE 6 Ms. Emery asked about the Conservation PUD and how it would work. Mr. Conner reviewed the history and noted that when there is a certain percentage of resources on a property, only 30% of the property could be developed, and 70% would have to be conserved. The city could also create PUD districts where there are conservation PUDs on a case by case basis. The current thinking is that when resources cover a very large percentage of the property, it would become a Conservation PUD. However, this is a bit of a “blunt instrument” and may not work for all properties because all properties are not the same. Mr. Conner explained that the PUD types require development to take place in a clustered form. Whatever the PUD type, a developer would have to build at least 4 per acre. If the developer doesn’t get TDRs, more land would be open. The Natural Resource Protection zones would be unbuildable. In most cases, Mr. Conner continued, the PUD would be the Traditional Neighborhood PUD. These would be a minimum of 4-acres, mostly residential, with provisions for a small store, and green spaces. TDRs would be a choice and would not be required. The objective would remain that buildable areas would be allowable for development up to 4/acre with purchased TDRs. Mr. Conner added that there would also be building types defined by height and other criteria which would create natural limitations on the scale of a development. Mr. Kaufman asked how he would be compensated for what he can’t develop but previously could. He felt that is the biggest crunch point. Mr. Conner said that is a discussion to have with the City Attorney. Mr. Chittenden said that “crunch point” is his concern and requires conversation with the City Attorney at some point. Mr. Barritt said it comes down to what the Council’s response is to the city and to landowners. He said he wouldn’t “trash ourselves over a few more units on a piece of land.” Mr. Kaufman questioned changing the rules once the game is underway. He felt you can’t deny someone the ability to do what is fair. Mr. Conner agreed there is a question of property rights and also the policy question of what the city wants to happen. Mr. Dorn asked where the Comprehensive Plan stands in the overall discussion. Ms. Emery said there are a lot of competing goals. Ms. Riehle said the LDRs don’t necessarily reflect the Comprehensive Plan. Ms. Emery asked about the link between Article 12 and Map 7. Mr. Conner explained that Article 12 is trying to achieve the goals in the Comprehensive Plan. There are competing goals, CITY COUNCIL 9 MARCH 2020 PAGE 7 and the Comprehensive Plan asks for balance. Every piece of land has value. There are natural resources. Development affects natural resources. Map 7 proposed what should be regulated. It doesn’t say everything should be non-developable. Mr. Conner went on to say that a big part of future PUDs looks at a larger picture, connectivity in many forms. The Planning Commission is looking at where things are already protected and whether there are “holes.” Ms. Louisos added that PUDs and Chapter 12 are always looked at together. Some things may call for a more detailed analysis, and there is a question as to whether there are resources to do that. Ms. Ostby stressed that “co-existing” can occur. It’s not all one thing or another. She noted that the Open Space Report is based on lot lines. She noted there are things other than regulatory measures. She noted that the Planning Commission is not looking at lot lines; it is looking at the resources. If there is a lot the city has a priority vision for, it would be helpful for the Commission to know that. Mr. Conner said there are tools available to the city for this (e.g., official city map). Mr. Chalnick said connectivity is the key. Map 7 provides that. It was taken from the State to provide the highest level of protection. It also drove the parcels identified in the Open Space Report. He felt there should be a connection between the IZ reports and regulations. Identified parcels shouldn’t be burdened by extra development. He also felt the open space and affordable housing have to be balanced and that some density should be moved out of the Southeast Quadrant. Ms. Morway said the first step is to figure out Section 12. She said they have been told a habitat block can be developed carefully. They spend 2 hours on the phone with the State today regarding slopes, etc. They are hearing 2 different stories. There is also a question of removing TDR value. She said that they would lose 80%^ of the value of their property because of slopes. She was concerned that by changing the rules, the city is diminishing people’s property values. Mr. von Turkevich said the owners of the 25 identified open space properties haven’t yet been brought into the discussion. Act 171 doesn’t touch Title 24 and didn’t get into Act 250. It is very important, he said, that local regulations be connected to Act 250; otherwise the city will end up in Court. Act 171 required a study committee to look at Act 250. The committee realized it had failed and needed more work. CITY COUNCIL 9 MARCH 2020 PAGE 8 Mr. von Turkevich said he isn’t surprised the city is struggling with this. He felt that dealing with TDRs will help. He also felt the habitat idea is not ready for prime time and will delay the process. Above all, landowners want their interests considered. Mr. Gonda urged the Council to take time to fit together all the moving parts and understand all the issues. Mr. Nick noted that he owns property (Hill Farm) zoned Industrial-Open Space. They could have built a bunch of industrial lots, but didn’t feel that was the right thing to do. Four years ago, they brought a mixed use plan to the Planning Commission, and it got a good review. They are still working toward that. However, now they could lose all the rights to that property. They want to know where this is headed. Ms. Riehle said the final decision may be a combination of ideas. That is the challenge. Mr. Nick said they want to be treated fairly. Mr. Mittag cited the volume of work facing the Planning Commission. He felt that completing Article 12 and the RDRs are the 2 things that will give landowners more certainty. He felt it could be done with added resources. Ms. Dopp said the South Burlington Land Trust is “chewing on” how to make people “whole,” but it is complicated. Ms. Greco felt the Open Space Report is not getting enough action. It may be unfair to the landowner, but we don’t get to choose where natural resources are. PUDs have to fit in where they fit with resources. She felt the Council has to think about the “greater good.” She acknowledged this may be hard to do when people are not treated fairly. Mr. Langfeldt said developers know that things change. He also noted that many investments are long-term. He said they have been patient, they have paid taxes, and they have invested in the community as well. He did not want those facts diminished. Mr. Simoneau of the Affordable Housing Committee stressed that he is not a landowner. He is concerned about the environment. But he also supports housing at all levels. He said that South Burlington is part of a greater community. He urged the Council to spend more time on housing as well as on the environment. There needs to be a balance. CITY COUNCIL 9 MARCH 2020 PAGE 9 Mr. O’Connell, owner of the Windjammer and other property, said he was involved in the Form Based Code discussions. He felt that this process is different from what happened in the past, and it his him “in the pit of the stomach.” He wants the process to be transparent. Ms. Riehle asked what is not transparent. Ms. Morway said everyone is saying something different, the committees, the Planning Commission, etc. Ms. Riehle stressed that nothing is law yet, and the economic piece is yet to be presented. Mr. O’Connell said being transparent is being part of the decision. He wanted to be involved. He has been a taxpayer for 40 years and sometimes feels he is being looked at as a “bad guy.” Mr. Kaufman said he sees the O’Connell property as important for the economic health of the community. Mr. Larkin said he is confused. He noted how hard it is to develop in South Burlington. Now he is hearing it may be even harder. He said that if the goal is to include development, it is not being made easier. Ms. Riehle said there is a goal for development in the City Center. Mr. Gill said the Open Space map of the 25 parcels said they were evaluated for environment on the basis of 16 criteria. However, those parcels don’t have the most of those 16 criteria, and it is unclear why they were chosen. The Windjammer property scored 5 while others with a score of 10 weren’t chosen. He noted that the Open Space Committee Chair said “it was subjective.” Ms. Lord felt the changes are being based on more scientific information being available. She felt there are many ways to protect the 25 identified properties. Some may conserve only part of a parcel. There could be Conservation PUDs. The question is how the resources can be evaluated to provide the best information and what is best type of PUD to be chosen. Ms. Emery noted how decision were made by reading from the Open Space IZ report. She asked how the Planning Commission accepted the TDR report. Ms. Louisos said the Planning Commission reviewed and discussed the report and considered the next steps in the bigger context. That information was provided to the City Council. There was also a presentation of the Open Space IZ report. The Commission said it was not going to regulate the identified parcels as parcels. They would be regulated per Section 12. Anything more is up to the Council. CITY COUNCIL 9 MARCH 2020 PAGE 10 Mr. Conner added that the Planning Commission also had staff put on the work list that the 25 parcels might have the option to be TDR sending areas, thought this would not be required. The big question is where to put the receiving areas. Ms. Louisos said the Planning Commission is trying hard to be transparent. 12. Other Business: Mr. Dorn noted that Cairns Arena is groundbreaking for the addition on the 20th or 23rd of March. He will confirm the date. Mr. Chittenden reminded members that the 21st of March is the Firefighters’ Appreciation dinner. As there was no further business to come before the Council Mr. Chittenden moved to adjourn. Mr. Barritt seconded. Motion passed unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 9:23 p.m.