Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - City Council - 11/01/1976CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 1, 1976 The South Burlington City Council held a regular meeting on Monday, November 1, 1976, in the Conference Room, Municipal Offices, 1175 Williston Road. MEMBERS PRESENT Paul Farrar, Chairman; Frank Armstrong, John Dinklage, Michael Flaherty MEMBERS ABSENT Catherine Neubert OTHERS PRESENT William Szymanski, City Manager; Harold J. Nolting. Pat Burgmeier, Wayne Jameson The meeting was opened by Chairman Farrar at 8:00 p.m. There were no additions made to the Agenda. Minutes of October 18, 1976 It was moved by Mr. Dinklage, seconded by Mr. Armstrong, and voted unanimously to accept the Minutes of October 18, 1976, as presented. Sign Disbursement Orders Chairman Farrar called attention to the Disbursement Orders to be signed by members of the Council. Review City Charter Committee minutes and memorandum to City Council Mr. Harold J. Nolting, Chairman of the City Charter Committee, reported the opinion of the City Charter Committee that the membership of the Zoning Board of Adjustment should be five or seven members, with the City Council being given the authority to change the membership number, with Mr. Wayne Jameson adding that the emphasis should be on either or. Chairman Farrar said his personal feeling was that the number of members, whatever it was, should be a fixed number, as is the case with the member ship of the Planning Commission. The Council has requested, he said, a review of the zoning document by the Planning Commission and the removal of that section from the zoning ordinance. From a legal point of view, acting to make a change could start from there and then proceed to put it in the charter in some other form. Mr. Dinklage moved that the Council receive the report of the Charter Committee, with appreciation from the Council. Seconded by Mr. Armstrong and voted unanimously. Mr. Farrar explained that, assuming a favorable recommendation from the Planning Commission and after making the change, there would be discussion as to whether to have five or seven and the proper language prepared to propose to the Charter Committee. Although there was no reason to rush on this, he would like to have it in time to go to the voters with this. Mr. Flaherty asked Mr. Nolting why the decision was to come up with five or seven. Mr. Nolting explained the committee felt the Council should have the option. Mr. Flaherty asked if the committee couldn't find any strong arguments for either five or seven. Mr. Nolting said he recommended staying with five but didn't want to say that should go forever. There could be circumstances where seven might be useful in the future. If the Council could have the option, the Council could go for a change without having to change the Charter. Mr. Nolting said once the zoning ordinance was rescinded, Council would have the authority to appoint anywhere between three and nine. Mr. Farrar said he felt the number of members should be set. To allow Council to change at a whim is giving too much power to the Council. He said he would support seven because the Zoning Board requires a certain amount of continuity. Appointing two new members on a board of five means really reducing the total of experience which may be below the critical amount which may be necessary for good functioning. Also, that body must have a majority to make a statutory decision, and with one absence and one abstention, then the three members all have to agree in order to make a decision. Mr. Jameson said the committee didn't want to say there had to be seven members; they didn't see the necessity for seven right now. Mr. Dinklage said he would hope the committee would feel free to transmit their ideas to the Planning Commission which is burdened with the routine functions the Planning; Commission is required to perform. This committee would be a valuable source of information as to planning needs. Mr. Jameson said that would require research into other areas so they would be passing on information anyway. Mr. Flaherty moved that Council accept the report of the Charter Committee for Ordinance Review. Seconded by Mr. Armstrong and voted unanimously. First reading of amendments to Sewer Regulations ordinance Mr. Szymanski reviewed the four-page document for An Ordinance to Amend the Sewer Regulation Ordinance of the City of South Burlington, calling attention to Section 10 on the second page where Article VIII should be changed to read Article VII, in the third sentence from the bottom of the page. Mr. Dinklage moved that Council accept the first reading of An Ordinance to Amend the Sewer Regulation Ordinance of the City of South Burlington as corrected, but waive the reading of the document. Seconded by Mr. Flaherty and voted unanimously. Mr. Szymanski next reviewed a four-page document for An Ordinance to Amend the Ordinance to Establish Sewer Disposal Charges and explained a change to be made in paragraph (3) on the last page: Sewage charges payable hereunder shall be payable at the office of the City Manager, Usage charges payable hereunder shall be payable at the City Water Department office. Mr. Dinklage moved that the Council accept for first reading An Ordinance to Amend the Ordinance to Establish Sewer Disposal Charges, as corrected, and that the reading of the document be waived. Seconded by Mr. Flaherty and voted unanimously. A two-page document for An Ordinance to Amend the Sewer Installation Regulations of the City of South Burlington was then reviewed by the City Manager. He noted that under Section 1 on the first page, in the second group of items in Section 1. items 1 and 4 are to be deleted, with items 2 and 3 being renumbered as 1 and 2. On page two a new Section 5 is to be inserted: Poly Vinal Chloride material shall conform to American Society for Testing and Materials Specifications 3034. The present Sections 5, 6, and 7 are to be renumbered as Section 6, 7, and 8. Mr. Dinklage moved that Council accept for first reading An Ordinance to Amend the Sewer Installation Regulations of the City of South Burlington, as corrected, and that the reading of the document be waived. Seconded by Mr. Flaherty and voted unanimously. Before calling for a vote on each of the three motions above, Chairman Farrar asked if there was any request to have the document read. No response was received at any time. Review Planning Commission and Zoning Board Agendas Referring to the Planning Commission, Chairman Farrar said he had a discussion with Chairman Wessel regarding their proposed checklist, a draft of which was given to Council members. Mr. Farrar said he felt such a checklist could be valuable both to the Planning Commission and the developers. In discussing the Zoning Board Agenda, the City Manager explained that what was being requested was both a use variance and a setback variance for Burlington Savings Bank to establish a drive-in bank. Mr. Farrar felt there was no particular problem, that the Zoning Board was well able to handle it. Mr. Dinklage said he hoped the Board would be receptive to comments from the adjoining neighbors. Mr. Dinklage then expressed concern about the second request for variance, saying this would be the first deviation from the zoning ordinance in the southeast quadrant. He asked if there was any reason to think the Board would be disposed to grant this request and said he would prefer to have Council represented. Mr. Dinklage then moved that Council become a party to Appeal #2 of the Agenda for the November 15th meeting of the Zoning Board of Adjustment. Seconded by Mr. Flaherty. Mr. Flaherty then commented that a motion to become a party is vague, and Mr. Armstrong said it was sending a representative with no instructions. Mr. Dinklage said he would be in favor of opposing the variance unless there were arguments so compelling that he couldn't anticipate them. The Chairman said his feeling was that he would like to hear the arguments. Mr. Dinklage said whatever uses are proposed by the appellant have no direct bearing; it is a dimensional request rather than a use request, a request for a lot without the use being specified. Mr. Szymanski said one problem would be that the lot is right on a bad curve. The motion was voted unanimously. The Chairman reported on the meeting that afternoon of the Zoning Board, at which time the request to sell dairy products at the Gulf Station on Shelburne Road was denied by a vote of 4 to 0, and that no information was yet available for the proposed housing project on Hinesburg Road. Discussion of swimming pool and hockey rink applications Mr. Fred Blais attended the Council meeting to ask why only the hockey rink facility was to be on the application for Federal funding. He felt there had been a misunderstanding which should be clarified. It was explained by the City Manager that the architect said he could do one or the other in time for the application; he could not do both and he had had more experience with a hockey rink facility. Mr. Farrar said there was no question of priority; there was a question about preparing plans for both. The plans for the swimming facility probably could not be done without some problems, but there were no problems in getting the skating plans done on time so if the grant was received they could go ahead. Mr. Blais said he represented a strong interest in the community in the swimming pool project; he didn't want to see this project get lost; he would be very upset if Council didn't talk about the possibility of both facilities. Mr. Flaherty said Mr. Lamphere did the work on Essex and Leddy, making it very easy to prepare plans for South Burlington's facility. Mr. Blais asked about the sequence in time. Mr. Szymanski said the application should go in this week. If approval was received it should be received around Christmastime; then they would have the architect finish the plans. Mr. Farrar said they would have to have the working drawings in time to have bids drawn up and have people on the site by the first of April. He said there was never any question of priorities; the question was could the necessary things be done to get the program going. Both Mr. Farrar and Mr. Szymanski described the complicated appeal process involved in getting funding approval. Asked if there was some way that both facilities could be applied for, Mr. Szymanski said it would need a great deal of help from the architect in submitting the detailed application. Mr. Blais said he would like to see additional input on the swimming program, but he had not agreed with the economics of the situation as contained in the first presentation. Meet as Liquor Control Board to consider application of Pauline's Kitchen, Inc., 1934 Shelburne Road for a first class liquor license. Mr. Flaherty moved that the regular meeting of the Council be adjourned and the members meet as the Liquor Control Board. Seconded by Mr. Dinklage and voted unanimously. Mr. Szymanski explained this was a request for Pauline's Kitchen, Inc., of 1934 Shelburne Road; formerly Thelma's Restaurant and now under new ownership. A letter from Chief Carter stated he had no objections. Mr. Dinklage moved that on the recommendation of the Chief the liquor license for Pauline's Kitchen, Inc., be signed. Seconded by Mr. Flaherty and voted unanimously. The Liquor Control Board meeting was declared adjourned at 9:05 p.m. upon a motion by Mr. Flaherty, seconded by Mr. Dinklage, and voted unanimously. Clerk Published by ClerkBase ©2019 by Clerkbase. No Claim to Original Government Works.