Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - City Council - 10/01/2012CITY COUNCIL 1 OCTOBER 2012 The South Burlington City Council held a regular meeting on Monday, 1 October 2012, at 5:00 p.m., in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset St. Members Present: R. Greco, Chair; S. Dooley, P. Engels, P. Mackenzie, H. Riehle Also Present: R. Rusten, Deputy City Manager; T. Hubbard, Recreation Director; K. Murray, Planning Department; J. Knapp, M. Simoneau, J. Zaetz, L. Levite, B. Goldberg, J. Larkin, G. Rabideau, J. Olesky, B. Ducevicz, J. Stuart, D. Marshall, K. Donahue Executive Session: Ms. Riehle moved the Council meet in executive session to discuss personnel, contract negotiations and litigation and continue deliberative session on Interim Zoning applications. Mr. Engels seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Following the executive session, Mr. Engels moved to exit executive session. Ms. Dooley seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Regular Session: 1. Agenda Review: Mr. Rusten asked to delete item #4d from the Consent Agenda. 2. Comments & Questions from the Public not related to Agenda items: Mr. Knapp expressed concern that there is nothing on the agenda regarding evaluation of Interim Zoning, which was a requirement of the by-law. The language is a mandatory "shall." He said that in his opinion as a citizen, by failing to do this, the Council calls into question any action relating to Interim Zoning after this time. He added that evaluation was critical to understanding how interim zoning would affect the community. Mr. Knapp reminded the Council that because the Interim Zoning Bylaw was adopted prematurely, before there was a clear picture of the potential impacts, the post adoption evaluation was critical to showing how the Bylaw complied with statute requirements. Mr. Knapp referred to decisions already made under Interim Zoning and said he didn't know how the Council can make decisions based on regulations that don't exist. He noted that 2 of the 5 decisions rendered by the Council have been appealed, and there is a civil lawsuit against the city. These appeals and the lawsuit are based on decisions which appear to ignore or avoid the requirements of the Interim Zoning Bylaw language. He stressed that no statute allows the Council to deny an application for failing to comply with regulations that may be adopted in the future. He quoted the statutes to illustrate his contention. Mr. Knapp also noted that the city added a full time position to coordinate the interim zoning process, and this position was not included in the 2012-2013 city budget. In addition, Mr. Knapp said the Council has only now undertaken studies in 4 areas to justify the interim zoning bylaw. None of these studies has begun, though the first of these is on the agenda tonight for approval of a contract cost of more than $20,000. Mr. Knapp said that the citizens of the city deserve the evaluation promised to them so they can fully understand the consequences of the anti-development regime they have imposed on the city. Mr. Donahue brought evidence of the damage the city's roads have done to the springs of his car. He cited a $434.00 costs to replace the springs. He said the city couldn't tax him enough to equal what it has cost him to fix his cars. He felt the City Council will be negligent not to have a bond to pave city roads. He felt that explaining this to the citizens would gain their support. Mr. Simoneau noted that he is a commercial broker and as such is aware of transactions that might occur with regard to commercial development. He said there is a significant financial services agency soliciting for a space in the area. Mr. Simoneau felt any community would be pleased to have this firm locate in their town. Two or three potential properties are located in South Burlington, but Mr. Simoneau said he can't invite this entity because of interim zoning. He said that sometimes the impacts of an ordinance are clear; in other cases, such as this, they are not so clear. He thought the city could be pursuing the well-intentioned goals of interim zoning without encumbering the public with the negative impacts. Members agreed to address the concerns raised under "Other Business." 3. Announcements and City Manager's Report: Mr. Rusten: Mr. Miller attended the Airport Strategic Planning meeting on Thursday. The committee will be issuing an RFP for a consultant. Using language from the Airport's plan, Mr. Miller said that "striving and thriving" should also apply to the community. The committee agreed with this. Mr. Rusten noted that the city has received an e-mail from the airport appealing stormwater charges. The Correctional Facility Liaison Committee met and is planning to have a tour of the facility. Ms. Dooley: The Affordable Housing Committee met on 13 September and had a presentation from the Vermont Housing Financing Agency. They Committee also discussed the RFP. Their next meeting is 9 October at 2:30 p.m. They hope to have the consultant present, if approved by the Council tonight. Ms. Greco: Attended the Planning Committee and Airport Strategic Planning meeting as well as a seminar on agriculture and food systems. 4. Consent Agenda: A. Approve Minutes for 4, 6, and 18 September b. Sign Disbursements c. Approval to spend unreserved Sewer surplus for Bartlett Bay Plant Disc Filter Repair Project d. Consider approval for City Manager/Designee to sign the Warranty Deed to complete the land swap between the City of South Burlington and Lewis Family Partnership e. Consider approval of the Irrevocable Offer of Dedication between Dorset Links, LLC, and the City of South Burlington f. Consider approval of Resolution to Create a Senior Citizens Organization Reserve Fund g. Approval Entertainment Permits for the following: Magic Hat Art factory - Art Walk - 5 October 2012. Members asked to removed the 4 and 6 September minutes, the disbursements, and the Bartlett Bay disk filter repair from the Consent Agenda as well as item "d" as requested by the Deputy City Manager. Ms. Riehle moved to approve the Consent Agenda minus the items enumerated above. Ms. Dooley seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 5. Update from the Veterans Memorial Committee: Mr. Zaetz reviewed the history. He said they could be breaking ground within 30 days. They have DRB approval and have applied to Act 250. Mr. Zaetz felt the "basics" could be done before winter, with the memorials to be installed in the spring. They are targeting 27 May 2013 (Memorial Day) for the opening dedication. The Committee received over $50,000 in cash donations, many in drop boxes in local businesses. There are several large donations pending the breaking of ground. All the memorials have been ordered. There are also "in kind" donations from local businesses amounting to $35,000. Mr. Zaetz stressed that no taxpayer funds will be used, and there will be no administrative costs. Mr. Zaetz recognized the valuable assistance provided by Tom Hubbard of the Recreation Department. Ms. Levite then explained the "paver" program which will honor specific people who have served. The cost to purchase a small paver is $75; the cost for the larger "square" is $150. This will be placed around each memorial. Anyone can donate a paver for someone, whether that person has lived in South Burlington or not. Ongoing donations will be used for maintenance, flowers, etc. Residents can get information at Sbremembers org. and also through a Recreation Department link. 6. Interim Zoning - Public Hearing: a. Interim Zoning #IZ-12-11, Larkin Realty, amendment to existing PUD, demolish existing two story, 89 unit hotel, replace with four story, 89 unit hotel, 5 Dorset Street: Mr. Rabideau said they plan to demolish the existing hotel and build a new, extended stay hotel with the same number of units. Units would have a sleeping area, kitchen and bath. He showed a photographic representation of the proposal. Mr. Rabideau noted that the adjacent Friendly's property is encumbered by a 100-year lease, so this developer has no control over that property. Mr. Rabideau also noted that when Dorset Street was redone, underground power vaults were placed up and down the street. One is to the front of this property, and that limits the location of the building. There will be a dedicated pedestrian/bike lane and a pedestrian connection to University Mall. There is also a vehicle connection to the Mall. Mr. Rabideau said they are asking for flexibility in terms of form based codes, which generally wants buildings right up to the street. The proposal is compliant with the existing rules, given the power installations up against the street. Mr. Rabideau said this would be a major chain hotel, and they would use the highest quality materials. 30% of the ground floor will be glass, and there will be meeting space, a pool and a gym. He felt this is a great bargain to get rid of an "eyesore." Ms. Greco asked about the possibility of solar. Mr. Rabideau said the applicant has a lot of experience with solar, and there is a very substantial roof. They are willing to integrate that into the project. He did note that credits for solar are expiring at the end of the year. Mr. Larkin said there will be a tremendous savings in energy just by taking down the old building, which is not well insulated and has outdated appliances. Mr. Rabideau said the new building will use energy star appliances. Mr. Engels asked about the water table on that side of the road. Mr. Rabideau said the first 6 inches is decent soil, but below that there is not a huge potential for underground parking. Ms. Mackenzie said this is a nice solution and a needed service in the community. She loved the fact that there is no parking in front and that it incorporates the bike path. She applauded the work and saw a lot of hope in this. Mr. Rabideau also noted the reduction in the width of the curb cut. Ms. Mackenzie moved to continue IZ-12-11 until 22 October with a deliberative session before that date. Ms. Riehle seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 7. Interim Zoning Continued Public Hearings: A. Interim Zoning Application #IZ-12-07, Rye Associates, 52 unit PUD with 20,000 sq. ft. of commercial space in 4 buildings, 1075 Hinesburg Road: Mr. Rabideau provided a brief overview, noting that the property is across from Eye Laser. This would be a commercial and residential development with significant green space and a connection to Fox Run at the south end. Mr. Rabideau noted that the Council had wanted more information on affordability. He said the applicant believes 6 units will be available to people making 80% of median income; an additional 4 units would be available for first time buyers. He felt that 10 of the 52 units being affordable should satisfy a requirement. Regarding ag soils, Mr. Rabideau said TDRs would be a mechanism to preserve agriculture in the Southeast Quadrant in a meaningful way. Open space will make community gardens possible. The applicant would offer as a stipulation that they will find donor sites with as good or better prime ag soils. Mr. Rabideau said it was their opinion that the Council cannot impose conditions with regard to agriculture. Ms. Greco said her only reservation is that she feels this is in the wrong place. You can't walk to anywhere. Mr. Rabideau noted there is a significant employment base in the area with Eye Laser, the new medical building, etc. He felt this is a great chance to say to people who say the process is broken that they are wrong. Ms. Mackenzie said she likes that the applicant has addressed affordable housing. She felt they went beyond what she anticipated. She believes that neither the Council nor the developer can get 100% of what they want and that they can work together. Ms. Dooley asked if there is any process to insure that lower income people would get the affordable units. Mr. Ducevicz said this is challenging. They do not have the right to "income verify" people. In other areas they have been paired with a non-profit, and Champlain Housing has a great interest in doing this project. They need a time-line to apply for grants. Mr. Rabideau said they don't want to see a "project-like" development which is what happens when quotas are given, etc., as in the City of Burlington. Ms. Riehle moved to close the hearing. Ms. Mackenzie seconded. Motion passed unanimously. B. Interim Zoning Application #IZ-12-08, 900 Dorset Street, LLC; construct three unit multi-family dwelling on lot with existing single family dwelling, 900 Dorset Street: Mr. Olesky said they do not have a revised plan, but they have responses from the applicant to some questions raised by the Council. Regarding proposed units and what they would look like, the applicant is thinking of something like the South Village type. All of the units have the potential to be affordable if "aesthetics" don't preclude that. The applicant wanted to know if affordability or aesthetics is the higher priority. Regarding the proposed parking lot, there will be 12 standard parking spaces, 3-4 for use of the community garden, and 8 or 9 to support existing barn activities. Regarding the request to pull the bike path up to join with the path, there is a significant cost impact as there is a 4-6 foot grade change which would require massive earth work and would impact the utilities below ground. They might be able to shift the path a little. The applicant asked for a continuance to get responses to their questions. Ms. Dooley moved to continue IZ-12-08 to 5 November and to have a deliberative session before that date Mr. Engels seconded. Motion passed unanimously. C. Interim Zoning Application #IZ-12-10, John & Kathleen Pennucci, two lot subdivision, 1721 Dorset Street: Mr. Stuart said the 1.7 acre lot would encompass the house, barns, and sheds. There is no development plan for the second lot. Lot 1 contains gardens, which can be expanded. Barns could be used for small scale livestock. Lot 2 is hayed and will stay that way as long as a farmer can be found to do it. Regarding open space, lot 2 is entirely open. Any potential development would be subject to any ordinance in place at that time. The lot would be sold when the subdivision is complete. No issues were raised. Mr. Engels moved to close the hearing. Ms. Mackenzie seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 8. Review Affordable Housing Committee Recommendation Regarding Consultant Selection and Authorize City Manager/Designee to Finalize and Sign Contract with PlaceSense and Front Porch Community Planning for Affordable Housing Study: Ms. Murray reviewed the process. Three proposals were received from the RFP as follows: PlaceSense & Front Porch Community Planning - $22,900 Vanasse Hangel Brustlin, Inc. And Birchline Planning - $54,000 Community Opportunities Group - $59,925 The recommendation is to go with the low bidder. Ms. Mackenzie raised the question of funding for interim zoning. She felt that if money had been set aside, this would make sense. She did not want to encumber money the city doesn't have. She indicated she will vote against this. Mr. Rusten said they have $75,000 in an interim zoning reserve fund and have applied for grants of $40,000 and $25,000. Mr. Knapp asked what was in the more expensive bids that the city would not be getting. Ms. Murray said their hourly rate was higher. Mr. Knapp asked if PlaceSense is as qualified as the others. Ms. Murray said the feeling is they are more qualified for Vermont issues. Ms. Goldberg said this seems to be a case of "robbing Peter to pay Paul." The $75,000 was taken fro anticipated surplus. The taxpayers approved a budget with money for certain items and were never told that money would be used for interim zoning. Mr. Rusten said the $75,000 was in the contingency fund. Voters approved $50,000 for an undesignated reserve fund, but there is no proposal to take any of that money. Ms. Goldberg felt tax funds should not be used for something the public was so opposed to. Ms. Riehle moved to authorize the City Manager/designee to finalize and sign a contract with PlaceSense and Front Porch Community Planning in an amount not to exceed $22,900.00. Ms. Dooley seconded. Motion passed 4-1, with Ms. Mackenzie voting against. 9. Reconvene as Liquor Control Board to consider approval of Liquor License for: Guild & Company, 1633 Williston Road: Ms. Dooley moved that the Council convene as Liquor Control Board. Mr. Riehle seconded. Motion passed unanimously. It was noted that this is the former Ground Round. Ms. Mackenzie moved to approve the liquor license for Guild & Company as presented. Ms. Dooley seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Ms. Mackenzie then moved that the Board reconvene as City Council. Ms. Riehle seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 10. Reschedule Priorities and Procedure Review: Members greed to meet for this purpose at 5 p.m. on 30 October. 11. Other Business: A. Items from Consent Agenda: In the minutes of 4 September, it was noted that on p. 8, paragraph 2, Ms. Lyons said the union opposed the City Clerk's proposal. Also on that page, it was noted that in the second paragraph, second sentence, "City Clerk" should read "City Council." Regarding disbursements, Ms. Greco asked about the expenditure for protective clothing. Mr. Rusten noted this was the Fire Department, and is within their budget. Ms. Greco also questioned the "overpayment" of taxes by the City of Burlington. Mr. Rusten said that did happen, and they have been reimbursed. Ms. Greco also questioned the two payments for highway technology. Mr. Rusten said these are LED lights/crosswalks and fall under a federal grant for this purpose. Mr. Rusten noted that the Airport Parkway payment is the last payment for this upgrade. Regarding the Bartlett Bay filter, Ms. Greco asked whether they need to budget for this in the future. Mr. Rusten said they need to talk to technical people about that. This is a sewer related issue, not storm water. A filter needs to be replaced, the sooner the better. There is no indication of other anticipated failures. A major refit of the Bartlett Bay plant is planned in 10 years. Mr. Knapp noted that the state monitors the capacity of the system. As of 1 July 2007, the state has jurisdiction over every system in the state and won't let a community oversubscribe. Ms. Mackenzie moved to approve the items removed from the Consent Agenda. Ms. Riehle seconded. Motion passed unanimously. B. Items Council May Wish to Place on a Future Agenda: Regarding the interim zoning evaluation, Mr. Engels said they better address it tonight as the Bylaw requires it to be addressed by 1 October. Ms. Dooley said they were going to revisit it when all RFP are finalized. Ms. Mackenzie said they need to have a process now to plan for the economic analysis. And they need to address issues raised by Mr. Simoneau, that interim zoning is keeping people from doing business in South Burlington. Ms. Dooley said her recollection was that the Councilors had different ideas of what the economic impact analysis was getting at. She had a problem discussing this without Mr. Miller present. Ms. Mackenzie suggested taking a look at the ordinance and seeing if they are addressing what they are supposed to be addressing. Mr. Rusten noted they had sent out RFP on this and we are not comfortable with the responses. The Council then told staff to work on the RFPs for the 3 components of interim zoning. Staff would then try to get better RFPs for the economic piece. Ms. Mackenzie said they need to clarify a due date for the economic analysis as they owe the community transparency. Mr. Engels agreed that it should be addressed tonight. Other members felt they should stick with the prior decision. Mr. Engels said as the ordinance says they shall have an economic analysis by 1 October, they will have to amend the ordinance. Ms. Greco said she didn't see a need to amend the Ordinance. Ms. Goldberg said the Council owes the public a financial analysis to justify interim zoning and they have failed. With regard to a bond for roads, members felt this should be discussed as part of the budget process. Members also discussed having members of the Planning Commission and City Council attend each other's meetings. Mr. Rusten suggested adding this to the 30 October agenda. As there was no further business to come before the Council, Ms. Riehle moved to adjourn. Ms. Mackenzie seconded. Motion passed unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 8:45 p.m. Clerk Published by ClerkBase ©2019 by Clerkbase. No Claim to Original Government Works.