Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - City Council - 06/19/2006CITY COUNCIL 19 JUNE 2006 The South Burlington City Council held a regular meeting on Monday, 19 June 2006, at 7:00 p.m., in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset St. Members Present: J. Condos, Chair; M. Boucher, D. O'Rourke, C. Smith, S. Magowan Also Present: C. Hafter, City Manager; D. Gravelin, Assistant City Manager; J. B. Hinds, Director of Planning & Zoning; T. Leblanc, City Assessor; D. Young, T. Manazir, School District; A. Parent, The Other Paper; R. & M. A. Irish, K. Albee, T. King, J. Bahrenberg, A. Morwood, P. Jensen, M. Pond 1. Comments & Questions from the Audience not related to Agenda Items: No issues were raised. 2. Announcements & City Manager's Report: Mr. Condos: Will attend MPO meeting, Wednesday, 7 p.m. Retirement party for Police Chief Lee Graham, Friday night at the Double Tree, $35 includes meal and gift. Mr. Hafter: Open house to honor Mary-Barbara Maher, Tuesday, 27 June, 4-7 p.m. GBIC Annual Meeting, tomorrow, Noon Special City Council meeting, 6 July, 8 a.m., to discuss and set tax rate Airport Quarterly meeting, 10 July, 8 a.m. The next Council meeting agenda will include: Stormwater Policy A group home request A discussion on implications of Act 75 relative to the way affordable Housing is valued and a movement to change this A request to close the road to the Lime Kiln Bridge for 2 weeks in September; when reopened, the new bridge will be in use. Mr. Hafter then asked Mr. Leblanc to update members on the reappraisal process. Mr. Leblanc said the official notices have now been sent out. People have 2 weeks to formally grieve their assessments (this may be as simple as saying, "I appeal my assessment"). Mr. Leblanc noted that 16% of homeowners went through the informal appeal process. After the formal appeal process, if people are still not satisfied, they can appeal to the Board of Civil Authority, then to the State appraiser, then to the courts. Mr. Boucher asked if specific neighborhoods have been looked at again. Mr. Leblanc said they have. Several neighborhoods were adjusted. Mr. Leblanc stressed that if a person appeals, the appraisal can go down, stay the same or go up. Mr. Condos added that a person can't appeal his/her taxes. Taxes are based on the fair market value of the home. Mr. O'Rourke asked if the process of checking for errors will continue. Mr. Leblanc said it will. Mr. Magowan said he has been disappointed in the process. He noted there were cards which people were told to fill out expressing concerns. When he talked to someone from CLT about the cards, the response was, "No one looked at those." When he sat down with a person from CLT, he was told, "Yes, that's wrong, you're appraisal will go down." However, the appraisal did not go down. Mr. Smith said he is hearing from people who don't believe the numbers are fair. Many people are also having trouble getting through to talk to someone. Mr. Hafter said additional phone lines have been added as well as additional mailboxes. Mr. Magowan said his concerns relate to the contractor the city hired. Mr. Leblanc said there were people who came in about very small amounts which did not result in a change in the value of the house. Mr. O'Rourke said he felt some of the issues are working themselves out with the process. 3. Public Hearing: Proposed Amendments to the South Burlington Land Development Regulations and Official Zoning Map: 1) Allow self- storage in C2 (heavy commercial) district and add use standards for self-storage to Article 14; 2) Allow retail food establishments less than 5,000 sq. ft. in the IC-Mixed Industrial Commercial District; 3) Zoning map change from R4 to Mixed Industrial-Commercial for Property at 4 Shunpike Rd; 4) Zoning Pam change from R1-Lakeshore to Lakeshore Neighborhood in area of Bartlett Bay Road & Lakeview Lane; 5) Create new R1 Lakeview sub-district in the existing R1-Lakeshore district south of Holmes Road and north of Bartlett Bay Road, with a maximum density of 3 du/acre, minimum lot size of 14,000 sq. ft. and setbacks per LN district, as shown on the attached map; 6) Apply the provisions of Section 4.07(F), Queen City Park Road, Height of Structures of the LN-Lakeshore Neighborhood and R1-Lakeview zoning districts; 7) Make minor amendments of definitions ("natural materials," "RVs" and "self- storage"). Second reading of same: Ms. Hinds reviewed the Planning Commission process. Mr. Condos complained about the "ugliness" of some self-storage units. Ms. Hinds said there are no design standards. Self-storage is allowed in the C2 District, which is the appropriate zone for "ugly-looking" things. Ms. Hinds briefly reviewed the minor definition changes and items 1-3. Mr. Condos felt that 5,000 sq. ft. was too large for food establishments in the Mixed Industrial Commercial District. Ms. Hinds said these would simply be places for someone working in the area to grab a sandwich instead of having to drive somewhere else in the city. 5000 square feet is based on traffic generation numbers. Such establishments also need roof for food preparation, storage, refrigeration, etc. She noted there would be a maximum of 16 seats allowed in these uses. Ms. Hinds then reviewed the changes in the Lakeshore District. She noted that the land at the northeast tip would be changed to R-1 Lakeview Neighborhood. The same height review standards as Queen City Park would be added to the Lakeshore Neighborhood. This would reduce the maximum height to 25 feet and would require design review for anything requested above that height. Neighbors would get notice of anything being requested above 25 feet. Mr. Bahrenberg spoke in favor of the changes to the Lakeshore area. He noted his is the only house with entrance to Bartlett Bay Road that is not in the Lakeshore Neighborhood. Mr. King, who lives in the house that abuts the Irish property, questioned the relevance of the zoning. He said they had originally been told there could be R-1 zoning next to them. This change would mandate that their road become the ingress and egress to the neighborhood, probably making that road a public road. He was concerned that people would want to access to that road. Ms. Hinds noted that if Lakeview Lane were to become a public road, the city would have authority over who would get a curb cut onto that road. If people have access to Bartlett Bay Road, they couldn't have access to this road. Mr. King felt that the Farrell property adjacent to this property should be thought about first, before making the proposed changes. Ms. Hinds noted that the Farrell property could be developed at 7/acre. If the Irish back property were joined with the Farrell property, it could also be developed at 7/acre. The proposed change is for less than that. Ms. Hinds noted that the Planning Commission felt a legal merging of the land at the top of Bartlett Bay Rd. wasn't fair to the Irishes, and the current scenario would allow development at 3/acre with no review of anything. With the proposed configuration, there is a maximum of 6 units on the Irish property, more likely 5. Ms. Irish noted that the homes on the east side of Bartlett Bay Road have backyards that abut Lakeview Lane and they wouldn't want to be affected by any change. Mr. Irish added that when Homestead Design built in the area, there was an offer of dedication to the city to accept the road, so there was always a likelihood that Lakeview Lane would become a city street. Mr. Irish also noted there are 24 homes on the northwest section of Bartlett Bay Road. There are 9 lots less than 9,000 sq. ft., and 52% of the lots are less than 12,000 sq. ft. These started out as camps but were converted to year-round homes. He did not know why the land he and his wife own was not put in with the Lakeshore Neighborhood. Ms. Albee was concerned with stormwater runoff and noted there is already a bad situation. Mr. Condos said any development that happens must solve their own stormwater issues and can't make an existing situation worse. Ms. Hinds noted that today the Irishes could put 3 "McMansions" on the back piece of land and make a real mess. With the proposed plan, there will be standards to follow. Ms. Morwood asked what recourse they would have if their stormwater situation gets worse because of this development. Mr. Condos said the developer is responsible if the development causes any problems. The Irishes would be required to have an engineer certify that they will not make an existing situation worse. Ms. Hinds noted there is now a Stormwater Superintendent, and there are review standards and potential Technical Review. This is more review than the situation that now exists. Ms. Albee noted a concern with traffic and said that at times Bartlett Bay Road becomes almost a drag strip. Mr. Hafter noted this is a private Road. Residents can put up "Children at Play" signs. Mr. Smith moved to close the public hearing. Mr. Boucher seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Mr. Magowan moved to waive the second reading and approve all sections except those relating to self-storage and retail food establishments. Mr. Boucher seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Mr. Boucher moved to approve sections allowing self-storage in the C2 district and retail food establishments less than 5,000 sq. ft. in the IC-Mixed Industrial Commercial district. Mr. Smith seconded. Motion passed 4-1 with Mr. Condos opposing. 4. Consideration of First Reading of Proposed Amendment to the South Burlington Land Development Regulations to allow Outdoor Lighting of Recreation Fields in the MU-Municipal Zoning District. Schedule public hearing and 2nd reading: Ms. Hinds noted that the Planning Commission felt there was no resolution to the question of whether this is a "reasonable and customary use" of a municipal school facility. They feel the proposed standards are OK for a school use but not for a commercial use. With a commercial facility, there would be review of parking and whether the site can even handle the parking. There might also be a requirement for a buffer to the residential neighborhood. This would not be required with a school use as there is more leeway given for uses that have a public good. Mr. Hafter said there are also more noise issues with a larger crowd which a commercial use could create. Mr. Young said the intent is to provide for students and for the community. They don't have an overall plan as yet. Rental use is a 3rd option. Mr. Boucher moved to waive the first reading and set a public hearing for 17 July. Mr. Smith seconded. The motion passed unanimously. Ms. Hinds stressed that nothing in this proposal precludes rental of the facility as a commercial use. 5. Public Hearing on amendments to Sign Ordinance: 1) Allow signs on community gardens and 2) allow temporary signs at gas stations per Section 19 or the Ordinance; second reading of same: Ms. Jensen noted the gardens at the Lutheran church are up and running. Mr. Magowan moved to close the public hearing, waive the second reading, and approve the amendments as presented. Mr. Boucher seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 6. Public Hearing on Capital Budget and Program and Capital Inventory and Services Description (2006); second reading: Mr. Smith asked what the Council would be committing to. Ms. Hinds said they would be committing to nothing. This is just an "order of magnitude" which allows the city to impose impact fees. Mr. Smith moved to close the public hearing, waive the second reading and approve the Capital Budget and Program and Capital Inventory and Services Description as presented. Mr. Boucher seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 7. Request from Meg Pond, Director of Community Development, Lake Champlain Housing Development for City to join application for Champlain Valley Rehab Loan Fund: Mr. Hafter said this has been an excellent program. Ms. Pond said it is a program that provides loans to help lower income people with home repairs. She said they will be applying for $750,000. A public hearing will be needed. Mr. Smith moved that South Burlington join the application for Champlain Valley loan fund with Town of Swanton and Lake Champlain Housing and to set a public hearing for 17 July 2006. Mr. Magowan seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 8. Approval of Resolution of Appreciation for the Public Service of Lealand Graham and Mary-Barbara Maher: Mr. Magowan moved to approve the resolutions as presented. Mr. Smith seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 9. Consideration of Entertainment License Application from Circus Smirkus: Mr. Hafter noted that any tent will require approval. Mr. Magowan moved to approve the entertainment license application of Circus Smirkus as presented. Mr. Smith seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 10. Review Development Review Board agenda for 20 June 2006: No issues were raised. 11. Review Minutes of 15 May 2006; 22 May 2006, Special Meeting of 22 May 2006, and 6 June 2006: Mr. Boucher moved to approve the Minutes of 15 May as written. Mr. Smith seconded. Motion passed 3-0 with Mr. Magowan abstaining. Mr. Smith moved to approve the Minutes of 22 May as written. Mr. Boucher seconded. Motion passed 3-0 with Mr. Magowan abstaining. Mr. Smith moved to approve the Minutes of the Special Meeting of 22 May as written. Mr. Boucher seconded. Motion passed 3-0 with Mr. Magowan abstaining. Mr. Smith moved to approve the Minutes of 6 June as written. Mr. Boucher seconded. Motion passed 3-0 with Mr. Condos abstaining. 12. Sign Disbursement Orders: Disbursement Orders were signed. 13. Liquor Control Board: Mr. Smith moved the Council adjourn and reconvene as Liquor Control Board. Mr. Boucher seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Mr. Hafter presented a one-time outside consumption permit for The Ground Round and a Liquor License application from El Mariachi. He said both applications were in order. Mr. Smith moved to approve the one-time outside consumption permit for The Ground Round and the Liquor License application of El Mariachi as presented. Mr. Boucher seconded. Motion passed unanimously. As there was no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 9:30 p.m. Clerk Published by ClerkBase ©2019 by Clerkbase. No Claim to Original Government Works.