Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - City Council - 12/19/1985CITY COUNCIL 19 DECEMBER 1985 Correction to Regular Meeting of December 19, 1985 Mr. Murray noted that on Page 4, next to the last papagraph, the reference should be to the Supreme Court, not Superior Court. The South Burlington City Council held a regular meeting on Thursday 19 December 1985, at 7:30 pm, in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset Street Members Present Paul Farrar, Chairman; Michael Flaherty, George Mona, Francis Murray, Leona Lansing Others Present William Szymanski, City Manager; Sid Poger, The Other Paper; Jane B. Lafleur, City Planner; Frank Evans, Reg Orvis, Peter Vlahos, Vermont Agency of Transportation; William Wiese, FFF; Richard Fletcher, Chittenden Trust Co; Ralph Deslauriers, Delauriers Land; Louis R. Mazel, Mark Oettinger, 89-2; Gary Farrell, Gene Cenci, Hospitality Inn, Inc; Randy Echo, Echo Real Estate; Richard Spokes, City Attorney Comments & Questions from the Public (not related to items on the agenda) No issues were raised. Condemnation hearing for land required for the Williston Road (at Gaynes) improvements Mr. Farrar said that two questions were involved in the proceeding: 1) is the project necessary and 2) if it is necessary, what are reasonable and equitable values for any land that has to be taken. Representatives of interested parties present introduced themselves. Mr. Szymanski noted that UVM had no representative but had sent a letter (attached). Issues with landowner Edith M. Fisk have been resolved. No representative from Mobil Oil/Spillane's was present. Mr. Farrar then asked if anyone present was contesting the necessity of the project. It was noted that no one had appeared to contest the necessity of the project. Mr. Farrar then introduced Mr. Evans, Survey Engineer for the Agency of Transportation. Mr. Evans indicated that the Agency had developed the plans for the project at the request of South Burlington. The area involved runs along Williston Road from the Jughandle to the I-89 Interchange. At present, the road is 4 lanes wide and experiences much traffic congestion. An outer lane goes straight through while inner lanes have both through and left turning traffic. The proposed project will widen this section of the road to essentially 6 lanes. There will be 2 through lanes westbound with ramp traffic coming onto a right turn lane which will serve the Sheraton and East Avenue. A left turn lane for Gaynes, Spillanes and the Chittenden bank will be provided. There will also be 2 eastbound lanes with an outer lane for right turns. At one point, there will be 7 lanes providing for left turns for businesses. This lane will end at Gaynes. A major intersection will serve Gaynes and the Sheraton. It will be signalized with a pedestrian activated crosswalk. There will be sidewalks on both sides of the road. An adjustment will be required to the island between Interstate entrances. Mr. Oettinger said it was their understanding that there was to be an eastbond lane exit from Gaynes. Mr. Evans said they have not received a formal request from the property owner for this but are willing to provide such a lane when they get a request. Mr. Evans noted that the project will eliminate lengthy delays which back up onto the Interstate. He indicated that in the design year (2006) they anticipate the road will carry 55,000 vehicles per day, or about 5,000 per hour. There were no questions raised on the design aspect of the project. Mr. Farrar then noted that the State Assessor could not be present at this meeting and that if anyone had questions for him, the hearing would be continued until he could be available. Mr. Fletcher of Chittenden Bank said they had had their own appraisal done with significantly different figures resulting (see appropriate file). While the State has offered $29,800, Chittenden's appraiser reached a figure of $56,500. Mr. Fletcher said they would be happy to have their appraiser speak with the Council. Mr. Oettinger, speaking for 89-2 Realty, said their loss of 12 feet will have serious affects. They will lose 27 parking spaces by one design plan or will have a crowding of spaces which will cause traffic flow problems if they use another design plan. The development of Gaynes was prior to the Zoning Ordinance and it already has fewer spaces than the Ordinance requires for its size. They have been offered a minimum of 5 acres of land behind their building at $80,000 and acre, but even this would require redesigning the building for rear access. They have had 2 appraisers look at the property and written appraisals will be provided. Both appraisers concur on a $15/sq. ft. value. The State has offered $21,250 for the land, $11,650 to reline the parking area, and $5,900 to move signs, etc., for a total of $38,800. By their appraisers' figures, the land should be worth $90,000, resulting in a total of $107,550. Mr. Deslauriers indicated he was simply present to pass on information to the family about the hearing. Mr. Farrell, representing the Sheraton, noted they have submitted all their material to the State. He said they have been interested for many years in getting the project done and do not contest what the State offered for the land. They do, however, differ on figures for work required for redoing the parking area and other related work. He noted that their entrance will be relocated and they have had to redesign access to their main building. In addition, their 180 foot marble wall will be removed and the State has offered to replace it with a concrete wall. He indicated the Sheraton will make improvement finishes to the wall themselves. They will also be losing a number of parking spaces and will have to reconstruct islands. He felt that instead of a concrete wall, the state should put in footings for the full length of the property so they can put in whatever type of wall they want. The State has offered $36,000 for reconstruction work while Sheraton's own engineer has come up with a figure of $42,000. He indicated they had received no response from the State and that they would furnish the Council with the same information that was given to the State. Mr. Fletcher raised the question of the relocation of their exit and who was to pay for it. He also noted all the demands for utilities placements and felt they wouldn't have enough land left. He said these questions affect the value of their property and wanted to reserve the right to question the State appraiser. Mr. Vlahos indicated that the State will build the new exit for the Chittenden. Mr. Szymanski added that a lot of the utilities questions have been resolved and he would communicate this to Mr. Fletcher. Mr. Flaherty then moved that the hearing be continued until January 6, 1986. Ms. Lansing seconded, and the motion passed unanimously. Accept resignation of J. Barry Carris form Regional Planning Commission. Mr. Flaherty moved that the Council accept with regret the resignation of J. Barry Carris as the city's representative to the Regional Planning Commission and that the City Manager send a letter of gratitude. Ms. Lansing seconded, and the motion passed unanimously. Continue review of City Master Plan Mr. Murray noted that Rick Carbin of Ottaquechee Land Trust had met with the Planning Commission. Mr. Farrar said he had met with the Chairman of the School Board and the Superintendent, and they will make more data available to the City Planner. He asked whether a sewer district plan is available indicating service areas of the 2 plants. He said they will have to make some assumptions on growth with regard to sewage facilities. Mr. Mona indicated for the record that he had no reservations with the plan as rendered. Review Planning Commission Agenda. No issues were raised. Sign Disbursement Orders Disbursement orders were signed. Review Minutes of 2 December 1985 Mr. Flaherty moved that the Minutes of 2 December 1985 be approved as written. Ms. Lansing seconded, and the motion passed unanimously. Old Business Ms. Lafleur asked why the Dorset St. appeal was ended. Mr. Spokes explained that at the time the case was filed, there was a case in Superior Court involving the Town of Essex. Last week, the Superior Court ruled that in a variance situation, a by-law or plan is not at issue; therefore, South Burlington's case is moot. Mr. Spokes indicated he did not understand the Court's rationale. Mr. Farrar said the next step is to have the legislators introduce a bill allowing for such a procedure. Members agreed this should be done. Mr. Murray noted that without such a possibility, elected officers would have no option to appeal an arbitrary decision and to protect the public. Mr. Spokes also updated the Council on the Charwill/Pizzagalli case. Pizzagalli filed a protest appeal with EPA. A hearing was held in Boston 3 weeks ago. As a result, Mr. Spokes and Pizzagalli's responded with a brief letter. The hearing was conducted by an attorney not familiar with the case, but the case has now been given back to the original lawyer and a decision is expected any day. Pizzagalli also filed in Vermont Superior Court for a permanent injunction. The City filed to have it dismissed because Pizzagalli had not exhausted all of its other remedies. Court did dismiss it because Pizzagalli did not file a counter. Executive Session Mr. Flaherty moved that the Council meet in Executive Session to discuss pending litigation and resume regular session only to adjourn. Mr. Mona seconded, and the motion passed unanimously. Clerk Published by ClerkBase ©2019 by Clerkbase. No Claim to Original Government Works. /i.. . , ,,. ! . ., LAN11 HtCOHI16 CIFHCE j~,, . - ,, z, j; '- I WATERhlAN UUlLolNCriM 339 ! , . .,;j . ,-. /U BURLINGTON. VERMONT 05411201110 ,%:::,,. ,:~y . .'li December 19, 1985 .,, . .. . Mr. William Szymanski City Manager 575 Dorset Street Re: Williscon Road Widening South Burlington, VT 05401 Project M-EGC 5200 (7) City of South Burlington Dear Mr. Szymanski: Officials from the University will be unable to attend the public hearing to be held on 19 December 1985, at 7:30 p.m. at the South Burling- ton City Hall nor the Vermont Agency of Transporation compensation hearing following the public hearing. Therefore, by way of this letter I am submitting the University's position for not accepting the offer of $10,000 from the Vermont Agency of Transportation. When the University first learned of the project we had an appraisal a done in July 1984 which arrived at a value of $2.75 per square foot. This project requires a strip of University property 16' wide and containing 4.966 sq. ft. We have arrived at a value of $14,475 as follows: * escalator value to allow for inflation from July 1984 to July 1985. Because the difference between the two values is relatively small, the University's General Counsel has suggested we split the difference and settle on a value of $12,237.50 for the strip of land. Should you have any questions or need additional information. I may be reached at the above address or by phone at 656-2038. Thank You. Sincerely, arris G. Abbott, Manager Land Records cc: Lee Liggett William Ballard Rayburn Lavigne An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer