Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - City Council - 02/02/2009 South Charles E. Halter, City Manager AGENDA SOUTH BURLINGTON CITY COUNCIL CITY-HALL CONFERENCE ROOM 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT REGULAR MEETING 7:00 P.M. MONDAY, Feb. 2, 2009 1) Comments and Questions from the public(not related to the Agenda). 2) Announcements and City Manager's Report. 3) Meet with Mike Simeneau, Commercial Broker, Hickok and Boardman to review status of request for proposals for Police Station site. * 4) Presentation from the Dog Park Committee on the Suitability Analysis Study of the Landfill. * 5) Consider participation in VCDP Grant Application for a proposed expansion of Grand Way Commons (Grand Way II) for senior housing. Amy Wright, Director of Development, CSC; Molly Dugan, Project Manager, CSC. * 6) Report of the CCMPO Blue Ribbon Commission on Innovative Financing; Denis Gravelin, Asst. City Manager, CCMPO Representative. * 7) Consideration of acceptance of streets: Tilley Drive (Phase II); portion of cul-de-sac on Dorset Heights. * 8) Review agenda for Development Review Board meeting to be held Tuesday, Feb. 3, 2009. * 9) Review and approve minutes from regular City Council meeting held on January 20, 2009. 10) Sign disbursement orders. 11) Adjourn Respectfully Submitted: 111. Charles Hafter, City anager 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4107 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburl.com SOUTH BURLINGTON RECREATION DEPARTMENT 57 % .51`T $,TREET,fiOUrti BURLINOTOM VT05403. TEL:(80 6 4108. F *-7,V Tara MODIM TO: City Council FROM: Tom Hubbard RE: Dog Park Committee DATE: January 27, 2009 The Dog Park Committee will make a brief presentation to the City Council at the meeting on February 2nd. A copy of the Suitability Analysis for the covered landfill off Patchen Rd. is attached for your review. In essence, the closed landfill site can be reused and developed as a community dog park rovi some modifications are made and ded additional data is collected as outlined in the conclusions and recommendations of the report. Matt Poirier, Senior Project Director for Sanborn, Head &Associates will be attending the Council meeting to provide further information and answer questions. Members of the Dog Park Committee will also be in attendance. CATHEDRAL SQUARE - Grand Way II Senior Housing The Project Cathedral Square proposes to build a 24 unit expansion of its award-winning Grand Way Commons Senior Housing development on Farrell Street in South Burlington. All units will be perpetually affordable to very low, low, and moderate income senior households. The new units will feature barrier-free design, allowing residents to remain in their homes as their health and service needs change. The addition of 24 units to our existing 63 units also creates an economy of scale that will make meal and service programming more cost feasible. Proven Demand In May 2007, Cathedral Square opened the doors to Grand Way Commons Senior Housing. Before opening the doors, all 63 units were leased up by eager applicants. As of December 16, 2008, the waiting list for these units stands at 175. We have no doubt that an expansion of our housing at this location will be very desirable. To further illustrate the existing demand for CSC housing, our soon-to-open Essex Senior Housing generated an Inquiry List of 300 people seeking 48 units. High Quality Affordable Housing with Services CSC units are fully ADA adaptable and designed to anticipate the evolving needs of senior residents. With each new development, we integrate additional measures to improve the living experience in our housing. Equally important to the high quality of the housing itself, Grand Way II will also feature CSC's standard service program. Basic services include recreational and activities planning, scheduled paratransit van trips, 24 hour on-call emergency response, on-site health screenings and wellness clinics, and nurse services. CSC property managers also secure significantly reduced bulk cable TV rates and make sure income-eligible residents are receiving subsidized phone service. These basic services are offered to residents of all CSC properties at no charge. Proven Location Grand Way Commons has proven so popular with our residents not just because of the high quality of the housing itself, but also because of the proximity to so many shops, services, and activities. The Farrell Street location is within easy walking distance of a supermarket and pharmacy, a CCTA bus stop, and many retail shops. In addition, the new housing units will be located in the same complex that includes HomeShare Vermont, the United Way, and the Visiting Nurse Adult Day program. Some of CSC's residents enjoy these organizations' services. Others volunteer for them. Ready to Build CSC knows the site, has strong relationships with the City of South Burlington, and can promptly construct this new development. When funds are committed, CSC is ready to build! Current residents of Grand Way Commons P � Ill T �� 1 t i $ any li C. i I Grand Way Commons, home to 63 seniors, an a Adult Day program of the VNA, and offices for United Way, HomeShare Vermont and CSC. r1 • ..n!l'iFfc' ,..-r • ` 1" Former VNY building, adjacent to Grand Way Commons Proposed site of 24 new units Report of the CCMPO Blue Ribbon Commission on Innovative Finance (as presented to the CCMPO Board on 11/19/08) PREAMBLE Purpose and Charge of the Blue Ribbon Commission' The Board of the Chittenden County Metropolitan Planning Organization(CCMPO)recruited five prominent Chittenden County citizen-statesmen, each with extensive experience in the public and private sectors, to form a Blue Ribbon Commission on Innovative Finance of transportation(BRC). The charge of the BRC was to: "Provide recommendations by December 1,2008 regarding viable innovative finance strategies to advance the region's transportation needs, including all modes as well as the necessary connections with our land use, economic, environmental and quality of life needs." Working Groups2 The work and recommendations of the BRC has been informed by three working groups, each comprised of individuals from the local, state and federal governments,regional organizations, and the private sector. The working groups and their charges are: • Intergovernmental Roles and Responsibilities Group "Assess appropriateness of current roles and relationships of the state,regional entities and municipalities in the planning, delivery and management of transportation projects; to pursue promising avenues for redesigning roles and responsibilities to make multi-modal transportation network development and management more efficient and cost-effective." • Funding Options Group "Identify methods and opportunities for increasing the type and amount of methods available to Chittenden County and Vermont for funding needed transportation improvements across all modes." • Flexible Standards and Project Delivery Group "Re-examine Vermont's current standards for transportation design, engineering and construction to identify options for applying them in proportion to the nature and needs of different types of projects. Further,to examine Vermont's laws, regulations and policies to enable the use of expeditious mechanisms for transportation project delivery, such as public-private partnerships and design- build contracts." These working groups met several times to discuss their charges and develop information and recommendations for the BRC's review. The BRC considered these proposals and has produced seven recommendations,which are listed on the following page. ' See Addendum 1 for Blue Ribbon Commission members 2 See Addendum 1 for working group participants 11/19/08 CCMPO BRC Recommendations Page 2 of 10 Blue Ribbon Commission Recommendations The BRC,by unanimous vote,makes the following recommendations to the CCMPO Board which may be considered in whole or in part for further action. Intergovernmental Recommendations 1. Promote enabling legislation for Regional Transportation Districts(RTDs). 2. Establish a Chittenden County Regional Transportation District.3 Funding Recommendation 3. Promote enabling legislation allowing the development of additional funding for regional transportation needs. Project Delivery Recommendations 4. Promote streamlining of permit processes 5. Promote streamlining of Right of Way processes 6. Recommend specific ideas to improve design and construction efficiency 7. Recommend multi-year project budgeting in the Transportation Bill Intergovernmental Recommendations Recommendation 1: Legislation should be adopted enabling Regional Transportation Districts in Vermont Vermont should enact legislation enabling regions within Vermont to create regional transportation districts (RTDs). An RTD would correspond to a regional planning commission territory or,where applicable, a metropolitan planning organization(MPO)boundary as defined in federal statute. Powers would be vested in an RTD in three phases,with progressively greater responsibilities in each phase. Creation and Governance An RTD would be created by affirmative votes of the governing bodies of the subject communities. The RTD would have a"whole region"4 perspective; however the towns voting affirmatively could proceed without the participation of a town or towns which chose not to participate. 3 For ease of reference,"Chittenden County"is used to signify the region for the RTD,however,the MPO Boundary may expand to include adjoining communities outside of Chittenden County after future Censuses as prescribed in federal statute. a The Intergovernmental Roles and Responsibilities Working Group felt strongly that an RTD should be constituted with a truly regional perspective,rather than as a collection of municipalities with representatives. One approach might be for all RTD board members to be elected by a majority vote of the select boards in the region,with no more than two members from any single municipality. 11/19/08 CCMPO BRC Recommendations Page 3 of 10 The development of any RTD would involve three definitive phases. Each phase would need to be completed to the satisfaction of the participating governing bodies before the RTD could proceed to the next phase. Phase 1 RTD powers: a) Coordinate closely or merge with the subject regional planning commission and, if applicable, the metropolitan planning organization; b) Set all regional transportation priorities that are subject to federal funding; c) Create a Regional Transportation Facilities (RTF)program to plan,build and maintain the regionally significant transportation facilities5 within the RTD's jurisdiction; d) Receive and manage an appropriate share of the federal transportation monies each year, based on the average of the prior 5 years and a fair and appropriate annual adjustment; e) Receive and manage an appropriate share of state transportation revenues based on a formula to be negotiated; f) Enter into mutually beneficial agreements with member and non-member municipalities around corridor planning and other issues; g) Enter into mutually beneficial agreements with private parties for financing some or all mutually beneficial projects; h) Participate in Act 250 and other land use planning processes that affect the regional transportation system; i) Implement incentive programs to use public transit and alternative modes of transportation. Phase 2 RTD powers: a) Where applicable,undertake other regional transportation-related responsibilities such as regional transit management and funding, and charge member communities accordingly; b) Levy and collect user fees and/or taxes within the region, for expenditure on a regional transit system and on transportation infrastructure development; c) Levy fees on new development and create special tax districts to support the regional transportation system. Phase 3 RTD powers: a) Issue revenue bonds backed by funding streams developed in Phase 2; b) Issue general obligation bonds with the credit backing of the member communities. 5 The definition of"regionally significant transportation facility"would be developed by the RTD in collaboration with regional municipalities and VTrans and pursuant to federal regulations governing MPOs designated as "Transportation Management Areas"(which the CCMPO current is not). 11/19/08 CCMPO BRCRecommendations Page 4 of 10 Recommendation 2; Chittenden County should establish a Regional Transportation District Under the statutory authorities described in Recommendation 1, the Chittenden County Metropolitan Planning Organization and the Regional Planning Commission should merge, and the merged entity's duties should be expanded to include those of a Regional Transportation District under the new law. Phase 1, Chittenden Region a) The RTD would be formally designated as the Metropolitan Planning Organization for the Census-designated Burlington Urbanized Area and adjacent municipalities comprising the CCMPO. b) Chittenden County's obligated federal funding for the 5 years from FY'03 to FY'07 averaged $37,691,000. This amount,with reasonable adjustments based on future federal funding, would be provided annually by VTrans to the Chittenden RTD. c) Chittenden County's historical share of state transportation dollars(amount to be determined)would be provided annually by VTrans to the Chittenden County RTD. d) Chittenden County's regional transportation priorities will continue to be established based on the Metropolitan Transportation Plan(MTP)and Transportation Improvement Program(TIP). e) The Chittenden County RTD would create a Regional Transportation Facilities program to plan,build and maintain regionally significant transportation facilities within the RTD's jurisdiction. 0 The Chittenden County RTD would develop the institutional capacity to handle, either directly or through consultants, the permitting, engineering, contracting and project management for new capacity and preservation transportation infrastructure projects. g) Where applicable, the Chittenden County RTD would enter agreements with municipalities and private entities to augment the resources needed to plan,build, or maintain transportation capacity. Phase 2, Chittenden Region a) The RTD would propose/levy a regional tax to establish a permanent, stable source of funding for public transit. b) The RTD would subsume the regional transit authority. c) Each year, the RTD would evaluate the additional annual funding requirement, above and beyond receipts from the federal and state government,to meet both the preservation and new capacity goals of the Metropolitan Transportation Plan. By 2012,this additional funding requirement is estimated to be $50 million to $60 million. d) The RTD would propose/levy a regional tax to meet some or all of the additional funding requirements of the MTP6, above and beyond the federal and state funding available under Phase 1. Phase 3,Chittenden Region The RTD would consider the use of public debt as a strategy for accelerating the execution of transportation infrastructure projects. 6 See Addendum 2 for forecast of MTP funding needs through 2025.Projections based on the current MTP,adjusted for inflation and averaged over the 25-year life of the Plan,suggest that annual system preservation needs in the region may cost$55 million by 2012. The cost of new capacity investments,including TIP commitments,may represent an additional$31 million annually by 2012. 11/19/08 CCMPO BRC Recommendations Page 5 of 10 Funding Recommendations The BRC recognizes a clear need for additional transportation funding sources to maintain our existing system and particularly for additional needs related to CCMPO's 2025 Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP). Attached to this document is a list of possible funding sources.As such, the BRC recommends the following: Recommendation 3 A sustainable source of additional funding should be developed for regional transportation needs Under Phase 2 of Recommendations 1 and 2, the Regional Transportation District would be enabled by state law to levy a regional tax or user fee to meet some or all of the additional funding requirements of the Metropolitan Transportation Plan(MTP) above and beyond the federal and state funding, and a regional tax to support public transit. Accordingly,the BRC recommends two dedicated funding sources: one for public transportation and one for infrastructure development. Project Delivery and Standards Recommendations The four remaining recommendations provide a detailed framework for more efficient use of transportation construction funding. Recommendation 4: Permitting Process Streamlining For the permitting process,Vermont should statutorily streamline state permit procedures in cases where there are little to no environmental impacts associated with a project(referred to as Categorical Exclusion projects). The streamlining would include, but not be limited to the following: a) Coordination of Federal and State environmental and cultural resource approvals, and elimination of separate, redundant state and local processes; b) Development of a single coordinated process for all necessary state and local permits; c) Exemption of projects on existing alignments from an Act 250 permits to limit process redundancies; d) Study of the use of wetlands banking; e) Establishment of permit timelines for action at the state and local levels; and 0 Identification by municipalities of one local permitting authority for projects. Recommendation 5: Right of Way Process Streamlining Streamline the Right-of-Way(ROW)process by adopting the federal Uniform Act thereby eliminating necessity hearings. Appeals should be assigned to a quasi judicial board such as the Transportation Board. Investigate methods to speed up appraisals and negotiations with landowners. See Addendum 3: Funding Sources Evaluation 11/19/08 CCMPO BRC Recommendations Page 6 of 10 Recommendation 6: Design and Construction Efficiency a) Vermont should increase the use of standardized bridge designs in order to improve the speed of design and construction, and reduce project costs. b) Vermont should take full advantage of pre-cast concrete bridge components in order to get the most out of the Vermont's short construction season and reduce project costs. c) Vermont should revisit/review the historic bridge requirements. d) Vermont should pursue the use of design/build contracts for bridge rehabilitations and replacements, and roadway reconstructions. Successful bidders would be fully accountable for designing and building to required standards. The purpose would be to give contractors greater control and predictability over their projects,thereby reducing costs. e) VTrans should consider ways to improve bundling of projects in a single contract, for completion within a set number of years at a fixed price. The goal would be to increase even further the contractor's ability to plan for work flow,work force recruitment and training,material acquisition, etc. thereby reducing costs and making costs more predictable. f) The state should encourage,where feasible, the turnover of management to local teams for projects on local transportation facilities. Recommendation 7: Multi-year budgeting The Legislature should consider providing multi-year budget approval for construction projects with annual adjustments based on available revenue to allow for meaningful multi-year planning. 11/19/08 CCMPO BRC Recommendations Page 7 of 10 LIST OF ADDENDA ADDENDUM 1: Blue Ribbon Commission Members & Working Group Participants ADDENDUM 2: Forecast of MTP Funding Needs Through 2025 ADDENDUM 3: Funding Sources Evaluation 11/19/08 CCMPO BRC Recommendations Page 8 of 10 ADDENDUM 1: Blue Ribbon Commission Members & Working Group Participants Blue Ribbon Commission Member Peter Clavelle Member Jim Condos Member John O'Kane Member Bob Penniman Member Tom Torti Funding Options Work Group(Dave Roberts,CCMPO Staff) Private Developers Bob Bouchard LCCC Dawn Francis Town Reps Jonathan Leopold,Paul Conner CCTA Chris Cole VTrans Tom Daniel,Carmen Neveau,Matt Langham Citizen Marcy Ryan Legislative Delegation Ted Brady,Jeff Munger,Mary Sprayregen FHWA Chris Jolly CCRPC Charlie Baker VLCT Trevor Lashua Planner Juli Beth Hinds Flexible Standards&Project Delivery (Eleni Churchill,CCMPO Staff) Concrete Industry Mike Coates VTrans Jim Bush,Al Neveau,Kevin Marshia Engineers Greg Edwards,Jim Donovan Community Representatives Sonny Audette,Carol Duncan,Bruce Hoar VLCT Karen Horn TAC Representative Andy Legg FHWA Chris Jolly Intergovernmental Roles&Relationships Work Group(Christine Forde&Bryan Davis,CCMPO Staff) CCTA Chris Cole Town Managers Chuck Hafter, Sandy Miller VLCT Trevor Lashua LCCC Dawn Francis CCRPC Charlie Baker BIA Brian Searles VTrans Mel Adams,Amy Bell CATMA Meredith Shuft UTC Lisa Aultman Hall FHWA Chris Jolly 11/19/08 cCMPO BRC Recommendations Page 9 of 10 ADDENDUM 2: FORECAST OF MTP FUNDING NEEDS THROUGH 2025 :-:"x- III r",`° Year 20 Dollars (Millions) r n vim. n .E _, f 3 s Y 3. a * 3 8 " Cr 8 8 8 k ; a , �0D `¢ a D y R Y Y k k 0 3 3 0 N �I e 1 t i a R i t 8 �v 3 R 9 R f k # s k V • t s i i i 1 3 f ` � w k._ . e r f f > 6.- 8 6 3 . Y i ! i f yy� rim/ f )' 8. k 8 ; �, :: f R. 3 k i • ' x 3. y 3 k ; r i i '...... i•. • 53......• .1.....a....'4.s*......1i...w......•••...•.•. [k 8 8 A (� 3 k * * SSS�rr i . k . x. m —f ♦ f a • f x �1 'r' ::8 i V'AV 8 ; i 3 f 8 ;•' f k f z y $ •. /1 R f k. k 3 3 3 C� 3 >0 3 3 8 e fi !A ]CO 4 et$ f a' e . :k 8 8 At < k d R f 8 k k Y 3 8 V ¢ Y s ., ! 8 ��/t�. i 8 V4 NC > „� f f V - rqr "��- a {� 8 g�. f: 8 f f _ 8 i ; 8 CI s +y.. 3 x fD gift,. Argli k1 O Z e x R • *-7. 1)0, * */ t * - ,. .., . 4 ....,v,----. "fat.33.. ' 2 i Q f34 �/1� 8 s i . e 3litiralit kk//y q —4 5. a •: y: l k aIts �. m % f k 01 C X .`\ 5 N OC ; a m ! r at 8 , 8 .::.17.A.,.:.!....1-'*.i::::::: y� 1 'a mow+ Al. x f^ Y i r��- R �v� 34� z a k 8 1 R' i . Y ep do N s. ...! 1,Y. e 8 fi33 a ..,s, 3 N 3 f 8 ' A' 4 't 4:. * 3 a! p k S 3 3 f :3 f II. 2 qzt -...., cz -.4 AI)DENDUNI 3: FUNDING SOURCES EVALUATION CCMPO Innovative Finance Blue Ribbon Commission Funding Options Workgroup Funding Sources Evaluation 10/25/2008 Revenue -r•-,•..xlif a--`° faultifncidat %eletM" P *-E t Annual Chit rt. ' '''' i,oteritta I Funding Source AeleivacY 1 ' l-,i-',v hrit>lerile'i'• Etortoroic a" '- ° ,, ., ., ,. : . .,,,,,.. <-..,,,,,,., „,,..,i ,.,`.1`i I t.,',f•1.e,'1orizedx Feasibiht!./ ,...,-,trcienc,,, Gasoline Excise tper gallon)Tax (...:,) (I) 11 • (11 () -51 alto-ion it/gallon $ State level only Cnesel Erctse Tax 0 il) • I.) C' -50.5 million It/gallon S State levet only it-Wen-el Gasoline Excise Tax (II C-3 (..) • (3 C) -$1 million. le/galton+CPI S No Motor Fuel Sales Tax 3 c) (') • () ,-, -53 million 1%on gas sales 5 No Value Added Tax IP 3 3 ,11 ',la (1.) Mid Varies with industries covered S/R No RegistraLon Fee 0 31 0 • C, ) $1-2 million 55-$10 per year on each reg vehicle S/R State level only ,., Personal Property Tax on Vehicles • • GI rill ',II f,10 $9-10 million 55000/vehicle x 1%tax 5/R No vehirle Sates Tax 10 11 0 • (11 (.) 52-4 million 1%•,2%on each vehicle sold in CC S/R State level only Tolling New Lanes/Facilities 41 (111 0 '.''. () I. Low-Mid Minimal new highway lanes S/R No ...._..............._ i..., VMT Fees S (a) a • Mid-High Significant VMT in CC S/R No ....,.. (--,,, ,.....,, -;..-.. Local Option Sales Tax • • CO • . ,- •) $10-20 million 1%on retail sales in CC - R Yes w/restrictions _ "te ,-ii. impact Fees 1... (3 • 0 3 3_ AIliel-High Regionalized fees r municipal fees R Yes w/restrictions Lt Innovative Financing•Debt 41 • 3 (1) 0 (1 mld_High Regionalized debt capacity,munctp capacities StR Yes w/restrictions :t. Pubile,Prtvate Partnerships 41 10 • C) 3 • Low-Mid Few CC projects approp for PPPs S/R Yes w/restrictions ..., , Payroll Tax 41 II ci (11 • ,,,,-, s10-41 million ..25%-1%of total annual CC wages SIR No Business Ener T Civil (3 3 • (3 • • gz gy laxfLow-Mid 35%tax credit on eligible private spending S No 4:1 Special Asssessinerit Districts • • • 3 1111 410 Mid-High Similar to successful BID Initiatives R ? r ....,' 40 Excellent (ill Fair 0 Poor raZ -,-. a, i,. ii, _ . cathedral Square Corporation January 29,2009 Christopher Smith,Chair South Burlington City Council South Burlington,Vermont Dear Mr. Smith: I am writing to ask if the City of South Burlington would be willing to submit a Vermont Community Development Block(VCDP)Grant application for an expansion of Grand Way Commons,the award- winning affordable senior housing development on Farrell Street in South Burlington. The expansion project,which we are calling Grand Way II,will be developed by Cathedral Square Corporation(CSC),a non-profit housing organization with over 30 years of experience providing affordable housing with services to seniors throughout northwestern Vermont. Currently CSC has a waiting list of over 600 seniors who need rent subsidized or reduced rent housing. We know first hand there is a high demand for senior housing in South Burlington due to the fact that of December 2008, we have 175 seniors on the waiting list for Grand Way Commons. Sponsor: Cathedral Square Corporation is a non-profit housing organization serving the needs of senior citizens and the disabled throughout Vermont. Our mission is to provide housing that is permanently affordable and that helps residents secure the support services they need to maintain independence. In partnership with a variety of community organizations we have developed over 20 affordable senior housing communities in Chittenden County. Project: Cathedral Square is proposing to purchase a.52 acre site immediately adjacent to our current Grand Way Commons property.This site is currently home to the former VNY building,now a vacant,deteriorating building. We will clear the site and add on a 24-unit extension to our existing 63-unit building. The new building will be completely integrated with our existing building. We will provide a barrier-free design for all the units,allowing residents to remain in their homes as their health and service needs change. As is the case at Grand Way Commons,we will design Grand Way II anticipating that over time residents will require an increasing level of assistance with meal preparation,health and personal care services needs. These apartments will have long term affordability restrictions that insure that the apartments remain affordable throughout the life of the building. Project funding: The total project cost is estimated to be$4,700,000. We will be seeking funds from a variety of sources including the Low Income Housing Tax Credit(LIHTC)program through the Vermont Housing Finance Agency,the Vermont Housing and Conservation Board(VHCB),the Affordable Housing Program of the Federal Home Loan Bank of Boston,among others. We are seeking a grant/deferred loan of approximately$500,000 from the VCDP program to close the funding gap on the project. VCDP program: The Vermont Community Development Program(VCDP)provides development grants for eligible projects that serve low and moderate income households. Importantly, municipalities are the only eligible applicants for the VCDP funds. It is a highly competitive process, where the state seeks to insure that successful projects provide long term benefit to lower income rf _ r6 Vermonters,based on the needs of the community. The funds are awarded to municipalities as grants, and the municipalities can loan or grant the funds to the project. We believe that the Grand Way II project will be a very competitive project that serves an on-going community need for affordable senior housing with services. VCDP Application process: The VCDP application process has recently been changed to a completely on-line system. Cathedral Square would take responsibility for preparing all of the submissions required for the application for the City's approval. An executive summary of the project will be provided at the February 2nd meeting. In order to apply on behalf of this project the City would need to take the following action: • Validate CSC staff members as authorized users on the VCDP on-line application system. • Warn a public hearing stating that the City is considering applying for VCDP funds. This must be published prior to February 25th in order to apply for the current(and final)funding round for this program year. We can provide the hearing notice form. • Hold a public hearing on this matter at least 15 days after the notice is published(the public hearing does not have to be held by the City Council, it can be held during business hours with project and town staff in attendance)and at least 5 days prior to the March 17th application deadline. • Insure that the required VCDP policies are still in effect(drug-free environment, displacement,excessive force) • Sign a resolution authorizing the submission of the application(we will bring a draft copy on Monday night). I hope that this memo has provided useful background information on our proposed Grandway II project. We look forward to discussing this project and request more fully with you at your meeting on February 2nd. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Amy Wright Director of Development southbudington PLANNING & ZONING AGENDA South Burlington Development Review Board Tuesday, February 3, 2009 7:30pm Regular Meeting City Hall Conference Room, 575 Dorset Street, South Burlington, VT 1. Other business/announcements. 2. Minutes of January 20, 2009. 3. Preliminary plat application #SD-08-62 of Homestead Design, Inc. for a planned unit development consisting of: 1) subdividing a 6.3 acre lot developed with a place of worship into two (2) lots of 4.27 acres (lot#1) and 2.03 acres (lot#2) and 2) developing the 2.03 acre lot with 18 dwelling units consisting of one (1) two-family dwelling, four(4) three (3) unit multi-family dwellings and one (1)four(4) unit multi-family dwelling, 899 Dorset Street. 4. Continued site plan application #SP-08-116 of the South Burlington School District to place 80 cubic yards of fill to create snowboard park, 550 Dorset Street. 5. Sketch plan application #SD-09-01 of South Village Communities, LLC to amend a previously approved Master Plan for:1) a 334 unit residential development, 2) a 100 student educational facility, and 3) a 35 acre community supported farm. The amendment consists of adding a publicly owned soccer field, 1840 Spear Street 6. Sketch plan application#SD-09-02 of South Village Communities, LLC to amend a previously approved planned unit development of Phase I consisting of 156 residential units, a 100 student educational facility, and a 35 acre community supported farm. The amendment consists of: 1) subdividing a 15.9 acre parcel (lot#63) into three (3) lots of 2.71 acres (lot#11 B), 0.45 acres to be added to lot 11 A, and 12.7 acres (remaining lot#63), and 2) developing lot#11B into a publicly owned soccer field with associated parking, 1840 Spear Street. 7. Sketch plan application#SD-09-04 of Terry Lieberman for a two (2) lot subdivision to create a small lot to be added to 44 Country Club Drive. 8. Miscellaneous application#MS-09-01 of Terry Lieberman for after-the-fact approval to alter the existing grade by adding approximately 300 cubic yards of fill, 44 Country Club Drive. 9. Continued sketch plan application#SD-08-26 of South Burlington Realty Co. for a planned unit development consisting of: 1) razing the existing 1000 sq. ft. building, and 2) constructing a two (2) story 15,880 sq. ft. mixed use building, 2040 Williston Road. Re ctfully Subm. ed, Raymo J. Belair Administrative Officer 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburl.com } el OA southburlington PLANNING & ZONING • MEMORANDUM To: Chuck Hafter, City Manager /`_ From: Raymond J. Belair, Administrative Officer if Date: January 21, 2009 �/ Re: Street Acceptance- Tilley Drive (Phase II) Please ask the City Council to accept the remaining portion of Tilley Drive (on attached plan). Both Bruce Hoar and Jay Nadeau have signed off on the street (see attached). Also, City Attorney Will Flender has examined the title for Tilley Drive and found nothing of concern (see attached). • 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 WWW.sbrrrt enm , ) Page 1of1 ray From: Bruce Hoar Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2008 3:21 PM To: ray Subject: RE: Tilley Drive Acceptance Confirmed Bruce K. Hoar Director South Burlington Public Works 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 802-658-7961 bhoar aC�sburl.com ........_....._....._.... From: ray Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2008 3:13 PM To: Bruce Hoar Subject: Tilley Drive Acceptance Hi Bruce, Could you please confirm that you are in agreement that the remaining portion of Tilley Dr. is acceptable to be a City street. Thanks. Ray Belair Administrative Officer City of South Burlington 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 Ph:802.846.4106 Fax:802.846.4101 rbelair@sburl.com www.sburl.com 12/16/2008 • ray From: Jay Nadeau (jayn@cwd-h2o.org] -Sent: T igiaay, November 18, 2008 8:13 AM To: ray Subject: Tilley Drive • • Ray- I received your message concerning•the Tilley. Drive II acceptance. .We approved the water infrastructure in August of this year. All points addressed in my past project inspection letter were taken care of to our satisfaction. Jay • • • • • • • • 1 Page 1of1 ray From: Will Flender [WFlender©firmspf.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2009 9:41 AM To: ray Subject: Dorset Heights and Tilley Drive Ray, We have examined the title for the circle at Dorset Heights and for Tilley Drive and find nothing of concern. Therefore, you should feel free to proceed with accepting both deeds on behalf of the City. You may, however, wish to wait to accept Tilley Drive until the question of what the City is going to accept in order to facilitate the construction of the bike path along Tilley Drive to Community Drive. If you have any questions or if I can be of further assistance, please let me know. Will William E. Flender, Esq. Stitzel, Page & Fletcher, P.C. 171 Battery Street P.O. Box 1507 Burlington, VT 05402 Telephone: 802-660-2555 Fax: 802-660-2552 Website: www.firmspf.com This Electronic Mail transmission and any accompanying documents contain information belonging to the sender which are CONFIDENTIAL and legally PRIVILEGED. This information is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to whom this transmission was addressed, as indicated above. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution, or action taken in reliance on the contents of the information in this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error,please reply to the sender at 802-660-2555 or the above address and delete this message and all attachments from your storage files. Thank you. 1/20/2009 h :Ala Hill ! I I I ` �_ I I ! 's , } I � ' } —_ � i N-L= `ri ___A2 -L.z -->°z --i•z o i ( I'�'I i I-.l.' u _ I II ,74.i. •w,. '.. M. ..- IWR •W JJJIy1��� " V ,AiO� O Wi� iJ ;: O '1 \ -\ nD Qy Zr -•: TWO n- uu I. �\ /� n.... I`� I-�i r �� - gib- y"rv� :N £ ^rro1"? %e^;�F ;,u f vzi n HO Ell gf 7 \ 7N"fi n��F �WY� W°i ,�ooF Weo ,W° oW� ouY O ki �� +`n. Wd 9 W u al : °_ 4 w� WaV a``r _ P1168 u wWri °V' 8 -° N° i.w - ow �'— 191:61,11 n iw suria..0,,If),,ir -_________„ _ nel _________________\ ,.,,, __________--------- .417p1:.sap --_______ ---..... li `� �� � ' �`�_` _� \�9I. !op..; OOi 8� OA) 0O11T) A 010 z= � { ; a <.F « • p w? <J c c ! ,; _ `v= •ww . WV.'" ,wWa a •\W lee WOW� w Hr r , k° W " TT . \ llw � W N b \ DIEWIttAPIRS PISMPl :.s-=_000cccocaaccca Or� ' \ keg���r. --- . y��, 1942. / �� nl I F6. R. 00 �� ,a� �A° �F t - g U •\ ► s '.I. _ �-__ _ ---__ -•_ m o E s 4. ,lip z4 nSV :I{'{ . 1 - - - of oA' 1ar \; `�. ..I ., ,,,,...., ,...., „,, , g „... ;„, -„,4 2,,,,„ ,-.,„ . , . ; , r q: -�-_goW8N : i•' s� a _fi ne�� os£ , 11 f N w § 0� —Ix; I Ett� ?: > '''',...„.. Al 1 ; ,,itg :,g, 45 ggi ,‘. . . i 011,13,,.fr, ki .-<::: I ------_ 111,o " . IIF il \ g_ . h-£ : " t i , 1 a M ‘rAVIIr o Ill-1, k,','''''.'-vi tie . • . 4 \l''Ai\ 11'. . 00 (482!„ , rn ‘, , ,7. , 0 ......, .. • 1, 1 vi , , 1 - r' . vi .... , f,, t.i.A \ // . . vt, • ...' ,___--L_ ' • 1 1 . ill' '1:' ''L li 1 t'''.5., 6 k 4 ' \ III, iiiliii- ii � ' ___ <I I IIIIINI a 4£' '—� Ipitiv% lI11111 '' .-'1::-.),;,; 0. ,., , i , / \,,a.., --,,.. ih ___ ___Iii vanF .4...; A lib/ .._, ,._...., , . . . . "kfillit.,h, ked /Ili b . . . \ ________) , Ai> PY lige - ..' li4 4. \I\ . 7. a / „ S ° 447 gat., ..,-1414 / �m / pS,"714,,freVil g 4 rAtt 1 .. ,,,,,,,,, .101 il --.1 , g , / /i itr' —ititi,*1( , -op,- w-,,,,. .•:),_,41 11 ilL ,4, riv i -' ii; $.32' !I -,,'/' -i- ‘ : g. 404.4.4.0,16.1., Alt 0. ,, r, 0 _ ),(2. ... cy n O m CO om 'oa i/„c, \ o' ��' ,v: i r_____I ' y ��°� R fi i=ems. .4; d �, — -- O urn, A j 5 / 11.E . '' . , 'z r i.' Af- k Z w , 5 F. . 0:1 gibt44 southburlington PLANNING & ZONING MEMORANDUM To: Chuck Hafter, City Manager- From: Raymond J. Belair, Administrative Officer Date: January 21, 2009 Re: Street Acceptance- Portion of Dorset Heights Please ask the City Council to accept the highlighted portion of the cul-de-sac on Dorset Heights shown on the attached plan. Both Bruce Hoar and Jay Nadeau have signed off on the improvements (see attached). In addition, City Attorney Will Flender has examined the title for the subject property and found nothing of concern (see attached). 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburl.com 4 i • ) 0 1 , .,____,Af.Z11 1. 0 7Z1 . VI tan "4 N/F ; DRILLED WELL = SHINOZASKI rn lr,.... CI IM ' 4 VI • d 1 1 1 .- ),,AVED •RIVE • i SURVEYED WITNESS AT CABLE TV PEDESTAL END OF WATER MAIN , I (TYP.. RUNS 147TH POWER) \ l I 7EIPHONE PEDESTAL 1 4 (TYP., RUNS_MTH POWER) --G -- i .... 1 4 1 -..t. _ I POSER MTC - - (TYFQ- * I - •*IR ONLY \ 1 . * f , •. / .1- 4 ,,-- / \ / i LANE '•.,f• --1 / LIGHT POLE \ / 1 / \ . \ it \ / or -Al 70 1 i / \ / --- / i / • x I / 1 , • .----- , / -- # ( I V 1 4 MAIL BOI gti•1•%* I 04. 1 ' \ P • lk 1 - 4 lit I / / / 4411% 0,p .t) FIRE HYDRANT v' / I // rC. CABLE. / *.k/ 11111 LOT 1 ELEPHONE G/ CURB STOP 'EDESTALS / sd , X ' - - i 1-1 N K-COPP.7 i a !COILED _Z . 4 • • • Page 1 of 1 ray From: Bruce Hoar Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2008 10:53 AM To: ray Subject: RE: Dorset Heights Cul-de-Sac Acceptance I thought I already did. OK. Bruce K. Hoar Director South Burlington Public Works 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 802-658-7961 bhoart sburl.com From: ray Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2008 10:52 AM To: Bruce Hoar Subject: Dorset Heights Cul-de-Sac Acceptance Hi Bruce, Please let me know if you are OK with the new cul-de-sac on Dorset Heights for acceptance. Jay has given me his OK. Thanks. Ray Belair Administrative Officer City of South Burlington 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 Ph:802.846.4106 Fax:802.846.4101 rbelair@sburl.com www.sburl.com 12/1 R/7(1(1R ray From: Jay Nadeau [jayn©cwd-h2o.org] Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2008 11:42 AM To: ray Subject: Bill Daley Project Ray- The one outstanding punch list item for the Bill Daley Project (Dorset heights) has been addressed to our satisfaction. Jay Nadeau SBWD Superintendent • 1 Y � 1 Page l of l ray From: Will Render[WFlender@firmspf.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2009 9:41 AM To: ray Subject: Dorset Heights and Tilley Drive Ray, We have examined the title for the circle at Dorset Heights and for Tilley Drive and find nothing of concern. Therefore, you should feel free to proceed with accepting both deeds on behalf of the City. You may, however, wish to wait to accept Tilley Drive until the question of what the City is going to accept in order to facilitate the construction of the bike path along Tilley Drive to Community Drive. If you have any questions or if I can be of further assistance, please let me know. Will William E. Flender, Esq. Stitzel, Page& Fletcher, P.C. 171 Battery Street P.O. Box 1507 Burlington, VT 05402 Telephone: 802-660-2555 Fax: 802-660-2552 Website: www.firmspf.com • This Electronic Mail transmission and any accompanying documents contain information belonging to the sender which are CONFIDENTIAL and legally PRIVILEGED. This information is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to whom this transmission was addressed, as indicated above. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution, or action taken in reliance on the contents of the information in this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error,please reply to the sender at 802-660-2555 or the above address and delete this message and all attachments from your storage files. Thank you.