Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - City Council - 10/17/2022CITY COUNCIL 17 OCTOBER 2022 The South Burlington City Council held a regular meeting on Monday, 17 October 2022, at 6:30 p.m., in the Auditorium, 180 Market Street, and by Go to Meeting remote participation. MEMBERS PRESENT: T. Barritt, Acting Chair; M. Emery, M. Cota ALSO PRESENT: J. Baker, City Manager; A. Bolduc, Deputy City Manager; P. Conner, Director of Planning & Zoning; V. Nichols, Acting Superintendent of Schools; D. Catalano, J. Slason, K. Ryder, K. Boozan, M. Ostby, L. Bailey, C. Trombly, G. Nelson, G. Silverstein 1. Instructions on exiting building in case of emergency and review of technology option: Ms. Baker provided instructions on emergency exit from the building and reviewed technology options. 2. Additions, deletions or changes in the order of Agenda items: Members agreed to postpone items #11 through #14 as only 3 Council members were present. 3. Comments and questions from the public not related to the agenda: No comments or questions were presented. 4. Announcements and City Manager’s Report: Councilors reported on meetings and events they had attended. Ms. Baker: The final design for the bike/ped bridge will come to the Council on 7 November. The city has been selected to be part of the State Ideal cohort which is looking to do equity work across the state. The next City Center project is in the final stages of an amendment approval. It will include 120 residential units, a childcare facility and a coffee shop. They hope to break ground this winter. Permits are being sought for the Garden Street project. The very ambitious goal is to start in early spring. CITY COUNCIL 17 OCTOBER 2022 PAGE 2 Registration for youth basketball can be done on line. The winner of the Halloween decoration contest will be announced on 28 October. The Halloween walk in Goose Park will take place the next evening. The fencing for the Dog Park is expected to arrive on 24 October. The second tax installment is due on 15 November. Those in need of a payment plan can reach out to the Assessor’s office. The next public meeting regarding City Center Park will be on 27 October, 6 p.m. Mr. Barritt noted that the ballot for the Waste District bond vote must be requested separately. It can be dropped off at City Hall. There is no pre-paid postage for this ballot. Mr. Cota said voters who choose to vote at the polls on Election Day should bring the ballot they received in the mail. If that ballot was lost or not received, people can still vote but will have to sign an affidavit regarding the missing ballot. 5. Consent Agenda: a. Approve and Sign Disbursements Mr. Cota moved to approve the Consent Agenda as presented. Ms. Emery seconded. Motion passed 3-0. 6. Opportunity for Councilors and the public to share information and resources on Climate Change: Mr. Barritt said the Energy Committee had a good discussion regarding Wheeler House and its old steam heating system and a possible alternative. 7. Public Hearing on amendments to the Land Development Regulations on expanding the Transferable Development Rights: Mr. Conner explained the function of the TDR program. The proposed amendments don’t change where rights can be sold from but expands where they can be transferred to (including CITY COUNCIL 17 OCTOBER 2022 PAGE 3 Shelburne Road, Williston Road, Swift Street). Developers could buy additional density in those areas. Mr. Conner noted that there is a change being recommended based on a letter received from the Vermont Land Trust. The concern was with the Conservation PUD. They are considering conserving more than 70% of a parcel and were concerned that they might have to conserve an additional 70% of the remaining 30%, if they ever chose to develop that piece. Mr. Conner showed the language which makes it clear that this would not happen. Mr. Conner also noted that this change will require a second public hearing which is recommended to be on 21 Novembers, 7 p.m. Mr. Cota moved to open the public hearing. Ms. Emery seconded. Motion passed 3-0. Mr. Conner noted receipt of one written comment from the Vermont Land Trust as noted above. Mr. Mittag, commented as a member of the public not representing the Planning Commission or TDR Interim Zoning Committee on which he served. He felt the proposed amendment is a vast improvement but is flawed as there are still receiving areas in the Southeast Quadrant. He felt all open space should be conserved. Ms. Bailey was concerned that since TDRs are forever, this could tie the hands of future generations. She suggested a 30-year revisiting of the regulations to determine whether it is still in the city’s best interest to conserve that land. As there was no further public comment, Mr. Cota moved to close the public hearing. Ms. Emery seconded. Motion passed 3-0. 8. Potential action on amendments to the Land Development Regulations on expanding the Transferable Development Rights: Mr. Cota moved to schedule a second public hearing for 21 Novembers 2022, at 7 p.m. on proposed amendments to the Land Development Regulations regarding expanding Transferable Development Right to include the proposed amendment previously described. Ms. Emery seconded. Motion passed 3-0. CITY COUNCIL 17 OCTOBER 2022 PAGE 4 9. Receive a proposal from the School Board on implementing school impact fees and provide direction to staff in advance of considering an ordinance update: Ms. Baker reviewed the history and noted that staff has considered what school impact fees could look like. The stressed the need to invest in school infrastructure as the community continues to grow. What is being proposed is a phased approach. Issues to be addressed include the proposed impact fee amount, a possibly exemption for affordable housing, and a time line. When these issues have been resolved, staff will draft an ordinance. Supt. Nichols said the School District has been working with many people on the issue of overcrowding in schools. Both Orchard and Marcotte schools are over capacity. Phase One of the plan to address this includes the use of Zero Energy Modules (ZEMs) which would be attached to the schools. They would be asking for a bond vote in March. Ms. Nichols said that in order to continue to support city growth, these impact fees are essential; otherwise she cannot attest that the schools can accommodate more students. Mr. Slason of RSG noted that the impact fee amount is a legally maximum fee that has to be justified in terms of the cost of the ZEMs. Mr. Barritt asked for a bottom line impact fee cost. Mr. Slason outlined the following: 1-bedroom unit …………………… $550 ` 2-bedroom unit …………………… $3,577 ` 3-bedroom unit …………………… $11,280 He noted that alternatively, there could be a $4,331 fee for all housing equally. Mr. Cota felt the phased approach was prudent because there are projects already approved with secured funding. Mr. Slason explained how the phased approach would work. Mr. Barritt asked if there has been feedback from developers. Ms. Baker said there has been no public hearing as yet, though there would be with an ordinance update. CITY COUNCIL 17 OCTOBER 2022 PAGE 5 Mr. Barritt said he would like to see a number for a 4th bedroom. Mr. Cota agreed. Ms. Emery said she liked the near-term weighted average as it assures the impact is spread out and the goals of the schools are met. Mr. Barritt suggested possibly talking about a percentage of the fee for affordable housing. He noted this housing will generate children in the schools, and he felt they should be responsible for some of that cost. Mr. Silverstein expressed concern with a double jeopardy situation for the homeowners. Mr. Slason said there is a law which protects people from paying twice for the same benefit. There will be no double jeopardy situation. Mr. Silverstein asked about the student teacher ratio in the crowded schools. Ms. Nichols said they do not exceed the designated student teacher ratio because they have had to hire additional teachers to meet the overages. Mr. Slason then showed a table of recommended square feet per student and indicated there is a 24 square foot deficiency per student in the 2 pre-K schools. Ms. Ostby asked if there were impact fees in the past. Mr. Conner said there were, but they were removed in 2009 when all the projects those fees were collected for were completed. Ms. Ostby felt it seems appropriate and reasonable and she supported the idea. Ms. Nichols noted there will still be a need for High School and Middle School projects in the future, and separate impact fees would be calculated for those projects. Phase 1 is just for the significant over-enrollments in the elementary schools. Ms. Emery asked if the fee structure can be amended within the 6-year life of the fees. Mr. Slason said it can and would have to come back to the City Council. There would be some compensation if the fees were to be reduced. Mr. Silverstein felt a decision should be delayed until contract negotiations are settled. He felt big salary increases could stress the State Education fund and that might have to be mitigated with a reduction in yield. CITY COUNCIL 17 OCTOBER 2022 PAGE 6 Mr. Trombly of the Affordable Housing Committee said he fully supports impact fees for the ZEMs as it is directly related to growth. He was concerned with future fees and housing affordability. Ms. Emery said the school system is key to the health of the community. She cited the need to think long-term. Ms. Nichols noted that action has been put off for many years which is why they are in this situation now. There are no undesignated funds in the budget to account for inflation. She also noted South Burlington ranks near the bottom for education spending. She stressed that unbudgeted costs can’t be put off any longer. Ms. Baker said that the School could issue a bond vote ballot item for March. The impact fees would then be a revenue stream to pay the debt service on the bond. If revenues come in sooner, the school would borrow less money. Bond money could not be accessed until July, 2023. Ms. Baker said staff may present several possibly ordinances in November and can pick one for a public hearing. Mr. Slason said he will try to provide a 4-bedroom column. Ms. Ostby questioned whether moving 5th graders to the Middle School is still an option. Ms. Nichols said at this is on the agenda for the next School Board meeting. She added that the ZEMs will buy them time to consider that possible move and also consider retrofitting and future building. As there was no further business to come before the Council Mr. Cota moved to adjourn. Ms. Emery seconded. Motion passed 3-0. The meeting was adjourned at 8:12 p.m. /s/ Tim Barritt _________________________________ Clerk