Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - City Council - 06/07/2010CITY COUNCIL 7 JUNE 2010 The South Burlington City Council held a regular meeting on Monday, 7 June 2010, at 7:00 p.m., in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset St. Members Present: M. Boucher, Chair; S. Dooley, J. Knapp, M. Emery, F. Murray Also Present: D. Gravelin, Acting City Manager; D. Kinville, City Clerk; P. Conner, Director of Planning & Zoning; J. Rabidoux, Public Works Director; Chief D. Brent, Fire Department;G. Edwards, A. Rowe, A. Deforge, B. Penniman, C. Ford, M. Young, P.Nowak, C. Plum, A Clift, C. Richardson, B. Etherton, B. Simindinger, S. Dopp, G. Maille 1. Comments & Questions from the Audience, not related to Agenda items: No issues were raised. 2. Announcements & City Manager‘s Report: Mr. Gravelin: Councilor Knapp’s son, Jon met with him to discuss an internship program thru Champlain College for IT support. There are potential cost savings for the city from using interns. Later this month, there will be a report on Exit 12B from RSG regarding their justification review. This involves testing all the criteria which an exit ramp would have to satisfy. A public meeting is set for Tuesday,September 9, 2010, to present the report The Police Station open house will be held on Saturday, 12 June, with the dedication at 11 a.m. and tours of the building until 3 p.m. Mr. Gravelin will attend the MPO meeting on 16 June. The Police Department has received an award for placing second in a Vermont challenge regarding traffic safety. 3. Public Information Meeting on US2/I-89 Exit 14 Improvements (STP 5200(18)): Mr. Gravelin explained that this is the project that involves the third lane in front of Staples Plaza. The project is ¼ mile long. The $3,000,000 cost will be funded by federal (80%), State (10%) and local (Burlington 5%, South Burlington 5%) shares. Construction is anticipated for spring of 2012. The intention is to coordinate the project with the repaving of Route 2 from Burlington to Pete’s RV. If this is possible, it could represent some cost savings. Mr. Edwards, Project Manager, reviewed the project improvements. The project begins at the “jug handle” and extends eastward to the on/off ramp of I­89. The aim is to alleviate traffic congestions. The new lane will be a “right turn only.” The project will also improve conditions for pedestrians and cyclists. The road will be widened by approximately 16 feet, with property taken from the Sheraton side. There will be a 5-foot green strip and a replacement sidewalk. On the south side, the green strip will be extended out 11 feet to accommodate landscaping and some lighting. The traffic signal at the Sheraton/Staples intersection will be replaced. The project also includes 5-foot wide bike lanes. Street lighting will be improved with new LED fixtures interspersed with more decorative fixtures similar to what exists now in Burlington. There will be pads for bus shelters at the intersection. The existing overhead signs will be replaced. Mr. Edwards said they have been working with the Sheraton to get screening and buffering. This will require replacing the retaining wall and relocating larger, more valuable, trees. There will be storm water treatment for the project. Existing drainage goes to Centennial Brook. This will continue, but water will be treated first. Mr. Rabidoux added that the project will pick up the bike path from Burlington and will tie into the South Burlington bike path. Mr. Simindinger said he felt the project is poorly designed. He showed an area where skateboarders would now be going into the road. He felt extending the median is bad because of ambulance traffic. It will also inhibit the ability of people to turn right on red. Mr. Edwards explained that an alternate plan was rejected because it would put a bike lane between an exclusive lane for the properties and the right turn lane. Mr. Rabidoux noted that the widening is on land donated by the Sheraton, and they are comfortable with giving up 16 feet. He added that the EMS people will have an opportunity to review the plan. Mr. Young asked if the alternate Staples exit would remain. Mr. Rabidoux said it will. Mr. Penniman, representing UVM and the Sheraton, said they had always thought the widening would have to happen on the Staples side. There is less impact with the plan, and it allows major trees to remain. If the road were any wider, those trees would have to go. Mr. Edwards noted that the project will reduce the instances of accidents because of people merging from the right lane. Mr. Penniman also noted that traffic at the “jug handle” backs up at 5 p.m. This project will help alleviate that situation by a predicted 40%. The proposed geometry matches the 3 lanes coming out of Burlington. Mr. Rabidoux noted that the project does not require an EIS permit or its own Act 250 permit. Ms. Emery asked about the possibility of changing the location of the overhead signs so they don’t block the view of the mountains. Mr. Rabidoux said that the width of the road wouldn’t provide enough clarity if signs were on the side of the road. 4. Update on Burlington International Airport: Ms. Emery presented the results of research she had done regarding noise issues and abatement at airport of similar size (e.g., Columbus, Ohio and Madison, Wisconsin) to Burlington International Airport. In Columbus, aircraft can take off from a different runway at certain times of day, resulting in less noise to residences. There are nighttime curfews for maintenance of aircraft. Residential and school insulation has been provided as well as noise abatement walls. In Madison, there is a voluntary noise abatement policy with a great level of dialogue between the airport and community. The airport also purchased land around the airport long ago in an effort to avoid the noise problem. Ms. Emery reviewed some findings from a presentation given in Florida in October, 2009 regarding airport noise issues. This included methods to address noise outside the 65 DNL (e.g., continuous descent, noise abatement, etc.). These methods should be cost effective, and should confirm that there are noise concerns beyond the 65 DNL contour. Ms. Emery also reviewed means of abating ground noise including berms (25 feet and higher), blast deflectors, ground run-up enclosures used in areas of aircraft maintenance, and sound barriers created from “retired tires.” At the airport in Albany, some of these measures were funded by the FAA. Ms. Emery then presented a proposed resolution calling for an RFP for a noise engineering firm to perform an independent noise study to include: towing of planes for early morning departures, noise abatement devices, upgrading airfield standards from Stage 2 to Stage 3, restricting use of auxiliary power units in exchange for alternate sources of ground power, and determining noise abatement flight tracts for aircraft. Ms. Emery also presented a draft of a letter to the Burlington City Council regarding clarification of concerns. Mr. Murray expressed concern with this approach. He felt it was appropriate to work with the Airport Commission and staff before going to independent counsel. He also felt communication with the Burlington City Council arouses concern as they would ask what the Airport people had to say. Ms. Emery said she didn’t feel this approach was contentious or hostile. Mr. Murray felt it could become contentious. He felt that before there is “Council to Council” communication, they South Burlington should work upward through the staff. He felt the Airport staff was competent and concerned. Mr. Murray said he respected the work Ms. Emery did, but his concern was with procedure. He felt issues should be raised by city staff with Airport staff. He added that it may become necessary in the future to hire a consultant, but he felt the Airport has resources that taxpayers don’t, and the Airport should pay the cost of a consultant. Mr. Murray added that the cost for a consultant is not in the city’s budget. Ms. Emery said she felt it would make sense to combine noise measurements (which will start on 1 September) with a noise study. She felt everyone could work as a team to provide a positive solution. Ms. Dooley said she felt that neighbors and Ms. Emery have played a great leadership role, but she could see signs of this proposal having an adverse impact on the Airport. She shared Mr. Murray’s view that another approach is needed. She was concerned that there are no budgeted funds for a consultant, and noted that it cost companies money to submit proposals. Ms. Dooley said she was conflicted about the letter to the Burlington City Council. She agreed with the need to work with Airport staff, but she noted that the Airport Commission is entirely advisory and members of the Commission have articulated comments regarding neighbors’ concerns that have not been very positive. She felt the real power would be in forming a true partnership with the Airport, but she was not sure of the path to get to that. She suggested the possibility of a letter outlining concerns and asking the Burlington City Council to designate a liaison in this process. Mr. Knapp felt Ms. Emery’s proposal was premature. He felt things have moved farther ahead than where they have been in the past. He was concerned with asking a consultant to put together an RFP when there is no money available. He encouraged members to wait to see the outcome of the September study. Mr. Murray felt there is an urgency to move forward more quickly than in the past. He suggested the possibility of having a Councilor as a co-representative to the Airport Commission and to ask that city concerns be on the agenda for every Commission meeting. Mr. Maille reviewed the history of the noise abatement issue. He noted that when the Airport put in its noise compatibility program in 2008 it was based on 2006 data, which is now 4 yeas old. He noted that the Airport has experienced considerable growth since that data, and that new data would be significantly different from what was submitted to the FAA in 2008. Mr. Maille also noted that the major method of “mitigation” in the compatibility program was always property acquisition. There were no noise mitigation devices proposed, and any mention of such devices by the community was rejected. Mr. Maille said he agreed with the need to work with the Airport and with the City of Burlington, but he felt there has to be a new study done, and people have to be convinced that what is going on now is not reflected in the 2008 submission. If that is not done, the Airport won’t enter into a new cycle. He felt that if the Airport could be convinced to submit a new report, it might be possible to get them to include other mitigation potential, which could be funded by the FAA. Mr. Maille suggested that from an urgency standpoint, the city entertain a letter to the Burlington City Council and engage with the Airport to get a new NEM-NCP study. The Airport would have to make a case for each of the proposed mitigation devices. This is not a short process, but Mr. Maille felt everything is in place; it is only a matter of generating the study. Mr. Knapp asked if the F­35’s will generate that study. Mr. Maille said their data will be based on the current existing study. Mr. Worthen read an e-mail to the Airport staff from Ms. Emery and also noted a headline in The Other Paper indicating that the Airport and community are to move forward. He felt that meeting with city staff are the way to get things done. He directed any questions regarding funds to the appropriate expert at the Airport. Mr. Worthen then responded to specific noise abatement methods raised by Ms. Emery. He noted that there are no Stage 2 aircraft operating at the Airport. The one existing Stage 2 aircraft has been modified with a “hush kit.” Every aircraft that operates at the Airport, with the exception of one, plugs into the jet way. There are no ground power units used except for one Continental aircraft which is powered up as far away as possible. Mr. Worthen encouraged the Council to work with staff until they can say, “You said you would do this and you didn’t.” Airport people have said they will set up “instant e­mail” capability as communication is now very strong. Mr. Worthen acknowledged that the Airport Commission is “advisory,” but he said they also have a “strong arm,” and nothing is rubber stamped. They are the liaison to the City of Burlington Finance Board, and communication with management staff is the way to get things done. Mr. Worthen said the proposed resolution is not needed at this time. He said there is an Airport staff meeting tomorrow, and this will be at the top of his agenda. Ms. Emery suggested the Airport have a copy of the resolution and cross off things that are done and provide updates on what needs to be done. She said she was happy to have this as a “working document.” Mr. Worthen noted that a complete Airport orientation has already been scheduled with new City Manager Sandy Miller. Mr. Maille asked if the Airport is committed to doing the September study. Mr. Worthen said they are, providing the F­16’s are back then. He added that they will find the funding for the study. Mr. Boucher said there needs to be continued communication that timing is critical. Ms. Nowak said she has an issue with Ms. Emery’s Front Porch Forum item that provides no data or sources. She said that when she sat on the Environmental Board there was never any information on children’s stress levels or test scores resulting from Airport noise. Ms. Emery said they are all federal studies. 5. Discuss Capital Planning: 5-10 year infrastructure; 575 Dorset Street: Mr. Boucher said that what the city calls a “capital plan” really isn’t. What it does not address is what it costs to maintain what the city already has. He felt there needs to be a process for what drops off the capital plan when something like the need for an ambulance comes up. Mr. Murray agreed. He said the Council also has to address the vault in the City Clerk’s office and Library needs. Mr. Boucher said the School District has a 20-year facilities maintenance plan, which includes everything down to dealers, estimated costs, etc. Ms. Dooley said she would like to see all of that in the context of a strategic plan. Mr. Rabidoux suggested a Capital Planning Committee which would give an annual report and would be able to shift gears in mid-year if the need arose. He said that staff fully supports this notion. Chief Brent agreed, but he noted that when staff does get on board and then gets the rug pulled out from under them, it is hard. Mr. Young said it is his impression that the city is living beyond its means and is spending money on things it can’t take care of. Mr. Knapp said the question is what to do. What services need to be provided? What can the city afford to pay for them? Ms. Emery said the city must also be an attractive community to live in. Staff was charged to develop a policy. 6. Consider Authorizing City Treasurer to Issue Credit Cards to Select Employees: Ms. Kinville said the company the city will be using needs something in writing or in the Minutes to say that this is authorized. There would be no “outrageous amounts” involved. Mr. Murray moved to approve the proposed letter with the addition of the words “solely to transact city business” on the second line, and the words “no addition” to replace “any addition” on the last line, and to authorize the Council Chair to sign the letter. Ms. Dooley seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 7. First Reading of Proposed Revisions to the City fire Ordinance; Schedule Public Hearing of Same: Chief Brent said some ordinances in the city are very old, and there are now devices people buy that are not legal. Mr. Murray said if there is no problem, they shouldn’t try to fix it. Chief Brent said it could save the Fire Department a lot of responses. Ms. Dooley asked what adjoining communities do. Chief Brent said Burlington allows no open burning. It is not an issue in more rural communities. Ms. Dooley said she would like more specificity about what can be burned. Mr. Conner asked whether the proposed ordinance addresses outdoor boilers. The Chief said it does not. Chief Brent will do some rewriting and bring the proposal back to the Council. 8. Request for approval of tax rate to support the fiscal year ending June 30, 2011 budget, special assessment districts, user fees for sanitary water and sewer, and storm water services; approval of tax due dates and fiscal budgets: Mr. Gravelin said the tax rate is down a little since the Grand List is up a bit. Ms. Emery moved to approve the tax rate to support the fiscal year ending June 30, 2011 budget, special assessment districts, user fees for sanitary water and sewer, and storm water services; and to approve the tax due dates and fiscal budgets. Mr. Knapp seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 9. Consideration of Municipal Bond Financing Documents for the Permanent Financing of 19 Gregory Drive, $7,200,000 Bonds: Mr. Gravelin explained that this will repay the bond anticipation note. Ms. Emery moved to approve the Municipal Bond Financing Document for the permanent financing of 19 Gregory Drive in the amount of $7,200,000.00, as presented. Ms. Dooley seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 10. Consider appointments to Transportation Advisory Committee of the Chittenden County Metropolitan Planning Organization: Mr. Gravelin advised that Sonny Audette is OK with becoming the alternate with Justin Rabidoux as representative. Mr. Murray moved to appoint Justin Rabidoux as representative and Sonny Audette as alternate representative to the Transportation Advisory Committee of the CCMPO. Ms. Emery seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 11. Review and Approve Minutes of 17 May 2010: The spelling of Mr. Maille’s name was corrected. On p. 1, last paragraph, Ms. Emery said she had talked with city staff, not Airport people. Mr. Murray moved to approve the Minutes of 17 May 2010 as amended above. Mr. Knapp seconded. Motion passed 4-0 with Mr. Boucher abstaining. 12. Consider Special Event Permit for Janet Newberry & Christopher Ruggerio, June 26, 2010, 9:45-9:55 p.m.: Ms. Dooley asked why a fire truck and 2 firemen are needed. Chief Brent said the fireworks will be in an area with grassy field. He noted this is also required for National Night Out fireworks. The event holders will pay for the service, and the firefighters will not be those on duty. Mr. Murray moved to approve the Special Event Permit for Janet Newberry & Christopher Ruggerio as presented with conditions. Mr. Knapp seconded. Motion passed 4-0 with Ms. Dooley abstaining. 13. Sign Disbursement Orders: Disbursement Orders were signed. 14. Executive Session: Mr. Murray moved the Council adjourn and reconvene in executive session to discuss litigation and to resume regular session only to take possible action and/or adjourn. Ms. Emery seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 15. Regular Session: On motion by Councilor Murray, seconded by Councilor Dooley and voted, the council agreed to accept the Settlement Agreement between Century Partners and the City of South Burlington and authorized the Acting City Manager to sign. As there was no further business to come before the Council, the meeting was adjourned at 11:20 p.m. ________________________ Clerk Published by ClerkBase ©2019 by Clerkbase. No Claim to Original Government Works.