Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - City Council - 04/19/1999CITY COUNCIL 19 APRIL 1999 The South Burlington City Council held a regular meeting on Monday, 19 April 1999, at 7:30 p.m., in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset Street. Members present: William Cimonetti, Chair; James Condos, David Austin Also present: Charles Hafter, City Manager; Peter Bestenbostel, Assistant City Manager; Margaret Picard, City Clerk/Treasurer; Albert Audette, Street Dept; Joe Weith, City Planner; Bruce O'Neill, Recreation Department; Stephen Stitzel, City Attorney; Anna Johnston, The Other Paper; Merv Brown, Paul O'Leary 1. Comments and questions from the audience (not related to agenda items): No issues were raised. 2. Announcements & City Manager's report: Mr. Cimonetti advised that the MPO Transportation Committee will meet on Wednesday at 7 p.m. Mr. Condos advised that there will be no Solid Waste Executive Board meeting. The regular board meeting will be next Wednesday at 7 p.m. Mr. Condos also noted that the District won its lawsuit with Hinesburg Sand and Gravel. Mr. Hafter gave members an invitation to the "Baby Brunch" celebrating babies born in 1998 and sponsored by the Library, Friends of the Library and the Family Center. As part of the Exit 13 study, there will be a presentation of alternatives at the next Council meeting. There is a grant project to provide Sunday bus service to senior citizen homes, etc. The service would take patrons to and from morning worship services and to shopping locations at a cost of 25 cents. CCTA will bid out the service to the private sector and hopes to begin service on 5 September. There will be a meeting on 13 May in South Burlington of the Regional Affairs Commission which will focus on affordable housing and the Chittenden Correctional Center. On 5 May, there will be a forum on Channel 17 for candidates running for City Council and School Board. Mr. Hafter gave members the list of penalty and interest waivers that were granted. Mr. Hafter noted that the question of schools in the southeast quadrant will be on the next agenda. This discussion had previously been tabled. 3. Review of proposed alternative locations for planned City Center street east of the Blue Mall: Mr. Weith showed four alternative routes on the plan. He said that the Planning Commission was comfortable with either the existing designation or with alternative #1 which would shift the road to the east. Mr. O'Leary, representing developer Merv Brown, showed the current plan and said that land taken for this plan would be 60% from Dorset Square and 40% from the Orchid property. The proposed building encroaches on this right-of-way, and the applicant is asking to adjust the location of the road. Mr. O'Leary noted that a majority of the Planning Commission favored alternative #1. This would create a lined-up intersection. 70% of the land taking would come from the Orchid property and 30% from Dorset Square. Mr. Austin said he liked the "s" curve of the road in alternative #1 but did not like the 70-30 split with the party who is not the applicant giving up more land. He asked if the split can be made more even. He suggested shrinking the building or sliding it up a bit. This would still provide safe, easy access across the street. Mr. O'Leary said they hadn't looked at that. He felt they might make it more equitable but not 50-50. He added that they would prefer not to move the building or make it smaller. Mr. Austin noted that the crosswalk that crosses Market St. and connects two buildings is not perpendicular. This could be straightened out if the building were shifted slightly. Mr. Cimonetti asked how much of the street south of Market St. would be built as a result of this project. Mr. O'Leary said none. Mr. Cimonetti asked if there would be a curb cut and what it would look like. Mr. O'Leary said all the area to the east of the building would remain the same as it is. He felt they could provide a curb cut, but it would not be needed for the proposed building. Mr. Cimonetti asked if any conversations had been held with Orchid. Mr. O'Leary said no. Mr. Condos said he was not as tied to lining up the driveways but liked how the "s" comes into the road. He also wanted to make the land split closer to even. Mr. Cimonetti asked if any consideration had been given to a 2-story building. Mr. Brown said you can't rent the upper floor. Mr. Cimonetti said that in order to reach the mixed use goal, buildings will have to go up. Mr. Brown replied that residential units above commercial is impossible. Members felt they were willing to go to a public hearing on alternative #1 with the road shifted slightly for a more equitable land split. 4. Consideration of approval of Red Rocks Park fees: Mr. Cimonetti read the proposed changes which would increase a resident season pass from $6.00 to $10.00, a non-resident season pass from $12.00 to $20.00, a second car from $1.00 to $2.00, a Vermont daily pass from $2.00 to $3.00, and an out of state daily pass from $3.00 to $5.00. Using last year's attendance figures, this would increase the annual revenues by $4,179. Mr. Hafter noted this still does not equal what it takes to run the Park. Mr. Condos moved to approve the Red Rocks Park fees as presented. Mr. Austin seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 5. Discussion with City attorney reference subdivision document review under retainer: Mr. Stitzel explained that he works under retainer for things that occur on a regular basis (e.g., contract review, ordinance drafts, legal document review, answering day-to-day questions, development review, etc.). He noted that there are a number of standard forms used in exchanges between the city and developers. What has happened over time is that developments have become more complex, and standard forms don't work, so that documents have to be drafted for each development. This has not been figured into the fees. Mr. Stitzel noted that the city paid $30,000 for the last fiscal year for these services under retainer; what would have been billed amounted to $63,000. The situation this year will be almost the same. Mr. Stitzel said that other communities have identified a minimum amount for document review. If work exceeds that amount, the cost is passed on to the developer as part of the development review process. Mr. Cimonetti explained the city's arrangement with Mr. Stitzel and that they are entering the second of a 3-year contract. Mr. Cimonetti asked if Mr. Stitzel envisioned that a developer might not know the fee until the process was over or whether there could be a set fee for review. Mr. Stitzel explained that this could depend on how documents come in (i.e., complete, incomplete, etc.). He noted that his office has spent up to 18 months trying to get a deed for a road. He stressed that the problems are developer driven. Mr. Stitzel stressed that this problem will arise when the contract expires and felt the Council needs to be prepared. Mr. Cimonetti encouraged the City Manager to look into this issue and to bring any warranted change in the contract to the Council. Mr. Hafter suggested a possible fee proposal instead of a contract change. 6. Discussion of grand list and assessment appeal dates: Mr. Cimonetti said the city has had a problem explaining how property taxes can be appealed. Mr. Hafter noted that if there is an error in the appraisal (incorrect number of rooms, etc.), the appeal can be made at any time. He showed a document that all homeowners should have gotten last week regarding rebate/prebate information. He encouraged everyone to file a homestead declaration (p. 25 of the tax booklet) which must be filed by October 15. This year, the state will be taking last year's prebate and increasing it by 4%. South Burlington was concerned because there was a reappraisal in the city so this figure won't be representative of what the tax burden will be. This will have to be corrected when income taxes are filed. Mr. Condos suggested contacting county Senators about this issue. Mr. Hafter noted that prebates are due out on 1 September which is after the first South Burlington tax payment. There is also a problem with property that turns over between April and the tax payment. People who no longer own property get the payment, and now that period will be extended to 18 months. Mr. Hafter noted that the Grand List Abstract must be lodged with the City Clerk by 24 June. That also starts the appeal rights clock for a two-week period. The city will place an ad in The Other Paper regarding the appeal process. Homeowners will get an appraisal notice only if the property value has changed, but a homeowner can appeal the appraisal even if it has stayed the same. Mr. Hafter said he would like to lodge the grand list on May 30 which would make the appeal time 5/31-6/14 with hearings to be held on June 14 and 15. He felt the city could get tax bills out on July 1 so that the first payment is due on 1 August. He stressed that what is being appealed is the appraisal not the tax bill. Mr. Cimonetti explained that if homeowners are not satisfied with the administrative appeal process, they can go to the Board of Civil Authority. That Board will appoint a committee to inspect the property. As a result of this, the appraisal can stay the same, be reduced, or be increased. Ms. Picard noted that 5/31 is a legal holiday and 6/14 is a Sunday. Mr. Hafter said they would change the dates to accommodate this. Mr. Cimonetti stressed that appeals must be made in writing. Exact dates will be set at the next meeting. 7. Review Planning Commission agenda for meeting of 20 April: Mr. Cimonetti noted that the first item on the agenda deals with an amendment to allow school in the southeast quadrant, and there is a lot of emotion on this issue. 8. Review Addendum to Public Hearing for Zoning Board of Adjustment meeting to be held on 4/26/99: No issues were raised. 9. Review minutes of 5 April 1999: This item was tabled as a majority of members present had not attended that meeting. 10. Sign disbursement orders: Disbursement orders were signed. 11. Review and Sign Entertainment License Application for Holiday Inn. 1068 Williston Road; Jakes Original Bar & Grill, 1233 Shelburne Road; Franny O's, 733 Queen City Park Road; Windjammer Restaurant, 1076 Williston Road; The Sheraton, Williston Road: Mr. Hafter briefly reviewed the application and what kind of entertainment they covered. He said all the applications were in order. Mr. Condos moved to approve the Entertainment License Applications as submitted. Mr. Austin seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 12. Liquor Control Board: Mr. Condos moved that the Council adjourn and reconvene as Liquor Control Board. Mr. Austin seconded. Motion passed unanimously. a: Consider First and Second Class License renewals: Mr. Hafter presented license renewals and said all applications are in order. Mr. Austin moved to approve the first and second class license renewals from the following applicants as presented: Airport Mobil Champlain Farms Dorset Street Beverage Hawthorne Suites Hotel KWAN's Restaurant Magic Hat Brewing Company Marco's Pizza Pizza Putt, Inc. Windjammer Restaurant Vermont National Golf Course Mr. Condos seconded. Motion passed unanimously. As there was no further business to come before the Council, the meeting was adjourned at 9:35 p.m. Clerk Published by ClerkBase ©2019 by Clerkbase. No Claim to Original Government Works.