Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - City Council - 04/07/2008CITY COUNCIL 7 APRIL 2008 The South Burlington City Council held a regular meeting on Monday, 7 April 2008, at 6:15 p.m., in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset St. Members Present: C. Smith, Chair; M. Boucher, S. Dooley, S. Magowan, D. O'Rourke Also Present: C. Hafter, City Manager; D. Gravelin, Assistant City Manager; D. Kinville, City Clerk; J. B. Hinds, Director of Planning & Zoning; R. Kay, B. McDonald, D. Boyce, M. Beaudin, C. Shaw, Planning Commission; M. Flaherty, B. Searles, Burlington Int'l Airport; S. Audette, B. Nedde, L. Bresee, J. Kirk, D. Marrier, C. Rody 1. Executive Session: Mr. Boucher moved the Council meet in executive session to discuss real property acquisition. Ms. Dooley seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Regular Session: 2. Comments & Questions from the Audience, not related to Agenda Items: No issues were raised. 3. Announcements & City Manager's Report: Mr. Hafter: The Public Hearing on the proposed 2008-09 City and School budgets will be held on Thursday 10 April, 7 p.m. The City tax rate is down 6.3 cents because of the local option sales tax. This saves the average home owner $200, most of which disappears because of Act 60 and 68. Mr. Hafter read from an article entitled "Pilfering of Education Fund Continues," which noted that taxpayers have to pay $1,600,000 because of siphoning off of the Education Fund. There is a proposal before the State Senate that local police would have to pay to house incapacitated persons. A "local concerns" meeting regarding the proposed 3rd lane in from of Staples Plaza will be held at the 5 May Council meeting. A meeting will be held on 8 April, 4:30 p.m., regarding public education about the SAFER grant ballot item. A meeting regarding traffic modeling in connection with the proposed Exit 12B will be held at the MPO, 16 April, 9 a.m. Ms. Dooley: Noted that at the last Steering Committee meeting it was revealed that South Burlington is now a "receiving community" and will get education money back from the State. (Note: This means that the Ed Fund payment to the South Burlington School District plus individual rebates are greater than the Educational State-Wide Property taxes paid by South Burlington property owners.) 4. Review of Burlington International Airport Noise Compatibility Update: Mr. Flaherty noted that the Airport Commission is very favorable to South Burlington as to what to do with the noise abatement program. He added that the Airport has no interest in or use for anything on the west side of Airport Parkway. Mr. Flaherty also stressed that the Airport is trying to rectify previous communication problems. Mr. Searles said that the Burlington Airport is one of 450 airports in the country, all of which are heavily regulated on issues which include noise. The FAA has established a voluntary plan to mitigate noise so that it does not impact people's lives. The Airport is currently making changes to move aircraft away from fences. They are also allowed to purchase homes if they fall within certain noise limits and if homeowners voluntarily come to ask that the Airport buy their homes. The home purchase plan is currently being updated so that homes in the 65 decibel range can now be purchased (the limit used to be 70 decibels). In talks with the Planning Department, several issues arose, including: a. which homes to purchase b. in what order homes should be purchased c. what happens after houses are removed Mr. Searles said the good news is that the federal government has said they will allow the Airport to engage in land use planning and will pay for 95% of that planning. The first step is to get the document approved. After that, there can be time take for land use planning. Mr. Searles noted that the Airport is a major economic piece for the area. The Airport wants to make the plan work to allow people to participate in the program, but they also recognize that the boundary between the Airport and the community is important. Ms. Dooley cited the existing program, Section 3.16, which addresses "voluntary minimization." She said it appears that this hasn't happened. Section 3.17 says that military training would occur away from the Airport, but that hasn't happened either. She asked why there hasn't been an investment in soundproofing. Mr. Searles acknowledged that no decision have been made to put "non-natural" soundproofing in place. With regard to military training, he noted that this is not administered by the Airport and suggested questions be addressed to the Air National Guard. Mr. Flaherty added that when the feds say it is not appropriate to live in a 65 decibel zone, you have to tear those houses down. Mr. Magowan noted that the report indicates that the City of Burlington has chosen not to put money into soundproofing. Mr. Searles said he doesn't know why that decision was made. Mr. Flaherty said that even with soundproofing you still have the noise. Mr. Hafter said it could still be an option for someone who doesn't want to move because they can't find an appropriate place to live. Mr. Smith noted that in a real estate market, where demand and supply are not equal, the context of the program changes. Mr. Boucher added that the buy-up program is removing a huge portion of the affordable housing stock in the city. Mr. Hafter said "voluntary" becomes a question when the Airport buys up three homes on a street and only one is left. Mr. Searles noted that in the past, the Airport didn't have people lined up at its doors to buy their homes. He stressed that they are aware of what is going on and that's why they agreed to put things on hold and do some planning. Mr. Magowan said he is most concerned with the lack of trust in the relationship. He said he understands there are several contracts for sale with homeowners in the 65 decibel area. Mr. Searles said the current year's program is still on-going. Mr. Flaherty added that the only homes being bought are those where talks have already been going on, about 7 or 8 homes. Mr. Boucher asked how they can buy homes in the 65-decibel area if that plan hasn't been approved yet. Mr. Searles said the plan has been approved, but the 65 decibel line hasn't been drawn. Ms. Dooley asked if any consideration has been given to spending some of the money available on soundproofing. Mr. Searles said he doesn't believe so. He offered to find out the history of that issue. Mr. Smith asked how long the study will take. Mr. Searles said 6 months or more would be an estimate. Mr. Hafter stressed the need for public participation in that study. Mr. Smith said it feels like the city is "in a box." There is a street in question that will either be included or excluded, and the Council feels it is being "bad" to someone, whatever it does. He asked if the study can be done in 3 months. Mr. Searles said they want a "good sound study." He added that there have been no offers and no appraisals. Mr. Boucher said some people think they have offers. Mr. Searles said there is nothing on paper with a number. Mr. Kirk said the people on his street don't want to be held up by a study. They want to move and get on with their lives. Another neighbor said 6-9 months is not acceptable. Ms. Marrier said her mother lives on White Street, and the noise level has increased greatly. She asked if a copy of the draft report is available to citizens. Mr. Hafter said he has can provide one. Mr. Smith added that the City Council didn't know that document existed until 3 days ago. Ms. Hinds stressed that the Planning Department needs something they can read. The print is very small and barely readable. Mr. Smith asked how to push this forward to help residents but also be fair to others in the 65 decibel range. Ms. Dooley asked if it is a "first come first serve" basis or some other criteria. Mr. Searles said they haven't had to worry about that in the past. Mr. Kirk noted that everyone on Picard Circle wants to move. Mr. Magowan cited a serious communication issue with the Council hearing of different conversations. He said he drove to Picard Circle and sat there for a while. He felt it is not a livable place. He stressed that the Council gets pressure from the taxpayers, and there needs to be a logical expansion of the program. He added that the "humanized boundary" either is or isn't a boundary. Mr. Searles agreed that once the program is approved, any reference to anything outside that boundary should be removed. Mr. Magowan said if a home isn't livable, it isn't "affordable." The program will give people a chance to live somewhere livable. He felt the Council needs to be more active with the Airport on issues such as that and would like the Airport to say, "Pay attention to this." Mr. Smith said the question for him is whether there will be determination that any home in the 65 decibel range is not livable. That could mean 100-150 homes. He said the Airport can't buy 150 homes tomorrow, so how do you create a "queuing" line. Mr. Boucher added the concern with a homeowner who may just fall outside the line and asks, "What about us?" Mr. Kirk noted that Bob McEwing said that the "humanized boundary" was just randomly drawn. Mr. Hafter added that one problem the city has to address is that the 65 decibel line is just a line and doesn't take into account neighborhoods. Mr. Smith said that's a bigger issue to him than affordable housing...that and what happens to property once the houses are bought. Mr. McDonald asked if there has been a survey of the number of people who want to sell. Mr. Searles said the Airport knows who has come to them. Mr. Hafter noted there have been people from as far out as Myers Court. Ms. Rody asked who would want to buy a house in that area once the report is published. She felt there will be no buyers but the Airport. Mr. Audette stressed the need for everyone to have the facts clear. He noted that people get worked up when there are comments on both sides that aren't clear. Mr. Kay noted that the City of Burlington has an ordinance that for every house that is torn down, one has to be built. He asked if South Burlington can do that. Mr. Hafter said if you required an affordable house to be built to replace an affordable house, it would slow the purchase process down. Ms. Hinds suggested the City Council and Airport work on a short-term plan for Picard Circle in order to help the Airport get the report done. Mr. Magowan said that would be fine if there aren't other people out there who think they should be first. Ms. Hinds asked if there could also be a short-term plan to include some fencing and landscaping to prevent further problems when houses come down. Both the City and Airport agreed to sit down and work on a plan within the next 30 days. 5. Report from Consultant on Proposed Police Station Site Feasibility and Concept Design: Mr. Hafter introduced the consultants who were hired by the City to do a site study on property owned by the city and to so a site concept. The presentation was given to the Police Facility Committee, which thought it was excellent. Ms. Arnold reviewed the process for the study. She noted that in January borings were done to locate ledge. This helped to decide where to site the building. They also looked at utilities and did a traffic study. Mr. Nedde referred to an ortho photo and indicated the Calkins property and other land owned by the city. He showed an area of exposed ledge and indicated that they found ledge from 2 feet to 13 feet. Some of the utilities would require removal of ledge as will some of the building. Mr. Nedde said the next phase will quantify that ledge amount. No permit would be required to disturb the Class 3 wetland. The traffic study considered queuing lanes for cars and found that the proposed curb cuts are outside of the queuing limit. Mr. Nedde showed the location of curb cuts on several alternative plans and indicated the preferred location. An option to push the building to the east was considered, but it was felt that would begin to encroach on the residential neighborhood. The site layout would include 36 parking spaces in front of the building and 78 in the rear (including an impound lot). There would be a 20″ water main in front of the project. There is already an electrical transformer on the north side of the project and an existing sewer manhole to connect to. The project could use the stormwater facility at the Cairns area which is sized to accommodate the additional flows. The police facility would utilize approximately 6 acres of the 100-acre parcel. In general, the study found the parcel very feasible for the Police Station. Mr. Hafter asked if using city-owned land would be enough of a cost savings to make the project cost feasible. Mr. Nedde noted there are utility and stormwater facilities at no cost on this property which wouldn't exist on another property. A proposed building concept was then presented. There is a grading from lower to higher which would ″minimize the amount of cut and fill needed. The front of the building could be at the low portion with the rear of the building 6 feet higher. The building would be about half the size of one of the hockey rinks and just about as high. The building would include a public area (conference room, etc.) and would become more secure as you move from front to back, with the prisoners' area in the rear. The layout for departments, rooms and furniture indicates that it will all fit within the 28,000 sq. ft. An attempt would be made to make the building look as "residential" as possible by use of a variety of materials. Several elevations were shown to indicate this. The next phase of the study will include more work on one of the elevations to be sure all the spaces are where the Police need them to be. Mr. O'Rourke noted that the Committee recommends building in conservation mitigation by conserving some areas of other City owned property. Mr. Nedde said the limit of disturbance is less than 4 acres. Committee members noted that the results of the study were more favorable than they had hoped for. Mr. Bresee stressed the need to show the public what the site looks like today and what it would look like if the proposed facility were built. Mr. Audette said that the way the building has been sited blends in with the rest of what is there. He was very encouraged to see it coming out so well. Ms. Dooley asked why there is so much parking. A representative of the Police said there are 18 Police vehicles today, but they also have public use, training, etc. Mr. Bresee stressed the need to size the building for 15 years out. Committee members stressed that there is no much more being recommended than what is needed today, and no "fat" left to cut. A straw vote indicated that 4 of the 5 Councilors favored pursuing this site. Ms. Dooley was opposed. Mr. Kay asked if there was excess capacity that could house City offices. Mr. Hafter said no, or just possibly one or 2 offices. The proposal to use the Calkin site is planned to go on the September ballot. Council members thanked the Committee for its continuing hard work. 6. Consideration of First Reading of Amendment to Sign Ordinance re: Regulations on Signs in Residential Zoning Districts; Schedule public hearing for same: Ms. Hinds said that overall the Sign Ordinance is working very well. One issue that has arisen concerns signage for Rice High School and Timberland Medical Center, both of which are located in residential districts. Ms. Hinds felt the Ordinance re signs in residential districts shouldn't be "messed with," but recommended providing an allowance for educational and medical office signage. Under this allowance, a free standing sign would be allowed for an accredited school in the R-4 district, up to 30 sq. ft. At Timberlane, which is a unique facility with many entrances, a master signage plan is proposed to include an additional free-standing sign at each curb cut. One of these would be 40 sq. ft. There could be a Directory Sign at each entrance. Ms. Hinds noted that there would not be a greater area of signage, just a greater number of signs. Ms. Hinds noted the sunset date for non-conforming signs is June, 2009. She said that free-standing signs are the worst of all and suggested making an immediate sunset date for those. Mr. O'Rourke noted he got an inquiry from the Children's School on Patchen Road which has the same signage problem. Ms. Hinds suggested including licensed preschools in the proposed change. Mr. Magowan moved to waive the first reading and set a public hearing for 5 May 2008. Ms. Dooley seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 7. Consideration of Computerization of Land Records: Ms. Kinville said that following a great deal of research she is recommending that ACS install a turnkey system. There would be no cost to taxpayers. There would be a charge of $4.60 per document with an additional $1.50 possible addition for indexing. Mr. O'Rourke suggested checking the status of "uniform mortgage recording" in the Legislature. Ms. Kinville noted that ACS has volunteered to go back to 1968 and put everything into the system and tie it into the index system. The cost would be $200,000. This would make it possible for everything to be done on the web. Mr. Boucher moved to authorize the City Manager to sign the contract with ACS as determined by Mr. Hafter and the City Clerk. Mr. O'Rourke seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 8. Consideration of Approval of Warning for 20 May 2008 City Meeting: Mr. Magowan moved to approve the Warning as presented. Mr. O'Rourke seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 9. Request for Contribution to Vermont Convention Bureau to Support 2009-10 USA National Triathlon Championship Festival: Members were in agreement to provide a contribution. 10. Consideration for a $580,000 grant anticipation loan for stormwater mitigation project: Mr. Hafter said the loan is at 2.77% for the first year. Mr. Magowan moved to approve the loan and related documents for stormwater mitigation as presented. Mr. O'Rourke seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 11. Minutes of 17 March 2008: Mr. O'Rourke moved to approve the Minutes of 17 March with typographical change as noted. Mr. Boucher seconded. Motion passed 4-0 with Mr. Magowan abstaining. 12. Sign Disbursement Orders: Disbursement Orders were signed. 13. Consideration of Entertainment Application From: Windjammer Restaurant, 1076 Williston Road, live entertainment; Sheraton, live entertainment: Mr. Magowan moved to approve the two entertainment applications as presented. Ms. Dooley seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 14. Liquor Control Board: Mr. Magowan moved that the Council adjourn and reconvene as Liquor Control Board. Ms. Dooley seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Liquor license renewals were presented for the following: Mr. Hafter said all applications are complete. Mr. Boucher moved to approve the liquor license applications as presented. Mr. O'Rourke seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Mr. Hafter noted that the City Clerk had asked the State what information they wanted on the renewal application. They indicated that only violations in the last year should be indicated. When the Clerk told them that is not what the form said, they indication they will be changing the form next year. As there was no further business to come before the Council, the meeting was adjourned at 10:20 p.m. Clerk Published by ClerkBase ©2019 by Clerkbase. No Claim to Original Government Works. CITY COUNCIL 7 APRIL 2008 PAGE 9 Mr. O’Rourke moved to approve the Minutes of 17 March with typographical change as noted. Mr. Boucher seconded. Motion passed 4-0 with Mr. Magowan abstaining. 12. Sign Disbursement Orders: Disbursement Orders were signed. 13. Consideration of Entertainment Application From: Windjammer Restaurant, 1076 Williston Road, live entertainment; Sheraton, live entertainment: Mr. Magowan moved to approve the two entertainment applications as presented. Ms. Dooley seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 14. Liquor Control Board: Mr. Magowan moved that the Council adjourn and reconvene as Liquor Control Board. Ms. Dooley seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Liquor license renewals were presented for the following: Shaws Beer & Wine Pulcinella’s Marco’s Pizza Sheraton Vermont Corp. Airport Grocery Vermont Soup Company Chittenden Cider Mill Champlain Farms Exxon-801 Williston Rd Champlain Farms-1800 Williston Rd Hannaford Food & Drug – Hannaford Dr. Jolley #107 Pizza Putt Maplefields GU Markets Spillane’s Service Center Simon’s Store & Deli Tommy’s City Grill UNO’s Short Stop #104 Applebee’s Champlain School Apartments Partnership Klingers Doubletree Hotel Moe’s Southwest Grill M.T. Bellies Pauline’s Café & Restaurant Champlain Farms-1118 Williston Rd. Champlain Farms-1041 Shelburne Rd. Ground Round Restaurant Kinney Drug #55 Magic Hat Shelburne Road Variety Vermont National Country Club USAVE Beverage Waterfront Catering Group Windjammer Restaurant CITY COUNCIL 7 APRIL 2008 PAGE 10 Silver Palace Shortstop #105 Jiffy Mart One Flight Up Rotisserie Hooters Mr. Hafter said all applications are complete. Mr. Boucher moved to approve the liquor license applications as presented. Mr. O’Rourke seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Mr. Hafter noted that the City Clerk had asked the State what information they wanted on the renewal application. They indicated that only violations in the last year should be indicated. When the Clerk told them that is not what the form said, they indication they will be changing the form next year. As there was no further business to come before the Council, the meeting was adjourned at 10:20 p.m. __________________________ Clerk