HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - City Council - 05/05/2008 (2) , CAK6 1R , (=
CITY COUNCIL 5 MAY 2008
The South Burlington City Council held a regular meeting on Monday, 5 May 2008,
at 7:00 p.m., in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset St.
Members Present: D. O'Rourke, Acting Chair; M. Boucher, S. Dooley, S. Magowan
(arrived late)
Also Present: C. Hafter, City Manager; D. Gravelin, Assistant City Manager; Rep. H.
Head; B. Hoar, Public Works Department; P. Engel, D. Barker, T. Burritt, C. Ryan, P.
Bennett,N. Carr, C. Carlson, T. Fowler, M. Kilorman, C. Ford, G. Edwards, L. Bresee,
R. Penniman, D. Rothman, L. Murphy, D. Austin, C. Wallace, B. David, M. Flaherty
1. Comments & Questions from the Audience,not related to Agenda items:
No issues were raised.
2. Announcements & City Manager's Report:
Mr. Hafter: On 22 April, the City received an Environmental Merit Award for its
Stormwater services. The City was cited for being a"model for managing water quality."
The Department of Justice has announced the appointment of South Burlington
Police Chief Trevor Whipple to the Medal of Valor Review Board.
Mr. Hafter will attend a meeting of the Unemployment Trust Board of VLCT,
Tuesday, 9 a.m.
The Correction Center Liaison Committee will meet on 7 May at the jail.
Mr. Hafter will attend a session on"Current Issues in Personnel Management" on
8 May.
The next City Council meeting will be on 19 May, 7 p.m.
3. Request from Citizens for a 3-way Stop at Farrell Street & Eastwoods Drive
intersection; discussion:
Mr. Hafter said he attended a meeting at Grandway Commons following an accident in
which a citizen was struck in a cross-walk. He has also received comments regarding
problems at the intersection just up the block from the cross-walk.
Mr. Hafter noted that after the opening of the new housing units, the East Woods
neighborhood was experiencing an influx of 3000 cars a day. The city felt this was not
appropriate for that residential neighborhood. A one-way street was created, which cut
off 40%of the traffic from East Woods. Farrell St. was relocated and renamed
CITY COUNCIL
5 MAY 2008
PAGE 2
Eastwood Drive. According to Police, there has been one accident at the intersection and
several other accidents in the area.
Mr. Halter noted that changing to a 3-way stop is more difficult than just putting up a
sign.
Mr. Engel's said he was encouraged by the Police to talk to the City Council. He said the
area is stuck with traffic because the Southern Connector was never built. When the
roads were changed, he felt there should have been a 3-way stop put in there. There are
many children in the neighborhood and it is hard to see cars coming from under the
Interstate. There is also a lot of traffic turning left in to the businesses there. Mr. Ingalls
felt a 3-way stop would slow traffic down and address some safety concerns.
Ms. Barker said existing signs are fine,but they are not slowing traffic down, and there
are more people crossing the road to get to the stores. She felt something more
permanent needs to be done.
Mr. Fowler, Manager of Grandway Commons, said that since the Commons was built, he
has had concerns for safety. There are visually impaired people crossing the road, and it
was only a matter of time before someone got hit. He noted that cars seem to "gun it"to
get around the corner faster.
Ms. Kilorman said the area used to be a great place to walk,but as soon as the road was
put in, it became "an accident waiting to happen."
Ms. Carlson felt a sign is needed at Swift Street. Mr. Hoar said the crosswalk there has
been eliminated because it was too dangerous. Ms. Carlson said that now leaves no way
to cross.
Mr. Halter said the city will put up more signs.
Ms. Ryan asked what a 3-way sign would do to help people cross from Grandway
Commons to Shaws. Mr. Hoar said he is concerned that a 3-way sign would increase
speeds at the other end.
Mr. Burritt said there are 2 issues: speed in front of Grandway and the intersection. He
felt a 3-way stop sign would increase pollution and double the noise in the neighborhood.
He also noted that traffic backs up when Rice H. S. lets out. He felt a 3-way sign would
help that.
Mr. Can asked about the possibility of speed bumps.
CITY COUNCIL
5 MAY 2008
PAGE 3
Mr. Halter said they can't make the bumps as high as they need to be to slow people
down. He added that the road is a connector street. He felt that ultimately there will have
to be a light there.
A resident of Grandway said people stood outside with signs. Drivers would slow down,
then"gun it."
Mr. Hoar suggested that they could narrow the cross-walk areas from 28 to 24 feet.
Mr. Bresee felt there are several places along the way where the road could be narrowed
a bit.
Mr. Hafter said the city will have to consider different options, and also keep the two
problems separate.
Rep. Head said she wasn't sure of the best solution. She also cited confusion at the
intersection as a contributing factor.
Mr. Hoar noted that the engineer who designed the intersection has agreed to look at it in
light of the problems.
4. Local Concerns Meeting: Solution for Third Lane at Staples Plaza: The U.S.
2/I-89 Southbound On-Ramp:
Ms. Ford reviewed the history of the area. She noted that this meeting is part of the
process established by the Dept. of Transportation to get public input. There will be
follow-up meetings in a few months.
Mr. Edwards showed the proposed project area, about 1000 feet long. He noted there
was a corridor management plan done in 2007, and this project was one of the
recommendations of that study. He indicated the specific area where lanes are reduced in
front of Staples Plaza. The study felt that US2 would be improved by extending the
"third lane"to the Interstate entrance.
Mr. Edwards noted this is a Class 1 highway, maintained by the City of South Burlington.
It handles over 40,000 vehicles a day and is one of the busiest pieces of highway in the
State.
Mr. Edwards indicated the sidewalk and bike lanes and showed where they are
interrupted. He also pointed out the public transit stops.
In 2005, the intersection at Staples Plaza was at a level of service "F" in the morning and
"E" in the afternoon.
CITY COUNCIL
5 MAY 2008
PAGE 4
Mr. Boucher asked if there would be a 2-lane approach to the Interstate such as there is
on Shelburne Road. Mr. Edwards said that is a possibility. They will consider traffic
volumes on the ramp to see if there is a need for 2 lanes.
Ms. Dooley asked what would happen to the sidewalk if a lane is added. Mr. Edwards
said it would be relocated.
Mr. Carr cited a tremendous problem getting onto Williston Rd. from Spear Street at rush
hour. He was not sure a third lane would solve that. He also noted that at times it is
difficult of get out of Champlain Farms if you stop there for gas. He felt it would become
more difficult if that lane fills up. Mr. Can also noted that if you're in Staples and want
to get out, there are 2 options. He said he suspected one of those would be closed if there
was a 3rd lane, which would make it harder to get out of Staples.
Mr. Rothman asked if the third lane would be continued across the bridge. Mr. Edwards
said that was a recommendation and will be analyzed and considered.
Mr. Hafter noted the city is concerned with taking a"do-able"project and making it so
big it doesn't get done.
Ms. Dooley asked if the project would eliminate a row of parking at Staples. She felt that
parking area is already a"disaster," and navigating the parking lot is difficult.
A resident noted that the area is dangerous for pedestrians. By opening the second egress
from Staples, traffic backs up there and makes it hard to get to the light. He also felt the
"jughandle"has to be considered. Mr. Hafter noted the "jughandle"belongs to the City
of Burlington.
Mr. O'Rourke observed that drive behavior creates a lot of the problems.
Mr. Penniman of UVM said the City of Burlington has passed a"do not block the box"
ordinance. Violators will be ticketed. He also noted that the Main St. signals are all
coordinated and need to be tied into the signals on Williston Rd.
Mr. Austin commented that it is very dangerous to ride a bike in the area.
Ms. Dooley felt the light at the Sheraton is not long enough for people to get across the
road.
Ms. Wallace said the plan will work hard to accommodate cyclists and pedestrians. Mr.
David said he bicycles there frequently and has tried many things to make himself seen.
CITY COUNCIL
5 MAY 2008
PAGE 5
Rep. Head said it is very important to continue to plan for the third lane. She echoed
concerns with the "jughandle." She felt it would make a difference to have a lane go all
the way to Dorset St.
Mr. Hafter said the city would hope for a minimum impact on businesses in the area.
Mr. Murphy, representing Staples Plaza, said he was concerned that the project has begun
with the presumption that a piece of Staples land will be "knocked off." He asked that
other alternatives be considered or"cooperation would dry up very quickly." He said this
is a very important business area, and loss of parking would have a dramatic effect on
tenants and on the ability to maintain leases. He felt it was not realistic to give everyone
what they want without having a devastating effect on Staples Plaza.
Mr. Bresee said it may be time to offer that developer ways to improve parking and
traffic flow and to make a better solution for everyone.
Mr. Carr asked that the increasing flow of traffic from new development also be
considered.
5. Consideration of Entertainment License Application from National Night
Out,Dorset Park, 4-5 August 2008:
Mr. Gravelin noted that setup will be on 4 August, and the event will be on 5 August
from Noon-l 0 p.m.
Mr. Magowan moved to approve the Entertainment License for National Night Out as
presented. Mr. Boucher seconded. Motion passed unanimously.
6. Public Hearing on Amendments to the Sign Ordinance & Regulation of Signs
in Residential Zoning Districts; second reading of same:
Mr. Magowan moved to waive the second reading and open the public hearing. Mr.
Boucher seconded. Motion passed unanimously.
No public comment was received.
Mr. Magowan moved to close the public hearing and approve the amendments to the
Sign Ordinance and regulation of signs in residential zoning districts as presented. Ms.
Dooley seconded. Motion passed unanimously.
CITY COUNCIL
5 MAY 2008
PAGE 6
7. Review Agenda for Development Review Board Meeting on 6 May 2008:
No issues were raised.
8. Review Minutes of 21 April 2008:
The Minutes of 21 April could not be reviewed as there was not a quorum of those
present at that meeting.
9. Review Minutes of 26 April 2008:
The Minutes of 26 April could not be reviewed as there was not a quorum of those
present at that meeting.
10. Capital Equipment Refunding Notes:
Mr. Hafter said that the note is the second of 5-years at 2.95% for dump trucks and a
backhoe.
Mr. Magowan moved to approve the Capital Equipment notes and accompanying
documents as presented. Mr. Boucher seconded. Motion passed unanimously.
11. Liquor Control Board:
Mr. Boucher moved that the Council adjourn and reconvene as Liquor Control Board.
Mr. Magowan seconded. Motion passed unanimously.
Mr. Halter presented a liquor license renewal application from Quarry Hill Club. He said
the application was all in order.
Mr. Magowan moved to approve the liquor license renewal of Quarry Hill Club as
presented. Mr. Boucher seconded. Motion passed unanimously.
12. Sign Disbursement Orders:
Disbursement Orders were signed.
13. Executive Session:
Mr. Boucher moved the Council meet in executive session to discuss personnel issues
and to resume regular session only for the purpose of adjournment. Mr. Magowan
seconded. Motion passed unanimously.
CITY COUNCIL
5 MAY 2008
PAGE 7
14. Regular Session:
The City Council returned to regular session. Mr. Magowan moved adjournment. Ms.
Dooley seconded. The motion passed unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 10:00pm.
Clerk
CITY COUNCIL 21 APRIL 2008
The South Burlington City Council held a regular meeting on Monday,21 April
2008, at 7:00 p.m.,in the Conference Room, City Hall,575 Dorset St.
Members Present: C. Smith, Chair; M. Boucher, S. Dooley
Also Present: C. Hafter, City Manager; D. Gravelin,Assistant City Manager; R. Bliss,
Police Association; J. Nadeau, CWD; J. Melville
1. Comments & Questions from the Audience,not related to Agenda items:
Police Officer Bliss spoke to the issue of water infiltration in the Police facility. The
Police had a study done to see if water intrusion was beginning to compromise the
facility and causing health issues for the workers. The study found low traces of mold.
The roof needs to be replaced and the building completely cleaned. Officer Bliss said the
heating system has been cleaned.
Mr. Gravelin said the city has begun to get some quotes to get the work done. A. C.
Hawthorne is going to provide an assessment of the whole building. This will be
compared to Tim Duff s study. Air ducts are currently being cleaned, and that work
should be done next week. After that, the inside construction will be looked at (walls,
ceilings, etc.) to see what needs to be done.
Mr. Hafter stressed there is no disagreement about what needs to be done. He said he
may have to come to the Council for authority to use funds from the Rooms & Meals tax.
He felt a decision should be made at the second Council meeting in May.
Mr. Boucher asked if this is considered a 2-3 year fix. Mr. Gravelin said he would ask
how much time the work will buy.
2. Announcements and City Manager's Report:
Ms. Dooley: Noted that Robert Putnam, Professor of Public Policy at Harvard University,
will be speaking next Monday at UVM regarding the "rebuilding of America." Mr.
Hafter said he is an excellent speaker and well worth hearing.
Mr. Hafter: The City/Fire Department has been awarded a SAFER Grant which will be
presented by Senators Leahy(VT) and Dodd (Connecticut). A letter to The Other Paper
has been drafter by Mr. Magowan regarding the SAFER grant ballot item. Presentations
will also be made at 3 schools, on Channel 17, at the Rotary, and at a Senior Center.
A letter was received thanking the Police Department for not destroying the
moose that recently appeared in the City but"shooing" it back to a safer place.
a d
CITY COUNCIL
21 APRIL 2008
PAGE 2
At a meeting with Airport Manager Brian Searles, a protocol has drawn us to
address recent issues. The Airport will provide the city an annual plan for land
acquisition and will defer to the city on objections. Land on Picard Circle will be
upgraded with landscaping and berms within 60 days of the removal of houses. On 5 of
May, Airport Master Plan consultants will visit the Airport. City representatives will
attend that meeting. The master planning will be a public process, and the City of South
Burlington will be invited to participate in the land use planning process. Mr. Boucher
suggested noticing the Picard Circle about this. Ms. Dooley asked if soundproofing is
included in the agreement. Mr. Halter said the city will want that as part of the plan. Mr.
Hafter stressed that the city is concerned with meeting standards; it does not want to
decide which houses the Airport will buy.
Mr. Hafter will attend the Lake Champlain Chamber of Commerce Board of
Directors meeting on Wednesday. He will also attend the CCTA meeting. Mr. Magowan
will then take over as CCTA representative.
The next Council meeting agenda will include the Sign Ordinance amendments
and a"local concerns" meeting regarding the proposed additional lane in front of Staples
Plaza. A meeting on the same topic will be held on 14 May at UVM.
3. Public Hearing on Public Nuisance Ordinance; Second Reading of Same:
Mr. Melville cited the problem with stereos and sound systems and said he would like to
see an ordinance like the City of Burlington has. Mr. Smith said the proposed ordinance
will address those issues.
As there was no further public comment, Ms. Dooley moved to close the public hearing.
Mr. Boucher seconded.
Mr. Boucher then moved to waive the second reading and adopt the Public Nuisance
Ordinance as presented. Ms. Dooley seconded. Motion passed unanimously.
Mr. Hafter noted that this ordinance establishes graffiti as a civil penalty,but that does
not take away the ability to have it charged as a criminal penalty.
4. Consideration of Approval of Vermont WARN, Mutual Aid Agreement for
Water and Wastewater Utilities:
Mr. Nadeau explained the WARN agreement. He noted there has been a strong push for
intra-state agreements for water and wastewater utility operations. If the need arose,
South Burlington could call on someone with appropriate skills for help. WARN is run
by the utilities. Membership also enables the city to get FEMA reimbursement when
a • 4
CITY COUNCIL
21 APRIL 2008
PAGE 3
they step into an emergency. He urged the City of South Burlington to participate.
Mr. Boucher moved to approve the WARN agreement for mutual aid for water and
wastewater utilities as presented. Ms. Dooley seconded. Motion passed unanimously.
5. Review Minutes of 7 April 2008:
Mr. Boucher moved to approve the Minutes of 7 April 2008 as written. Ms. Dooley
seconded. Motion passed unanimously.
6. Sign Disbursement Orders:
Disbursement orders were signed.
7. Consideration of Entertainment License Application from: American Cancer
Society, Make Strides Against Breast Cancer Walk:
Mr. Hafter said the application is in order.
Mr. Boucher moved to approve the Entertainment License Application from the
American Cancer Society for an event on 19 October 2008 as presented. Ms. Dooley
seconded. Motion passed unanimously.
8. Liquor Control Board:
Mr. Boucher moved that the Council adjourn and reconvene as Liquor Control Board.
Ms. Dooley seconded. Motion passed unanimously.
Mr. Hafter presented a new Liquor License Application from Nothing But Noodles, 150
Dorset Street, and Liquor License Renewals from the following: Zen Garden, Orchid
Restaurant, Shelburne Road Exxon, and Outback Steakhouse. He said that all the
applications are in order.
Mr. Boucher moved to approve the Liquor License Applications as presented. Ms.
Dooley seconded. Motion passed unanimously.
As there was no further business to come before the Council, the meeting was adjourned
at 7:45 p.m.
Clerk
J
Chuck Hafter April 29, 2008
City Manager
City of South Burlington
Dorset Street
South Burlington, VT 05403
Dear Chuck,
This is to confirm our discussion today regarding the prospective purchase by the airport
of my property at 7 Shamrock Road. (One of the 3 remaining houses adjacent to the new
Homeland Security Headquarter Facility) Enclosed is a copy of the letter I sent to Brian
Searles, Director of Aviation outlining the ongoing promises the airport has made to
purchase our property. Basically, we purchased the property with the idea of converting
it to a duplex. There were some sewer issues at the site which delayed the original plans.
For at least the last four years, however, we held off on our plans with the expectation
that the airport would purchase our house in the next year's allocation ,and each year we
got pushed back as other houses became the priority. We have continued to lose money
holding this house, making repairs, trying to lease it for whatever we could get, etc. In
the meanwhile the area has been rezoned to "Airport"which means we no longer have a
conforming lot, we could not meet set back or sideline requirements to use the lot,no one
would purchase the house next to the Helicopter Facility, the house on the Saint
Michael's side of our house is being purchased by the airport, and the other neighbor
(Brady) does not wish to sell due primarily to his age, until he dies, leaving our house the
only remaining house on Shamrock Road. It makes no sense that the city of South
Burlington would stop the airport from fulfilling what I consider it's obligation to
purchase this property. After all if it were not for the promise of the airport to purchase
the property, I would have opposed the zoning change or at least gotten a pelulit in
advance of the zoning change so I could use the property and stop the bleeding. I
understand that the City Council has put a moratorium on the airport purchasing houses
other than those that were put on some priority list. I think that the airport inadvertently
left my house off the list and I hope that the City Council can understand the frustration
of owning a property that should not have been caught in the middle of a discussion
which should not apply to this property. I believe the airport would go along with the
purchase of my property if this correction could be made. I understand I will be able to
speak to the City Council on May 16, 2008 at their meeting.
Thank you for your consideration
Res ectfully submitted,
`Jack Russell
April 22, 2008
Brian Searles
Director of Aviation
1200 Airport Drive
South Burlington, VT 05403
Dear Brian,
I am writing to you regarding a property that I own at 7 Shamrock Road in South
Burlington, Vermont. For the past four years the airport was supposed to acquire my
property. During that time we have had difficulty renting the property,have had to keep
making repairs waiting for the airport to act ( our original intention was to coM4rt the
property to a duplex). When we were told the airport was going to purchase the property,
we abandoned our plans to build a duplex. Since then the area has been rezoned to"
Airport Zone" so we cannot do anything with our property but to keep trying to rent it,
make repairs, and lose money. With the change in zoning (which we would have opposed
if it were not for the promise that the airport would purchase our property) the lot size is
now too small to meet the requirements to build an airport related structure unless we try
to create a PUD which is unlikely. What are we supposed to do? We cannot build a
duplex as originally planned, we cannot build on a now undersized lot as determined by
the new zoning ,we cannot sell the property other than to the airport.
I understand that you have already purchased all but 3 of the houses on this street and one
neighbor does not wish to sell. I would hope, despite the recent stir in South Burlington
about the airport buying houses, that you can see how even the South Burlington council
should realize that there should not be housing, owned or rented, on Shamrock Road.
Please let me know if the airport is going to be able to purchase my house in the next 3 to
6 months.Please let me know if we could meet to discuss possible solutions,
Thanks for your consideration,
ye-sect lly su nitted,
,. Jack Russell
•
May 16, 2008
Mr. Chuck Hafter
City Manager
City of South Burlington
575 Dorset Street
So. Burlington, VT 05403
Re: Allen Road Land Company
Sketch Plan Application #SD-08-12 (in process)
Final Plat Application #SD-07-64 (denied by DRB January 2008 and in
appeal)
Dear Mr. Hafter:
1. As representative for residents of Foxcroft Homeowners Association (Derby
Circle, Barnsley Street, Dover Street, Kinsington Street and part of Hayes
Avenue) there are issues of concern that need to be brought to the City Council's
attention regarding the above referenced applications for development. Allen
Road Land Company (John Larkin) has proposed a Planned Unit Development
consisting of 30 multi-family dwelling units in four buildings, with fwo existing
single family dwellings at 725 Hinesburg Road and 18 Derby Circle. A similar
application was denied by the DRB at the final plat level because there exists a
high potential for conflict between the proposed private driveway to this property
and the future northbound on-ramp for Exit 12B.
2. The proposed driveway at 725 Hinesburg Road is partly located within the
lines of this possible future highway access ramp depicted on the City of South
Burlington's Official Map. Proposed alternate access from this property to
Hinesburg Road do not meet the minimum distance from a highway access ramp
or a signaled intersection. Assuming the access ramp project is built with access
lining up with Tilley Drive, alternate access points would not line up with anything
and would be on a curve in an area of increasing traffic.
3. Mr. Larkin then purchased 18 Derby Circle (suggested by a city official') and
proposed a 50-foot wide easement that would provide an alternate access via
Derby Circle. At this time, Mr. Larkin does not have full legal right to cross this
land. 18 Derby Circle is deeded property protected by the Covenants of Foxcroft
Homeowners Association. These covenants restrict each lot "to be used for
permanent single family residential purposes only". This access via Derby Circle
would also require the City to condemn a substantial portion of Foxcroft
Homeowners common land. Condemnation of land is necessiated for public use
not for private development or personal gain. The City could be forced to buy
this whole project and tear it down if it allows this developer to proceed with the
existing driveway at 725 Hinesburg Road. Based on these issues, there is no
legal access to these proposed 31 units of housing.
4. Derby Circle and it's neighboring streets were not built to sustain this level of
additional traffic. There are several blind T-intersections and corners, many cars
that park on the streets and no sidewalks. This is a small "family" neighborhood
with lots of small children that are able to safely play in our streets due to the
existing small volume of traffic. Increasing traffic by 31 additional family
dwellings would produce a dangerous situation. No access, circulation or traffic
management studies have been done for any of the proposed driveway access
points to this project.
5. The Land Development Regulations require adequate parking areas and safe
pedestrian movement for all new development. This project does not meet those
requirements. Allen Road Land Co., on application#SD-07-64, was granted a
parking waiver for only 60 parking spots, three of which are required to be
handicapped-accessible. Regulations require that minimum required parking for
30-units is 68 parking spots. This waiver allows for no overflow parking. Are we
going to allow vehicles to park along the corner of Rte. 116 or perhaps on Derby
Circle and trespass to access this development? This site does not provide for
safe pedestrian movement. The omission of any sidewalk on the developer's
plans was addressed during the preliminary plat process. The sidewalk approved
by the DRB to continue this application leads out and on to Rte. 116 about 110'
north of the driveway. It was determined that a sidewalk adjacent to the driveway
would be too dangerous! The closest connecting sidewalk is still several hundred
feet to the north. When we addressed the safety concerns about this sidewalk to
nowhere ending on the side of a dangerous road, on a curve with a high volume
of traffic, we were told that this is a State highway, it is the State's problem to
connect to the existing sidewalk. The DRB accepted this sidewalk for safe
pedestrian movement.
6. The Land Development Regulations require that the height and scale of each
building shall be compatible with its site and existing or adjoining buildings. The
existing and adjoining buildings are two-story single family homes and two-story
condominiums. The proposed new development is three-story, some of which is
only 17' from the adjoining property lines of single family homes. 'There are no
"buffers, screens or visual interruptions to create attractive transitions between
buildings". The proposed new structures do not "relate harmoniously to the
existing buildings".
7. The Land Development Regulations require adequate snow storage. There is
not adequate snow storage. Site plan shows that snow would have to be pushed
to the back yards of adjoining Derby Circle residents. Developer states that they
would "haul the snow out when necessitated"!
8. The proposed project is not consistent with the goals and objectives of the
South Burlington Comprehensive Plan. It proposes a privately owned and
maintained roadway, which the Plan strongly discourages and which interferes
with the proposed 12B interchange.
9. Former Director of Planning and Zoning, Juli-Beth Hinds, in deposition, stated
that she spoke to Paul O'Leary, engineer for John Larkin, about the feasability of
buying a house on Derby Circle as a way to gain access to Derby Circle. She
also stated that she spoke to John Larkin as well and "suggested that he and
Paul look into it". "If he owned the house he could either remove it or gain an
easement, bringing it out to Derby Circle". Apparantly there was disussion
regarding neighbor concerns. In deposition Ms. Hinds was asked if she recalled
telling John that she would "deal with the neighbors". Ms. Hinds denied that she
said this. When asked if she knew John Larkin was buying the house she replied
believe he told me, at a yoga class, I think I am going to buy that house."
Considering that the Department of Planning and Zoning advises the DRB on
how they should proceed with many development issues, one has to wonder how
this flawed application made it all the way to Final Plat Application? There were
safety issues brought up and ignored. Traffic studies were requested by
concerned citizens and denied. In the preliminary plat process, only one member
of the DRB physically looked at this site. He thought the density of the project
was too high for the size of the site and also requested the board address the
alternate access in lieu of the proposed 12B on-ramp. His requests and
suggestions were never addressed and promptly dismissed. He no longer sits
on the DRB. I attended all DRB meetings for these applications, dating back to
September 2005, and wondered why all of the valid concerns, most of which are
in So. Burlington's Land Development Regulations or Comprehensive Plan were
overlooked. After sitting in during the deposition of the former Director of
Planning and Zoning, Ms. Juli-Beth Hinds, I believe I understand how this may
have happened.
10. The City previously approved residential development on this very land with
substantially the same access on Rte. 116 to the previous owner of this property.
However, the approved Chetti project accommodated the possibility of using this
property's deeded right of way behind the Kinsington Condominiums out to
Kinsington Street. The Allen Road Land Company's engineered project design
(SD-07-64) does not accommodate the use of this right of way. The buildings are
not situated to access the property from this side of the property. This deeded
right of way is the only other legal access to this property, not Derby Circle. The
City of South Burlington needs to insist that Allen Road Land Company submit a
new application using this deeded right of way access with a project designed to
accommodate this entry of access. If they let the existing project continue as it is,
then the City can tear it down or build the new road to access it when
necessitated. I'm sure the taxpayers will be very pleased with our city officials if
this happens.
11. There is a need for high density housing in South Burlington but it needs to
be planned and developed responsibly. Land is expensive in this city and
undesirable property for high density affordable housing is hard to find. This
does not mean that the City has the right to devalue the properties of tax paying
responsible middle income families by allowing overcrowded, unsafe, and
incompatable housing with no legal access to be constructed at this site. There
is also the future potential scenario that So. Burlington will have to buy this whole
project and tear it down. This would be difficult to explain to the taxpayers of this
city.
12. Protecting our homes from this irresponsible develoment has been a costly
legal expense for the residents of Foxcroft Homeowners Association. Now is the
time to transfer the burden of correcting this flawed decision making process to
the City of South Burlington.
13. The residents of Derby Circle, Barnsley Street, Dover Street, Kinsington
Street and Hayes Avenue will be in attendance at the City Council meeting on
Monday, May 19th to address these concerns. The City failed us in their actions.
We are not going to be the "out" for these mistakes. Is this City Council prepared
to explain to the taxpayers why they need to appropirate funds to settle a lawsuit
with the developer or to buy a housing project and tear it down?
Respectfully,
Sharon Carlson
President
Foxcroft Homeowners Association
6 Derby Circle
So. Burlington, VT 05403
scderbycircle@comcast.net
cc: Chris Smith, Chair
Steve Magowan, Vice Chair
Dan O'Rourke
Mark L. Boucher
Sandra Dooley, Clerk
CM'
(71
•
•
STITZEL, PAGE & FLETCHER, P.C.
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
• 171 BATTERY STREET
•
. • P.O.BOX 1507
BURLINGTON,VERMONT 05402-1507
(802)660-2555(VOICEITDD)
•• STEVEN F.STITZEL FAX(802)660.2552 or 660-9119 OF COUNSEL
PATTI IL PAGE' W W W.FIRMSPF.COM JOHN H.KLESCH
ROBERT E.FLETCHER E.MAIL(FIRM255503FIRMSPF.COM) DINA L ATWOOD
JOSEPH S.McLEAN • WRITER'S E-MAIL(SSTITZELQFIIW4SPF.COM)
. AMANDA S.E LAFFERTY WRTTEWS FAX(802)660-2552
WILLIAM E.ELENDER
(*ALSO ADMITIBD IN N.Y.)
. May 16, 2008
•
: Charles Hafter, Manager
City of South Burlington
. 575 Dorset Street
South Burlington, VT 05403
•
Re: Allen Road Land Company Property/Exit 12B
Dear Chuck:
As you are aware, the •Official Map for the City of South
Burlington identifies property that is proposed for development
• of an interchange for Interstate 89 and Hinesburg Road. This
• interchange is presently designated as Exit 12B.
. The. Allen Road Land Company is seeking approval to develop a
parcel of land in the north east quadrant of the interchange. A
portion of the subject parcel is identified on the Official Map
as the site of a proposed "on ramp" . In a decision dated January
. 23, 2008, the Development Review Board denied the requested
approval primarily because the proposed development conflicted
with the proposed on ramp. Allen Road Land Company has appealed •
• . this denial to the Environmental Court.
Pursuant to 24 V.S.A. §4421 (4) (A) , the City Council has 120
•
days from the date of the Development Review Board's denial to
commence condemnation proceedings to acquire the necessary land.
If the City fails to do so; the Development Review Board will be
obligated to review the proposed development without considering
the conflict with the proposed on ramp. This will, in all
likelihood, result in the Allen Road Land Company obtaining the
approval it seeks. If the Allen Road Land Company then
constructs the development and the City later acts to acquire the
land needed for the on ramp, the City will be responsible for
providing appropriate compensation for the impact on the
development.
I To commence condemnation proceedings at this time, the City
Council needs to set a date for a public hearing. I have
A
Charles Hafter, Manager
City of South Burlington
May 16, 2008
Page 2
attached a hearing notice sufficient to accomplish this. Setting
this hearing does not obligate the City to complete the
condemnation process. If the Council decides at some point
during the process that there is basis not to proceed, it can
abandon the condemnation.
} Sincerely,
Steven F. St tzel
SFS/af
Enclosure
SON08-069.COR
•
CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
FOR THE PURPOSE OF
ACQUIRING LAND AND INTERESTS IN LAND
FOR THE HINESBURG ROAD/INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 89
INTERCHANGE 12B PROJECT
Notice is hereby given that the South Burlington City
Council will hold a public hearing and conduct a site visit on
July , 2008 for the purpose of inspecting lands and hearing
testimony and comment regarding the necessity for acquiring land
and rights in land in connection with the Hinesburg
Road/Interstate Highway 89 Interchange 12B Project. At this
hearing, the City Council will also hear testimony and comment
regarding the compensation to be paid to the landowners for
acquiring such lands and rights in land. The lands to be
inspected and considered at this hearing are shown on a plan
entitled, "City of South Burlington, Hinesburg Road/Interstate
Highway 89 Interchange 12B Project, " dated 05/08 . This plan is
available for review at the South Burlington City Offices during
the offices' normal business hours .
The hearing will begin at 7 PM on July , 2008, at the
South Burlington City Offices, 575 Dorset Street, South
Burlington, Vermont. The City Council will conduct the site
visit following commencement of the hearing.
For further information, please contact Charles Hafter, City
Manager, at (802) 846-4107 .
Dated this 19th day of May, 2008 .
Chris Smith, City Council Chair
scn08-006.fo
A
iiiiippowt.----00""'"*".(\
South Burlington Public Works
11 fi�y f�j 4+ j k'! 575 DORSET STREET
.�e1.2,,,„_`$t/ice SOUTH BURLINGTON,VERMONT 05403
1\ �rrr TEL:(802)658-7961
FAX:(802)653-7976 ioa OFF4CE RC
May 16, 2008
To: Chuck Hafter, City Manager
From: Bruce K. Hoar, Director
Re: Area Calculation Ramp 12B
Public Works was requested to calculate the approximate area for one leg of the proposed Exit
12B. Attached is a blow up of the plan sheet for the area in question. The area in question is
designated by the red line and is approximately 1.23 acres.
t
$2o i�I.�1 s •
ax irt�'GJt i Yi }1{%75
I ' „Z].� �� \ P..- ti ll.+1=.....1 yr 'av_.L, ���Y
f�-+�-- r� 1.2'': �° It s
_,,,-77; . ,.‘*6-14P4r----...-- il'I'.---,:..-7:.:•:,--7i,..:.:i-..-'.';'.-4','7.!:elfil
•
ill\
\ - r // ( a ter 1.'1` { )_ 1
i ._____
la
•
/ I1
\I \ / Car018 i l a n i t- 7 r .
\ �'-r bbb �F
N .0,....._ ...e.,,
,,c,,, .i
__,___ ______,„.,,.. .....,,,,,„7„:„,,,_,,,,,,i,_:,:,,,i;:ci:::,;,,,..,:,-„,,,,,-;::,.,„„, ,.:::...,:,7„:„..:.:.,,,,,,.:,,,..„..„,,...„.„,,,..,,,,,:„...„,„.„
\ / . ' 4`lb �---\
_ { 5 nl .' f F7
\/ ha t 1 L
•
UI �\ ( f.,,i z3 {` l.'1. at�•L i�.a i ! r { 3.�3c;_r{b rS
\ / `' 0 s ` 41411 {mot f r !i t 1.1' N1}�
\ / \ i
\y L
'J f T'
\ li" , - f t 7, 'y`L :ice,
/ < / N� i.\ v _ N
.. ''.: -'..:, i fyiffi.:F,.....!..;!!7:!..14-:.-::::;,!!!:71., . 10)111.,'-'::::::.-.1,.:::-. :'''_:.....:-.•,':-. :',:i'...';.,...:,,,:::...,"]Ksailt:".
/ \ ''''.`?'....
N i".1%, 1 Ar.31. \/.V\
CD
:.: ': ''':::::.::. :::. 1. f''''' ',.'2.'4:'..:11',''.:'.'.''''' ',:.i: '!,.'•::':;.,:'':"1'.:':'.. , .:,:: '. ..!'''.. , :.';......2.'.
{ If•�t , .:;t:r`v\ G zr s�i iLr�
\)‘/ sl \\__.__ tsI\-7 s _
rr
\ 1 \ 1°1 40
. v'I.'.\ b � • / L� , rl 3 zf1 - + , s l = s' � <�'�� , _-� \ �,z -/ .S`•a
1 \ 0 \ , - • ,
0 / . •
I /NTER T TE \ ri) \ 4 , s\ fr 1 ,;ram , , ~ ,
0 1
f +"Z'
I�C \ \\ 0
\ \ ie��/I p [.iF '.
1l!1_ \ 1 111 �� 1 ,. r t ,I F7.7,.,* ii - y�'' : -.,',
•
'7
\ O� \
If .\.---
\ �� 1 it ' ��j
d A\
'psi ' :,'''',1"--,7"--7,7., -,.--•', .,,,- .. '::.:,-.,, ; . ..-,,:log.'
Sa Fi
,.,,,, .,,,;,''.1:;'.'''.'.:,!:'''',,,,;
j 711111 .
_____ a ,,�Odd (y04 \\ 5�0 '�1�•
eo J
l
i :
I t.:::::Tri:-...;:::::',:.:1:,.:,,.-,,;:,;:,-;'::-,::,,'''...,,Iii-..i.':::1',..,,_,..,::::.;;;;-i-i',.,;,;',,,!..i t ,A4.16,
\ —\ .4 ��
JS/ c q0C —•
/ \
,. ` ;.\\�i (!�� ct jai i,�'' ' F� riaa((i[� �' '�
1 \ \ ,,,,40
. .... .: �:�j- .,. , , ,� IN oil
`1 j ,ai_ �Lr1 ,a �� vim lR��dtt�)
1i 1 3„,,,,: Yr'� „117 �1 r°bi, p
,,--,. ..
r F / \. + ` �\, .. , t of 11 "
I1 •
m I. '.T lk•',4r',;::,'-'•','',, 7
7 \ ' ‘ , _-..„.::-;::.,),:,,:-All - y 1
I
1A
__.
,r,
/ffliffita Iliriarr
\ I . 4 ‘' '. ''. 71:.:_ ',.:._-.,..,
„
, k.•..,_y:„:_...-__. . ..,.:....-...sibL .,,, ,.. , „._________i_______:,
4 : __________
1 4! i\. /Il\17�
______\_ ,_______, ,
\ . ,H..:,..,,,„„....,,:.„.f:Z.i...111
_____
: , R.,.:-....'2,1,..„' ,, :-...,-,:,-,::, _Iti 4,• 1 i...\\,s t
4►1 I.
�a�\Is� \ , y y p
tuft
"1.. 5:o
r'l
( . . , .
� 1, y\ s.r; 11,-:_- .. •,: -.--,,.._:-.•::-- _ipo,,I,A0, � a z m
1
1 ......___
g ,;' _
Pk
aloft
I 1 iiik., ::,:2'2::',': ,:.1. . ..,..Afitkill\Al\ "Iv'.---ci g^YI),_— r, ---- i
t. - • -,:,- , ---ml;Ali, ..,0001°11\P: 1.i •INN 31-7-
Ekis T-i -G iNE G—_ offw -��ii1�'NI yi ��il� ��,� \ _
-.3, .-•:‘ To ni \ck°
' _
i1, , -, Is.loot 1 -t) --LI'
_
- 0�
V:7,..w14VVV atct ,.crwg os.t 1�(VVEl VVJ
APR-9-2e08 11:044 FROM:CITY OF SOUTH BIJLIN 2028464101 TO:96589145 P.2
CITY OF SOUTH rnJRLINGTON
ENTERTAINMENT LICENSE APPLICATION
Type of Application Q Annual Permit
Special Event Permit
Date of Application: 5 ! f 6 I 0 F
Name of Establishment: 0 i Vie,- P--rec:(4-44-ar%
Address of Establishment: -- �`e n n e e 4 t �.- Sf .
GAS"LN.j e tJ o h e d c4 6 -�e t c r. orb �1 �f
eta) 65 -7-3-1 x3 Y 1 . n I -
Name and Address of Owner:
Name and Address of Operator: ; r F#cz~ '
�rt-t-�''�- '�'R7n n
or e
Complete Description of Show:
Pi- be- C›,1 e Petrk -zr- +1.._ { 1,- _� f4-
-9"t}rn tf ct, h _ [ ,,,.;!i , iaj fr,CI ►i,f� ,e„i l► i
.4.-k n th s i S f" is hk'' u_tt c a rn Sa_ t iA.4 6-61 4
t E`t $ 2.f:a.,,! '?¢�4.;r� -C-, 3.'"o ..,.; r-- =k r-. I .JZ+0. -,..36
Date(s) of Show and Hour(s) of Operator: P,�
Date(s) S dj 3 t .1 e— i
Hour(s)
Security Provisions:t.s eta k [e 40yr- t i.ir't f 8t.J ,kj o 4-1t om f- i-' + 4-b44-
Ja .4.,. ! w;II he- row; d S n ba c.-
t tI e
As applicant, i have read and understand the provision of the
South Burlington Ordinance Regarding Licensure of Regulation of
Circuses, Carnivals and Other Shows. I also understand that only
the specific type of entertainment applied for in this license is
permitted and that additional types of entertainment will require
an additional application.
Signatur
4}�/ (i)'b -L i f", v. f may"
var +vr •-vvv +++ +v-+r .�+
�yvrrr vv�
APR-9- 11:05P FROM:CITY OF SOUTH BURLIN 8083464101 TO:96569145 P.3
•
South Buriinq n City Council Action:
I. Verification of license fee:
(See Section. 6 of Ordinance) City Manager
z. vericatian of approval standards: _
(See Section 4 of Ordinance) Council Chair
3. Application of License has been approved/disapproved by
South Burlington City Council on en.,1,1
aoe)gb
4. Special Conditions attached to License (See Section S -of
Ordinance) ,
•
South Burlington City Council chair
•
Date
' .O I} ra -f4
,� • ` - �r +fit' .
F ;,.
•
•
r .- i' , a +'''.;.fir
^,
a, X "-
,,:.:T.:._.:.._i,:,:„,s,...":
• :„ -- 4�.
jj 1 \,
L� [ '- 1 Y _
r r. •
•
1.
•
y':4i ..::-•
F
• •,,,,k,... 1.,,,t--
A.
it _� • I- d: a p`•a • �':.
. r.Z.:*1‘: •4', % ..
iiVifr
,r � v
Via,
1•li
t'
r's' :?.
.L: tip
- ..
:'#ttAi.' '' ; -4,
•
'.t.L. - • .
n i f'?7.a+ �.+
f l f •
Ar • s
t ,
.. •,-- --- .• .. • -4. ."•'.- '
-* f
.,. a .
,- • .47 . . ,
‘•,?!---
-
• - . 1:-4 .• -.„, - ,.
. - _ )- N.-4,-- .,,•
. —i ..:-.. s,:, - - - ,It •
1...„-
2. 41 . .il- t• ,....;.
-a'r '; - • . .•- '''%i.-Alk' ,,••••-•, .3. 4
. * *. ',of •V-' p4PolVlirdiiNg.ir *-b• '• -
.,, , '"4:t -;• ' -4 f X , "'.,'" ''i' ''''
. • .!' , •• , , "4! j“,,,C410 415.
' : .V.! **in-''''s..,' •..,' .-I f• '1.,*it
' *•''''.'
N , .444''‘ * ' - - ..„4- ;.„,,.*.- ;we '1- ,-t•4 414')
; * .• • .4 4-'4..„. / * '.71.,-;r.••,..K.',. 41,4 -.,—it' .r:''.,?..
1,..' i".'''. x' ,'' t.' ' ,s0 14:' .•; 1:4*--.-:_'-', --:-.
• ...4,.-• ,-1,, ,;.,,t, •• . #..., _ :1....i: ..‘-.---'_---,
:* 'f- ..,,* -. -,., . ,- .-A,,_ . ,•
, ,,#.-5,7 s'l s--t,.,,.,s, • ‘, ..,,,,:\ ‘11,•:.. , -
-- ..---- -11‘ k.."0 1 '-- • 4 , • '--- ---
• -,' -' - 1 k. —' ...- ' It . #
' ,.,,N t,r• '.,..0...,.04,
?. ir‘,-, _. v_.,_,.,-• 4,.
; -
--- -
-- -• - ,... 'l-• 4 -- -
, /
' -,.` -
f
. , „• •'. -....11-•.:-`/••—• • -4.
- • ;.•. :—. - \...,
a -, ' • ,i 4".. '
..•-• 1 1. t1
,..,
T.
•, 1
.• 1 '
•44*.1.-
. ..• f ..% f
{
... -
-..!....•
1 1 . 11
4' , — •
.,
. '
. ,
. . •
•
... .,
-,_ - •;-4
IN
. '• .',
' * • 4- .
' .
• ..
. -4—
, '*,,* i • , ://, , .. -
F.. ''... •t:''..
rr
• . ' 4,
..'
,•0,
•' ,
if
. 1'4
4--14
r-
4 • -
4 4
44,
4'44 .4i
. -
44
•.***
a ,
•
•
•
. t j Jf k.
,,
A
r .7 ,
c
•
..T
"tee .'=tr - _ ..►_-
ldry
01
r •y.'
i'o1 .;PL s v:
_'_ _fie. -
- yt
y
' : _, ', '6. t
z Y t
. Ir•.. ..tea, t I y "
• Z. deb f a r
...:.. - ., _, „.„-,...„--,, fi.'-:.-1. -. ' ' ' -.
2"`
•w •
`•
s
4• = � N.. -
e�4+�.•t�- ' ,ls3 . \ .-
;L A.
vjgp-
� , �. ;r ,r,
i