Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - City Council - 02/16/1999CITY COUNCIL 16 FEBRUARY 1999 The South Burlington City Council held a regular meeting on Tuesday, 16 February 1999, at 7:30 p.m., in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset Street. Members Present: William Cimonetti, Chair; James Condos, David Austin, Joan Britt Also Present: Charles Hafter, City Manager; Peter Bestenbostel, Assistant City Manager; Albert Audette, Street Dept; Anna Johnston, The Other Paper; Art Balf, David Boehm, Amy Wright, Doug Weber, Ken Sassorossi 1. Comments and questions from the audience (not related to Agenda items): Mr. Austin noted that he had gotten a call regarding plowing of the bike path near the Wheelock Farm. Mr. Cimonetti said that limited parts of the path are plowed, but the rest can be used for cross-country skiing. Mr. Austin said the person he spoke to felt this was a walking area for people in winter, since there is no sidewalk in the area. He personally had never seen cross-country skiers there but had seen walkers and runners even on the coldest days. 2. Announcements & City Manager's report: Ms. Britt advised that the Channel 17 Board will meet on Thursday at 11:45 a.m. Mr. Condos noted that the Solid Waste Executive meeting scheduled for tomorrow has been canceled. The regular Board meeting will be next Wednesday. Mr. Austin said the subcommittee for regional planning for natural resources has postponed its meeting until March. Mr. Hafter gave members the proposed 1999-2000 city budget. There will be budget work sessions on 18 and 25 February. Mr. Hafter praised department heads for keeping their budgets within guidelines. He noted that the proposed city tax rate is .504 which is down from .52 last year. There will be a ballot item proposed for another 5 year street maintenance plan. This would increase the budget by half a cent. Mr. Hafter noted that UVM President Ramaley will be present at the next Council meeting. Binding arbitration is still being debated in the Legislature. Mr. Hafter gave members a copy of a letter of opposition from School Superintendent Bruce Chattman. VLCT also opposes binding arbitration. Mr. Hafter also noted that there is still no agreement between CCTA and the state for management of the commuter rail. All of CCTA's comments have been addressed favorably by the state except for the inclusion of indemnification language. Mr. Hafter said that if indemnification language is not put in the agreement, he would recommend that the Council ask CCTA not to approve it. 3. Discussion of city policy on private stormwater drainage systems and retention ponds: Ms. Britt noted that she is a neighbor of the people involved in this discussion and as such will not participate. Mr. Boehm said he was speaking as an individual and not representing the neighbors. He then reviewed the history of the problem, noting the requirement for treating stormwater before it enters streams in order to reduce the impact on the streams. There is a series of storm ponds in conjunction with several developments. He is particularly concerned with the one at Summit at Spear. The problem is that water is held in the ponds, then discharged onto the Hort Farm and then into streams and Lake Champlain. Ponds were not dedicated to the city, and the language of the approval says that the successors to the developers will maintain the ponds. But there is no mechanism in place for those ponds to be maintained. They are located on condominium common land. The UVM Hort Farm has concerns about the water being discharged onto their land and they consulted the Agency of Natural Resources. The Agency looked at the ponds and found them backed up, overgrown, etc. A year ago, the Condominium Association got them back into working order. The state and UVM now say that the ponds should be improved upon to handle 2-year storm events (they are now built to handle a 25-year storm). The state has done a preliminary plan and will do a final plan. The Condo Association is willing to participate in the cost, but some of the residents feel the city should maintain the ponds. Since the Pinnacle development has been built, there is drainage from their south end into city pipes at Summit at Spear. Mr. Boehm expressed concern with this as there is no way to handle this increased runoff. Mr. Boehm also indicated that he had been told by the State that the stormwater permit would have to be updated, and because the city owns the roads in the area, they would also be a part of the updating process. Mr. Boehm said the Bianchi decision also comes into play here as a "missing element" is created in property transfer attempts. Mr. Boehm said he feels the city exists to provide certain benefits to citizens, including a stormwater system. He felt it is cumbersome for the neighborhood to try to maintain these ponds, and it seems more sensible for the city to do it. He estimated the cost at $300-700 a year. Mr. Cimonetti noted the ponds are on private property. Mr. Austin added that the city has no easement to allow it to access the ponds. Mr. Cimonetti asked if Mr. Boehm knew of any community where the municipal government took on this responsibility. Mr. Boehm did not. Mr. Audette noted that 25 years ago the city put into the subdivision regulations the proviso that the ponds belong to the homeowners' associations. The city specifically did not want the responsibility for them. Mr. Boehm felt the homeowners' associations are not equipped to deal with them. Mr. Cimonetti said he had never heard that stormwater discharge permits had to be renewed and asked that this be looked into. He also felt that the city needs to understand this problem city-wide. Mr. Condos noted that if there are 100 such ponds in the city, it could cost over $50,000 a year to maintain them. Mr. Hafter added that in years when they had to be dredged, it could cost much more. Mr. Cimonetti recommended that the city learn about the permit renewal issue and also do an inventory of the ponds in the city. Mr. Audette said it is anticipated that there will be some federal regulations on these ponds in the next few years. 4. First Reading of Amendment to Motor Vehicle and Traffic Regulations to establish a no parking zone on the north side of Grandview Drive; schedule public hearing of same: Mr. Cimonetti read the amendment. Mr. Audette noted that the no parking zone should be on the south side where the sidewalk is. Mr. Condos then moved to approve the first reading with the correction to the south side of Grandview Drive and to set the public hearing of 15 March. Ms. Britt seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 5. Consideration of approval of letter of intent to apply for LDHDC and Cathedral Square affordable Vermont Community Development Grant: Mr. Cimonetti stressed that this is a request for a letter of intent to apply for the grant. Mr. Sassorossi said that it in no way obligates the community to apply for the funds. It only leaves that option open. There is a requirement to hold a public hearing to actually apply for the funds. Mr. Sassorossi then reviewed the process and dates involved in the actual application. Twenty units of the project would be considered affordable because of the debt service package (not because they are subsidized). The other units would be subsidized housing because they would serve the handicapped. Mr. Condos moved to authorize submission of the letter of intent to apply for the grant and to hold a public hearing on 15 March. Mr. Austin seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 6. Update on Phase III of the Rec Path; discussion of condemnation options: Mr. Hafter said the city has received the Corps of Engineers permit and that easements are falling into place. Mr. Weber said permits are current provided the path is built by October, 2000. Mr. Hafter reviewed the route of the path and noted that one problem is that all Grandview condo owners must approve of the easement and there are two who oppose it on principle. It may thus be necessary to decide whether to proceed with condemnation. Mr. Balf said the condo association is working to change the bylaws, but it does not look as though this will happen in the immediate future. Mr. Weber said the total taking would be 3500 sq. ft. There would also be a temporary construction easement. Council members agreed that it is their intent to move forward. Discussion would continue with homeowners and, if necessary, the city would proceed with condemnation. 7. Consideration of letter from Chittenden County local elected officials re: alternative transportation funding: Mr. Austin noted he had attended the meeting. There was a letter offered to attendees to sign at the time. This was generated by a subcommittee of the group. The letter addresses CCTA funding, but there are some other extraneous issues as well (e.g., local option taxes). Mr. Austin said he supports some of the components of the letter but felt a transportation letter should not deal with extraneous issues, especially without discussion of those issues. He felt the Council should not sign the letter but should voice its agreement with the recommendations for alternative funding for CCTA. Mr. Condos said the Committee did not generate the letter. It was generated by Mayor Clavelle. He and other members felt the Council should come up with a letter they could sign and send. Mr. Hafter will draft such a letter. 8. Review of current property tax collections: Mr. Bestenbostel reported that the delinquency rate is 1.28% for both property and personal property taxes. This is very low. Mr. Cimonetti asked that when any disbursement of funds is made to the State that the Council be advised. 9. Review Planning Commission Agenda for 16 February: No issues were raised. 10. Review Zoning Notice for Public Hearing on 22 February 1999: No issues were raised. 11. Sign Disbursement Orders: Disbursement Orders were signed. Executive Session: Mr. Austin moved the Council meet in executive session to discuss real property acquisition and personnel issues and to resume regular session only for the purpose of adjournment. Mr. Condos seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Regular Session: The City Council returned to regular session. Mr. Condos moved adjournment. Mr. Austin seconded. The motion passed unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 11 p.m. Clerk Published by ClerkBase ©2019 by Clerkbase. No Claim to Original Government Works.