Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - City Council - 12/10/1990CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION 10 DECEMBER 1990 A joint meeting of the South Burlington City Council and Planning Commission was held on Monday, 10 December 1990, at 7:30 p.m, in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset Street. Members Present: City Council: Paul Farrar, Chairman; Michael Flaherty, John Dinklage, James Condos, William Cimonetti Planning Commission: William Burgess, Chairman; Mary-Barbara Maher, Ann Pugh, William Craig, Catherine Peacock, Terry Sheahan Also Present: Charles Hafter, City Manager; Joe Weith, City Planner; Vi Luginbuhl, Legislative Representative: Art Hogan, Herb Durfee, Regional Planning Commission; Frank Murray, Regional Planning Representative; Sid Poger, The Other Paper; Charles Scott, Alex Blair, Arline Duffy, Michael Giancota 1. Review Draft of Regional Plan prepared by Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission: Mr. Farrar asked for topics of discussion other than those in the memos from the City Manager and Planner; Mr. Craig suggested the following: "defining regional impacts", discrepancies in annual growth rate, mitigation of property tax for open land, "fair housing", Southern Connector, "shore land by-laws." Ms. Peacock suggested: tax base sharing, regional impact, conflicts between regional and local plans. Mr. Sheahan added: revenue sharing, "fair share" of affordable housing. Mr. Dinklage offered: conflict between land use map and Southeast Quadrant zoning, and reduction in manufacturing jobs and possibilities of reversing this trend, also the Airport Master Plan, possible closing of Vermont Yankee, addressing of a second regional mall, Circumferential Highway, Rt. 116 Interchange, possible use of the Burlington wood chip plant, Tafts Corners as a major center. Ms. Pugh suggested land use in the Southeast Quadrant, Interchange location, accurate reflection of bike path. Mrs. Maher said the problems inherent in local officials acting as regional officials and also tax sharing. Mr. Farrar added: "dense growth" in growth centers. Mr. Flaherty said airport issues and tax sharing. Mr. Condos added: inconsistencies in maps, clarification of road designations, and the whole idea of regional government. Mr. Cimonetti said the omission of a statement of the Regional Planning Commission's stewardship of communities' funds, the assumption of no campus growth, industrial growth, mitigation of the property tax burden, Airport Master Plan, "Vermont control" of energy, solid waste, comments on VITA, election of Regional Planning Commission, "inner ring" definition. Mr. Hafter added a regional capital plan and the issue of regional problems vs. local responses. Mr. Farrar asked if anyone had taken all the parts of the plan to see if they mesh together. Mr. Murray said it seemed to him that drafting was done in something of an insular fashion and there doesn't seem to be that interactions (as between utilities, colleges, etc.). Mr. Durfee denied the plan was created in a vacuum. Mrs. Maher asked if Act 200 mandated a Regional Plan. Mr. Durfee said there has always been a plan and this plan is being done for the region under the auspices of Act 200. The deadline for a completed plan is December, 1991. After 2 public hearings, a simple majority vote by communities can veto the plan. Mrs. Maher asked what recourse exists if a plan is passed and some communities don't like it. Mr. Durfee said it can be appealed to the Council of Regional Planning Commissions or a community can go to court. He said such a community would probably lose Act 200 money. Mr. Flaherty asked if there has been thought that if communities lost 40% of taxes from industrial growth, they may rezone land and there will be a loss of jobs. Mrs. Maher proposed sending a strong message to Regional Planning that the city disapproves of this use of tax money. Ms. Luginbuhl noted that part of Act 200 was knocked out in the Legislature. Mr. Flaherty stressed that it is counterproductive to what the plan is trying to do. Mr. Cimonetti asked whether there is "entitlement" to transportation. Mr. Hogan said there is entitlement to mobility. Mr. Condos asked why the plan supports an interchange at Kennedy Dr. and not Hinesburg Rd. Mr. Hogan said at the time of the study, South Burlington was looking at a City center concept and solutions at both ends of Dorset St. seemed a priority. Mr. Cimonetti said the city has a new picture they would like Regional Planning to address. Mr. Hogan felt that if nothing more gets done, the on-ramp north at Interchange 13 should be done. All members agreed. Regarding the Airport Master Plan, Mr. Hogan felt a case should be made to the Airport Commission on non-commercial passenger plane use. Mr. Dinklage felt there should be a discussion on the city's concerns. Mr. Hogan said that regarding affordable housing, they used the state's definition. The Regional Plan used a regional basis. Mr. Cimonetti asked if there was any consideration given to a different kind of region. He said there is more sophistication in the plan in Chittenden County than elsewhere in the state and felt there should be more return to local control. Mr. Cimonetti also expressed concern that work already done in identifying natural resources, etc., is not acknowledged in the Regional Plan. Mr. Farrar stressed the unacceptability of tax base sharing and stressed that the city would seriously consider rezoning commercial land. He said such revenue sharing would defeat the stated purpose. Mr. Weith will have a memo out on the City's concerns within a few weeks. As there was no further business to come before the meeting, adjournment was declared at 10:00 p.m. Clerk Published by ClerkBase ©2019 by Clerkbase. No Claim to Original Government Works.