Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - City Council - 09/09/1996CITY COUNCIL 9 SEPTEMBER 1996 The South Burlington City Council held a meeting on Monday, 9 September 1996, at 7:30 p.m., in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset Street. Members Present: William Cimonetti, Chair; James Condos, David Austin, Terry Sheahan Also Present: Charles Hafter, City Manager; Peg Strait, Asst. City Manager; Sonny Audette, Street Dept; Richard Ward, Zoning Administrator; Wallace Possich, Fire Chief; Gary Rounds, Fire Dept; Ann Slattery, City Clerk's Office; Jeffrey Tucker, Leo Brown Mr. Cimonetti noted that Councilman Chittenden was attending the Regional Planning Commission meeting at which the 5-year Regional Plan is being reviewed. 1. Comments & Questions from the Audience (not related to Agenda Items): No issues were raised. 2. Announcements & City Manager's Report: Mr. Condos noted a Solid Waste District meeting to be held on Wednesday, 11 September at 7:30 p.m. Mr. Hafter reported the following: a. An item from the Internet on the hurricane damage in Surf City, N. Carolina, where 80% of the town was washed away. Mr. Hafter said this was the town where he had his first job. b. The Steering Committee will meet on Thursday, 19 September, at 7:30 p.m. c. There will be a special joint meeting with the Shelburne Selectboard on Monday, 16 September, to discuss the Commuter rail project. d. Many neighborhood groups are asking for speed bumps to slow traffic in their areas. He read a response to these requests from the VLCT citing the danger of speed bumps, their interference with emergency vehicles, and the noise factor. They can embroil towns in law suits, and speeders view them as "just another challenge." VLCT recommends speed ordinances, signs, and enhanced enforcement. e. Mr. Hafter recognized the efforts of Dick Ward in getting Dorset St. merchants to support the purchase of holiday banners. Mr. Ward said merchants gave $7500 for the effort. He showed the banners which will be placed on all poles in the area. Mr. Cimonetti noted the primary election to be held tomorrow from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. in the usual polling places. 3. Interview with Leo Brown for Appointment to City Charter Committee: Mr. Brown said he has been a resident of the city since 1981 and worked with the Charter when he served the School District. He noted that he has read the Charter from beginning to end and feels it is an excellent document with great foresight. He would like to serve on the Committee which might be an instrument for change when needed. 4. Discussion of the Two Planning Designs on Roads in South Burlington: New Northbound I-89/Hinesburg Rd. Off-ramp and Kennedy Drive Scoping Report: Mr. Hafter reviewed the background of the I-89/Hinesburg Rd. off-ramp, noting that the city is trying to find an alternate to using part of the Pizzagalli property. Construction of the off-ramp is not planned at this time. Mr. Turner then reviewed the design. Originally the plan was for a diamond shaped interchange which would require condemnation of the Pizzagalli property. In their study, Mr. Turner said they found they might be able to meet all the criteria with a new design. This would involve 2 4-way intersections with a road yet to be built. It would also involve the upgrading of Rt. 116. The study reviewed traffic volumes and did a level of service analysis and found the results to be reasonable. The Rt. 116 bridge would have to be almost doubled in width. The Agency of Transportation has been non-committal on the changes, but Mr. Evans said he thought they made sense. Mr. Turner said they also met with Regional Planning and AOT people. They didn't see any real "show stoppers" but wouldn't say they support the plan. Mr. Turner said they also looked at modifications to Old Farm Rd. Mr. Sheahan asked if warrants will be met for signalization at the bypass road for Old Farm Rd/Hayes Avenue. Mr. Hafter said warrants would be met for a signal at the off-ramp/new connector road and at Rt. 116/new connector road. They would not be met at Hayes Ave. Mr. Austin said it looks like the proposed plan requires buying three times more property than the Pizzagalli property. Mr. Turner said that if you include the connector road, that's true. Mr. Hafter said they city would have to buy all the Pizzagalli property because with what was needed for the diamond-shaped interchange, there would be no use for the property that was left. Mr. Austin noted there is a very low increase in the number of cars projected for the piece of Hinesburg Rd, only 18%, while other increases are projected to be as much as 40%. If it's more than 18%, that could result in a level of service "E" or "F" which is unacceptable. Mr. Turner said they will check on this and get back Mr. Hafter. Mr. Austin asked if there is a way to do the project so the level of service projected at "D" becomes "C." It was also noted that some major developments were not projected into the traffic figures for the design year (e.g., Technology Park). Mr. Turner said they had to pick something in the middle of the road. Mr. Hafter said he thought it might have been included in the calibrations for the T-model. Mr. Sheahan noted that Green Tree Park alone is projected at 750 trip ends in the peak hour. Mr. Austin said he would like to see this interchange built and hoped it would encourage growth in that area. He felt that if the design is already at level of service "D", it might discourage what the city is trying to accomplish. Mr. Cimonetti said that what hadn't been anticipated was potential growth on the two new connector roads. It's all zoned Industrial-Commercial and there could be rather dense development. Mr. Cimonetti felt the city should soon consider an action that warns the possibility of amending the official city map. Mr. Condos noted that a member of the Regional Planning Traffic Committee said he did not favor an interchange at this location because it would increase traffic on other roads (e.g., Williston Rd.). He felt there has to be consensus on this interchange. With regard to the Kennedy Drive scoping study, Mr. Hafter noted some changes in the report. On p. 19, alternate 2 should read "yes" and alternate 3 "no." Mr. Hafter said there are 4 possible alternatives: 1. Do nothing 2. widen and rehabilitate (add 2 lanes in each direction) 3. repave 4. widen/rehabilitate with a median Alternate 2 is the preferred choice. It also includes bus turnouts. Mr. Austin felt a median might be nice from an aesthetic point of view. Mr. Hafter said alternate 2 would include some islands with landscaping at all the intersections. Mr. Sheahan asked if the wetlands might create a problem. Mr. Hafter said they think it can be done by adding some wetland to mitigate. 5. Continue Discussion on Status of Fire Department Tower Truck and Replacement Options: Chief Possich reported on the highlights of his report as follows: a. Mutual Aid status with Winooski and Burlington: There is a 7 minute average response time from Burlington and a 10 minute average response time from Winooski. The response time for a South Burlington vehicle would be 4.5 minutes. b. Levels of Repair needed on tower truck: Bare minimum repairs, assuming no further problems are found, would cost $18,000. It would take 3-8 months to get the cylinders shipped. Repairs to the chassis would cost another $22,000. There is also a problem with floor rust. The Chief stressed that if all these repairs are made, the vehicle would still last only 2 more years. c. Complete repairs to the truck would cost $550,000. He said the tower truck has been described as "a classic." d. Compare platform to straight ladder options: Chief Possich said the straight ladder option has no bucket at the end. He felt the bucket/platform option was still the best for South Burlington for the following reasons: 1. for rescue of victims 2. safer for victims who might be scared of going down a straight ladder 3. hard to carry handicapped people down a ladder 4. danger of going onto a roof coated with snow and ice 5. all roofs are light construction and last only about 10 minutes in a fire creating a danger for firefighters falling through 6. water delivery is more available from a platform 7. better tools are available with a platform 8. more than one window can be accessed with a platform because of the sweep of a platform 9. there are more controls with a platform 10. the platform has a 750-1000 lb. limit; the straight ladder has a 250 lb. limit. Firefighter Rounds noted South Burlington was the first to have a platform; now there are six more in the state. e. Reach: The Chief referred to the list of what cannot be reached with the current 75 ft. ladder because of building height, parking, setbacks, configurations, etc. There is also a list of which of these can be reached with a 100 ft. tower. The Chief noted some areas, including Ridgewood, Meadowbrook, Overlook, Queen City Park, some of Spear Street and Country Club Estates, which could never be reached with any piece of equipment. f. Used Equipment: There is very little available. There are two possible units available, an 85 ft. tower at a cost of $365,000 with an estimated 14 year service life, and a 100 ft. tower with an estimated 19 year service life at $425,000. g. New Equipment: All equipment is noted at recent quotes with standard equipment and 1500 gallon pumps. Two of the units are available now. One would be available in November. There would be a total of $40,000 needed for equipment, of which $14,000 would be needed immediately. New engines would have an estimated 20 year service life. Chief Possich also discussed the situation of insurance rating. All municipalities are rated to set insurance rates. South Burlington currently has a Class 5 rating. The city is due for a classification update this year. 5% of the rating comes from the availability of an aerial unit. Without an aerial, the city would lose 5% of its rating. Chief Possich felt that with an aerial, they might get a Class 4 or even a Class 3 rating. This would be a significant benefit for homeowners insurance rates and also for business insurance rates. Mr. Sheahan thanked the Chief for a very thorough report. He asked about financing options for a new tower truck. Mr. Hafter said he would prefer to finance it through the current operating budget but that can't be done at this time. There could be a lease/purchase option, but he felt that would cost more than bonding. There could also be some financing through impact fees. Mr. Hafter noted the City would be paying off substantial indebtedness in the next two years. He said that if they purchase a new tower truck, he recommended a traditional bond. Mr. Cimonetti said that the fact that a debt is being paid off doesn't mean a new debt has to be incurred. Mr. Sheahan felt the city needs this piece of apparatus and he didn't feel it would do the city justice to "patch" it. He hoped the purchase of a new tower truck could be facilitated in the near future. Mr. Condos noted the additional time it takes to get equipment to the city via mutual aid and said he has been told that fire expands very quickly. Chief Possich said a fire doubles in size every two minutes. Mr. Hafter said he believes the city needs a platform capability. He hoped a decision could be made as to whether to put it on the November ballot. Mr. Condos asked the process for a November vote. Mr. Hafter said a warning would have to be approved that says the purchase of the tower truck cannot be supported through the operating budget process. The warning would have to be adopted by 4 October. Members felt that all proposed capital expenses should be reviewed and asked staff to have this information ready for the 23 September meeting. 6. Consideration of Adoption of Resolution of Intent on Street Renumbering System to Permit GIS Mapping and Implementation of E-911 System. Mr. Hafter said that if the city has a Resolution of Intent, the State will do the GIS mapping. If the city then decides not to change any number, they would have to repay the State for the mapping work, about $20,000. Mr. Hafter then read the proposed Resolution of Intent. Mr. Condos moved the Council approve the Resolution of Intent per the City Manager's memo of 5 September 1996. Mr. Sheahan seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Mr. Condos said he had talked with his neighbors who didn't seem to have a problem with the renumbering, except for people on corners where a driveway is on a different street than the current street address. 7. Consideration of Adoption of Warning for Special City Meeting on 5 November 1996 for Vote on Issuance of Debt for Shelburne Road Water Line Improvements in Conjunction with the Shelburne Road Improvement Project; Consideration of Resolution for Same Project: Mr. Hafter said the Water Dept. would send a letter to citizens explaining this item. Members questioned whether this vote is needed now since the Shelburne Rd. project is not immanent. Mr. Cimonetti said the Water Commissioners said they wanted to do the work before the Shelburne Rd. project and want the authority before they are ready to do the work. Members felt the May ballot would be soon enough to vote on this and decided to let the Water Commissioners know of their concerns and invite them back to restate their case if they choose. 8. First Reading of Ordinance to Establish a No Parking Zone on Proctor Avenue and a No Parking Zone on Swift Street Extension: Mr. Condos moved to approve the First Reading of the Ordinance as proposed. Mr. Austin seconded. Mr. Cimonetti paraphrased the Ordinance. He then questioned why the Swift Street piece is included. Mr. Audette said there had been a lot of problems with parking on Swift Street Extension. He said new parking had been added to the park and he felt there is no longer a need for people to park on Swift St. He said more lots could be added in the park, if needed. He also noted that residents have been complaining about parking on Swift St. Ext. Mr. Cimonetti agreed it's more appropriate to park in the park but did not feel parking should be prohibited on the street. Mr. Condos said he had experienced lane problems and sight distance problems because of parked cars. He suggested parking on one side of the street only. Mr. Austin moved to amend the motion to eliminate subsection "T" (eliminating Swift Street Extension from the Ordinance). The makers of the motion agreed to this amendment. The amendment and the motion then passed unanimously. Mr. Condos asked for continued monitoring of the Swift St. area to see if there are problems. Mr. Austin moved to hold a Public Hearing on the proposed Ordinance on 7 October 1996. Mr. Sheahan seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 9. Consideration of Capital Equipment Refunding Note and Resolution for Loader: Mr. Condos moved to approve the Capital Equipment Refunding Note and Resolution for $53,600 at 4.4% interest. Mr. Austin seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 10. Acceptance of Resignation of Shevonne Shuman from the Leisure Arts Committee: Members accepted Ms. Shuman's resignation by consensus. 11. Review City Council Minutes of 19 August 1996: Mr. Condos moved to approve the Minutes of 19 August 1996 as written. Mr. Austin seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 12. Review Planning Commission Agenda of 10 September and Zoning Board Agenda of 23 September: No issues were raised. 13. Sign Disbursement Orders: Disbursement Orders were signed. Executive Session: Mr. Condos moved the Council adjourn and reconvene in executive session to discuss litigation and appointments to Boards and Commissions and to resume regular session only to make such appointments and/or adjourn. Mr. Sheahan seconded. Motion passed unanimously. The Council returned to regular session. Mr. Condos moved the appointment of Leo Brown to a three (3) year term on the Charter Committee. Mr. Austin seconded. The motion passed unanimously. Mr. Sheahan moved adjournment. Mr. Condos 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.