Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - City Council - 09/04/1973SOUTH BURLINGTON CITY COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 4, 1973 The South Burlington City Council held a regular meeting in the City Hall Conference Room, Williston Road, on Tuesday, September 4, 1973, at 7:30 P.M. Mrs. Neubert made a motion to adjourn the meeting to the Assessor's Office. Mr. Flaherty seconded said motion which passed unanimously. Chairman Nardelli opened the meeting with the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. MEMBERS PRESENT Chairman Walter Nardelli, Catherine Neubert, Michael Flaherty, Paul Farrar and William Cimonetti. MEMBERS ABSENT None OTHERS PRESENT William J. Szymanski, City Manager; Richard Ward, Zoning Administrator, Charlotte Marsh, Norman Myers, Mary Barbara Maher, Cheryl Benfield, Sonny Audette, Richard Bingham, Nancy Neubert, Arlene Krapcho, Charles Bolton and Paul Poquette. READING OF THE MINUTES OF THE AUGUST 20, 1973 MEETING On Page 5, Mr. Flaherty made a correction. He stated that "in the next contract the date should be specified when all of the employees get the pay raise." Mr. Szymanski also made a correction on Page 4 which was penned in. Mr. Cimonetti made a motion to accept the minutes of the August 20, 1973 meeting as corrected. Mr. Flaherty seconded said motion which passed unanimously. DISBURSEMENT ORDERS Mr. Nardelli reminded the Councilmen that the disbursement orders were on the table for approval and signature. REVIEW JOB DESCRIPTION FOR CITY PLANNER Mrs. Mary Barbara Maher has worked up a job description for a City Planner and also an ad which could be placed in a magazine or newspaper. She recommended putting the ad in a magazine called "Tab." Mrs. Maher read both the job description and also the ad. Mrs. Maher also stated that this has not been brought before the Planning Commission for discussion. She stated that if the City Council really does want to hire a City Planner, they should do something about it now. Mr. Nardelli asked for any comments from the Council. Mr. Szymanski stated that six or seven applications have already been submitted. Mrs. Maher then asked again if the Council was of a mind to hire a City Planner. It was stated that the Council has no concensus of mind as yet. Mrs. Neubert stated that the Council has never discussed actually what kind of a Planner they really want. There followed much discussion re: type of City Planner wanted. Mrs. Neubert is on record as to thinking the City needs a person to help with the planning. Mr. Flaherty stated that he is concerned with the type of Planner. He is more in favor of an economist. He would like to advertise for the type of person they want. Mr. Cimonetti asked if Mrs. Maher anticipated any more expenses than the ad. She stated anyone coming would have their expenses of coming here covered. Mr. Cimonetti also stated that the City has to come to grips with the type of job a planner would have. Mrs. Maher stated that the City needs a broad range planner. Mr. Farrar stated he would like to move that the Council hire someone in the general nature of a planner. Mr. Farrar made a motion that the Council is in favor of hiring a person to assist in the general area of planning. The motion was seconded by Mr. Flaherty. Miss Charlotte Marsh then stated that she is against hiring a Planner. She suggested that the Planning Commission should do the planning themselves. There followed more discussion of what a full time Planner would do. Mr. Farrar brought up the question of whether the town is big enough to hire a Planner full time, and is it high enough on the City's priority list. Mr. Cimonetti asked about the status of a City Planner in the budget. The previous Council had recommended $15,000.00 for a Planner for the current fiscal year. Mr. Nardelli stated that the individual expertise of a City Planner is needed in the area. Mrs. Krapcho stated that at the time of the previous Council's decision to hire a City Planner, there was very little publicity, before it was put to a vote. It was then turned down by a 3 to 1 vote. Mr. Cimonetti asked Mrs. Maher if she had a straw vote idea of what the Planning Commission thought on this subject. Mrs. Maher stated she could not speak for her colleagues at present. There was further discussion as to what the City Planner's role was to be with respect to the Planning Commission. Mrs. Maher stated again that she feels very strongly that the City needs a City Planner. Mr. Flaherty stated he would like to send both papers back to the Planning Commission for consideration. Mr. Farrar again questioned whether the town was large enough to afford an outlay of this kind. Mrs. Maher stated the City should be able to pay for a City Planner. Mr. Farrar suggested his motion be tabled until the next meeting. Miss Marsh stated that if we had a City Planner, we would not need a Planning Commission. Mr. Flaherty made a motion to table the motion made by Mr. Farrar until the next meeting. The motion was seconded by Mr. Farrar. In addition to the motion to table Mr. Farrar's motion, Mr. Nardelli suggested to Mrs. Maher that she take both the job description and ad to the Planning Commission and get a concensus of the Planning Commission. Mr. Farrar wanted to expand it by asking the Planning Commission about the job of a City Planner being a full time job. FINAL READING OF ZONE CHANGE REQUEST ON TWIN OAKS PROPERTY ON KENNEDY DRIVE Mr. Szymanski read a letter from Mr. Norman Myers stating they wish to withdraw the request for a zone change. Mrs. Neubert made a motion to turn down the request of Mr. Norman Myers of the Twin Oaks property requesting said property be changed from Industrial to Residential C. The motion was seconded by Mr. Flaherty. Mrs. Neubert then withdrew the motion. Mrs. Neubert then made a motion that the Council consider the second reading of the Twin Oaks property zone change request presented by Mr. Norman Myers that the property be rezoned from Industrial to Residential C. Mr. Flaherty seconded said motion. Mr. Farrar asked Mrs. Maher how the Planning Commission feels re: zone change of the Twin Oaks property. Mrs. Maher stated the Planning Commission thought it should not be zoned Industrial, and should be zoned Residential. The Planning Commission did not come to any specific plan; Residential C or Planned District. Some on the Commission feel very strongly about Planned District. Mrs. Maher stated that the Planning Commission really thinks the property should be Residential. Mrs. Maher stated she had communications with the City Attorney in which it was stated he feels that the zone change request is not a site plan review. The request was in conformance with the adjoining property - 7.2 density. Mr. Ward stated that Planned District would be a problem as you cannot control density in Planned District. He recommends Residential C. Mr. Cimonetti asked what the Planning Commission can do with a Planned District. Mrs. Maher stated that the Planning Commission would have total control. Mr. Ward stated that the density can be changed in Residential C. Mr. Nardelli had a communication from the Planning Commission stating that they do not recommend that this property be rezoned to Residential C. Mr. Farrar then asked if a density of 7.2 is something the City should have. Mrs. Maher stated that the Planning Commission was very divided. Mr. Farrar feels that the present construction of apartments on Kennedy Drive is perfectly all right. Mr. Ward suggested that a change be made in Mrs. Neubert's motion to read "approve" instead of "consider." It was then decided that Mrs. Neubert's motion was null and void. Mr. Farrar made a motion that the City approve the second reading of the request to rezone the Twin Oaks property. Mr. Cimonetti seconded said motion. Mr. Flaherty then presented some questions: whether the Planning Commission has the right to deny a developer the 7.2 density if the developer has all the requirements: he also questioned densities in Planned District. Mr. Ward stated that the town has been treating Planned District as a multiple use area. There was a 4 to 1 vote against the zone change. Mr. Farrar made a motion to adopt the Planning Commission's recommendation to change the Twin Oaks property to Planned District. Mr. Flaherty seconded said motion. Mr. Nardelli read the communication from the Planning Commission re: rezining said Twin Oaks property to Planned District. Mr. Farrar stated he would like an answer to the question of controlling density under Planned District. Mrs. Maher stated the Planning Commission does have control. Mr. Nardelli then read the first reading of Zone Change request on Twin Oaks property on Kennedy Drive from Industrial to Planned District. There was a 4 to 1 vote in favor of the first reading of the zone change. Mrs. Neubert was the one vote against the first reading of the zone change and she stated the City should have an idea of what is going on the property before a zone change is made. SANCTION USE VARIANCE TABLED FROM AUGUST 20, 1973 MEETING - TAKE TEN CATERING SERVICE. Mr. Farrar made a motion to untable action on the Take-Ten Catering Service request for a use variance from the meeting on August 20, 1973. Mr. Flaherty seconded said motion which passed unanimously. There was discussion re: question before the City to change area from Residential to Industrial use, question of footage. It was stated that the Zoning Board approved of this use variance, and also there was a question of putting driveway to the left of the house. Mr. Farrar stated that this is the time to decide whether the City is going to encourage the area be developed Residential or Industrial. There was much discussion about the zoning of this area. Mr. Flaherty made a motion that the City accept the Zoning Board's recommendation to allow the use variance request by Take Ten Catering Service to operate a catering business in an Industrial zone, with the additional stipulation that the driveway be placed on the side of the open yard. Mrs. Neubert seconded said motion. There was a 4 to 1 vote. Mr. Cimonetti voted against the motion. DISCUSSION ON AMBULANCE SERVICE Mr. Szymanski presented more details of the Ambulance Service. There were 114 calls last year, 25 of them being in the category of Medicare or Medicaid. He stated 12 of those 25 calls had been collected. He stated the people are billed the $40.00 and it is up to them to collect the Medicare or Medicaid. In some instances the City waives collecting the whole bill if the people cannot pay it. Mr. Szymanski stated that 7 bills are not collectible. Out of the 114 calls, they have collect 60 bills. He feels they can collect all but 7. Mrs. Neubert stated she wished there was a system whereby the people on Medicare or Medicaid could get a write-off of the extra $15.00 to the bill. Mr. Farrar suggested that a fee be established of $25.00 for anyone 65 years or older. Mr. Farrar made a motion that the rate of $40.00 be set for anyone under 65 years of age and $25.00 be set for those 65 years or older, starting as of July 1, 1973. Mr. Cimonetti seconded said motion which passed unanimously. DISCUSSION OF PROPOSED ZONING REGULATIONS Mr. Nardelli stated the Council has already gone into suggested zoning regulations. He suggested that Mr. Szymanski and Mr. Ward start on a first draft, re: flood plain, business planned district, industrial, business retail, airport industrial to be ready sometime in October. SALE OF THOMPSON COURT TO BURLINGTON INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT Mr. Szymanski stated that the airport has bought all the property surrounding this property which consists of 27,800 square feet. He stated there is an asking price of $20,800.00 and he has received no reaction from Mr. D'Acuti as yet. It is understood that the Airport does not want to pay anything for this property. There was discussion re: what to do with the land, selling it for the maximum cost, taxing the land, etc. Mr. Szymanski will look up property adjacent to this property and find values, etc. SIGN PROPERTY TAX LIENS These liens are on a parcel of land on Dorset Street - Mechanics Construction, Inc. Mr. Farrar made a motion that the Council sign the notice of real property tax liens. Mrs. Neubert seconded said motion which passed unanimously. SIGN HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT'S BACKHOE PURCHASE AGREEMENT Mr. Szymanski stated this is a piece of equipment the City has rented. With Revenue Sharing it is $11,000.00 per year for three years, making a total cost of $33,000.00. It is used for sewer maintenance, sidewalk construction, road work, etc. and is extensively used. The City has put about $10,000.00 or $12,000.00 into it. Mr. Farrar made a motion that upon the Highway Department's recommendation, the Chairman as agent of the City, sign this agreement for purchase of the backhoe. Mr. Flaherty seconded said motion which passed unanimously. There was discussion of City equipment, re: trucks, sidewalk sweeper, dump machine, other equipment and expenses. It was stated that in the future, all encumbrances re: City equipment, etc. be properly listed. Mrs. Neubert made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 10:15 P.M. Mr. Flaherty seconded said motion which passed unanimously. Paul Farrar, Clerk Published by ClerkBase ©2019 by Clerkbase. No Claim to Original Government Works.