Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Minutes - City Council - 09/13/1993
CITY COUNCIL 13 SEPTEMBER 1993 The South Burlington City Council held a regular meeting on Monday 13 September 1993, at 7:30 p.m., in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset St. Members Present: Michael Flaherty, Chairman; James Condos, Robert Chittenden, John Dinklage, William Cimonetti Also Present: Charles Hafter, City Manager; Peg Strait, Asst. City Manager; Joe Weith, City Planner; Steve Stitzel, City Attorney; Mike Munson, Susan Pritchard, Laurie Wood, Tim O'Reilly 1. Comments & Questions from the Audience, not related to Agenda Items: No issues were raised. 2. Continued Discussion of Impact Fees: Mr. Cimonetti asked what flexibility there would be in amending the capital budget if impact fees are being collected based on the capital budget. He was specifically concerned about moving a project further into the future. Mr. Munson said the only problem might be with roads, but noted they had tried to put projects in the program that could occur in the 5 year window. He noted that if a project isn't built and the impact fee money expended in the 6-year program, the money would have to be refunded. Mr. Munson added that there is only a small number of projects from the capital plan for which impact fees are to be charged, and these are very fixed. If another project were added, the impact fees would have to be recomputed. It was not anticipated that impact fee projects would change often. Mr. Stitzel added that impact fees can be used for all aspects of a project (preliminary engineering, land acquisition, etc.), not only for construction. You also cannot use impact fees to accommodate an existing population; they must be for development to accommodate a new population. The money must be spent within 6 years of being collected, but you can continue to collect money for a project beyond the 6 years. A register must be maintained of all fees, dates paid, when spent, etc. Mr. Cimonetti asked if there can be both "site specific" improvements (those required of a developer on a site) and impact fees assessed in a project. Mr. Stitzel said not for the entire project. Mr. Dinklage noted the city will be paying on bonds for very big projects for a long time and can apply impact fee money to bond reduction. Mr. Munson added that "site specific" improvements that are outside the scope of what was included in the impact fee structure can be assessed. Mr. Dinklage asked if there have been any challenge to the law in the state. Mr. Stitzel said not that he is aware of. Mr. Dinklage asked if the city can impose impact fees just for sewer, water, recreation and wait till a later time to impose traffic impact fees. Mr. Weith said yes, but noted that in site plans the Planning Commission cannot require off-site improvements. Mr. Audette asked if the money can be used to reimburse the city for work the city does itself. Mr. Stitzel said it can. Mr. Flaherty noted the discussion will be continued at a Steering Committee meeting on 30 September. He suggested the Planning people and Mr. Munson relook at the transportation part of the plan with a City Council member. 3. Consideration of Approval of Finance and Maintenance Agreements with Vermont Agency of Transportation: Mr. Hafter noted the city was concerned about the possibility that the city would have to pay all preliminary costs for a project if the project did not get built. He said the State is not willing to move from this position as this is how they do all such agreements. He then outlined the city's potential liability for projects that did not get completed: The Bike Path could cost the city a maximum of $90,000. He recommended still doing this project and signing the contract as it was still a good project even at the "fail safe" point. The same recommendation applies to the Van Sicklen Road Bridge project which could cost the city $22,500. Mr. Hafter recommended rethinking the Williston Rd. project as the language does not have a 50% overrun cap in the language. Mr. Stitzel noted this is because of a different type of funding process. Mr. Dinklage moved that the Council approve the Finance and Maintenance agreements with the Vermont Agency of Transportation for the Recreation Path Phase 3 and the Van Sicklen Road Bridge projects. Mr. Condos seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Mr. Chittenden said he would want the State to come back to the city if the city's responsibility goes to $90,000. Mr. Hafter said the State provides the city with a cost estimate at every phase of a project and has agreed to come in more often during a project. 4. Consideration of Approval of Sanitary Sewer Line Relocation Project: Mr. Hafter noted a substantial portion of South Burlington sewer run off drains into Burlington. In many places in Burlington there is not enough capacity to handle this during heavy rains. Burlington is spending money to upgrade their system, but are not addressing the situation at the end of Fairmont St. where there are frequent backups and not enough capacity. The proposal for consideration would reroute this sewer line to the one at Rice High School. This won't be redundant spending because this would have to be done as part of the East Woods project. The estimate for this work is $25,000. Impact fees for sewer work can be used to pay for the work. Mr. Cimonetti recommended a written agreement with the City of Burlington. Mr. Dinklage moved to authorize the sanitary sewer line relocation project as described by the City Manager. Mr. Condos seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 5. Consider Accepting a Portion of Mill Pond Lane, Oak Creek Development: Mr. Audette said the street meets all requirements and has been checked out. Mr. Dinklage moved the City accept the approved portion of Mill Pond Lane, Oak Creek Development, as a city street. Mr. Condos seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 6. Consideration of Adoption of Name for the new city park: Members agreed that most people they had spoken with preferred Dorset Park. Mr. Dinklage moved to name the new city park "Dorset Park." Mr. Chittenden seconded. Motion passed. 7. Review of Scheduled Public Works Dept. jobs for 1993-4: Mr. Audette outlined the work to be done and the anticipated dates of the work. Both landfill work and road, curbs, parking lot and walkways at Dorset Park will be done by 10/1. The rebuilding of San Remo Dr. and completion of Ethan Allen Drive are also scheduled for October. Other projects include: a short stretch of Spear St., wheelchair ramps on Williston Rd., Hinesburg Rd/Kennedy Drive intersection work, topsoil and reseeding of Dorset Park, Airport Parkway/Shamrock Rd, Williston Rd/Kennedy Drive, East Terrace. Mr. Cimonetti felt strongly that reseeding work at the Dorset Park should be done by 15 Oct. 8. Appointment of Voting Delegate to VLCT Town Fair: Mr. Dinklage moved to appoint Peg Picard with Mr. Hafter as alternate. Mr. Condos seconded. Motion passed. 9. Review Planning Commission Agenda for 14 September and Zoning Board Agenda for 27 September: No issues were raised. 10. Minutes of 23 August: Mr. Condos moved the Minutes of 23 August be approved as written. Mr. Dinklage seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 11. Sign Disbursement Orders: Disbursement Orders were signed. Executive Session: Mr. Condos moved the Council adjourn and reconvene in Executive Session to discuss contract negotiations, personnel issues, and real property acquisition, and to resume regular session only to adjourn. Mr. Dinklage seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Regular Session: The City Council returned to regular session. Mr. Condos moved adjournment, Mr. Dinklage seconded. The motion passed unanimously, the meeting adjourned at 11:10 PM. Clerk Published by ClerkBase ©2019 by Clerkbase. No Claim to Original Government Works.