Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - City Council - 03/15/1999CITY COUNCIL 15 MARCH 1999 The South Burlington City Council held a regular meeting on Monday, 15 March 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, Terrance Sheahan Also Present: Charles Hafter, City Manager; Peter Bestenbostel, Assistant City Manager; Albert Audette, Street Dept; Anna Johnston, The Other Paper; Anne Geggis, Free Press; George Sporzynski, J. Ladd, Nancy Owens, Bill & Maurene Gilbert, Linda Young, David & Ellen Pariseau, Mary Winslow, Ed Olszewski, Amy Wright, Kenn Sassorossi, Adam Dantscher, Howard & Geana Mansfield, Kerstin Hanson, Lou Bresee, Steven Seipke, Nan Frymoyer, Judy McClellan, Gladys Jarvis, Eleanor Bradbury, Helen Head, Sue Watson, Lance Llewellyn 1. Comments and questions from the audience (not related to agenda items): Ms. Johnston asked about future Airport expansion which might result in homes being taken. Mr. Cimonetti said that in a recent briefing by the Airport people, there was no indication of any Airport expansion in the direction of the homes in question. Ms. Britt noted that she had also gotten a call about this. Mr. Hafter will speak with Airport officials and report back. 2. Announcements & City Manager's report: Members advised of the following upcoming meetings: Channel 17 Board - Thursday, 11:45 a.m. Regional Planning Commission - 22 March MPO - Wednesday, 7 p.m. South Burlington Steering Committee - Thursday, 7:30 for the presentation of school and city budgets Commuter Rail Steering Committee - 3/29, 1:30 p.m. Solid Waste Executive Board - next Wednesday, 5:30 p.m. Mr. Cimonetti then announced that he will not be seeking re-election when his term expires in May. Mr. Hafter gave members the Steering Committee agenda. Mr. Hafter noted he had testified at the Legislature last week regarding South Burlington's proposed Charter changes. He said he was concerned when he read the wording of the bill regarding implementation. The Bill said implementation would be immediate. Mr. Hafter said he suggested having implementation a month later with 1 August as a start date. Members felt this was acceptable. Mr. Hafter then gave members a list of applicants for the City Center Design Review Committee. He suggested the 5 April meeting for interviews. Several of the applicants are not city residents. Members felt that since there was an adequate pool of city people, the committee should be limited to residents. Dog and cat license renewals are due 1 April. Mr. Hafter gave members a brochure on the history of sprawl on the County. 3. Public Hearing on Amendment to Motor Vehicle and Traffic Regulations to prohibit parking on the south side of Grandview Drive; second reading of same: Mr. Cimonetti explained the amendment and noted it had been drafted at the request of residents of the area. No issues were raised by the Council or the public Mr. Condos moved to close the public hearing and to approve the amendment as presented. Ms. Britt seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 4. Continued discussion with Spear Street residents on establishment of special assessment sanitary sewage district; consideration of action to establish district: Mr. Cimonetti stepped down from the Council during this discussion as he is a resident of the proposed district. Mr. Condos served as Chair during the discussion. Mr. Condos noted the proposed district would run between Swift St. and Cedar Glen Road. Mr. Hafter said they have been working with residents of the area. The proposal for the district is similar to what has been done in other areas of the city. The city would pay half the cost and the residents of the district would pay the other half over a 10 year period. Mr. Hafter noted there are 3 residents of the area who do not want to participate. All live at the ends of the district, and he felt they could be eliminated from the district. If they wished to hook on at a later time, they would have to pay the full cost of extending the line. There are two methods of creating the district: by a vote of the City Council or by a vote of a majority of the city voters. Members supported the creation of the district eliminating the 3 homes that do not wish to participate. Mr. Austin moved to establish a special assessment district as proposed and to have the City Manager prepare the required paperwork. Ms. Britt seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Mr. Cimonetti rejoined the Council. 5. Public hearing on application of City of South Burlington to Vermont Community Development Program for grant funds to assist in construction of 30 affordable housing units, Williston Road behind New Covenant Baptist Church; consideration of submitting application: Mr. Sassorossi explained the grant program. The application must come from the municipality and must benefit low income and affordable housing. The grant would be in the amount of $450,000. The application is due on 13 April. The proposed PUD has 2 components: a 10 unit building for young adults with motor impairments, and 20 units plus two single family homes for affordable housing. The 20 units and single family homes would pay full property taxes. Ms. Owens explained that there is a commitment from HUD to build the other 10 units. One of the contingencies of this commitment is that a payment in lieu of taxes agreement be sought from the city. Ms. Wright noted that the land in question is not now taxed because it is part of the Baptist Church. Mr. Cimonetti noted that the project would be adding value to the land. He asked what the payment might be in relation to potential taxes. Ms. Owens said they pay $86,000 a year in Burlington for 100 units valued by Burlington at $5,000,000. Mr. Hafter asked what this would mean in terms of Act 60. Ms. Wright said she didn't know but would find out what she could. Ms. Wright then reviewed the proposed project showing the location of proposed and existing buildings. She noted there have been meetings with neighbors, and they are trying to minimize impacts on the existing neighborhood. There has been a long standing water problem in the area. The development has pledged not to make this worse and has agreed to put in a larger pumping and water retention system which will actually benefit the neighborhood. Traffic is another issue. A traffic engineer who reviewed the proposed project felt that the traffic impact would be negligible. The existing driveway will be moved. Mr. Cimonetti asked what the total population of the development might be. Ms. Wright said there would be a live-in manager of the congregate facility and 9 other residents. There would be no children in this building. The duplexes would be 950 sq. ft. with an anticipated 2 residents per dwelling (a maximum of 4). The new and existing single family homes would have 3 bedrooms. The average income for units would be below $10,000 a year in the congregate housing, $17,000-27,000 in the duplexes and in the $40,000 range for the single family homes. The single family homes would be sold. Mr. Sassarossi estimated a maximum of 18 children, many of whom would not be of school age. Ms. Wright said they often have older, single residents. Mr. Cimonetti asked if there would be a substantial amount of common amenities and whether the single family homes would be part of these. Ms. Wright said the two single family homes would pay part of the maintenance of the private road. Mr. Cimonetti asked if there would be garages. Ms. Wright said no. The street is wide enough for parallel parking. There are sidewalks throughout the internal part of the development and a sidewalk to Williston Rd. There will also be a sidewalk to allow residents of Hayden Parkway to get to Williston Rd, if the city allows it. Roads through the development will be privately maintained and plowed. Ms. Wright said there is a possibility of asking the city to take over the pumping station if it is shown to provide significant relief to the existing neighborhood. Mr. Sheahan asked about transportation for people in the congregate housing. Ms. Owens said some have their own vans or use SSTA. Others can use taxis or personal arrangements with friends, family, etc. Mr. Cimonetti noted that SSTA costs are borne by the city and that is a concern. It was noted that the congregate housing unit is being required to pay a recreation impact fee and this could offset some of the SSTA costs. Mr. Cimonetti asked if any variances from city regulations will be sought. Ms. Wright said none from current city regulations. She added that no major issues were raised at the sketch plan hearing at the Planning Commission. The preliminary plat will be submitted tomorrow. Mr. Cimonetti then solicited public comment. Mr. Pariseau asked the purchase price of the land. Ms. Wright said $260,000 with the single family home. One acre of this is from the church. Mr. Olszewski said he felt this was a lot of density for the amount of land. He also asked about access for fire protection. Ms. Wright said there will be a hydrant in the development. The Fire Marshall has reviewed and approved the plans. Mr. Dantscher asked what maintenance of the water system would cost if the city took it over. He also asked about landscaping. Ms. Wright said the estimate for maintenance of the storm water system is $6,000 a year. The development would pay this until it was found to be of benefit to the existing neighborhood. They would then discuss the possibility of having the city take it over. There is a $3,000 per unit landscaping budget. Ms. Watson said she feels good about a responsible group of people providing services to a very vulnerable part of the population and felt good that South Burlington would support such an effort. Mr. Mansfield questioned the safety of the driveway for people turning out to Williston Rd. Ms. Head noted that she works with people with disabilities who often live in very difficult situations in housing that is not compatible with their needs. She felt this was a place where those people could live together and share care givers and have greater sociability. She said she would be proud to see South Burlington provide this kind of housing. Mr. Condos noted that the city has a long history of providing affordable housing and that about 75% of the city's housing stock meets the "affordable" criteria. He also noted that the Comprehensive Plan says the city wants to provide this kind of housing. He indicated that this project would help protect the residential zone in that area from the pressure of commercial development. Ms. Britt added that the Queensbury Rd. project, done by the same organization, has been a real benefit to the community. Ms. Wright said they hope to create a similar neighborhood here. Mr. Condos then moved to close the public hearing. 6. Consideration of action to proceed with condemnation of property owned by Meadow Brook Condominiums for construction of Recreation Path Phase III: schedule of public hearing and site inspection: Mr. Hafter said this action is needed as there are three owners in the condo development who will not sign the easement agreement. Mr. Cimonetti noted that the impact on residents is very minuscule. He stressed that the city has no desire for an adversarial relationship and that the condo Association is stymied by its own rules which require 100% agreement in order to grant an easement. Mr. Condos moved to go forward with condemnation on Meadowbrook Condominium property needed for the Recreation Path Phase III and to set a site visit and public hearing for 3 May 1999. Mr. Sheahan seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 7. Continued discussion of special assessment for street improvements; consideration of approval of ballot item for same: Mr. Hafter gave members a proposal for a ballot item which showed a 5-year plan of decreasing funds from $194,000 the first year to $45,000 the fifth year. Over this period, additional funding would be added to the operations budget which, after the 5 years, would reflect $230,000 a year for future street maintenance. Mr. Cimonetti felt this would set up a much more appropriate technique for street maintenance and he strongly supported it. Mr. Austin agreed and stressed that the Council must remember its agreement to add the funds to the operating budget. He did have concerns with the wording of the warning. Mr. Cimonetti suggested additional language for clarification. He felt it was important to state clearly to the voters what they are being asked to vote on. Ms. Britt then moved that the May ballot include a request for a special assessment over a 5 year period to raise the following amounts: $194,000, $170,000, $130,000, $90,000, and $45,000. Mr. Sheahan seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 8. Presentation of plans for construction of new Public Works Facilities; consideration of bonding documents: Mr. Audette noted that they have added a roof over the area where school buses would be located. Mr. Llewellyn then reviewed the proposed site plan including new facilities and details of buildings. Mr. Audette noted the School District is very receptive to this plan. It will also increase the life of equipment that can now be housed indoors instead of being exposed to the elements. Ms. Britt asked how operating costs would be affected. Mr. Audette said the schools would probably be able to eliminate 1/2 of a mechanic position. Mr. Austin asked what it would mean to the taxpayers. Mr. Hafter said it would be 1.6 cents for the first year or about $16.00 per $100,000 of assessed value. He noted this would not be paid until the 2000-2001 budget year in which the existing capital debt would decline significantly. Ms. Britt asked what the project would be built. Mr. Audette said he hoped this summer. Mr. Cimonetti said it was hard to imagine putting this up against a $24,000,000 school item and the special appropriation. Members felt they were not ready to make a decision at this time. Ms. Britt said she would like to see facilities in other towns. She said she felt the city needed it, but she had concern about putting it on this ballot. Mr. Austin said he didn't want to include it unless the Council could fully endorse it. Mr. Sheahan said he had reservations about the scope, especially the back storage building. 9. Consideration of Refunding Note and Resolution for Library Computerization: Mr. Cimonetti said the note is for $13,000. at 3.9% interest. Half of this would be reimbursed by the schools. Mr. Austin moved to approve the Note and Resolution as presented. Ms. Britt seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 10. Review Planning Commission Agenda for 16 March 1999: Mr. Condos drew attention to item #2. Mr. Cimonetti said that the City Council indicated it is not willing to give up the land. Mr. Condos also noted that item #3 looks like the start of a "domino effect." Mr. Cimonetti noted that all the commercial buildings in that area are there by virtue of variances. 11. Review Zoning Notice for public hearing on 22 March 1999: No issues were raised. 12. Review minutes of 25 February and 1 March 1999: Mr. Austin moved to approve the minutes of 25 February as written. Mr. Sheahan seconded. Motion passed 4-0 with Mr. Condos abstaining. Mr. Sheahan moved to approve the minutes of 1 March as written. Ms. Britt seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 13. Sign Disbursement Orders: Disbursement Orders were signed. 14. Liquor Control Board: Mr. Austin moved the Council adjourn and reconvene as Liquor Control Board. Ms. Britt seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Mr. Hafter presented First and Second Class Liquor License Renewals from the following: Applebee's Restaurant Burlington Billiards Cheese Traders Ground Round Restaurant Net Result Pacific Gas Station Pauline's Restaurant Pizza Hut Pizzeria Uno Price Chopper #117 Rotisserie BEEM Inc.Shelburne Road Exxon Short Stop (3 locations)Silver Palace Spillane's Servicecenters The Olive Garden Parkway Diner U Save Beverage Waterfront Yogurt & Sandwich Co., Inc. Mr. Hafter indicated all applications were complete and in order. Mr. Condos moved to approve the Liquor License Renewals as presented. Mr. Austin seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Executive Session: Mr. Condos moved the Council meet in executive session to discuss personnel and an appraisal appeal and to resume regular session only for the purpose of adjournment. Mr. Austin seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Regular Session: The Council returned to regular session. Jim Condos moved adjournment. Joan Britt 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.