Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - City Council - 02/26/1973SOUTH BURLINGTON CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 26, 1973 The South Burlington City Council held a regular meeting on Monday, February 26, 1973, at 7:30 P.M. in the Conference Room of the City Hall at 1175 Williston Road. As Chairman Blais was going to be delayed for a short time, Vice-Chairman Brown opened the meeting with the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. MEMBERS PRESENT Frederick G. Blais, Chairman; Walter Nardelli, Dr. Harold P. Brown, Michael D. Flaherty, Brian J. Gee. OTHERS PRESENT William J. Szymanski, City Manager Robert Stewart, Executive Director of the League of Cities and Towns Richard Ward, Zoning Administrative Officer Albert Audette, Supervisor of Highway Department Melvin Monell, Fire Chief Alfred A. Calcagni of Calcagni, Frazier & Zajchowski, Architects Patrick J. Leahy, States Attorney Albert G. Thayer, Burlington Paul X. Zerr, 42 Logwood Street Michael A. Weissman, Shelburne, Vermont Arlene Krapcho, 13 Sebring Road Lubomir Dellin, 37 Brewer Parkway Franklyn McCaffrey, Volunteer Fireman George Smith, Volunteer Fireman James A. Lamphere, former Planning Commission Chairman Bruce O'Neill, Recreation Director READING OF THE MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 19, 1973 On motion duly made, seconded, and so passed, the minutes of the February 19, 1973 meeting were approved as read. SIGN DISBURSEMENT ORDERS Vice-Chairman Brown reminded the Councilmen that the disbursement orders were on the table for signatures. APPOINT PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBER Vice-Chairman Brown and the other Council members agreed to postpone consideration of the Planning Commission appointment until Chairman Blais arrived. REPORT ON COUNTY COURT BUILDING Vice-Chairman Brown announced that Mr. Alfred Calcagni of Calcagni, Frazier, and Zajchowski, architects, would present this item. Mr. Calcagni presented the Councilmen and those present with a brochure explaining Act 230, under which the Vermont Legislature enacted provisions in 1972 to create a committee of public representatives to plan the "court facility project." A copy of the brochure is attached to and made a part of these minutes. Mr. Calcagni showed slides showing the present facilities and the Post Office building as well as slides which showed the results of a remodeling project of a similar building in Bangor, Me. He explained that the County Court has to be situated in Burlington since it is the "Shire Town." The Committee had three alternatives as follows: 1. To remodel the present building. Mr. Calcagni reported that the present building, built in 1871, is unsafe under the State Health and Safety Regulations, and remodeling and enlarging it would cost from $800,000 to $1,000,000. He said it contained 18,000 square feet, the third floor was unsafe and unusable, and the basement could only be used for dead storage. 2. To purchase a site and build a new building which would cost approximately $2,097,000. 3. To remodel the former Post Office building which has (a) Enough space (b) Is structurally in good condition (c) Was built in 1901 (d) Would use a facility not presently on the tax rolls (e) Would preserve an historical building which can be remodeled at 30% to 40% of the cost of a new building. Mr. Calcagni went on to explain that 30,000 to 33,000 sq. ft. is needed for the Court House operation, and there is 33,000 sq. ft in the Post Office building. The proposal includes air-conditioning the entire building and to preserve the existing fireplaces and carved woodwork. The successful bidder on the project was the Kencliff Construction Company with a bid of $1,430,000 which covered everything including a parking area for 46 cars. Councilman Nardelli wondered why the bond was being warned at $1,400,000 when there is a reserve building fund of $200,000. Mr. Blais, who was now present, said the amortization was based on $1,200,000, but that according to the Act passed by the Legislature the warning has to be for the total cost of the building. Councilman Nardelli then asked what this would cost South Burlington. REPORT ON COUNTY COURT BUILDING, CONTINUED Mr. Blais said South Burlington's first year cost would be about $16,000, reducing to $8,000 or $9,000 by the 20th year. He explained that any grants received would reduce the cost. State's Attorney Leahy agreed with Mr. Blais, saying they had to leave leeway for rising costs, and said that maximum figures were being used. If the costs figure out to be less, the City's share would be less. Doctor Brown then asked what it is going to cost to operate the building. Mr. Blais said the state pays for the heat, phone, and electricity, and the City would share in the costs for Janitor Services, Janitorial Supplies, and possible phone extensions. Councilman Gee asked City Manager Szymanski what we were paying now for County Court operation, and Mr. Szymanski said a little over $9,000. In answer to questions from Mr. Franklyn McCaffrey, State's Attorney Leahy explained that the County Court houses the Superior Court, the Probate Court and the Sheriff's Office, and the Vermont District Court handled all civil cases up to a certain dollar amount, and all criminal cases, but maybe not murder. Councilman Gee pointed out that since the bond issue is for $1,400,000 and there is a $200,000 reserve building fund for a total of $1,600,000 and asked just what amount would we be figuring on. State's Attorney Leahy said the $200,000 would be used to reduce the cost, the maximum cost had to be warned. Councilman Nardelli said we have paid a large amount in the last five years for County Court operation, and wondered why the matter of a new Court House had come up so quickly. State's Attorney Leahy said that when he started practicing law ten years ago a new facility was long overdue then. He said if the facility becomes even more cramped the side judges could rent additional space and the costs would go up anyway, that South Burlington could be paying the same amount of money for a make-shift system as it would for the proposed remodeled facility. Mrs. Krapcho asked if we shouldn't anticipate an increase in operating costs, and Mr. Leahy said it should not be too much greater due to the fact that everything would be new and easier to maintain. Mr. Calcagni then showed the difference in costs between buying a site and constructing a new building and the proposed remodeling of the Post Office. Councilman Nardelli remarked that there isn't even a business manager in charge of the remodeling project, and Councilman Gee wondered what the present Court House would be used for if the bond issue passed, saying he hoped money wouldn't be requested for some project for that building. REPORT ON COUNTY COURT BUILDING, CONTINUED Vice-Chairman Brown thanked Mr. Leahy and Mr. Calcagni for a fine presentation and then turned the meeting over to Chairman Blais. REPORT ON REVENUE SHARING BY ROBERT STEWART, DIRECTOR OF VERMONT LEAGUE OF CITIES AND TOWNS Robert Stewart, Executive Director of Cities and Towns, reported on some of the aspects of spending the Revenue Sharing Funds the city has received. He listed the following allowable areas, saying that generally the funds can be used for Capital Improvements and operating expenses of the city government: 1. Public Safety (Police and Fire Department equipment, school busses, etc.) 2. Transportation (Public Transit Authorities, town garage, winter roads, police department garage, etc.) 3. Health (health clinic in schools) 4. Social Services for the Poor and Aged (help in some of the areas not being funded by the Federal Govt.) 5. Recreation (Swimming pool, hockey rinks, etc.) 6. Libraries (Assist the three types of libraries, Trustee Type, within-school libraries which are also used by the public, and public libraries. 7. Financial Administration (Analysis of city operation, setting up cost sharing with schools) 8. Environmental Protection Mr. Stewart said the money could not be used for any capital improvements that were being partly funded with matching funds. He explained that the Government has used a very complicated formula in figuring how much money was to be distributed to the cities and towns and the state governments, and that there were so many variables in the formula it was almost impossible to predict exact amounts. He pointed out that the revenue funds could not be expended for capital improvements incurred before January 1973. He was asked if we could use the money to reduce the tax rate, and he replied that if this was done it would reduce the amount the city would receive in the next year. He said that the higher our per capita income and the lower the tax rate the less money South Burlington would get in the future. REPORT ON REVENUE SHARING, CONTINUED Councilman Nardelli asked if future funds could be committed for a large expenditure and Mr. Stewart said no. Mr. Nardelli then asked if Revenue Sharing Funds could be used for an evaluation of city finances and city operations and was told that they could. Mr. Nardelli asked if school busses could be purchased with the funds and Mr. Stewart said yes, but the funds could not be used for school district operations. Mr. Stewart answered questions asked by the Councilmen about what actions would affect the future amounts the city could receive. Mr. Stewart said most areas of the program were not very clear, but repeated that lowering the tax rate would reduce the amount received. He estimated that we should receive some $270,000 through June 30, 1974, and said careful records of expenditures had to be kept and even publicized in the newspaper withing set time limits. Councilman Gee asked about the use of the money earned as interest on the Revenue Funds, and Mr. Stewart said that the interest earned could be used only within the allowable areas. Chairman Blais said he was not aware of any other town or city that was planning to reduce the property taxes, most areas seem to be planning on spending for new needs. Mr. Stewart was thanked for his presentation. SANCTION USE VARIANCE APPROVED AT ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING OF WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 7, 1973 Zoning Administrative Officer Ward explained that the Church of God, Inc. had received approval for a variance to construct a modular church unit on the Zeno property, Hinesburg Road. He said if the church does well in the area it would propose to construct a permanent building, and that this approval was granted with the stipulation that it be reviewed in a year. Councilman Gee asked if the unit had to qualify for a set-back and referred to the proposed ordinance which requires a 50' setback from any property line. Mr. Ward said it did. Councilman Flaherty asked if the "subject to review" stipulation meant review by the Council. Mr. Ward said only if it was part of any stipulation made by the Council. Chairman Blais asked Real Estate Broker Weissman if Church of God, Inc. owned the property, and Mr. Weissman said not yet. Councilman Brown told Mr. Weissman that we are now working on the new proposed ordinance and it would require the 50' set back from any property line, and since the property was only 100' x 871' it would be impossible to conform to the ordinance. SANCTION CHURCH OF GOD, INC. USE VARIANCE, CONTINUED Chairman Blais said we did not want to mislead the buyer, he should know that the proposed zoning ordinance would not allow a building on a lot with that size frontage in that area. Both Mr. McCaffrey and Mrs. Krapcho spoke of the traffic problems there would be since the driveway comes out on such a busy road. Councilman Nardelli said the buyer would undoubtedly come back in good faith in a year asking for another variance, maybe on a hardship basis. Councilman Nardelli then made a motion that the variance ratification as approved by the Zoning Board of Adjustment regarding this plot of land on Hinesburg Road be denied. Mr. Gee seconded the motion which passed unanimously. EXECUTIVE SESSION TO CONSIDER PLANNING COMMISSION APPOINTMENT At 9:15 P.M. Councilman Gee made a motion to go into Executive Session on the Planning Commission appointment. Mr. Flaherty seconded the motion which passed unanimously REGULAR MEETING RECONVENED The regular meeting was reconvened at 9:30 P.M. APPOINTMENT TO PLANNING COMMISSION Councilman Nardelli made a motion to appoint Attorney Ronald C. Schmucker of 1480 Dorset Street to the Planning Commission to fill the vacancy caused by the resignation of James A. Lamphere, the term to expire in 1976. The motion was seconded by Councilman Brown and passed unanimously. Chairman Blais expressed his thanks to all who had applied for the appointment, and announced that the Council would now go into a work session on the proposed zoning ordinance. On motion duly made, seconded, and so passed the meeting was adjourned at 11:55 P.M. Approved Brian J. Gee, Clerk Published by ClerkBase ©2019 by Clerkbase. No Claim to Original Government Works.