Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - City Council - 03/16/1981CITY COUNCIL MARCH 16, 1981 The South Burlington City Council held a regular meeting on Monday, March 16, 1981 at 7:30 pm in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset Street. Members Present Paul Farrar, Chairman; Michael Flaherty, Martin Paulsen, John Towne, William Burgess Others Present William Szymanski, City Manager; Albert Audette, Street Dept.; James Goddette, Fire Chief; Bruce O'Neill, Recreation Director; Jodie Peck, Free Press; Ruth Poger, The Other Paper; Dick Trudell, Walt Bruska, Chuck Thweatt, Elaine & Normand Lavoie, David & Debbi Martell, Donald & Bernice Brisson, Donald Kerwin, Viola Luginbuhl, Ann Emery, Roberta & L.H. Coffin, Thomas Chittenden, Judy Hurd, Leo Nadeau, Richard Painter, Theodore Goodrich, M.K. Wright, Carl Cobb, Gary Farrell, Thomas O'Connor, Maria & Luke Albee, Alan Levy, Dan, Jane & Edith Hendley, Richard Lang, William Schuele, John McKenzie Agenda addition Mr. Farrar noted that the City Attorney had sent a memo answering some questions asked of him. A number of the topics come under Old Business, so he thought those would be discussed at the end of the meeting, if time permitted. Minutes of March 2 and 9, 1981 The March 2 and 9, 1981 minutes were approved on a motion by Mr. Paulsen a second by Mr. Flaherty and a unanimous vote. Disbursement orders Disbursement orders were signed. Continue public hearing on zoning change from agricultural to industrial for a 145 acre parcel located south of I-89 and east of Hinesburg Road Mr. Farrar said a question had arisen at the last meeting regarding appraisal of the land. He said the land would be appraised as industrial, not farm land. Regarding procedure, he said that if the Council wanted to change the boundary of the area in question to delete land, they could approve the zone change with the change in the boundary. The change would go to the Planning Commission for comment and the Council would have another meeting to ratify the action. To write different regulations for the land in question would require starting again at the Planning Commission level. Mr. Farrar said the present change requested by the applicant could be approved and the Commission then directed to come up with permanent zoning for the entire area. Mr. Schmucker was concerned that the Council could direct the Commission to start the process but the Council could not tell them what to do. Mr. Farrar felt the Commission would proceed in a reasonable manner and added that they could be requested to respond within some reasonable time limit. Mr. Szymanski pointed out on the map the area requested by the applicant for a zone change plus the area added by the Commission. Three residential lots originally included in the change had been deleted by the Commission. The Council did not want those 3 lots included in the change either. Mr. Towne arrived at this time. Mr. Gary Farrell felt the city should encourage a business like the one proposed and he hoped there would not be a long delay. Mr. Nadeau felt the company should locate near Digital, but was told that land was not for sale. Mr. Farrar said one concern which had been raised was that the applicant (GBIC) and the proposed tenant (Mitel) might change their plans and subdivide the land. He said assurances had been received from both that they would put it in writing that this was not their intent and that they would forego any legal rights they have in this area for 2 or 3 years. This assurance applies to only the 111 acres GBIC is interested in now. Mr. Chuck Thweat, a Mitel representative, spoke about the company and about what kind of employees they would have. Mr. Flaherty asked what improvements to the Kennedy Drive-Hinesburg Road intersection, as described at Planning Commission meetings, might cost and was told it would be about $5-10,000. Mr. Nadeau asked how the city could control the growth of this facility and was told control was in the Zoning Ordinance and site plan reviews at both the local and Act 250 levels. Mr. Farrar said one argument which had been presented was that because of the location of this area in the Quadrant, it might be desirable to have permitted uses in this industrial area be different from permitted uses in the existing industrial zone. Because the existing zone was being extended under this zone change proposal from the Commission, area residents were concerned about the uses to which the two small parcels might be put if the change was passed in this form. Mr. Burgess moved to close the public hearing. Mr. Towne seconded the motion and all voted for it. It was noted that with deletion of the two small parcels, the area in question would be 111 acres. The two parcels can be rezoned industrial at a later date. Mr. Burgess did not see any advantage or disadvantage to excluding the two parcels. Mr. Paulsen preferred to include all the areas which came to the Council, to avoid zoning for a particular applicant. Mr. Flaherty was concerned over the rezoning. He was afraid rezoning would accelerate development of that area of a type the city might not want, and he was afraid that this change might change the character of Hinesburg Road and the south part of the city. He also did not want to see small lots used for small industrial uses. He was against any industrial zoning south of the Interstate. Mr. Towne felt the proposed tenant would be compatible and should be welcomed. Mr. Farrar felt the Council was dealing with a situation where a zone change had been requested for a particular applicant and that was what should be granted. He also felt the Commission should be directed to look at the entire question of rezoning that area with reasonable speed and in a way which is compatible with what has been put forth in the Plan. Mr. Burgess moved that the City Council delete the 10 and 25 acre parcels of Tilley and Wright from the present application and that the Council then approve the zone change on the remainder of the land. The motion was seconded by Mr. Towne and passed 4-1, with Mr. Flaherty dissenting. Mr. Paulsen then moved to schedule a meeting to consider final action on this item for Monday, April 6, 1981 at 7:30 pm at City Hall. Mr. Burgess seconded the motion and all voted for it. Mr. Paulsen then moved to direct the Planning Commission to take appropriate action to present this body with a new industrial zone and regulations for that zone which is to take in all the land presently designated in the Master Plan for industrial uses in that area called the Southeast Quadrant. Mr. Burgess seconded the motion. Mr. Farrar hoped 2 or 3 people would volunteer to help with input and suggestions on this item. He felt input from area residents would be useful so everyone would be aware of what would happen in the future. The motion carried with Mr. Flaherty voting no. Mr. Paulsen, who was not feeling well, left at this time. Mr. Schuele invited Council members and the public to an open house by the Natural Resources Committee at the library on Friday from 7-9:30 pm. Continue discussion on "Nuclear Freeze" item on the May ballot Mr. Farrar explained the request which had been made to include this item on the ballot. The City Attorney has said that such a question would have no legal effect and would only be advisory. Two more personal letters on the subject were received plus names of co-signers. Mr. Flaherty moved to instruct the City Attorney to prepare a suitable item for inclusion on the ballot to allow the citizens to express their views on this question. Mr. Towne seconded the motion and it passed 4-0. Continue work on City Budgets for 1981-82 The City Attorney's opinion on the CCTA budget item was read. It was noted that the Council could put an item on the ballot asking whether citizens of the city wanted to continue with the system. The subsidy this year will be $80,000. Mr. Farrar said the CCTA could be requested to reduce service in the community or a resolution could be sent to them informing them that it is not South Burlington's intention to appropriate additional funds for them this year. Serious concerns were expressed about CCTA's ability to control their budget. Mr. Schuele asked whether taxi fares could be regulated within the city if the CCTA collapsed. If the question of whether to stay in is asked on the ballot and it does not pass, it was felt this body would have a moral obligation to send a letter to CCTA withdrawing from the system. Mr. Burgess did not want to arbitrarily cut out the bus - he wanted to know the opinion of the citizens on the question. The City Attorney had been asked whether the property assessments could be kept at 100% of fair market value by adjusting them every year. Mr. Farrar read the answer from the attorney. Mr. Burgess felt the grand list should be divided into 10 pieces so that every property is checked once every 10 years. This will catch projects done without benefit of building permits and will also give an index for property values. He did not want less than 10% done each year and said the city could not afford to do more than that. Mr. Burgess moved that we approve a method of appraisal based on an index system to be developed by a statistical sample of 10% of the property in South Burlington annually, to be effective with the appraisal year starting April 1, 1982. The purpose of this is to maintain 100% valuation of all real and personal property. Mr. Flaherty seconded the motion and all voted for it. Fire Chief Goddette spoke about aluminum vs. steel fire truck bodies. He felt at least one of the trucks had to be fixed this year. He felt the equipment had to be maintained to maintain the ISO rating. He said it would cost about $32,000 and should last 20 years. It would take 30-60 days to fix the truck. There is no safety problem to people riding the truck if it is not fixed, but equipment could be lost from the compartments, he said. He felt that if the truck was not fixed, in a year it would not be serviceable. The fences at Red Rocks and JC Park were also mentioned. It was decided to meet Wednesday at 7:30 pm to talk to the City Attorney and then spend one or two hours on the budget. Planning Commission agenda There were no comments. Discuss City Hall Employees and Police Department contract proposals Mr. Flaherty moved to go into executive session for the purpose of discussing the Police Department and City Hall contract proposals. No action will be taken and the Council will reconvene only for the purpose of adjourning. Mr. Burgess seconded the motion and all voted yes. At 10:30 pm the Council came out of executive session and adjourned. Clerk Published by ClerkBase ©2019 by Clerkbase. No Claim to Original Government Works.