Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - City Council - 08/24/1987CITY COUNCIL 24 AUGUST 1987 The South Burlington City Council held a special meeting on Monday, 24 August 1987, at 7:30 pm, in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset Street. Members Present Paul Farrar, Chairman; Michael Flaherty, Francis X. Murray Also Present William Szymanski, City Manager; Albert Audette, Street Dept; James Goddette, Fire Chief; Jane Lafleur, City Planner; Gerry Milot, Peter Owens, Russ Colvins, Charles Deslauriers, Alexander Lewis, Connie Lewis, Richard Freeley, Bob Marcellino, Charlie Van Winkle, Skip McClellan, James Roeder, Lance Llewellyn, Al Bartlett, Carl Cobb, Merv Brown; Sid Poger, The Other Paper; Mike Donoghue, Free Press Comments & Questions from the Audience (not related to items on the Agenda) Mr. Farrar noted that the City has concluded an agreement with the Police Department and the hope is that it can be signed at the next regular meeting. Public Hearing: on Planned Unit Developments for the following parcels of land: a) Brand Farm located east side of Dorset Street just south of the I-89 overpass Ms. Lafleur advised that the Planning Commission had approved the preliminary plat which the Council must now review. There will be 98 single family and 80 multi- family dwellings. The development will be in the wooded area on the easterly portion of the property. The westerly portion will be for the future City park. Mr. Llewellyn explained that the project is set back 150 ft. from I-89 and 100 ft. from the wetlands on the east. Lots will be about 60ʹ x 100ʹ. Access to the development will be off the Swift St. Extension off Dorset St. There will be 2 access points. Water and sewer will be from City systems, and all utilities will be underground. Swift St. will be an 80ʹ right-of-way with 32ʹ paved; the road serving the single family units will be a 60ʹ right-of-way with 30ʹ paved; and the road serving the multi family units will be a 50ʹ right-of way, 30ʹ paved. Roads will be curbed with a sidewalk on one side. There will be a central location for mailboxes. Mr. Milot said they will have to delineate a building envelope when permits are issued and will then determine what trees can be saved. Mr. Milot will do the building, but they also want to insure residents will not cut down trees in the back yards. Mr. Murray said he had 2 concerns: the contour of the road which is not consistent with the plan for the park, and the question of putting the ballfields on the Act 250 application. Mr. Milot said the City can't get input on the ballfields to him in time for their Act 250 hearing. He also didn't feel an Act 250 permit was needed for the ballfields. Mr. Murray said it is important the ballfields be shown so it is known there will be a park facility there. Mr. Milot said they anticipate giving that information in their marketing program and also in the deeds. He suggested filing a memorandum of record so that attorneys searching title will be aware and can inform their clients. Ms. Lafleur noted that after preliminary plat approval, Peter Owens raised concerns about trees along the meadow line, the contour of the road as it goes around the knoll, and the location of the road on the easterly portion of the development. Mr. Owens said the ideal solution to the last problem would encroach on Calkins land which the city doesn't own. He said he would prefer a meandering quality for the park road. Ms. Lafleur said the Planning Commission felt the issue of the trees along the meadow line was the most pressing concern. They were not convinced that a 10 foot buffer of trees was adequate. 14-18 lots border on that stand of trees. Mr. Milot suggested moving the front setback from 30ʹ to 20ʹ and having a 30ʹ rear setback instead. Ms. Lafleur felt that was an improvement and would protect the trees more effectively. She also felt there must be covenants against cutting the trees. Mr. Milot agreed to add the ballfields as "proposed" to their Act 250 application so as not to lock the City in to any particular locations. Mr. Murray then moved that the South Burlington City Council approve the Preliminary Plat of A & G Investments for a 179 unit planned development consisting of 98 single family units and 80 multi-family units in 20 buildings, farmhouse, on 2 acres, and 68 acres of open space to be deeded to the City as shown on a 28 page set of plans entitled "Southsett at Swift, South Burlington, Vermont" prepared by Fitzpatrick-Llewellyn, dated May, 1987, stamp dated June 23, 1987. The Council hereby finds that the project: a. Will not result in undue water or air pollution. In making this determination the Council has considered (1) the availability and capacity of municipal sewer facilities; (2) the elevation of land above sea level and in relation to the flood plans; (3) protection of ground and surface waters; and (4) all applicable regulations of the health department and other State agencies. b. Does have sufficient water available for the reasonable needs of the development. c. Will not cause unreasonable soil erosion or reduction in the capacity of the land to hold water so that a dangerous or unhealthy condition may result. d. Will not cause unreasonable highway congestion or unsafe conditions with respect to use of the highways, existing or proposed. e. Will not cause an unreasonable burden on the ability of the City to provide educational services and facilities. f. Will not cause an unreasonable burden on the ability of the City to provide municipal or governmental services and facilities. g. Will not have an undue adverse effect on the scenic or natural beauty of the area, is aesthetically compatible with existing buildings and site characteristics. h. Will provide housing types, costs, and characteristics appropriate to the housing needs of various social and economic groups. i. Will provide convenient allocation and distribution of common open space in relation to the proposed development and will conform with the city's recreation plan. j. Will provide efficient layout and high-quality installation, construction, and maintenance of streets and public facilities and will conform with the City's utility plan. k. Will provide for cooperation and adjoining properties in the extension of roadways, drainage facilities, and utility lines. l. Will maximize potential for energy conservation and solar energy use via appropriate site layout and use of building materials. m. Will conform with the City's comprehensive plan. and further stipulates that: 1. The developer will provide a letter from the Superintendent of Schools that the development will not put an unreasonable burden on the district to provide educational services and facilities. 2. On lots 1-19, the rear setback will be changed from 20 feet to 30 feet and a buffer/non-graded zone of 20 feet will be provided. The front yard setback will be changed from 30 feet to 20 feet. Covenants will be required for future homeowners to assure that no digging is permitted in the 20 foot buffer zone and that no cutting of trees is allowed in the buffer zone without City approval. Covenants will be provided by the City Attorney prior to Final Plat. The covenants will be enforceable by the City. 3. Utility easements will be provided by the developer and approved by the City Manager prior to Final Plat. 4. The general outline of the City's park plan will be included in the developer's promotion and marketing materials. 5. The developer will include drawings of the ballfields in his plans to be submitted to Act 250. Mr. Flaherty seconded the motion which passed unanimously. b) Vermont Structural Steel land location on the west side of Hinesburg Road approximately 1/4 mile south of the I-89 underpass. Mr. Llewellyn explained that Act 250 did not like the proximity of the project to Hinesburg Rd., so front yards have been moved back 100 ft. This resulted in a net loss of 2 lots. The cul de sac has been removed. Water and sewer will be public. There will be 60ʹ road easements with 30ʹ roads. Members briefly discussed the sewer question for future reference when other development occurs in the area. Mr. Murray then moved that the South Burlington City Council approve the Revised Final Plat of LDB Incorporated for the subdivision of a 100+ acre parcel into a 28.1 acre parcel of land zoned Industrial-Agricultural, 113 single-family lots and approximately 21 acres of open space to be dedicated to the City as depicted on a 20 page set of plans entitled "LDB Development, Overall Site Plan, September, 1986, last revised 7/27/87. The Council hereby finds that the project: a. Will not result in undue water or air pollution. In making this determination the Council has considered (1) the availability and capacity of municipal sewer facilities; (2) the elevation of land above sea level and in relation to the flood plans; (3) protection of ground and surface waters; and (4) all applicable regulations of the health department and other State agencies. b. Does have sufficient water available for the reasonable needs of the development. c. Will not cause unreasonable soil erosion or reduction in the capacity of the land to hold water so that a dangerous or unhealthy condition may result. d. Will not cause unreasonable highway congestion or unsafe conditions with respect to use of the highways, existing or proposed. e. Will not cause an unreasonable burden on the ability of the City to provide educational services and facilities, as shown in a letter from the Superintendent of Schools to Charles Van Winkle, dated 13 November 1986. f. Will not cause an unreasonable burden on the ability of the City to provide municipal or governmental services and facilities. g. Will not have an undue adverse effect on the scenic or natural beauty of the area, is aesthetically compatible with existing buildings and site characteristics. h. Will provide housing types, costs, and characteristics appropriate to the housing needs of various social and economic groups. i. Will provide convenient allocation and distribution of common open space in relation to the proposed development and will conform with the city's recreation plan. j. Will provide efficient layout and high-quality installation, construction, and maintenance of streets and public facilities and will conform with the City's utility plan. k. Will provide for cooperation and adjoining properties in the extension of roadways, drainage facilities, and utility lines. 1. Will maximize potential for energy conservation and solar energy use via appropriate site layout and use of building materials. m. Will conform with the City's comprehensive plan. and further stipulates that: 1. The building will either construct an alternate sewer line or post bond prior to issuance of the first building permit. 2. The contract for the City's acquisition of park land will be signed prior to issuance of the first building permit. Mr. Flaherty seconded the motion which passed unanimously. Review proposal for modifying the exterior of the proposed fire sub-station Mr. Murray advised that he met last week with Mr. Deslauriers and the owner of the Volkswagen dealership at the site and listened to suggestions for changing the exterior design to be more compatible with the development taking place there. Mr. Murray did not feel a large sum of money was involved. Mr. Flaherty moved to take off the table the motion to reconsider. Mr. Murray seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Mr. Deslauriers outlined his recommended modifications and showed a model of the proposed structure. The roof line was reversed in direction and increased in pitch. Two gabled ends at either side would eliminate the problem of snow falling into the drives. He suggested a colored pre-finished roof instead of galvanized and recommended a roof overhang of 2 feet. The split block effect could be carried along to the north side of the building, and this could be enhanced by changing from metal to grade B cedar siding. They recommended color co-ordinated windows, doors, etc, the use of a cupola or bell tower, and a decorative vent on either side. Mr. Deslauriers estimated costs of about $19,000. The bid for these changes from ICV was 34,000. A proposed meeting between Mr. Deslauriers and the ICV representative had to be postponed due to a death in the representative's family so that Mr. Deslaurier could not say why there was such a divergence in cost estimates. Chief Goddette said he had no objection to the higher roof or the split block in the rear of the building. He did have a problem with the cedar siding. His major problem was with the cost and did not feel they should have to pay the increased amount. He felt that proposed landscaping would make the building more aesthetically pleasing. Mr. Lewis said he would like to see a sense of "permanency" in the new building and felt the cost of the changes was worth it to the taxpayers. Mr. Murray then moved to continue the discussion until a special meeting can be held. Mr. Flaherty seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Review proposal for architectural services for development of the planned Dorset Street Park Mr. Murray said he questioned how the different neighborhoods in the city get integrated to the park (pedestrians, bikers, etc.). Mr. Owens said there is no specific language that speaks to this question, but he would look into it. Mr. Farrar suggested Mr. Owens also look at the interchange study just completed. Mr. Owens said the question of the pond/lake would be addressed in the program portion of the report. Mr. Murray moved that Mr. Farrar be empowered to sign the agreement after the City Attorney has reviewed it and after the question of access is addressed. Mr. Flaherty seconded. Motion passed unanimously. As there was no further business to come before the Council, the meeting adjourned at 9:50 pm. Clerk Published by ClerkBase ©2019 by Clerkbase. No Claim to Original Government Works.