Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - City Council - 10/02/2008CITY COUNCIL/TOWN MEETING 2 OCTOBER 2008 The South Burlington City Council held a special City Council/Town Meeting on Thursday, 2 October 2008, at 7:00 p.m., in the Cafeteria of the Tuttle Middle School, Dorset Street. City Council Members Present: C. Smith, Chair; S. Dooley, S. Magowan, M. Boucher, M. Emery Also Present: C. Hafter, City Manager; D. Gravelin, Assistant City Manager; S. Stitzel, City Attorney; D. Kinville, City Clerk; T. Whipple, Police Chief, and other members of the Police Department; D. Brent, Fire Chief; B. Hoar, Public Works Department; Rep. A. Pugh, Rep. H. Head, Rep. A. Audette, C. Tabor, A. Pilari, A. Shepardson, E. Graham, D. O'Rourke, D. Lovering, B. & J. Britt, E. Cremoli, P. Mruan, L. Ravin, J. Favreau, K. Schwarzenberger, R. Pockop, M. Cypes, D. Senecal-Albrecht, H. Smith, J. Miner, A. Clift, L. Hersay, D. & J. Lebreque, S. Saferstein, B. White, M. Beaudin, T. Barritt, S. Boyd, M. Wallace, Z. Sachs, C. Forde, D. Bedard, P. Jenner, N. Pollack, K. Boucher, B. Welmer, K. & B. Wallace, J. Van Dresche, B. Young, R. Perkett, C. Byers, C. Welch, W. Byrne, B. Zuccarenco, B. Coleman, D. Sachs, T. Woodard, P. Meyer, A. Johnson, R. Sunderajin, L. Piper, C. Hignite, P. Opferman, R. Brent, J. Jewett, K. Andersen, T. Duff, A. Griffort, C. Boerger, W. Stuarno, L. Levite, C. Pfenning, L. Butler, K. Boozan, B. Gardner, J. Jane, P. Dustra, S. Weber, C. Sheffield, M. Turner, T. Regis, M. Favreau, J. Dattilio, A. & P. Bakeman, D. Matteson, M. Lyons, R. Reno, G. Silverstein, S. Quest, C. Weimer, B. Smith, W. Dunn, M. Ostley, L. Mital-Skiff, F. Neuer, D. Holmes, P. Williams, C. Hall, P. Mahoney, E. N. Bell, C. Arambellan, J. Kochman, L. & K. Marston, W. Degroot, E. Smith, S. Borden, M. Tory, M. Esty, D. Heinberg, D. Seff, G. Smith, S. Baker, B. Thorpe, M. D'Dea, S. Wolfe, S. Clark, D. & G. Haffarty, J. Schneider, L. Nadeau, T. Audette, S. Bradeen, J. & B. Fox, H. Rivers, G. Barry, B. Rippa, S. Hindley, L. Bresee, D. & C. Lith, J-S. Challot, P. Steinman, L. Chenette, D. Young, A. Crocker, N. Simson, L. Yankowki, L. Rovner, C. Graves, J. Heins, P. Lavallee, F. Johnston, D. Read, J. Zaetz, S. & M. Paige, J. Hannigan, L. Kochman, W. Davidson, A. & J. Chaulot, M. & S. Barovick, K. & M. Donahue, E. Farrell, D. Leban, M. Rivers, P. & J. Barry, K. Davis, J. Kearns, E. Milizia, J. Shepard, S. Dopp, C. Hatch, D. & J. Aitker, B. & L. DiPaolo, A. Price, D. Fisette, J. Stewart, B. & G. Maglaris, D. Dubie, S. Milizia, other citizens David Young, Assistant Superintendent of Schools served as Moderator for the meeting. He noted that this meeting is one step leading toward a vote on 4 November concerning use of the Calkins property for a new Police facility. He then introduced members of the City Council, Police Chief Trevor Whipple, and Director of Planning and Zoning Paul Conner. 1. History and Proposal: Chris Smith, City Council Chair: Mr. Smith reviewed the history of the present Police Facility in the building it shares with City offices. The building was built in 1980 and was downsized as an economy measure so that it was then barely the right size for the existing 25 full time employees. In 2006, the voters were presented with a plan to demolish the existing City Hall and most of the Police facility and construct a new Police Station and City Hall. This proposal was defeated by the voters with 65% voting against the proposal. The City Council then convened a new committee which was instructed to start "from scratch" and to consider such things as long-range needs, building, site, cost factors, and communication with the public. Committee Site Criteria: Size: 2.5-4 acres (the smaller the site, the more pressure for structured parking) Location: flexible, co-location with other city facilities a "plus," attention to limited impact on natural landscape, geographically central location a convenience; City Center not desirable from a Police standpoint. Cost: land preferably owned by the City (purchasing land would add significant cost). The Committee looked at 4 sites in detail: City Center, commercial property, current City Hall/Police Station site, Calkins property. They reviewed the pros and cons of each, as follows: Calkins Site: Mr. Smith showed the location of the property on an aerial slide. He noted that the land was purchased by the City in 1992 after voter approval of $1,250,000 purchase price. No restrictions were placed on the use of the property by the seller. The revenue bond requires voter approval to use the property for a Police facility since the intent was to use the land for passive recreation. The total property is 103 acres. The Police facility would use a 6- acre piece of the property. Mr. Smith also showed a slide of the 12-acre piece of property the City would preserve for open space if the vote to use the Calkins property passes. [Click here for pros and cons] Mr. Smith read passages from the Comprehensive Plan and noted that the plan is a "fluid" document that changes as life/factors change. [Click here for Capital Plan] Opponents concluded "that the choice asks you to decide whether certain outcomes for example preserving the integrity of the Comprehensive Plan and keeping our police facility within the urban care are important enough to dig a bit deeper into your pocketbook to enable them to happen." The Police Facility Committee concluded that the Calkins site is the most cost-effective and timely option that result in an effective, responsible building and location. This plan is the most effective use of taxpayers' money resulting in a modern dedicated Police facility. Mr. Smith noted that the City Council endorsed the Committee's recommendation by a vote of 4-1. All members agree with the need for this facility. 2. City Growth/Southeast Quadrant Planning: Paul Conner, Director of Planning & Zoning: Mr. Conner noted that the Comprehensive Plan is a visionary document, not regulatory. It attempts to contemplate all of the City's needs (e.g., business, recreation, housing, transportation, etc.). Mr. Conner cited development in the City in the past 20 years due to its central location in Chittenden County. The population in 2007 was approximately 17,500. Mr. Conner noted that the City has actively acquired land for conservation and open space and encourages the clustering of homes to protect open areas. The Southeast Quadrant regulations provides incentives for land conservation. The maximum density in the SEQ is 1.2 units per acre. This would result in a maximum of 3700 homes of which 1300 currently exist and 450 more are in the planning/permit stage. This means that 1950 more homes can be permitted in the future. Mr. Conner showed a slide indicating lands where development is discouraged. Units allowed in those areas can be transferred to more desired developable location via a process called "transfer of development rights." 3. Ten-Year Strategic Capital Plan: Mr. Hafter explained that a sub-committee of the Police Facility Committee looked at the City's 10-year Capital Plan. He noted that long-term borrowing can be used only for capital improvements and these can represent no more than 15% of the annual operating budget. Currently, capital borrowing in South Burlington is at 4.29% of the annual operating budget. Other potential future projects that would fall into the Capital Plan include: The total for all of these projects would be approximately $42,000,000. Mr. Hafter then outlined those strategies that could be employed for the Police Facility and City Hall: Plan A: locate Police facility at Calkins site with full renovation of City Hall; co-locate School Administrative offices at City hall. Cost estimate: $12,500,000. Long-term: build a new City Hall in City Center and re-use old City Hall as Library/Senior Center. Plan B: locate Police facility at Calkins site; build a new City Hall in City Center and repair existing City Hall (4-8 years). Reuse old City Hall for Library/Senior Center. Cost estimate: $17,800,000. Plan C: locate new Police Station on current site. Temporarily relocate Police and City hall during construction. Build a new City Hall in City Center. Cost estimate: $19,300,000. 4. Question and Answer Session: Ms. Quest: Why has the Police Facility been sited so far back instead of at the corner? Chief Whipple: When the committee looked at the site, the corner had a large amount of ledge there that would have to be blasted out. The proposed site has a minimum of blasting required. Ms. Yankowski: If voters decide on the Calkins site, is there a guarantee that the City will not infringe further into the natural area? Mr. Smith: Any other plans for the remaining site would have to be approved by the voters of the City. Mr. Britt: Why not swap land further down the road. Mr. Hafter: The City owns this land as it was given to the city as mitigation. Mr. Neuer: 25 years doesn't seem like a long time to plan for a building's use, why not 50 or 100 years? Mr. Smith: There is always a balance with size/cost/long-term implications. No one knows what will happen in the future. Changes in Police operations in the past 10 years have been staggering and unpredicted. The proposed site is more flexible than the existing site. Mr. Rivers: How much money has been spent on this already? Chief Whipple: The committee asked the City Council for $30,000 to get a conceptual design and to see if the land was buildable. Mr. Rivers: If the building gets built, will someone in the City be in charge to maintain it? Mr. Smith: With changes in State funding, buildings have not been maintained as well as possible. The city cannot let facilities get to the point where they are now. State laws do not allow communities to set aside funds for future needs. Communities are now trying to figure out how to do this. Ms. Crocker: How can we not think this is a "slippery slope" for taking over open spaces? Has the City thought of putting open space land into a land trust to preserve it? Ms. Dooley: Some concepts which would accomplish this have been discussed. Mr. Smith: Any proposed change in use of open space land always has to be approved by the voters. Ms. Schneider: Suggested people tour the land to see what would be lost. Are there "tours" of the land? Mr. Hafter: Anyone is welcome to walk the property. Audience member: With emergency vehicles coming and going, where would children play? Chief Whipple: The same situation exists with the current facility with 2 schools directly across the street and learning drivers going in an out. Almost no unaccompanied children have been noted on Swift Street. Audience member: Why is a plan that wasn't good enough to be on the ballot in 2006 good enough now? Mr. Smith: The first recommendation of the 2002-3 committee was the Calkins site. This was rejected by the City Council. When the vote to use the current site failed in 2006, the Council had many discussions as to why it failed. When the new Police Facility Committee began work, they were told to look at everything. Timing is very important, and it still isn't known of the current site can work. The additional cost may be more like $10,000,000- 15,000,000. Ms. Dooley: Cost has to be thought of in other ways. The beauty of the land is part of the identity of the City. Mr. Donahue: Voted against the 2006 plan. This plan will get 40,000 sq. ft. of space for less than the cost of the 2006 plan. Audience Member: Will there be an "exit survey" since it is the Calkins site or nothing option. Mr. Hafter: Would need to ask the right questions and pay people to do it, but it is a good idea. Ms. Weber: Is there any assurance the City Center property owner will sell the City property for a City Hall? Mr. Smith: No. They don't have to sell anything. Audience Member: Is it possible there would be a legal challenge to a vote because it doesn't fit the Comprehensive Plan? What could that cost? Mr. Stitzel: If the vote passes, there will be a further vote for specifics of the building. There is also a need to amend the Land Development Regulations for this type of facility. Both City and Act 250 permits will be required. Both could be appealed, and this could be expensive and cause a delay. The Comprehensive Plan is flexible and there would be no need to revise that. It is also subject to amendment by the City Council. Mr. Smith: further explained the City Council endorsement. There was a first vote to thank the committee. This passed unanimously. The vote to endorse the recommendation passed 4-1. Ms. Shepardson: Felt the proposal would devalue property in the area which people bought because it was next to conserved land. Mr. Barritt: Why not move City Hall and the Recreation Department to the Calkins site and leave the Police Station where it is. Mr. Smith: This would move City Hall further from the City Center. Donna Leban: Why 6-7 acres? Burlington has less than 1 acre and they say they need 2. Chief Whipple: The building and parking take up only 3 acres. Additional land squares the property with the road. ¾ of the first story is dug into the land. Ms. Ravin: Questioned the "mitigation" land which was already used for "mitigation." Mr. Stitzel: In the permitting process, Act 250 looks at the ability to conserve land in one location for use of land in another location. The City could swap restrictions on to another piece of land if that happened. Mr. Stitzel continued: it is not a perpetual restriction and is only in conjunction with a specific development. That land could be released from the restrictions at the wish of the landowner and could be altered any time in the future. Mr. Albrecht: What is the percentage of time the Police spend on commercial and residential property calls? Chief Whipple: The split is about 60%-40%, with commercial the heavier. The local options tax allows the city to have people who shop in the city to help pay for city services. Audience Member: How much of South Burlington is open space compared to developable land and how much is usable? Mr. Hafter: Will get those figures and post them on the website. Ms. Levite: Did the Committee look at putting City Hall on any other City-owned property? Mr. Bradeen: The Committee's focus was on the Police Station. Mr. Boyd: Has there been a traffic study of impact on the intersection: Mr. Hafter: A study of the whole Dorset Street corridor was just done, and there are plans to improve that intersection. There would have to be a traffic study done as part of the permitting process for a Police Facility, but to do that the size of the building would have to be known. Mr. Wallace: How would traffic be kept down in the area of a beautiful park with many uses, especially with the impact of the 12B interchange? Mr. Hafter: Models that have been run on Exit 12B show it would take a large amount of traffic off local roads. Mr. Smith concluded by saying that the problem with the City Center is that timing is not known. Something has to be done now for the Police Department. They deserve a new building now. Mr. Young thanked community members for their input. As there was no further business to come before the Council, the meeting was adjourned at 9:00 p.m. Clerk Published by ClerkBase ©2019 by Clerkbase. No Claim to Original Government Works. CITY COUNCIL 2 OCTOBER 2008 PAGE 2 In 2006, the voters were presented with a plan to demolish the existing City Hall and most of the Police facility and construct a new Police Station and City Hall. This proposal was defeated by the voters with 65% voting against the proposal. The City Council then convened a new committee which was instructed to start “from scratch” and to consider such things as long-range needs, building, site, cost factors, and communication with the public. Committee Site Criteria: Size: 2.5-4 acres (the smaller the site, the more pressure for structured parking) Location: flexible, co-location with other city facilities a “plus,” attention to limited impact on natural landscape, geographically central location a convenience; City Center not desirable from a Police standpoint Cost: land preferably owned by the City (purchasing land would add significant cost). The Committee looked at 4 sites in detail: City Center, commercial property, current City Hall/Police Station site, Calkins property. They reviewed the pros and cons of each, as follows: City Center: ¾ Pros: Would not require relocation of Police and City Hall during construction Emotionally appealing ¾ Negatives: Current owner of property will not sell the land for a Police facility Millions of dollars in additional cost Not preferable site for Police operations Commercial lands: ¾ Pros: Hope for an “ideal” site that someone would donate ¾ Cons: Expensive Would remove land from tax revenue CITY COUNCIL/TOWN MEETING 2 OCTOBER 2008 PAGE 3 K-Mart site not for sale City Center site not for sale 575 Dorset Street (current site): ¾ Pros: Centrally located No cost to purchase No loss to Grand List Utilities on site Across from Middle & High Schools Adjacent to I-89 and Kennedy Drive Public accustomed to going there On bus route Co-location with Fire Department ¾ Cons: New stormwater regulations may make site impossible to permit Building footprint would significantly increase parking or land acquisition costs Soil conditions limit height potential Underground utilities conflict with building footprint Reworking existing building not practical for Police functions Disruption of operations during construction Additional costs for relocation of City Hall Eliminates adaptive uses of City Hall City Hall needs to be dealt with sooner May have to condemn 6 pieces of property for parking Calkins Site: Mr. Smith showed the location of the property on an aerial slide. He noted that the land was purchased by the City in 1992 after voter approval of $1,250,000 purchase price. No restrictions were placed on the use of the property by the seller. The revenue bond requires voter approval to use the property for a Police facility since the intent was to use the land for passive recreation. The total property is 103 acres. The Police facility would use a 6-acre piece of the property. Mr. Smith also showed a slide of the 12-acre piece of property the City would preserve for open space if the vote to use the Calkins property passes. CITY COUNCIL/TOWN MEETING 2 OCTOBER 2008 PAGE 4 ¾ Pros: Centrally located .6 miles from current facility Identifiable and accessible Available now Sufficient size for building and parking No cost to purchase No loss of tax revenue No temporary relocation costs No disruption in services Reduced development costs: stormwater pond available and utilities on site Improved community resources: meeting room, parking for trails Most square footage at least costs Would allow School administrative offices to move from High School to City Hall Adjacent to youth and family activities No conflicts with landowners Majority of parcels in City are within a 2-mile radius ¾ Cons: Impact on natural area Only office building in the area Slightly further from City Hall No direct access to City Hall Not on bus route Concern this would set a precedent to use more of Calkins property Will require amendments to Land Development Regulations Important area of wildlife habitat Opponents concluded “that the choice asks you to decide whether certain outcomes for example preserving the integrity of the Comprehensive Plan and keeping our police facility within the urban care are important enough to dig a bit deeper into your pocketbook to enable them to happen.” The Police Facility Committee concluded that the Calkins site is the most cost-effective and timely option that result in an effective, responsible building and location. This plan CITY COUNCIL/TOWN MEETING 2 OCTOBER 2008 PAGE 5 is the most effective use of taxpayers’ money resulting in a modern dedicated Police facility. Mr. Smith noted that the City Council endorsed the Committee’s recommendation by a vote of 4-1. All members agree with the need for this facility. 2. City Growth/Southeast Quadrant Planning: Paul Conner, Director of Planning & Zoning: Mr. Conner noted that the Comprehensive Plan is a visionary document, not regulatory. It attempts to contemplate all of the City’s needs (e.g., business, recreation, housing, transportation, etc.). Mr. Conner cited development in the City in the past 20 years due to its central location in Chittenden County. The population in 2007 was approximately 17,500. Mr. Conner noted that the City has actively acquired land for conservation and open space and encourages the clustering of homes to protect open areas. The Southeast Quadrant regulations provides incentives for land conservation. The maximum density in the SEQ is 1.2 units per acre. This would result in a maximum of 3700 homes of which 1300 currently exist and 450 more are in the planning/permit stage. This means that 1950 more homes can be permitted in the future. Mr. Conner showed a slide indicating lands where development is discouraged. Units allowed in those areas can be transferred to more desired developable location via a process called “transfer of development rights.” 3. Ten-Year Strategic Capital Plan: Mr. Hafter explained that a sub-committee of the Police Facility Committee looked at the City’s 10-year Capital Plan. He noted that long-term borrowing can be used only for capital improvements and these can represent no more than 15% of the annual operating budget. Currently, capital borrowing in South Burlington is at 4.29% of the annual operating budget. Other potential future projects that would fall into the Capital Plan include: Police Station (2010 start) Estimated cost: $9,000,000 City Hall Renovations (2010 start) 3,500,000 Library Renovations/New (2012 start) 7,000,000 I-89/Hinesburg Rd. Interchange (2013) 400,000 (city share) CITY COUNCIL/TOWN MEETING 2 October 2008 PAGE 6 Airport Drive Extension (2014) 250,000 (city share) Williston Rd. Widening (2017) 445,000 ( city share) Hinesburg Rd. Construction (2017) 800,000 (city share) Community Center (2017) 7,000,000 Airport Parkway Wastewater Plant Upgrade 14,000,000 (paid from user fees) The total for all of these projects would be approximately $42,000,000. Mr. Hafter then outlined those strategies that could be employed for the Police Facility and City Hall: Plan A: locate Police facility at Calkins site with full renovation of City Hall; co-locate School Administrative offices at City hall. Cost estimate: $12,500,000. Long-term: build a new City Hall in City Center and re-use old City Hall as Library/Senior Center. Plan B: locate Police facility at Calkins site; build a new City Hall in City Center and repair existing City Hall (4-8 years). Reuse old City Hall for Library/Senior Center. Cost estimate: $17,800,000. Plan C: locate new Police Station on current site. Temporarily relocate Police and City hall during construction. Build a new City Hall in City Center. Cost estimate: $19,300,000. 4. Question and Answer Session: Ms. Quest: Why has the Police Facility been sited so far back instead of at the corner? Chief Whipple: When the committee looked at the site, the corner had a large amount of ledge there that would have to be blasted out. The proposed site has a minimum of blasting required. Ms. Yankowski: If voters decide on the Calkins site, is there a guarantee that the City will not infringe further into the natural area? Mr. Smith: Any other plans for the remaining site would have to be approved by the voters of the City. Mr. Britt: Why not swap land further down the road. Mr. Hafter: The City owns this land as it was given to the city as mitigation.