Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - City Council - 12/19/2011CITY COUNCIL 19 DECEMBER 2011 The South Burlington City Council held a regular meeting on Monday, 19 December 2011, at 7:00 p.m., in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset St. Councilors Present: S. Dooley, Chair; J. Knapp, M. Emery, P. Engels, R. Greco Also Present: S. Miller, City Manager; R. Rusten, Assistant City Manager; D. Kinville, City Clerk; P. Conner, Director of Planning & Zoning; P. Taylor, City Charter Committee; Chief T. Whipple, Police Department; Planning Commission Members: C. Shaw, T. Duff, B. McDonald, T. Riehle; DRB Members: T. Barritt, B Stuono; A. Lafferty, City Attorney; M. Young, S. Dopp, G. Farrell, M. Beaudin, B. Gilbert, B. Bull, M. Metallo, J. DeSarno, J. Parker Dickerson, B. Hall, R. Schulte, Ms. Dunn, M. Simoneau, B. Melizia, M. Mittag, D. Burton, B. Gardner, B. Smith, F. Murray, C. Gardner, L. Murphy, K. Donahue, J. Larkin, M. Scollins, P. O’Brien, R. Deslauriers, J. Ilick, J. Wilkins, P. Soto 1. Executive Session: Ms. Emery moved that the Council meet in executive session to discuss personnel, contract negotiations and litigation. Ms. Greco seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Regular Session: 1. Other Business & Announcements: Ms. Dooley explained that Councilor Jim Knapp would be arriving late as he had to attend the Burlington City Council meeting on behalf of a client. 1a. Agenda Review: No changes were proposed. 2. Comments & Questions from the Audience not related to agenda items: a. Ms. Kinville addressed the Council regarding a Charter change she is proposing for the March ballot and asked the Council to refer it to the City Charter Committee for their consideration. The change would add the following language to the Charter as Section 13-2005: The City Clerk shall have all the powers and duties established by general state law, including the power to appoint, supervise and remove all assistant town clerks. Ms. Kinville also noted concern with accessibility of the Clerk’s office after regular business hours. She cited the need to know who has access. She asked that locks be changed and that the City Clerk know who has keys. She further expressed concern that she has been put off on this request several times. b) Mr. Soto expressed concern with the direction of the current City Council. He felt it has become confrontational with increased amounts of litigation. He asked how much has been spent on such litigation and said he wanted to see taxpayers’ money spent on things that are more appropriate for the city. Mr. Miller noted that last year’s audit is on the website, and the audit for this year will be there when it is received. It will contain the information Mr. Soto requested. 3. Announcements and City Manager’s Report: Members reported on meetings and events they had attended. Mr. Miller: Advised Council members of the upcoming GBIC Legislative Breakfast series on 9 January, 13 February, and 19 March, 7:30 a.m. Noted the ongoing discussions between South Burlington and the City of Burlington regarding issues of taxes, storm water, and fees for services. He read into the record a letter written to Burlington Mayor Kiss regarding the disagreements between the 2 cities on these issues. Mr. Miller noted that Burlington had paid for services in 2007, 2008 and 2009. He also noted that FY2013 fees will be based on the normal process for calculating such fees. 4. Public Hearing and Second Reading of Draft Land Development Regulations approve by the Planning Commission: Ms. Greco moved to open the public hearing. Ms. Emery seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Ms. Emery moved to waive the second reading. Ms. Greco seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Mr. Conner briefly reviewed the proposed amendments as follows: 1. Change in bonding requirements to follow state law 2. Requirement for development plans to be submitted in digital form as well as paper 3. Heights of buildings in certain districts 4. Requires applicants to notify all abutters 5. Use definitions to conform to state law 6. Technical and typographical corrections 7. Establishes a transit overlay district 8. Amends non-conforming use and conditional use standards to conform to state law 9. Establishes the maximum number of units in a building in R-1, R-2, QCP and SEQ districts 10. Establishes perimeter setbacks for PUDs. The use changes include making places of worship a permitted rather than a conditional use (to conform to state law), allowing multi-family housing in the C-1 Auto District, allowing drive­in banks in the C­1 Auto District, allowing “retail warehouse outlet” in the C­1 Auto District, eliminating the category “clinic, medical, dental or optical,” and amending the tables legend. Mr. O’Brien asked if a 2­story building with 10­ceilings would be allowed. Mr. Conner said there could be 2 stories totaling 20 feet and still be within the limit. Mr. Conner noted the amendments would go into effect on 9 January 2012. No further public comment was offered. Ms. Emery moved to close the public hearing. Ms. Greco seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Ms. Emery moved to adopt the changes as presented with the effective date of 9 January 2012 added to Sections 905b and 3.07c. Ms. Greco seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 5. Presentation by Staff and National Gardening Association re: Ongoing Discussions: Mr. Metallo, President of National Gardening, noted that the organization is a 501-C3 non-profit organization. He showed slides of the original plan for the Dorset Street garden/park. He also noted that the mission of the organization is to provide educational materials and resources and to promote home, school and community gardening. Mr. Metallo also reviewed some of the published works of the organization, their activities, and the use of grants to establish gardens across the county. The history of the lease of Dorset Park land to National Gardening began in 2000. Many of the elements of the original lease still exist in the most current lease. Mr. Metallo noted that they have done the “water park” and are making arrangements for other milestones including an education center, an entryway, future community gardens, and other theme gardens. Ms. DeSarno said she has been with the Garden Park since 2000 and fully supports the effort. She noted that a grant received for vegetable gardening resulted in the donation of 550 pounds of food to the Chittenden Food Shelf this year. Ms. DeSarno also noted that private donations played a part in the establishment of the park, including a donation of $100,000 by the Wheeler family to build the 2 pavilions. Ms. Parker­Dickerson then reviewed some of the programs of the organization including programs for seniors, children’s birthday parties, on­site educational programs, youth transitional services, etc. This year they are planning a “Books in Bloom” project and hope to have a cooking class. They are also active in promoting gardens in the city schools. Ms. Emery asked about the relationships with the schools. It was noted that they would like to do more with schools; however, many of the programs take place in the summer when schools are not in session. Ms. Greco asked about parking. Mr. Metallo noted that there is an agreement that when they get to a certain point, additional parking would be made available. He noted it can be dangerous to get in and out of the area, and an alternate access would be good. He added that on a volunteer day, there is no place to park. Ms. Dooley noted the relationship of the park area to the ballot item just passed, especially the conservation easement. Mr. Hall, representing 44 community gardeners expressed concern that their gardens were moved from a very favorable spot to one with vastly inferior soil so that National Gardening could hold their weddings and special events in the previous area. He felt the gardeners have a less than favorable relationship with National Gardening and that the gardeners are getting “the short end of the stick.” He said this is ironic as one of the three “prongs” of NGA’s mission involves “communities gardens.” Mr. Shaw asked if the 7 acres the city is giving up is part of the NGA area. Ms. Dooley said it is not. Ms. Dunn expressed concern with what will happen to the community garden. She said the city put them there, but they are not being represented appropriately. They would like that rectified by the City Council so they can go back to where they were. Ms. Dunn said there is a real fear that the community gardens will be lost. Mr. Simoneau noted that the lease with NGA has 14 years to run. He asked if the city is prepared to honor the terms and conditions of that lease. Ms. Dooley said as long as the current lease is in existence, the city will honor it. She said the city understands that NGA wants some changes to that lease. Mr. Rusten said the city was approached by NGA to change the lease to add additional years. At that time, the city began to look at the lease and its benefit to the city. Ms. Melizia felt it is ironic that NGA wants to push the community gardeners off the site. Mr. Mittag said he has watched the development of the property with dismay and is appalled by the priority given to weddings instead of to community gardens. 6. Consider Resolution to Establish an Interim Zoning By-law and set a public hearing on the Interim By-law for Tuesday, 17 January 2012: Ms. Dooley noted the Council addressed the subject earlier in the year and couldn’t reach a common ground. She cited the enthusiasm for the recent City Center workshops and “form based codes” development. She also noted that consultants are already working to develop those codes. There are also “complete streets” and Shelburne Road studies going on and a Planning Commission committee studying “cottage­type” housing. Ms. Dooley said it was thought that the Council should give the Planning Commission and consultants time to do things right and not have land disappear. Ms. Dooley then read the proposed resolution. She then moved to approve the resolution as read. Ms. Emery seconded. Ms. Emery asked Mr. Conner to go through the proposed exceptions. Mr. Connor stressed that staff has not had a chance to go through this proposal and assess its implications. He then reviewed the exceptions: C. would not apply to a change in use as long as the footprint and square footage don’t change D. would not apply to modification or reconstruction of a commercial or industrial structure as long as there is no change in use or footprint or square footage. Ms. Dooley then read written comments prepared by Councilor Jim Knapp. These include The following: A. Concern with submission the week before Christmas when people’s attention is elsewhere. He felt it should be tabled until after the preparation of the FY13 budget B. Concerned with the impact on fiscal recovery C. Concerned with the apparent lack of faith in the existing planning process and with those who volunteer D. Lack of expertise of the City Council in this area E. There is no emergency situation F. The demand of the time of city employees G. The possibility of “unintended consequences” ( e.g., people will invest in other communities due to uncertainties; pressure for housing will move to other communities and this will result in more people driving through South Burlington to and from those communities). H. The specific criteria in state statute as to the nature of “studies” (e.g., the “cottage housing” study is being done by an ad hoc committee, not a professional consultant) I. there is no possibility of “sustainable agriculture” outside of the Southeast Quadrant and nothing to show there is contiguous land for sustainable agriculture J. unresolved issues: impact on the grand list, possibility of legal actions, exempted areas is unlikely to support affordable housing, question of discriminating against a protected class K. financial impact on those who can’t continue to farm their land L. there is no policy saying the city should be involved in sustainable agriculture M. redevelopment of existing commercial land can’t affect sustainable agriculture Ms. Greco said she fully supports the resolution. She felt that regarding timing, there is never a good time, and the city should take time out until it hears from the consultants doing the form based codes study. She also felt this should be the basis on which the budget is prepared. She also felt a lot has changed since the last interim zoning effort failed. She agreed it will cause more work for staff but felt it is important. Ms. Greco also noted there are 1000 units already approved that can be built. Mr. Conner said that number may be closer to 700. Public comment was then solicited in an alternating pro/con format, when possible: Mr. Gilbert: supported the measure as there are important issues Ms. Gardner: echoed Councilor Knapp’s sentiments. Ms. Dopp: Felt it was good to consider the matter more deeply. Noted her particular bias for wildlife and agriculture. Mr. G. Farrell: Objected to bringing this up during the holiday season. Agreed with Councilor Knapp. Felt the Council doesn’t have experience in this area and should trust the city’s Planning Commission and Development Review Board. Noted that agriculture is less than 3% of the state’s economy and less than 1% of Chittenden County’s. Farms are closing all over Vermont. The state is still 85% forest land, the same as it was 100 years ago. Mr. Mittag: Cited the amount of land used for new development. Mr. Gardner: asked whether this would affect previously approved developments. Ms. Dooley said the Council doesn’t know enough to respond to that. Mr. Conner added there are many different circumstances. Ms. Bull: supported the study of affordable housing. Ms. Burton: South Burlington has a lot to offer people who love nature. There is a need for housing that will not go away. A highly respected attorney and City Councilor says “don’t do this” and she agrees with him. Unidentified audience member: Cited the need for more local resources for food. Mr. Smith: Agrees with Councilor Knapp. Concerned with the uncertainty he is hearing. Mr. Murray: Was disappointed when it didn’t pass last time. Mr. Young: Seems like a rehashing. Thinks the Council is using the “form based codes thing as a spin to cover the whole city.” Mr. Scollins: Need to protect sustainable agriculture. DRB has no guidelines regarding renewable energy. Very few “appropriate” homes available. Mr. Larkin: Echoes Councilor Knapp. Cited an atmosphere of uncertainty. Mr. O’Brien: Terrible timing because of the economy. Ashamed of the Chairwoman for proposing such a bad idea. Mr. Barritt: Need to reflect on all the property in the city and set a course for the future. Mr. McDonald: This issue was not discussed with the Planning Commission. The Council should meet with the Planning Commission to discuss this. He is chair of the ad hoc committee looking at “cottage housing” and said this is not a professional study. He now feels uncomfortable volunteering for this committee because it has been politicized. Mr. Donahue: Think this all came about because of TDRs. Not sure if there is a different way to go about this. Curious as to why the City Council can’t get together with the Planning Commission and DRB. Mr. Shaw: Feels this would have merit for affordable housing and agriculture. Mr. Murphy: Represents a group of land owners. Supports Councilor Knapp’s comments. Felt it was ironic that the Council is proposing interim zoning which takes power away from the Planning Commission in light of the earlier agenda item of amendments to Land Development Regulations. He noted there was no objection to that amendment because they went through the normal process. Felt standards are vague. Question of approved developments not yet built. Asked the chair to recues herself because of her opposition to a development in her “backyard.” Ms. Dooley said the City Attorney has advised her there is no conflict of interest. Mr. Stuono: Cited a recent Planning Commission/DRB joint meeting and challenges of interpretation of regulations. Mr. Ilick: Sees nothing that would merit a full moratorium on development in the city. This is telling people they can’t do business for 2 years. Neither affordable housing nor agriculture merits this action. Ms. Dooley said there are places that now don’t allow for housing. Mr. Ilick said those should be studied and enacted as part of the normal process. Mr. Simoneau: The Council is polarizing the community and has vilified former DRB members. There will always be problems. This action is injurious to the economy of South Burlington and the state. Mr. Deslauriers: This will stop any meaningful development of commercial property. The city should do an economic impact study before doing this. Hundreds of jobs will be lost. Good effects can be achieved without this action. Mr. Duff: Doesn’t understand the scope of this. Studies cited are applicable to only a small area. The proposal is restricting housing. Noted that a few weeks ago the “cottage housing” committee was not deemed worthy of staff time, and now it is being used as a justification for interim zoning. Mr. Wilkins: Previous zoning changes have all been warned and people knew what was coming. He and his neighbors have no problem with how the Southeast Quadrant has grown. The city’s financial problems will be exacerbated by this action and subsequent lawsuits. Go through the regular process. Mr. Knapp arrived at this point in the meeting. He expressed concern with focusing on sustainable agriculture without understanding the cost of agriculture. He cited the expensive nature of land in the city and said that without an economic basis to support agriculture, he didn’t see how sustainable agriculture could return to the city. He did not believe the government should tell people they have to farm their land or have to wait till someone lets them sell it. Mr. Knapp continued by saying interim zoning won’t help interpret regulations. The city should let the Planning Commission and DRB do their job. The City Council has no better expertise to do that. He added that stopping everything for 2 years won’t bring South Burlington affordable housing. It will bring Colchester affordable housing. It will bring Shelburne affordable housing. In addition, the effects will last more than 2 years because people won’t invest in “pre­project” work which can take a year of more. Ms. Greco said it will give the city time to rewrite the Land Development Regulations. She said no developments have come in since the last interim zoning effort has been affordable. Mr. Ilick asked what the Planning Director thinks of this since he’s the paid professional. Mr. Miller responded city staff serves the City Council and staff opinions are irrelevant. In the vote that followed, the motion passed 3-2 with Mr. Knapp and Mr. Engels voting against. 7. Consider Ratification of Submission of the Car Seat Education Grant: Mr. Miller explained that due to a time consideration, the grant was submitted, but if the Council votes against it, the application can be withdrawn. He noted there is no city match required. The grant is for public education regarding car seat safety. Ms. Greco moved to ratify the submission of the car seat education grant. Ms. Emery seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 8. Consider approval of settlement agreement with Mr. John O’Connor: Mr. Miller said this is a separation agreement. He said there are “contentions” of each party that the other party does not agree to. Under the agreement, Mr. O’Connor will resign immediately and will not apply for future employment. The city will pay him $52,000, which is one year’s base salary. Mr. Young asked what that money will come from. Mr. Miller said it will come from the city’s general fund. Ms. Greco moved to approve the separation agreement and to authorize a representative of the city to sign it. Mr. Knapp seconded. Motion passed unanimously. It was noted that the document will be available to the public when fully approved. 9. Consider Approval to forward insurance proceeds to Dorset Park Skating Association and consider waiver of permit fees: Ms. Greco moved to waive permit fees and forward insurance proceeds of $328,838.22 to the Dorset Park Skating Association before the end of the year with the condition that the Dorset Park Skating Association agrees this is a full payment and that they will not come back to the city for additional payment. Mr. Knapp seconded. Mr. Knapp noted that the letter has to be modified since acknowledgment of payment has to come from the organization at a duly held meeting, not from Mr. Cairns. In the vote that followed, the motion passed unanimously. 10. Consider approval of the changes to the 2011 Grand List due to errors or omissions: Mr. Knapp moved to approve the changes to the Grand List per the Assessor’s memorandum of 13 December 2011. Ms. Emery seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 11. Other Business: No issues were raised. 12. Review and approve Minutes of 5 December 2011: Ms. Greco moved to approve the Minutes of the Pre-Town Meeting and regular meeting of 5 December 2011 as written. Mr. Knapp seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 13. Sign Disbursement Orders: Disbursement orders were signed. 14. Executive Session: Ms. Greco moved that the Council meet in executive session to discuss personnel matters and to resume regular session only for the purpose of adjournment. Mr. Knapp seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 15. Regular Session: Council returned to regular session. As there was no further business Mr. Knapp moved for Council adjournment. Ms. Dooley seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Council adjourned. ________________ Clerk Published by ClerkBase ©2019 by Clerkbase. No Claim to Original Government Works.