Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - City Council - 05/02/1994CITY COUNCIL 2 MAY 1994 The South Burlington City Council held a regular meeting on Monday, 2 May 1994, at 7:30 p.m., in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset St. Members Present: Michael Flaherty, Chairman; William Cimonetti, Robert Chittenden James Condos, John Dinklage Also Present: Charles Hafter, City Manager; Peg Strait, Asst. City Manager; Sonny Audette, Street Dept; Margaret Picard, City Clerk; Don Duell, WPCD; Wally Possich, Fire Chief; Brian Searles, Dave Lavallee, Police Dept; Dick Ward, Zoning Administrator; Sid Poger, The Other Paper; Michael Sheridan, Channel 17; Eric Fleggenheimer, Peter Collins, Dave Maclaughlin, Bob Hest, Lynne Stuart, Dave DeSarno, Michael Shaw, Mark Crow, Bill Burgess 1. Comments & Questions from the Audience (not related to agenda items): Mr. Flaherty introduced and welcomed Wally Possich, the newly appointed Fire Chief. Mr. Dinklage thanked those responsible for striping Dorset St. and Williston Road. 2. Public Hearing on Ordinance to Amend the South Burlington Motor Vehicle & Traffic Regulations: No Parking zones on San Remo Drive; consideration of adoption of same: Mr. Flaherty read the proposed amendment. He said it is needed to allow trucks to make turning movement in and out of San Remo Drive. Mr. Cimonetti moved the Council approve and adopt the amendment as read. Mr. Dinklage seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 3. Public Hearing on Ordinance to Amend the South Burlington Motor Vehicle & Traffic Regulations: Speed Limit set at 35 mph on Dorset St. between Williston Rd. and Swift St; consideration of adoption of same. Mr. Hafter thanked Mr. Audette and the Police Dept. for the engineering study which, he said, justifies the 35 mph speed limit. Mr. Condos moved the Council approve and adopt the speed limit amendment as proposed. Mr. Chittenden seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 4. Continued discussion of alternate median crossing on Dorset St: Mr. Hafter said he had been working with Eric Fleggenheimer to find an alternative to what is there now. Mr. Fleggenheimer then outlined what he had looked into including a possible jughandle (rejected because it would have to be on public property), a State directional sign (rejected by the state because there isn't enough green space for it); and a possible access road which had originally been on a city map. The proposal had been to have the road on Champlain Oil property, but they had no interest in the plan. Mr. Fleggenheimer suggested such a road on his property which would be accessed from a break in the median in the middle of the block. He felt the present signs and u-turns don't work. Mr. Fleggenheimer said he had checked with a traffic consultant who said it wouldn't be a problem to get a stacking lane for the median cut. No left turns would be allowed out of the access road. Mr. Fleggenheimer said he called the state which said it is a city road and the city controls it, and all changes have to come from the city. Act 250 people said the same thing. Both bodies said if there are no safety concerns, they wouldn't have a problem with it. Mr. Flaherty asked if there is enough room for a road parallel to Dorset St. behind the buildings. Mr. Fleggenheimer felt it was pretty clear most of the way. Mr. Condos asked what this plan would do to the parking spaces for the businesses in the building. Mr. Fleggenheimer said they'd lose a few, but there are more than enough. Mr. Dinklage felt a full airing was needed by the Planning Commission in terms of plans for overall parking and also traffic counts to be sure the stacking lane is long enough. He said he would want to see a bona fide city street that is built to city standards with an adequate right-of-way dedicated to the city. 5. Discussion of proposal from Living Technologies to construct and operate an EPA demonstration project of an 80,000 gallon per day sewer treatment facility at Bartlett Bay Wastewater Treatment Plant site: Lynn Stuart and Michael Shaw presented the plan. They began with a slide presentation which showed their other facilities (in San Diego, Sugarbush, VT, Rhode Island, Nevada, Massachusetts, and Maryland. They are a Burlington based company which produces natural wastewater treatment systems. The presentation included charts and graphs which showed the effectiveness of their systems; water can reach drinking water standards without the addition of other chemical treatment. Ms. Stuart said they propose to take raw municipal waste water and treat it to tertiary standards. She briefly explained the process, noting that it uses a minimal amount of energy. She then showed a tentative concept of the facility layout. The only thing they are asking of the city is to get the sewage to and from the facility. Mr. Duell said getting the sewage to and from the proposed site would be a minimal expense, about 450 feet of piping. Mr. Shaw noted that after the period of the grant, the city can take ownership of the facility at no charge. Mr. Cimonetti asked about energy requirements. Mr. Shaw said it uses about 3 kw for 75,000 gallons. Mr. Cimonetti then asked if the project would increase the capacity of the Bartlett Bay plant. Mr. Duell said it would not. Mr. Dinklage asked how the micro-organisms used affect people. Mr. Shaw said they are adding naturally occurring bacteria cultures which are not in any way dangerous to people. Mr. Hafter noted the process doesn't produce a lot of sludge, about a third of the regular treatment plant. Mr. Dinklage asked Mr. Duell if he had any concerns or saw any "down sides" to the proposal. Mr. Duell said he didn't. Mr. Flaherty noted that the facility would be open to the public for such activities as school tours, demonstrations for legislators and other prospective users of the system which might bring potential businesses to the area to see the system and to become interested in locating in the city. Mr. Cimonetti asked when the system would be on line. Mr. Shaw said at this time next year. Mr. Chittenden asked the cost to run the facility. Ms. Stuart said it would cost the same as the present facility. Mr. Cimonetti suggested the addition of a classroom or conference room to the facility. Mr. Cimonetti moved to have the City Manager meet with Living Technologies to draft an agreement for the project. Mr. Condos seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 6. Report from Sign Ordinance Review Committee: Addendum Mr. Weith noted that the Council had asked the Committee to consider the areas they had not come to a decision on. Mr. White then presented the addendum report. He said there are no changes from the original report and recommendations. The Committee dealt with 4 types of signs for the new report: a) temporary signage: The committee felt strong control was needed but realized this is an administrative headache. They recommend a new category of signage as a solution to this: window signs. These could be up to 25% of the window area. Signs such as sandwich boards would still be prohibited. b) wall signs: Currently, a business can have 5% or 100 sq. ft. of wall signage (whichever is less). The committee recommends this continue. A separate standard would, however, apply to gas stations since the committee felt this kind of business was different because consumers make decisions outside (so inside signage was of no use). Gas stations would have the same limitations but with no more than 2 wall signs on the structure and signs on auxilliary structures (canopies, etc.) that could add up to the 5% or 100 sq. ft. c) directional signs: the major focus was on whether logos would be allowed on these signs. The decision was that in most circumstances they would not. The exception would be where a business has entrance on a side road but most of the traffic is on the main road (such as Champ Car Wash). d) State authorized business directory signs: The committee had widely divergent opinions on these and felt it did not have enough knowledge. They asked that another group tackle this issue. Mr. Dinklage suggested VLCT provide some guidance on state signs. Council members agreed to send the report to the Planning Commission for its comments. 7. Accept resignation of William Craig from the Planning Commission: Mr. Dinklage moved the Council accept Mr. Craig's resignation with regret and directed the City Manager to prepare a Certificate of Commendation for his years of service. Mr. Chittenden seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 8. Consideration of approval of Finance and Maintenance Agreement between the City and State for Williston-South Burlington BRZ 1445(12): Muddy Brook Bridge on Poor Farm Road: Mr. Hafter said the cost to the city for this project is $15,000. Mr. Dinklage moved to approve the Finance & Maintenance Agreement as presented. Mr. Chittenden seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 9. Consideration of setting a meeting date for City Council reorganization meeting: Members agreed to hold the meeting on Monday, 23 May, at 7:30 p.m. 10. Review Planning Commission Agenda for 3 May: No issues were raised. 11. Review Minutes of 18 April: Mr. Dinklage moved the Minutes of 18 April be approved as written. Mr. Condos seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 12. Sign Disbursement Orders: Disbursement orders were signed. 13. Liquor Control Board: Mr. Condos moved the Council adjourn and reconvene as Liquor Control Board. Mr. Dinklage seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Mr. Hafter presented a liquor license renewal for China Lite and a new license request from Taco Shack/Oasis Catering. Question arose as to where and to whom Taco Shack will be dispensing alcohol as they are a delivery/catering operation. Members asked that this be checked before a license is granted. Mr. Cimonetti moved to approve the liquor license renewal for China Lite. Mr. Condos seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Executive Session: Mr. Dinklage moved the Board adjourn and reconvene as City Council in Executive Session to discuss litigation and contract negotiations and to resume regular session only to adjourn. Mr. Condos seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Regular Session: The Council returned to regular session. Mr. Chittenden moved adjournment. Mr. Condos seconded. The motion passed unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 10:00 PM. Published by ClerkBase ©2019 by Clerkbase. No Claim to Original Government Works.