Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - City Council - 06/06/2011CITY COUNCIL 6 JUNE 2011 The South Burlington City Council held a regular meeting on Monday, 6 June 2011, at 6:00 pm. 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; K. Murphy, City Staff; Chief D. Brent, Fire Department; J Rabidoux, Director of Public Works; D. Young, School District; P. Conner, Director of Planning & Zoning; M. Beaudin, R. Kay, T. Duff, R. McDonald, Planning Commission; M. Behr, B. Stuono, Development Review Board; S. Stitzel, A. Lafferty, City Attorneys; S. Dopp, M. Young, S. Loyer, S. Merrick, D. Schapiro, M. Esposito, J. Smith, B. Bull, S. Chapman, J. Kochman, T. Ashe, D. Seff, L. Charash, jE. Milizia, M. McBride, D. Wilber, W. Gilbert, P. Stabler, B. Cimonetti, M. Mittag, M. Scollins 1. Executive Session: Ms. Emery moved the Council meet in executive session to discuss personnel, contract negotiations and litigation. Ms. Greco seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Regular Session: 1. Agenda Review: Agenda Item #18 was moved to follow Agenda item #9, and other agenda items were renumbered accordingly. 2. Comments & Questions from the Audience not related to Agenda items: Mr. Donahue questioned the paving of city streets and said he is spending a great deal of money on front end alignments. Mr. Miller noted there is a report on the website from the Public Works Director as to how roads are selected for paving. Mr. Donahue said he felt a bond was needed to address this. 3. Announcements and City Manager’s Report: Ms. Emery: Will be attending the Smart Streets part 2 meeting. Mr. Engels: Attended the grand opening of the Solar Ray on Spear St. Other members indicated they had as well. Ms. Dooley: Attended the sustainability retreat and also a meeting with the Chair of the Airport Commission. Mr. Miller: Also attended the sustainability retreat. There will be a meeting of the Steering Committee on 15 June, 6 p.m., in the Middle School. Orientation for new City Council members will be held on 15 June. The Council will be asked to allow an extension of the Magic Hat contract for pre-treating solids. The contract for the Quint fire engine was executed to day. The contract for the new ambulance will be executed by the end of the week. Both vehicles came in at budget. Chief Brent credited members of the Ambulance Committee for their great job. 4. Warn Final Public Hearing concerning $600,000 Implementation Grant frm the State of Vermont under the Vermont Community Development Program. Hearing to obtain the views of citizens on community development, to furnish information concerning the range of community development activities that have been undertaken under this program, and to give affected citizens the opportunity to examine a statement of theuse of these funds. Determine who from Council will attend: Mr. Ashe, Development Project Manager, Cathedral Square Corporation, noted that the city team uncovered a loose handling of this throughout the state. The project involved 28 units at 412 Farrell Street (elder and special needs housing) of affordable housing in perpetuity. Federal rules require 2 public hearings, one before the project and one after. The hearing requires a 15-day notice. Mr. Engels moved to authorize the City Manager’s office to warn and hold the required final public hearing related to the City’s Vermont Community Development Program award which supported the development of 28 affordable congregate housing units at 412 Farrell Street. The public hearing shall be held on Thursday, 23 June, at 11 a.m. Mr. Knapp seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 5. Presentation from Parents and Adults Celebrating Children & Teens (PACT) concerning budget and activities: Mr. Loyer and Ms. Merrick reviewed the history of PACT and noted that their mission is to listen to the voices of children, teens and adults. Ms. Merrick noted that they try to do something at least once a month (potluck dinners, etc.) to provide opportunities to gather and to learn. Events are teen hosted. There is also an annual community awards dinner. Mr. Loyer noted that they work closely with Tom Hubbard, who is on their Board. They have a pro bono attorney and accountant. They carry their own General Liability and Professional Liability insurances which are paid for from donations. Mr. Loyer drew attention to their financial statement. He explained that their funds support programs throughout the year. Ms. Merrick said that their vision for the future includes continuing to partnership with local groups (Recreation Dept, Police, Fire, businesses, etc.) and to reach out to stake holders. They are working hard to make PACT a model. They are also putting together governing documents to insure sustainability. Ms. Merrick noted that they appreciate the cooperation of the South Burlington School District. Mr. Miller thanked PACT for providing the potluck meals at the city’s annual Town Meeting. 6. Consider approval of Homeland Security Training Grant: Chief Brent said that 2 of the city’s Firefighters have been selected to be trainers for the State: Todd Poole, and Chris Corbin. The State will cover all costs of training and personnel. Training has now been completed. Chief Brent noted that the two trainers helped with efforts following the flood devastation in the central part of the State. Mr. Young asked if the city has to pay them more. Chief Brent said the State does that. Mr. Miller noted this results in a savings to the city because people now don’t have to be sent out to be trained. Mr. Knapp moved to authorize the Homeland Security Training Grant as presented. Ms. Emery seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 7. Consider Approval of Public Safety Interoperable Communications Grant Program: Chief Brent reviewed the history of the program. He noted that 38 of the Department’s pagers are not upgradable. The cost to replace them is $14,780.00 of which the state pays 80% and the city 20% ($2,956). The city’s share is under what was budgeted. The deadline to replace the pagers is 13 January 2012. Mr. Knapp moved to approve the Public Safety Interoperable Communications Grant Program as presented. Ms. Emery seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 8. Consider Approval of Resolution to Allow City Manager to Negotiate Lease of Office Space at the City Public Works Building: Mr. Rabidoux explained that the room was going to have a specific use but was never finished for that use. It is 600-700 sq. ft. The State is doing a project this summer and has asked to lease the space. The anticipation is that it will be used by the Army Corps of Engineers in the future. Mr. Rabidoux said there is no inconvenience to the city as the space has a separate entrance capability and can be totally isolated. Mr. Knapp suggested an outside limit on this arrangement to be sure it is working. Mr. Knapp then moved to approve the Resolution to allow the City Manager to negotiate a lease of office space at the Public Works Building as written and to add to the resolution that it will expire in 5 years at which time it will need to be reviewed. Ms. Emery seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 9. Hear Presentation on Champlain Solid Waste District FY2012 Budget. Consider Approval of Budget: Mr. Stabler noted that the they have gone to a less expensive health plan. The budget includes a 1.75% cost of living increase plus merit increases as earned. CSWD revenues are derived from 3 sources: tipping fees, recycling, and drop-off center fees. There are no assessments to the city. Mr. Stabler said this is a very conservative budget with no hidden charges. He added that their record shows they meet their budgets. The new facility is under construction in Williston. It will open on 1 July 2011 and will reduce the cost of operations. Mr. Knapp moved to approve the FY 12 Champlain Solid Waste District FY2012 budget as presented. Ms. Emery seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 10. Continue Discussion on Interim Zoning, and if options are determined, decide when/how Interim By-Law Resolution language will be finalized and approved and possibly set date for public hearing concerning Interim Zoning Resolution: A poll of the audience showed 21 in favor of interim zoning (plus 4 e-mails in support) and one opposed. 4 members of the audience had no bias and were there to learn. Council members were then invited to make opening comments: Ms. Greco said she heard from people when she was campaigning that South Burlington is heading in the wrong direction. People value natural beauty and don’t expect noise and air pollution. She felt it is time to survey the public and to study the impacts of development. After that, the city can craft a vision and rewrite the Comprehensive Plan. Ms. Dooley said she feels the population growth constitutes an emergency. She also expressed concern with the purchase of “affordable” family homes by the Airport. PUD provisions give the DRB authority to grant waivers and include policies which accelerate residential growth. She was also concerned that congregate housing units count as zero. Given the options provided, Ms. Dooley said she preferred open space option #3. With regard to the west of Chamberlin area, she favored possibly conversion of commercial to residential use at R-4 with no more than 4 units per structure. She also supported PUD options 9 & 10 but not in all residential districts. She would nullify the definition of congregate housing. Ms. Emery said that in addition to population growth, she was concerned with the work load on the Planning Commission and DRB. She didn’t feel changes could happen quickly and felt the status quo should be protected while issues are worked on. She agreed that Chamberlin School needs families that live near the school in order to remain viable. She felt that PUD’s should be studied to see how to provide transitions to neighborhoods. She also wanted to look at open space strategies outside of the Southeast Quadrant (SEQ). Mr. Knapp said he wasn’t yet convinced of an emergency situation. He was also not sure there are resources available to study the issues or even that this is the best use of what resources are available. Regarding the area west of Chamberlin, he expressed confusion since noise from the Airport would still be an issue there. He felt PUD’s are important for the construction and preservation of affordable housing and that the city should identify sources of housing/funding for affordable housing. Mr. Engels said when he was elected he knew nothing about zoning. He said that in driving around the city he was surprised by the density in the SEQ and the large homes on small lots. He felt the city has to look at PUD’s. He felt TDR’s were well­intentioned but have resulted in enormous density. He also said he’d like to see an Open Space plan. Mr. Conner then reviewed the history of the city’s Open Space Strategy. Regarding PUD’s, Mr. Conner noted that in some circumstances PUD’s are an option. He cited the City Center, I-O, Airport and SEQ districts in which all subdivision of land must be PUD’s. There are allowances for increased density. Certain uses in certain other districts must be part or a PUD as well. There is also a requirement that development of any land area of more than 10 acres to be a PUD. Regarding non-conformities, Mr. Conner noted that if buildings were built to the standards at the time, they are allowed to continue as is indefinitely. Under state law, you can restrict how those uses can be expanded, rebuilt, etc. Regarding the area west of Chamberlin, Mr. Conner felt there are innumerable options. Mr. Stitzel then provided information on interim zoning from a legal perspective. He noted that what currently exists in South Burlington is the product of over 60 years of regulations and studies. He explained that courts use a couple of standards: A regulation has to be reasonably related to a purpose, and a landowner has to be allowed a reasonable use of his/her land. In addition, the more a regulation addresses an aesthetic issue, the less likely it is to get court support. The court begins with what is currently existing on a piece of land. They also look at “investment backed expectation.” People should be able to do something with the property they buy. The court would question whether a proposed restriction too greatly reduces the investment expectation of the property owner. Mr. Stitzel said the Council needs to focus on: who is the expert witness who will give compelling testimony as to the reasons for reducing density. He noted that while Vermont has the reputation of being a “green state,” the current Supreme Court is not living up to that reputation. Mr. Stitzel said the Council also needs to consider what justifies using interim zoning as opposed to the normal zoning process. There must be a reasonable belief that the status quo would be so altered that what the city wants can’t be done at the outset. The major question is whether the pace of development is South Burlington is such that it compromises the ability to put in amendments via the normal zoning process. Mr. Stitzel noted that previous interim zoning was institute to prevent a flood of applications prior to implementation of new zoning regulations. The Planning Commission was beyond the study stage when those interim zoning regulations were instituted. Mr. Knapp asked how a rezoned area west of Chamberlin would be accessed. Mr. Conner said that at present there are no large arteries to access the area. There would have to be 2 accesses across the brook. In addressing PUD’s, Mr. Stitzel said they are an option in land use planning and have been allowed for many years. Their use goes back to the question of what is a reasonable allowance of use to a landowner. Mr. Stitzel noted that 3 years is as far as you can go with interim zoning. During that time, the city would have to discuss what to do with PUD’s, what problems they have caused. The city would have to rely on experts to say what occurred that is problematic and then say what to do to correct that problem. Mr. Stitzel said that the ability to grant waivers is a specific that could be limited during interim zoning. Density bonuses are as well. What would also be taken into consideration by the courts is what the justifications were for creating PUD’s and TDR’s. Mr .Stitzel cited the problem the city had when regulations were not clear enough and when there was an unconstitutional “taking” Mr. Gilbert cited problems in the SEQ with TDR’s. He felt it was an emergency situation because of growth in the past 10 years. He felt that the expectation for use of land also applies to those who live in an area. He felt neighborhood aspects haven’t been taken into consideration. Mr. Kochman said he favored curtailing PUD’s on an interim basis. He felt they have been abused with respect to height waivers. Mr. Mittage felt there was an issue of storm water and that more development means more runoff. Mr. Scollins felt the city has gone awry with respect to the proposed Farrell development. Mr. Young felt there were many more issues in the city for the City Council to deal with. He questioned whether interim zoning would artificially inflate housing prices. He noted that with the lack of workforce housing, it seems you have to pony up so much money just to live here. He also felt interim zoning could discourage jobs. He questioned whether changing the rules on TDR’s was a “bait and switch” situation. Mr. Donahue felt TDR’s have allowed densities to go much higher and that interim zoning is a good idea. Mr. Stuono said he felt a 2­year interim zoning period was a “blink of the eye” in land use issues. Ms. McBride said she hoped “complete streets” would be included in the thinking. She felt that climate change also needs to be considered. Ms. Dopp felt that TDR’s didn’t need to be thrown out but that receiving areas could be studied. She questioned whether TDR’s should be sold from lands that are not developable or sold to lands that are not developable. Mr. Seff said he felt the current TDR regulations are unconstitutional. Ms. Dooley asked Mr. Stitzel what he needed from the City Council. Mr. Stitzel said he had heard some specific issues that could be molded into an Interim Zoning by­law: open space protections and prohibiting PUD’s in residential and mixed use districts. What he heard was that waivers and density bonuses may be the problem. He felt that the authority to grant waivers and to grant bonuses could be suspended during the study. He stressed that an action must address a specific problem. Regarding TDR’s, Mr. Stitzel said there would have to be a very comprehensive, technical density review to determine the appropriate density in each neighborhood. Mr. Knapp questioned whether getting 20 or so houses west of Chamberlin is solving the problem of the Airport buying up 160 homes. Ms. Emery suggested a possible higher density. She felt these could be feeder homes to the school. Mr. Stitzel noted that if the Council says there should be no development on open space, and a big chunk of the area west of Chamberlin is open space, there is a conflict. Addressing open space would effectively put a freeze on that property. Ms. Dooley said she didn’t feel the open space aspect should include the SEQ. She felt that areas has been studied and dealt with. The need is to address open space in the rest of the city. Mr. Duff noted that maps don’t reflect what was done after the open space studies. Ms. Dooley expressed her concern with congregate housing being considered as zero. Mr. Conner noted this includes developments behind Shaws, Lime Kiln Rd., Quarry Hill and possibly along Allen Road. It is treated as a non-residential use and is not subject to residential impact fees. Mr. Stitzel said they could look at limiting that under interim zoning. Mr. Knapp said he has been told that as soon as the city accepts federal money, it assumes an obligation to promote affordable housing. Mr. Kay suggested a possible study of whether congregate housing has an undue impact on fire and other services. Ms. Greco asked if there could be an interim zoning resolution at this meeting. Mr. Stitzel said there cannot. There needs to be a warned public hearing with 15 days notice. The earliest date for that would be 3 weeks from tonight. Mr. Miller noted that doesn’t work for notice in The Other Paper. Ms. Greco said she wanted to introduce a resolution that would start the clock at this meeting. Mr. Stitzel said it would not cut off vested rights. He stressed there is nothing the City Council can do at this meeting to start the clock. It requires notice in the newspaper of a public hearing and of the availability of the text. Ms. Greco said that what she would like is for 2 years there would be no new PUD’s, subdivisions, or waivers in the city. Members then worked to craft a motion that would reflect a majority of their thinking. Ms. Emery then moved to direct the City Attorney to draft a resolution to establish a period of interim zoning to: protect open space based on an open space strategy everywhere but in the SEQ, prohibit PUD’s in all residential and mixed use districts, prohibit PUD and all other waivers from the Land Development Regulations in all districts. Mr. Engels seconded. Mr. Stitzel stressed the need to come up with the money for the studies that this would entail. Mr. Miller added that this a a very broad set of restrictions. He noted that the 2012 budget was put together based on revenues from projected development that would increase the Grand List. The cost for required studies is also not budgeted. He asked where the money for all of this will come from. He noted that there could be 6-digit costs for each of the studies. There is also the process of managing a number of studies in a Planning Office that is already reduced by 25% of its staff. He said he would expect the City Council to address these concerns specifically at the public hearing. Mr. Conner noted that there are also development review fees that have been counted on and which were recently substantially increased. Mr. Conner also noted that any development that is approved also pays for a zoning permit, and impact fees for roads, fire and recreation. Ms. Emery moved to direct City Attorney Steve Stitzel to draft a resolution addressing open space protection based on the Open Space Strategy dated 2002, excluding the South East Quadrant, to limit land development so no additional dwelling units or construction of commercial properties or the expansion of existing properties beyond 20% of the existing foot print (all land lying within low, medium, and high priority outside the South East Quadrant); prohibit PUD’s in all residential and mixed use districts; prohibit waivers everywhere; prohibit all waivers in the LDR’s in all districts throughout the City. Mr. Engels seconded. Motion passed 4­1 with Mr. Knapp opposing. Ms. Greco then moved to set a public hearing for July 18 with notice as soon as feasible. Ms. Emery seconded. Motion passed 4-1 with Mr. Knapp opposing. 11. Consider approval of Library FY12 Resource Sharing Supplemental Grant: Mr. Knapp moved to approve the Library grant as presented. Ms. Emery seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 12. Possibly Authorize City Manager to Sign 10-year Agreement with Healthy Living Natural Food regarding the care and cost of the Urban Art Project Park: Ms. Greco moved to approve the agreement with Healthy Living Natural Food as presented. Ms. Emery seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 13. Consider Motion for Approval of FY2010 and FY2011 Agreements between the City and the Burlington Airport regarding Stormwater Fee and General Services Fee: Mr. Miller noted this was supposed to be approved each year but hasn’t been. The Airport wasn’t billed for 2010 and 2011. Stormwater fees have been paid, but the General Service Fee has not. Ms. Emery moved that the City of South Burlington continue in effect for fiscal years 2010 and 2011 its agreement with the City of Burlington regarding services provided to Burlington International Airport, which agreement was first entered into for FY2001 and thereafter renewed from year to year for FT 2007, FY2008 and FY2009, with the amounts being due and payable to the City of South Burlington as follows: Changes for FY2010: Total charges of $261,105: a) Stormwater management fee of $160,000, has been fully paid; b) Fees for other services, $101,105 to be billed so as to be paid in as timely a manner as possible Changes for FY2011. Total charges of $264,138. a) Stormwater management fee, $160,000 will be included in the Airport’s quarterly wastewater bills; b) Fees for other services, $104,138 to be billed so as to be paid in as timely a manner as reasonably possible. Mr. Knapp seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 14. Update on monthly financials and estimate of FY2011 closeout: Mr. Rusten said the 2010 deficit is over $450,000. It was originally predicted that there would be over a $300,000 deficit for FY2011. The prediction now is for a surplus of about $100,00. This could, however, change as new things are discovered. There are also big holes in a number of funds that have to be addressed. Mr. Miller noted these gains have been achieved with a lot of pain and with the cooperation of bargaining units. Mr. Rusten noted that a number of notes have been paid off which will reduce the 2012 budget by about $30,000. Water Pollution Control may come in with a slight surplus. There is still a deficit in stormwater. 15. Discuss Draft Attendance Guidelines for all Appointees to City Boards, Committees, and Commissions, and make decisions on process to seek current appointees feedback on draft guidelines: The draft will be sent to committees for their comments and will be posted on the website. 16. Approve a City Council schedule for interviewing candidates for City Boards, Committees and Commissions. Consider whether to establish a City Council Energy Committee replacing the current City Manager appointed Energy Committee: It was noted that interviews will be hold at a special meeting on 13 June, 7 p.m. and at the regular Council meeting on 20 June. Members agreed that the Energy Committee should be appointed by the City Council. 17. Consider Approval of Agreement with RHR Smith & Co. To perform the FY2011 City Audit: Ms. Emery moved to authorize the City Manager to sign the agreement with RHR Smith. Ms. Greco seconded. Mr. Miller noted the fee would be $18,000. In the vote that followed, the motion was approved unanimously. 18. Consider Authorizing the City to Obligate $350,000 from a no-match grant toward the City Center Project: Mr. Miller noted the city was contacted regarding the status of the project authorized several years ago. Any evidence the city can provide that the project is moving forward is a benefit to the city. The recommendation is that the city obligate the remaining $350,000 from the first grant it received. The money doesn’t have to be spent, but the action will buy time to complete the study authorized by the City Council. Ms. Emery moved to authorize the City Manager to sign the agreement as presented. Mr. Knapp seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 19. Read and Approve Minutes of 16 May 2011: It was noted that the motion at the top of p. 5 was seconded by Mr. Knapp and approved unanimously. Ms. Emery moved to approve the Minutes of 16 May 2011 as amended above. Mr. Engels seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 20. Sign Disbursement Orders: Disbursement Orders were signed. 21. Consider Entertainment License for The Rock of Greater Burlington: Ms. Emery moved to approve the Entertainment License for The Rock as presented. Mr. Knapp seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 22. Reconvene as Liquor Control Board to Consider Liquor and Tobacco Licenses for: a) Leisure World and b) Vermont National Country Club: Ms. Emery moved to adjourn as City Council and reconvene as Liquor Control Board. Mr. Knapp seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Ms. Emery moved to approve the Liquor and Tobacco Licenses for Leisure World and Vermont National Country Club as presented. Mr. Knapp seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Mr. Engels said he was told by a teenager that there are places in town known to kids where cigarettes will be sold to minors. Mr. Miller said to let him know about these and they will be reported to the Police. Ms. Emery moved to adjourn as Liquor Control Board and reconvene as City Council. Mr. Engels seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 23. Other Business: As there was no other business to come before the Council, the meeting was adjourned at 11:45 p.m. _______________________________ Clerk Published by ClerkBase ©2019 by Clerkbase. No Claim to Original Government Works.