Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - City Council - 10/02/2000CITY COUNCIL 2 OCTOBER 2000 The South Burlington City Council held a regular meeting on Monday, 2 October 2000, at 7:30 p.m., in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset St. Members present: J. Condos, Chair; C. Smith, T. Sheahan, D. O'Rourke, S. Magowan Also present: C. Hafter, City Manager; P. Bestenbostel, Asst. City Manager; J. Weith, Director of Planning & Zoning; S. McCallum, Planning Dept.; L. Wetzel, B. Cimonetti, M. Morcelli, W. Sanders, S. Audette, T. Duff, S. Fortier, B. Tremback. J. Pease, E. Edwards, L. Ravin, J. Grevet, W. Eldred, K. Butler 1. Comments & questions from the audience not related to agenda items: Mr. Wetzel voiced a complaint regarding the reappraisal of Grandview Condominiums. He said the properties were "spot reappraised" two years after the appraisal. All units were appraised at the same amount in 1998. On June 22, 2000, a bill was mailed with a notice requiring an appeal by 4 July. This allowed only 12 days for an appeal, and the law requires 14 days notice. Mr. Wetzel said he appealed to the BCA. He indicated he would like to appeal on behalf of the entire condo association but was told he could only appeal his units. Mr. Wetzel said the appraiser made errors in the calculations. He also used sales figures from sales that came after the reappraisal date of April 1. The Board of Civil Authority is hearing the appeal but has recessed the hearing because of their own confusion in this matter. Mr. Wetzel said that unless all of Grandview can have their appraisals reduced, he does not want preferential treatment. He also indicated that he has heard that the entire city will be reappraised next year. Mr. Hafter said the city hasn't decided how to reappraise, but there will be a review of all properties. Mr. Wetzel suggested the city let people know what is happening. Mr. Hafter noted that if there is an error in an appraisal, a property owner does not have to appeal. He also said that if it is found that using comparables done after April 1st is an error, all the units in Grandview would be reappraised. Mr. Magowan asked what process is being used now. The City Assessor said they review sales in the city and try to determine where the market is for each type of property (condos, single family, office condos, etc.). Then they determine from the state's report what the equalization rate is. If a neighborhood is above or below that, the Assessor's office equalizes the whole city. This makes the tax burden more fair. Mr. Cimonetti, a member of the BCA, said the Board didn't think there could be a "selective" reappraisal and was baffled to hear the city had done this. He noted that on an appeal, the BCA must establish fair market value of a property and then determine whether that is comparable to the rest of the city. He said that this is not that it is equalized to the kind of property but that it is equalized across the Grand List. Mr. Cimonetti added that there is no concept of differentiated equalization. He indicated that what is likely to happen is that they would turn the property back to its original appraisal because there is no way to equalize it. Mr. Sheahan noted that the City Council was not aware this was happening, and he was concerned about this. Mr. O'Rourke said he wasn't sure the city couldn't reappraise all "like properties," but he wasn't sure that's what happened in this case. Mr. Hafter agreed that a policy on this needs to be brought to the City Council. Mr. Cimonetti asked that the Council be represented at the next BCA meeting on Thursday to explain the city's position because the Board does not know how to deal with this appeal. Mr. Condos said he wasn't sure the Council can have an answer for the BCA. Mr. Hafter said there can be an explanation of what was done. The city attorney could also be present to suggest how to proceed. Mr. Bestenbostel noted that because of Act 60, the city doesn't have the ability to not do a reappraisal. But if property is not equalized, the state will come in and do it. Mr. Hafter said the City Charter does call for an "annual statistical reappraisal." Mr. Cimonetti acknowledged this is true but said it must be for all properties, not selective ones. 2. Announcements and City Manager's report: Mr. Condos: The MPO Executive Committee will meet Wednesday, 4:30 p.m. Mr. Hafter: The Green Mountain Chapter of the DAR has invited citizens to the unveiling of a monument honoring Consuelo Bailey, Vermont's first female Lieutenant Governor, 10 October, at Swift and Spear Streets. Mr. Audette: 40% of the new section of the Rec Path is now paved. The other part is crushed gravel. The Forestry Building to Gutterson Field House is also paved. Once the bridge is installed, the rest can be paved. Work has begun on the main maintenance structure of the new Public Works facility. The storage facility walls are up, and the roof is ¾ done. Mr. Hafter: Lindenwood Drive rec path should be paved by next week. There have been complaints about dogs running free in city parks and owners not cleaning up after them. A notice will be put in newspapers that dogs must be under the control of owners. This is a public health and safety concern. 3. Interviews with applicants for city boards: The Council interviewed Wes Sanders for the Natural Resources Committee. Mr. Sanders said he has been doing research on the environment for a decade and is widely read in the area. He has sat in on Committee meetings and is eager to serve. He felt that growth needs to occur with as little impact on the environment as possible because the city has already been impacted in some negative ways. The Council also interviewed Tim Duff for the City Center Design Review Committee. Mr. Duff said he has been a city resident since 1986 and was a member of the Design Review Board in Burlington prior to that. He has professional experience as a contractor and architect. He now has a business in South Burlington. 4. First reading of amendment to sign ordinance to permit higher educational information signs; schedule public hearing: Mr. Hafter read the language of the amendment. It allows one or two-sided, freestanding signs regarding on-campus events which are open to the public. Signs can be no more than 50 sq. ft. and no higher than 10 ft. They must be at least 15 ft. from the pavement of any public road and may not be in any public right-of-way. Signs may include electronically displayed, intermittent messages with intervals of greater than 5 minutes. They may be lighted from 7 a.m. to midnight. All signs must be approved by the City Manager or his/her designee. Ms. Fortier noted that UVM is doing a whole system of signs. The one affected by this ordinance would be at the most northern entrance on Spear Street. It is the only "changeable message" sign proposed in South Burlington. Ms. Fortier asked for a percentage figure of the total sign that could be used for the reader board. Mr. Hafter suggested no more than 25 sq. ft. Members agreed to change the wording of the last sentence to stress that there would be no lighting of the sign between midnight and 7 a.m. Mr. Smith moved to approve the first reading with changes to limit the area of the message board, to limit the number of signs to one per institution, and to indicate that signs may not be lighted from midnight to 7 a.m. He further moved to set the public hearing for 6 November 2000. Mr. O'Rourke seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 5. Consideration of postponement of second reading of zoning amendments from 2 October to 16 October: Mr. Condos noted that although the Free Press was given the information on this hearing, they did not publish it. Mr. Smith moved to postpone the second reading of zoning amendments to 16 October. Mr. Sheahan seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 6. Update on progress of stormwater retention project for Shelburne Rd. runoff, Bartlett Brook: Mr. Condos reviewed the history of the grant project. Mr. Belair indicated that CWD, the Agency of Transportation and the city are funding the project with other financial partners. Mr. Pease said there are actually 11 partners to the project, 2 of whom are contributing labor. Shearer Chevrolet is providing an easement for the pond. A part of the Brook will be reconstructed to get it into its natural channel, and the floodplain will be recreated. This work will also provide a fish and wildlife habitat. Mr. Tremback said the focus of the project was to remove hydrocarbons and contaminates from stormwater before it gets to the Lake. The system is designed to catch one inch of water from each storm and route it into the treatment system. He showed a picture of the system, illustrating the baffling device. After the water goes through the system, it will be released into Bartlett Brook. Mr. Sheahan asked if the system will have to be cleaned out periodically. Mr. Tremback said it would. Mr. Sheahan asked how disposal is handled and whether it is expensive. Mr. Pease said it is mostly disposed of at landfills as it is not toxic to human life. Mr. O'Rourke suggested a shared maintenance with CWD. Ms. Edwards asked if they are talking about the north or south part of the Brook. Mr. Tremback said the southern park, but flow would also be decreased to the north part of the brook by diverting the first inch of flow, so conditions in the north brook will also be improved. A resident asked if this would work also in winter and what would happen to salt. Mr. Tremback said it will work in winter and salt will go through the system. Mr. Pease said it is impossible to remove salt from the water. Another audience member asked if it is unhealthy to swim in Bartlett Bay. Mr. Pease said it is likely that toxicity after a storm may be above health limits. This is not a public beach, and it would be in the owners' best interest to have the water tested. Ms. Morcelli asked what metals would be involved. Mr. Pease said nickel, zinc, copper; also some insecticides, and breakdown products from oil. Ms. Ravin noted that the Natural Resources Committee is very supportive of this project and appreciates getting help from so many sources. Mr. Pease said if they can get the easements worked out, they hope to be finished by June 1. Ms. Edwards expressed concern that there has not been adequate mapping of this area. Mr. Weith said there is a consultant on board now who is updating all stream mapping. 7. Discussion of proposed Pesticide Ordinance with Natural Resources Committee: Ms. Ravin said they have been working on this for about 2 years in response to citizen concerns. The goals of the ordinance would be to educate residents regarding what is used in pesticides and what safer alternatives are available. It would also provide education on how to use pesticides safely. Other goals are to reduce the poisons that reach the water system and also to protect the Lake. Ms. Ravin said the South Burlington ordinance would be based on the Burlington ordinance as they both have the same resource to protect. The ordinance would limit pesticide use in wetlands, at schools and in public areas. All other use must be preceded by notification to adjacent property owners. Mr. Magowan asked if the ordinance would address fertilizers. Ms. Ravin said it would not. Mr. Eldred noted the ordinance would prohibit pesticide spray within 500 ft of the lake. He felt the area needs to be better defined. He noted that they live in this area and need to spray for carpenter ants. He was concerned they might be barred from doing this. Ms. McCallum said if this is a recurring problem, a solution could be worked out and something that is not dangerous could be used. Mr. Hafter said the language in some places would have to be reworded to be in line with other city ordinances. Mr. Magowan asked about an absolute ban subject to review. Ms. Ravin said they didn't want to go that far. Mr. Smith felt the wording was overly complex. Mr. Weith said he supported the concept but was concerned with enforcement, especially in regard to time. He suggested hiring an intern to help with this. Mr. Hafter suggested a first reading on 1 November. Members asked for a draft before that date to sort out issues. 8. Review Development Review Board agenda for 2 October 2000: With regard to Item #10, Mr. Condos expressed concern that the owner is dumping snow removed from Burlington in back of the property and it is going into the brook. Mr. Hafter will bring this to the Board's attention. 9. Review minutes of 11 September: Mr. Magowan moved to approve the minutes of 11 September as written. Mr. Sheahan seconded. Motion passed 3-0 with Messrs. Smith and O'Rourke abstaining. 10. Sign Disbursement Orders: Disbursement Orders were signed. Executive Session: Mr. Sheahan moved the Council adjourn and reconvene in executive session to discuss litigation and appointments to committees and to resume regular session only for the purpose of making appointments and/or adjourning. Mr. Smith seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Regular Session: The Council returned to regular session. Steve Magowan moved the appointment of Wes Sanders to a three-year term on the Natural Resources Committee (2003) and Tim Duff to one year remaining on an unexpired three-year term on the City Center Design Review Committee (2001). Dan O'Rourke seconded. The motion passed unanimously. Chris Smith moved adjournment. Steve Magowan seconded. The motion passed unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 11:15 p.m. Clerk Published by ClerkBase ©2019 by Clerkbase. No Claim to Original Government Works.