Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - City Council - 08/07/2017 AGENDA SOUTH BURLINGTON CITY COUNCIL South Burlington City Hall 575 Dorset Street SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT Regular Session 6:30 P.M. Monday, August 7, 2017 1. Pledge of Allegiance. (6:30 – 6:31 PM) 2. Instructions on exiting building in case of emergency. (6:31 – 6:32 PM) 3. Agenda Review: Additions, deletions or changes in order of agenda items. (6:32 – 6:33 PM) 4. Comments and questions from the public not related to the agenda. (6:33 – 6:43 PM) 5. Announcements and City Manager’s Report. (6:43 – 6:58 PM) 6. Consent Agenda: (6:58 – 7:00 PM) A. *** Sign Disbursement B. *** Approve Minutes July 5th and 17th C. *** Approve the designation of Stitzel, Page and Fletcher as the City’s attorney for tax sale collections D. ***Authorize the City Manager to sign the Grant Application for the Expansion of Stormwater Treatment Practice on Route 7 E. ***Authorize the City Manager to sign the Grant Application for a Scoping Study Related to the Failed Kimball Avenue Culvert 7. Councilor reports from outside committee/board assignments. (7:00 – 7:10 PM) 8. *** Consider and possibly take action on a draft City Council Resolution on Climate Change – Energy Committee representative (7:10 – 7:30 PM) 9. Report on current and future planned activities of the Energy Committee – Energy Committee Representative (7:30 – 7:40 PM) 10. *** Interview applicants for the South Burlington Energy Committee (4 vacancies). (7:40 – 7:50 PM) 11. *** Consider and possibly approve the appointment of Paul Stabler to the Board of the Chittenden Solid Waste District. (7:50 – 7:55 PM) 12. Council discussion regarding potential land conservation opportunity. (7:55 – 8:10 PM) 13. ***Chittenden County Public Safety Authority – Union Municipal District overview – Kevin Dorn (8:10 – 8:30 PM) 14. *** Consider and possibly act upon a Joint Resolution calling for Regional Governance of Burlington International Airport ­ Councilor Chittenden (8:30 – 9:00 PM) 15. *** Consider commencing proceedings to alter the rights­of­way for Dorset Street and Market Street, STP 5200(17) (9:00 – 9:10 PM) 16. Discuss scheduling issues for potential hearings on rights­of­ways issues. (9:10 – 9:20 PM) 17. Other Business: (9:20 – 9:25 PM) A. Items held from the Consent Agenda 18. Consider entering Executive Session to discuss personnel matters, receive confidential attorney-client communications made for the purpose of providing professional legal services to the body, and the negotiation or securing of real estate purchase or lease options matters where premature disclosure would put the City at a substantial disadvantage. (9:20 – 9:50 PM) 19. Consider and possibly take action on a proposed Letter of Intent between the South Burlington City Council and the South Burlington School Board relating to the exchange of real property. (9:50 – 10:00 PM) 20. Adjourn. (10:00 PM) Respectfully Submitted: Kevin Dorn Kevin Dorn, City Manager *** Attachments Included Issues raised by Councilors or the public that have not been on a prior meeting agenda: 1. Cost of development/cost of open space. Issues that have been discussed by the Council where further action is pending: 1. Street light policy. 2. Airport noise survey. 3. Evaluate water billing and rate structure. South Burlington City Council Meeting Participation Guidelines City Council meetings are the only time we have to discuss and decide on City matters. We want to be as open and informal as possible; but Council meetings are not town meetings. In an effort to conduct orderly and efficient meetings, we kindly request your cooperation and compliance with the following guidelines. 1. Please be respectful of each other (Council members, staff, and the public). 2. Please raise your hand to be recognized by the Chair. Once recognized please state your name and address. 3. Please address the Chair and not other members of the public, staff, or presenters. 4. Please abide by any time limits that have been set. Time limits will be used to insure everyone is heard and there is sufficient time for the Council to conduct all the business on the agenda. 5. The Chair will make a reasonable effort to allow everyone to speak once before speakers address the Council a second time. 6. The Chair may ask that discussion be limited to the Councilors once the public input has been heard. 7. Please do not interrupt when others are speaking. 8. Please do not repeat the points made by others, except to briefly say whether you agree or disagree with others views. 9. Please use the outside hallway for side conversations. It is difficult to hear speaker remarks when there are other conversations occurring. Published by ClerkBase ©2019 by Clerkbase. No Claim to Original Government Works. South Burlington Water Dept. Accounts Payable Check Register Date: 08/08/17 Date Check No. Paid To Memo Amount Paid 8/8/2017 3229 Aldrich & Elliott, PC 357.49 Date Voucher Number Reference Voucher Total Amount Paid 7/10/2017 VI-14334 77089 357.49 357.49 8/8/2017 3230 All Seasons Excavating 1,229.00 Date Voucher Number Reference Voucher Total Amount Paid 7/11/2017 VI-14327 29381-JUNE 679.10 679.10 7/11/2017 VI-14328 29381 549.90 549.90 8/8/2017 3231 Champlain Water District 49,718.00 Date Voucher Number Reference Voucher Total Amount Paid 6/30/2017 VI-14322 SBWD-327A 168.00 168.00 6/30/2017 VI-14326 SBWD-327B 35.56 35.56 7/31/2017 VI-14344 SBWD-328 49,514.44 49,514.44 8/8/2017 3232 Champlain Water District 116,034.50 Date Voucher Number Reference Voucher Total Amount Paid 7/31/2017 VI-14338 JULY 109,894.13 109,894.13 7/31/2017 VI-14339 SBWD-321 197.07 197.07 7/31/2017 VI-14342 CWD-684A 5,943.30 5,943.30 8/8/2017 3233 Eastern Sales, Inc. 173.54 Date Voucher Number Reference Voucher Total Amount Paid 7/5/2017 VI-14320 00156500 173.54 173.54 8/8/2017 3234 E.J. Prescott, Inc. 1,485.67 Date Voucher Number Reference Voucher Total Amount Paid 7/6/2017 VI-14321 5255007 585.77 585.77 7/6/2017 VI-14323 5257480 47.33 47.33 7/7/2017 VI-14324 5258218 58.75 58.75 7/17/2017 VI-14332 5262470 793.82 793.82 8/8/2017 3235 Office Essentials 909.65 Date Voucher Number Reference Voucher Total Amount Paid 7/17/2017 VI-14333 34176 909.65 909.65 8/8/2017 3236 Pollard Water 623.21 Date Voucher Number Reference Voucher Total Amount Paid 7/19/2017 VI-14336 0082859 623.21 623.21 8/8/2017 3237 City Of So. Burlington 1,974.00 Date Voucher Number Reference Voucher Total Amount Paid 7/24/2017 VI-14329 LIABILITY - 1ST QTR 861.00 861.00 7/24/2017 VI-14330 LIABILITY - 2ND QTR 861.00 861.00 7/31/2017 VI-14343 ADVERTISING 252.00 252.00 Printed: August 03, 2017 Page 1 of 2 South Burlington Water Dept. Accounts Payable Check Register Date: 08/08/17 Date Check No. Paid To Memo Amount Paid 8/8/2017 3238 City Of South Burlington 281,900.33 Date Voucher Number Reference Voucher Total Amount Paid 8/1/2017 VI-14341 JULY SEWER CHARGES 281,900.33 281,900.33 8/8/2017 3239 City Of South Burlington 220,701.28 Date Voucher Number Reference Voucher Total Amount Paid 8/2/2017 VI-14340 JULY STORMWATER FEES 220,701.28 220,701.28 8/8/2017 3240 South Burlington Water Department 12,226.49 Date Voucher Number Reference Voucher Total Amount Paid 6/30/2017 VI-14337 CAPITAL ENCUMBRANCE 12,226.49 12,226.49 8/8/2017 3241 SoVerNet, Inc. 44.62 Date Voucher Number Reference Voucher Total Amount Paid 7/15/2017 VI-14331 3783190 44.62 44.62 8/8/2017 3242 William Stocks 304.65 Date Voucher Number Reference Voucher Total Amount Paid 7/12/2017 VI-14325 REFUND 304.65 304.65 8/8/2017 3243 Ti-Sales Inc. 192.00 Date Voucher Number Reference Voucher Total Amount Paid 7/26/2017 VI-14335 INV0081061 192.00 192.00 8/8/2017 3244 Ti-Sales Inc. 6,822.00 Date Voucher Number Reference Voucher Total Amount Paid 8/2/2017 VI-14345 INV0081346 6,822.00 6,822.00 Total Amount Paid: 694,696.43 SOUTH BURLINGTON CITY COUNCIL _____________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________ Printed: August 03, 2017 Page 2 of 2 CITY COUNCIL 5 JULY 2017 The South Burlington City Council held a regular meeting on Wednesday, 5 July 2017, at 6:30 p.m., in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset Street. MEMBERS PRESENT: H. Riehle, Chair; P. Nowak, M. Emery ALSO PRESENT: K. Dorn, City Manager; T. Hubbard, Deputy City Manager; A Bolduc, City Attorney; P. Conner, Director of Planning & Zoning; I. Blanchard, Project Manager; B. Nowak 1. Directions on emergency evacuation procedures from conference room: Mr. Dorn provided directions on emergency evacuation procedures. 2. Possible executive session to discuss settlement of pending civil litigation to which the City of South Burlington is a party: Ms. Emery moved that the Council meet in executive session to discuss settlement of pending civil litigation to which the City of South Burlington is a party, and to include the City Manager, Deputy City Manager, and Director of Planning & Zoning in the session. Ms. Nowak seconded. Motion passed 3-0. The council entered executive session at 6:38 p.m. and returned to regular session at 6:50 p.m. 3. Agenda Review: Additions, deletions or changes in order of agenda items: No changes were made to the Agenda. 4. Comments & Questions from the public not related to the agenda: There was no public comment. 5. Announcements and City Manager’s Report: Council members reported on meetings and events they had attended in recent weeks. Mr. Dorn: Delivered the Memorandum of Understanding to Gene Richards. He said they would transmit it to their legal counsel and to Mayor Weinberger. Staff reviews are just about complete. The dispatch project continues, and the hope is to bring issues to the voters in March. There will be an earlier test with 2 or more districts participating. CITY COUNCIL 5 JULY 2017 PAGE 2 There will be a meeting with UVM people regarding the next mental health session. The State is working on similar issues City Council priorities are being worked into the work plan. The Dog Park at Farrell Park is open and in use. The other Dog Park will be open soon. The project to install windows in the upstairs conference room is set to begin. Panels are up at most of the landfill, and the project is on track to be charged up in October. Ms. Emery asked about GMP moving a substation behind a home on Country Club Estates. Mr. Dorn said that has been resolved, and the installation is being moved out of the neighborhood. Market Street construction is set to begin. Ms. Riehle asked about a 7 Days article regarding the living roof at the Airport and whether it is out of compliance. Later in the meeting Mr. Conner noted the 7 Days article didn’t say the roof wasn’t in compliance; it questioned whether it was. The administrative officer met with Airport people to discuss ways to make improvements as some TLC is needed. Mr. Conner noted the beautiful views from the roof and the Airport’s offer to community members to use that space. 6. Consent Agenda: a. Sign Disbursement b. Approve Minutes of 1 May, 15 May, 5 June and 19 June 2017 c. Approve All Hazards Mitigation Plan d. Approve grant application for Iby Street Gravel Wetland Stormwater project e. Approve resolution approving and authorizing execution of documents related to City Center TIF District Infrastructure and Capital Improvement bond Issuance Closing Ms. Emery asked to remove the Minutes of 19 June from the Consent Agenda. Ms. Nowak moved to approve the Consent Agenda minus the minutes of 19 June. Ms. Emery seconded. Motion passed 3-0. CITY COUNCL 5 JULY 2017 PAGE 3 7. Reports from Councilors from Activities of Committees to which they are Assigned: Ms. Nowak read a statement that she read at the Airport Commission meeting regarding the Memorandum of Understanding passed by the City Council. This began a dialog that was very complimentary to South Burlington. Gene Richards particularly appreciated the letter sent by Mr. Dorn regarding landscaping around the Airport. It was noted that the green roof was designed to help with runoff. The picture that was in the paper was taken after the vegetation dies back. A Master Gardener has been recommended by UVM, and Ms. Nowak said she is recommending someone to find a Master Gardener. The Airport is open to having meetings and fundraisers on the roof and inside the airport. 8. Overview, discussion and possible action on disposition of city’s leased land interest on 61 Procter Avenue: Mr. Bolduc explained this history of these types of land which still exist today. Every once in a while, an attorney will come upon one of these pieces of land and will ask that the homeowner be released from it. There is a process in state law for conveyance of city real estate, and it makes sense to go through that process. Mr. Dorn showed members the land in question on the computer screen. Mr. Bolduc noted that the property had been bought and sold without incident until now. The other attorney seems willing to pay for the cost of the ad in The Other Paper in order to cover the city’s cost. Mr. Bolduc also explained why this process is done by quit claim deed. Ms. Nowak moved to authorize the City Manager to enter into a quit claim deed regarding glebe leased land at 61 Procter Avenue, with the understanding that costs for notice and transfer will be covered by the homeowner. Ms. Emery seconded. Motion passed 3-0. 9. Consider and set FY 2018 Property Tax Rates and Tax Due Dates: Mr. Hubbard the proposed tax rate was .4946. This has now been reduced to .4920 and may be reduced a bit more. CITY COUNCIL 5 JULY 2017 PAGE 4 Ms. Emery moved to set tax due dates for 17 August, 15 November 2017 and 15 March 2018. Ms. Nowak seconded. Motion passed 3-0. 10. Presentation of 2017 VTrans Pedestrian/Bicycle Grant Application and Potential Approval of Letter of Support: Ms. Blanchard said there are 2 applications for bike/ped grants. These have been presented to the Bike/Ped Committee which supports both. The small scale grant would involve a 50% city match for construction only. Construction would be next summer. There is no funding for design. Ms. Blanchard showed a map of the scoping done last year. It involves a 10-foot shared use path that will complete 2/3 of the “gap” in the path. The application is for $173,000 which will be matched from impact fees. The larger grant would be for multi-year design, permitting, right-of-way acquisition and construction. This would be federally funded up to 80%. The city would match the remainder of the cost. 50% of the cost is eligible for funding using TIF district increment. Ms. Blanchard showed a concept for the streetscape with a larger buffer and a 2-way cycle track on the south side of Williston Road. The application includes lighting, trees, cycle track, and the wider sidewalk. Ms. Nowak asked how much land would be taken from property owners. Ms. Blanchard said there may be some offers of dedication. The city has 6 feet from the curb and would need an additional 20 feet. This would not alter the function of the property (i.e. parking). The sidewalk and cycle track would be combined in some places. Ms. Emery noted how little safe biking space there is from South Burlington to Burlington and felt this is something that could be discussed with the Mayor of Burlington. Ms. Emery moved to authorize the signature and submittal letters of support on behalf of the City Council acknowledging the city’s willingness to provide a local match and future maintenance responsibility for the Dorset Street Shared Use Path and the Williston Road buffered bicycle facilities and pedestrian improvements. Ms. Nowak seconded. Motion passed 3-0. CITY COUNCIL 5 JULY 2017 PAGE 5 11. Other Business a. Items held from Consent Agenda In the minutes of 19 June, members agreed to revise paragraph 3 on the top of p. 3 as follows: Following the first sentence, add: Council members agreed to continue with the current policy regarding appointments. Delete the remainder of the paragraph. Ms. Emery moved to approve the Minutes of 19 June as amended. Ms. Nowak seconded. Motion passed 3-0. Ms. Nowak noted that Paul Conner did an excellent presentation at the South Burlington Business Association and was very well received. As there was no further business to come before the Council, Ms. Emery moved to adjourn. Ms. Nowak seconded. Motion passed 3-0. The meeting was adjourned at 8:35 p.m. ________________________________ Clerk CITY COUNCIL 17 JULY 2017 The South Burlington City Council held a regular meeting on Monday, 17 July 2017, at 6:30 p.m., in the Gymnasium, Chamberlin School, White Street. MEMBERS PRESENT: H. Riehle, Chair; P. Nowak, M. Emery, T. Chittenden, T. Barritt ALSO PRESENT: K. Dorn, City Manager; T. Hubbard, Deputy City Manager; Rep. M. Townsend, Rep. A. Pugh, M. Leugers, H. Baker, Recreation Department; S. Dopp, B. Melizia, M. Cuke, J. Kochman, M. Simoneau, C. Sargent, B. Nowak, G. Maille, J. Leas, B. Servis 1. Directions on emergency evacuation procedures from gymnasium: Mr. Dorn provided directions on emergency evacuation procedures. 2. Agenda Review: Additions, deletions or changes in order of agenda items: Mr. Chittenden asked to add brief item on an article regarding Facebook publishing. 3. Comments & Questions from the public not related to the agenda: Ms. Dopp noted that an RFP has been submitted by UVM regarding 2 properties near Swift/Spear Streets. These are the Edlund and Martin properties which are being offered for sale by UVM. Proposals are due on 18 August with a decision to be made by 19 September. The Edlund property would require a zoning change from IA; the Martin property is zoned for residential. Ms. Dopp said there are reasons not to develop these properties including steep slopes, proximity to Potash Brook, unique geological features and a wildlife corridor. Mr. Barritt noted that the DRB has had proposals for that property in the past. 4. Announcements and City Manager’s Report: Council members reported on meetings and events they had attended in recent weeks. Mr. Dorn: Noted that close to 1000 people attended the first Bites and Bikes event at the park. He added that the electrical upgrade was a great decision as there were no wires running through the area. Vendors could just “plug in.” There will be 5 more of these events during the summer as well as City Fest and the Mozart Festival performances. The Affordable Housing Committee continues to discuss the development of affordable housing in the community. A follow-up meeting was held with the Hospital regarding mental health issues. CITY COUNCIL 17 JULY 2017 PAGE 2 The dispatching project continues. A report will be presented to the Council in August. There has been no response from Burlington to the MOU regarding buying and demolishing of houses by the Airport. 5. Consent Agenda: a. Sign Disbursement b. Approve Minutes of 19 June and 5 July 2017 c. Approve proposed stipulation resolving litigation in the matter of City of South Burlington v. Rieley Cohen Partnership, LLC, Docket No. 36-4-16 Vtec Ms. Nowak asked to remove the Minutes of 5 July from the Consent Agenda. Mr. Barritt moved to approve the Consent Agenda minus the Minutes of 5 July. Ms. Emery seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 6. Council reports related to outside committee assignments: No reports were presented. 7. Report on current and proposed activities of the Natural Resources Committee: Ms. Melizia and Ms. Cuke provided written information for Council members. Ms. Melizia noted the Committee has been reorganizing and has been receiving staff support from the Recreation Department. She praised the efforts of Holly Baker who has been working with the Committee. They are currently working on a Mission Statement, guiding principles, operating procedures, and a strategic plan process. They have also identified what will be in an orientation package. The Committee has brought in a conservation planning biologist who provides technical assistance to groups such as theirs. He has helped to start their work plan. Proposed projects for the fall include: a. Educational signage b. Input to the Planning Commission regarding renewables c. Removal of invasives at Dumont Park CITY COUNCIL 17 JULY 2017 PAGE 3 d. Addressing runoff concerns e. Additional garden space for another community garden f. Tree stewardship Ms. Melizia noted that they have been contacted by a citizen who has a concern regarding the use of herbicides. They have checked with the City Arborist, Craig Lambert, as to what he uses, so they can provide this information to the public. Ms. Melizia also noted that Mr. Lambert advised that people not plant more than what is required and that a “pot of money” be amassed to put plantings where needed. Ms. Riehle suggested the possibility of educating people about invasives that may exist on their properties and training them about removal. Mr. Barritt expressed concern with the loss of “meadow.” He hopes there could be tools for concerned landowners so that people can have options other than just mowing their lawns. 8. Report on current and proposed activities of the Recreation and Parks Committee: Ms. Kochman and Mr. Simoneau said they are a very hard-working committee that needs more members. The Committee’s long-term goals include: a. Indoor recreation facilities and office space b. Looking at the CIP c. Creating additional playing fields and maintaining surfaces The Committee has been told it will take $4,000,000-$5,000,000 to maintain open space land in the city, and only $1,300,000 has been approved for this use. There has been positive public response to the work done a Wheeler and Red Rocks this year. The Committee continues to work on an NRP review. NRP provides a matrix for all Recreation Departments to enter data. They then have a report on how a community measures up. A sub- committee has met on this several times. The Committee is also looking to develop a Parks Management Plan eventually. The Committee has also begun to meet with developers to see how open space will be worked into a development plan. They would like to have a process to formalize this procedure. CITY COUNCIL 17 JULY 2017 PAGE 4 Mr. Simoneau noted that recreation and parks are the most visible things people get for their taxes, and it is important for the Committee to provide information to the City Council in order to demonstrate to the community the value of a proposal. Mr. Chittenden spoke to the need for an indoor pool. Ms. Kochman said this was in her mind when she learned of the drownings of the 2 young people this past week. She cited the importance of teaching children to swim as there is water all around this area. Ms. Nowak asked if it is possible for an individual to donate money to a particular city project. Mr. Hubbard said the City Council has the authority to establish a reserve fund for any particular project; this has the same effect as a non-profit donation. Ms. Nowak suggested this might be a way to get an indoor pool. Ms. Riehle said this might be a good topic for a Steering Committee meeting. Ms. Nowak said it would be interesting to know if the High School has a swim team. Rep. Townsend said she appreciates the new Dog Park. Mr. Dorn noted that a second Dog Park at JC Park will be open soon. 9. Consider and possibly act upon a Joint Resolution calling for Regional Governance of Burlington International Airport: Mr. Chittenden noted that the current governance of the Airport ascribes “ownership” of the Airport and all the decision making authority over this public asset to the City of Burlington and its elected leaders, even though the Airport is not located in that city. He ascribed the root of planning and communication friction with the Airport to this “abnormal governance” and said there is a better way to govern an airport. Mr. Chittenden said that the governance issue has been raised many times over the past decade, but there has been no progress toward that recommendation. The Airport is self- funded, and Burlington taxpayers have not been financially supporting it for 70 years; yet, its leaders have been making decisions that affect public air space and the City of South Burlington. Mr. Chittenden said it is time for a Regional Airport Authority to separate the governance of the Airport from the City of Burlington. CITY COUNCIL 17 JULY 2017 PAGE 5 Mr. Chittenden suggested that a governing board with representatives from the state house and all abutting communities could align the strategic decision making of the Airport to meet the needs of the region and could reduce the conflicts that distract their collective attention. He noted that while Burlington and South Burlington were engaged in suing each other over property values, Plattsburgh Airport grew to threaten Burlington International Airport’s attractiveness. Mr. Chittenden said that the creation of an Airport Authority would enable residents affected by Airport operations to have a direct line of influence to elected leaders empowered to appoint members to an authoritative body. Mr. Chittenden welcomed any suggestions and/or amendments to the resolution he presented. Ms. Emery said she shares Mr. Chittenden’s concerns for the long term viability of the Airport, but she did not believe the solution lies in the governance structure but in the state’s budgetary prioritization of the Airport. She noted that the State of New York made Plattsburgh Airport a budgetary priority and infused millions of dollars, including federal grants, into improved infrastructure. Since Burlington International Airport is too large to benefit from such grants, the State of Vermont has sought to keep the Airport “alive” through subsidies for emergency and rescue services available through the U.S. Air Force by expanding VTANG’s flying mission. This resulted in the buyout of nearly 200 South Burlington homes, one-tenth of the city’s workforce housing, even though the lack of affordable housing has been identified as the main obstacle to worker recruitment. Ms. Emery said that as an elected official she is sensitive to the constitutional requirement that governmental officers by legally accountable to the people they govern, but this has not been the case sing the Airport began requesting federal grants to acquire South Burlington homes. She felt this lack of legal accountability would not be corrected by a regional governance structure. She felt the State would be better served by pooling the resources and pooled interest to acquire farmland north of the most densely populated are of the state to construct a fully operational, international mixed use airport . Ms. Emery noted that a federal regulation authorizes the South Burlington City Council to levy fees “on or related to a flight of a commercial aircraft or an activity or serve on the aircraft” since that aircraft takes off and/or lands in South Burlington. Burlington levies a $4.50 per passenger enplanement fee to fund airport equipment and upgrades. If South Burlington levied a similar fee, it could benefit the residents by preserving their quality of life (e.g., constructing a berm) and ensuring the future economic future of the region and state. CITY COUNCIL 17 JULY 2017 PAGE 6 Mr. Barritt said he felt there is value in taking complete control of the Airport from the City of Burlington. He noted there appears to be no interest on the part of the State’s Congressional delegation to changing the Air Guard’s mission. There is also no current sound data, no information on the percentage of time the F-35s would fly with and without after burners, and not consultant to tell the city what would work for the Airport and for the city. He felt the proposed resolution is a “piece of leverage”. Ms. Nowak said she doesn’t disagree with any of the thoughts previously presented. She noted that city committees have been bringing in “expertise” to help with their work. She suggested a similar approach to Airport issues, namely brining in a group of people (not to include people from the Airport, FAA or Air Guard) to find out what happened with the Airport Study Committee. She would like to see GBIC involved with their expertise regarding regionalization, representatives from the Governor (e.g., is the State interested in purchasing the Airport?), a finance person from the City of Burlington (e.g., Bob Rusten or an appointee), and others who have their finger on the pulse of the economic viability of the Airport. Ms. Nowak cited the importance of the viability of the Airport. Businesses could be lost if the Airport loses solvency. She noted that now for the first time airlines flying out of the Airport have contracts. Mr. Chittenden agreed that getting data is important, but he felt that without different governance, the City of Burlington can’t require that data. South Burlington has no influence on “the other side of the fence.” Ms. Emery said she was told that there was a study that showed other communities did not want regionalization because of the cost. Ms. Riehle said it is her understanding that the City of Burlington is not financially invested in the Airport and there are no consequences to Burlington if the Airport does not make money. She added that she was hard-pressed to believe there is a need to buy this Airport. She didn’t see regional governance requiring communities to kick in millions of dollars. Ms. Riehle said she liked the idea of having real data and expertise involved in the process. Ms. Nowak added that experts could help with the construction of a resolution. CITY COUNCIL 17 JULY 2017 PAGE 7 Ms. Emery said she didn’t think South Burlington is helped by having people from Shelburne, Essex, etc., involved in governance. Mr. Chittenden said there are difference types of governance models. His resolution is only a “launch point,” a catalyst to start the conversation. He stressed that the current structure does not answer whether this Airport serves the needs of the State for the next quarter century. He also noted that the City of Winooski is taking up this resolution tonight. This is just the start of the discussion. Ms. Nowak noted that the Regional Planning Commission and Chamber of Commerce have lobbyists. She felt if this resolution goes forward and is regionally considered, support of such groups is important. She felt the city should hear “their piece” first and also hear from the state. Then a resolution could be made based on their information. Ms. Riehle said she did not feel regionalization would hurt South Burlington. Ms. Emery said she didn’t see how a regional body would be as accountable to the South Burlington electorate as the City Council is. Mr. Chittenden said that right now the Airport director reports to the Mayor of Burlington. He noted that Charlie Baker commented that the “Airport is a department of the City of Burlington.” He asked how effective it would be if the General Manager of CCTA/GMT reported only to the Mayor of Burlington. Public comment was then solicited as follows: Mr. Leas: Felt the real problem is an accountability issue. He felt the city should us the power of an enplanement fee, the funds from which could provide a benefit to residents. He also felt the City of South Burlington could derive funds from the landing fees, the parking garage, and other terminal activities. He felt the resolution would perpetuate the lack of accountability. Mr. Maille: Noted that the 2007 and 2009 NCP plans were never acted on by the Airport. He also noted that the possibility of collecting fees was never brought to the City Council because a petition to do so did not get enough signatures in 2009. He explained that the Airport has a “passenger facility charge” which is regulated by the FAA. Any fee enacted by the City of Burlington would be above that and would be economically disadvantageous to the Airport. He CITY COUNCIL 17 JULY 2017 PAGE 8 felt the resolution needs to be reconstructed. He personally wouldn’t give control to a state body but would recommend joint acquisition and joint maintenance. He strongly recommended using State Legislative Representatives to change the language of the law to recognize South Burlington’s unique situation. The law currently does not recognize an airport owned by one municipality but totally located in another municipality. This would change the dynamics as to “owning and hosting” an airport. Because the city now is not recognized as doing either, it has no power. Ms. Riehle asked if Burlington is required to reinvest the $19,000,000 it gets from the Airport into Airport uses or does it just go into the general fund. Mr. Maille said that money is put into a fund and the FAA is petitioned for its use. Ms. Nowak noted that revenues from Airport parking are down because so many motels are offering free parking. Ms. Sargent: praised the “refreshing conversation” and felt energized that it is taking place. She felt that any major changes should come from a position of strength, and South Burlington doesn’t have that. She felt an enplanement fee could fund South Burlington’s own studies. She stressed keeping residents included in this conversation. Rep. Townsend: Noted that regionalization of the Airport has been a discussion for a long time. She supports it and felt that it would in no way lessen South Burlington’s power. She said she is no stranger to other structures in the State where people are accountable to their local governing bodies. She felt that surrounding communities do have a stake in this and encouraged the City Council to reach out to their governing bodies. She stressed her willingness to help in any appropriate way with whatever approach the City of South Burlington takes. Rep. Townsend also stressed the need to present the strongest position possible because of the attitude of other legislators to Chittenden County. Rep. Pugh: Echoed Rep. Townsend’s comments and felt it behooves South Burlington to pass a resolution and noted that things change over time and people now have a new way of looking at things. She said she has never understood how Burlington owns the Airport and gets all the revenue from its concessions. She cited the importance of bringing other communities into the discussion so the Airport can move forward and benefit the whole state. CITY COUNCIL 17 JULY 2017 PAGE 9 Ms. Riehle then laid out some potential steps to take: a. Consider/have conversation regarding a legislative remedy b. Refine/recraft the resolution c. Pursue the idea of a broad information-gathering group which could lead to a broader consensus for change A special meeting to continue the discussion was suggested. Ms. Nowak said she would like to move forward on a “brain trust” group to provide perspective and give the city a position of strength. Ms. Riehle said she appreciated that concept but felt that organizing such a group would be a challenge. She didn’t think crafting South Burlington’s thoughts would be coming from a position of weakness. Ms. Nowak felt they need the educational piece on things the Council is not mindful of, specifically hearing from the person who did the original report. Ms. Riehle asked about having the City Attorney work on a “legislative remedy.” Mr. Maille stressed that whatever model the city has, it must be within statutory law, and the law is very specific on the authority of owners of an airport (e.g., ability for bonding, etc.). He said everything should be vetted through legal counsel. Ms. Riehle asked about the imposition of fees. Mr. Dorn said the city has no power to impose any of the fees mentioned tonight. There would have to be a public vote and legislative approval to impose them. Ms. Riehle then summed up a proposal for the Council to pursue: a. Ask Rep. Townsend to investigate a Legislative remedy b. Refine the resolution c. Ask Mr. Dorn to organize a broader meeting d. Pursue the fee(s) possibility Members agreed. CITY COUNCIL 17 JULY 2017 PAGE 10 10. Review of issues on “Bike Rack” and/or “Parking Lot” and determine priorities: Members reviewed Bike Rack issues and made the following determinations: a. Hadley Road landscaping issue – removed from Bike Rack b. Cost of development/cost of open space – keep on Bike Rack c. Noise survey – remove from Bike Rack (is on city website) d. Water billing and rate structure – keep on Bike Rack e. Citizen participation in democratic process – remove from Bike Rack f. Building codes – remove from Bike Rack (are being worked on) Members reviewed Parking Lot issues and made the following determinations: a. East Terrace forum – remove from Parking Lot b. Street light policy – keep on Parking Lot c. Crosswalk issues – remove from Parking Lot and send to Bike/Ped Committee d. Committee reorganization – remove from Parking Lot e. Litter removal – remove from Parking Lot f. Wastewater capacity – remove from Parking Lot g. Sanctuary City designation – remove from Parking lot as Governor has said Vermont is a Sanctuary State 11. Liquor Control Board: Mr. Barritt moved that the Council convene as Liquor Control Board. Ms. Nowak seconded. Motion passed unanimously. The Board considered the following applications: a. Hudson Store #1277 (located at Airport) – second class license b. Hudson Store #1278 (located at Airport) – second class license c. Hudson Store #1279 (located at Airport) – second class license CITY COUNCIL 17 JULY 2017 PAGE 11 Mr. Barritt moved to approve the 3 second class license applications as presented. Ms. Nowak seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Ms. Nowak moved to reconvene as City Council. Ms. Emery seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 12. Other Business a. Items held from Consent Agenda Ms. Nowak said she would send her recommended changes to the Minutes of 5 July to Mr. Dorn. Mr. Chittenden noted that Police Chief Whipple was quoted in a recent article regarding posting on social media. He encouraged the Council to consider that they may be on “shaky ground” with regulating what is on Facebook. He was concerned with consistency in such a questionable area. Ms. Nowak suggested the Council hear from Chief Whipple. 13. Possible executive session to discuss real estate issues where premature disclosure may put the City at a competitive disadvantage: Ms. Emery moved that the Council meet in executive session to discuss real estate issues where premature disclosure may put the City at a competitive disadvantage, and that the executive session include the City Manager and Deputy City Manager. Ms. Nowak seconded. Motion passed unanimously. The Council entered executive session at 10:35 p.m. Following the executive session, Tom Chittenden moved to adjourn. Tim Barrett seconded. Motion passed unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 10:20 p.m. ________________________________ Clerk City Council Consent Agenda Item Mtg. of 7 August, 2017 REQUEST FOR DESIGNATION OF ATTORNEY FOR TAX SALE COLLECTION (all fees reimbursed to the City once sale is final) In accordance with 32 VSA Section 5258, the South Burlington City Council hereby authorizes the South Burlington Tax Department to contract with Stitzel, Page & Fletcher, P.C. as the City’s attorneys for tax sale collection for the 2016-2017 tax year. This includes six properties that have more than one tax year delinquent and have not paid according to their individual payment plans and are included in the 2016-2017 tax sale. ________________________________ _______________ Helen Riehle, Chair Date Memo To: South Burlington City Council From: Tom DiPietro, Deputy Director of Public Works CC: Kevin Dorn, City Manager Justin Rabidoux Director of Public Works Date: August 2, 2017 Re: Grant Application for the Expansion of Stormwater Treatment Practice on Route 7 The Bartlett Brook watershed is one of five stormwater impaired waterbodies in South Burlington. The City is in the process of developing a Flow Restoration Plan (FRP) for this watershed. To date, we have developed a draft Best Management Practice (BMP) plan for the watershed, which identifies projects that have the potential to reduce flow in Bartlett Brook, restore the Brook to health, and satisfy requirements in the City’s MS4 permit. As part of FRP development the City identified the existing Bartlett Brook Stormwater Treatment System (BBSTS) as a candidate for a retrofit project. This system was originally constructed in 2002 to treat runoff from commercial development along the Route 7 corridor. By expanding the existing treatment system, the BBSTS would be able to treat stormwater runoff from an additional 9.34 acres of impervious surface, including Route 7, a portionHarbor View Road, and some surrounding properties. In order to implement these projects in a cost effective manner, the City is pursuing all grant funding opportunities available. In order to implement these projects in a timely manner, the City must take the opportunity to apply for Fall 2017 Vermont Agency of Transportation (VTrans) Municipal Highway and Stormwater Mitigation Program Grant funding. The grant funding would allow for the engineering design and construction services needed to implement this important Stormwater project. I am requesting that Council indicate their support for this work and the City’s grant application to the VTrans Municipal Highway and Stormwater Mitigation Program grant by taking a formal vote on this matter and signing the attached letter for inclusion with our grant application. If you have any questions, please contact me at (802) 658 – 7961 x6108 or tdipietro@sburl.com. City Of South Burlington, Grant Request Form Prior to applying for a grant please complete this form and submit to Assistant City Manager.. Please submit at least two weeks prior to City Council approval meeting. Extenuating circumstances which do not permit two weeks notice should be brought to the attention of the Assistant City Manager as soon as possible. Please attach actual grant application form – either blank or completed Tom DiPietro, Deputy Director August 2, 2017 Name and title of person completing this form (Project Manager) Date 1. Name/title of grant and submittal deadline date: Municipal Highway and Stormwater Mitigation Program. Submission deadline of August 15, 2017. 2. What specifically is the grant’s purpose? Funding for the engineering design and construction associated with expanding the existing stormwater management system located along Shelburne Road and Bartlett Bay Road, behind Shearer Chevrolet. 3. What does the grant fund and not fund (be specific) The grant will fund 80% of costs for design and construction. 4. Total Project Cost: a. Amount of grant: The project design is estimated to cost $40,000 and initial estimates of project construction costs are $378,000. The grant project budget cap is set at $400,000, so we will be applying for this amount b. Is there a City match required, how much and in what fiscal year(s)? Yes the City will be required to provide a 20% match. c. Are there other grants “tied into” or being used as a match for this grant of which are matching funds for this grant? No. 5. From what budget line will match be paid, and is there unencumbered money to pay it? The match will be paid through the stormwater utility’s capital improvement line item. 6. Is there a cost to the city upon grant conclusion, and if yes, please describe? No. 7. Is grant for stand alone project, and if no, how does grant fit into another project (describe in some detail)? Grant funding will be for design and construction of the project as a stand-alone project. 8. Length of grant - will the grant cross fiscal year(s)? Yes. Design work would likely begin in FY18 and construction would likely end in FY19. 9. Who will apply for grant (name/title)? Tom DiPietro, Deputy Director of Public Works. 10. How much time will it take to complete grant application form? 4 hours. 11. How likely is it that we will receive grant? We have a good chance to receive this grant funding. The project meets all eligibility requirements indicated on the application form. 12. Who will manage (project manager) grant and grant paperwork if approved (if different person than who is filling out this form), Tom DiPietro what are any grant compliance requirements, how much time will this take and how is that time available? Compliance with the grant will require review by the Vermont Agency of Transportation (VTrans) program. Are there funds available in the grant to pay for our administrative costs? Can in-kind service be used as part of the City match? Stormwater utility staff will handle grant related work and paperwork. Yes, In-kind service can be used as part of City match. 13. Describe grant payment process – method of cash flow: The City would pay design service and construction expenses and then submit invoices and copies of cashed checks to VTrans for reimbursement. 14. Should a Council-appointed Committee, Board, or Commission review this request? If yes, please update status: A request for project support has been submitted to council to accompany the project’s grant application. 15. In terms of priority, with 5 being highest and 1 being lowest, please rate this grant in terms of how it fits into your primary mission as approved by City Council and current projects to complete that mission: 5. The project and grant would be to fund stormwater improvements in a stormwater impaired watershed. ___________________________________ _______________________________ Reviewed by Asst. City Manager, Date If approved, grant money will be in this fund ____________________________________ _______________________________ Approved by City Manager, Date Not Approved By City Manager, Date ___________________________________________ ______________________________________ Approved By City Council, Date Not Approved By City Council, Date 2/17/11 Procedure Regarding Grant Request Form 1) No City of South Burlington staff member or volunteer shall apply for a grant without completing and receiving approval of the attached Form. 2) All Form questions must be answered – if you need assistance on financial questions please contact the Assistant City Manager (846-4112). 3) As a rule the Form needs to be submitted to the Assistant City Manager at least two (2) weeks before the City Council Meeting where the application will be reviewed. Exceptions can be made especially when the funding source(s) do not provide sufficient lead time 4) Attach any supporting documentation to the Form. 5) Assistant City Manager will review Form for accuracy and completeness – Assistant City Manager does not approve or reject application. 6) After being reviewed if the Form is complete the Assistant City Manager will submit form to City Manager for approval or rejection. 7) City Manager may request meeting with applicant for clarification. 8) City Manager will determine whether to approve or reject the application and have the project manager informed of the decision. Project manager can request a meeting with City Manager prior to Form being reviewed by Council. 9) Whether Form is approved or rejected by City Manager the Form will be reviewed by the City Council. Project manager will be given the opportunity to discuss Form with Council. 10) Council will make final decision as to whether to approve or reject grant application. Council will also have to formally approve accepting the grant itself if/when it is awarded. 11) If Council approves Form the project manager will be expected to use his/her Form responses to guide the actual grant application. 12) Project manager will update Assistant City Manager in writing as to grant writing, submittal, approval, and implementation progress. 13) If grant is accepted by granting authority project manager will submit to Assistant City Manager and Deputy Finance Officer a monthly progress report on grant implementation and financials – upon request of project manager report time frame can be modified by Assistant City Manager based on actual grant conditions. 14) Deputy Finance Officer will maintain a spread sheet of all grants that tracks grant progress related to financials. 15) Grant spread sheet will be included in yearly Budget Book. 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.658.7961 fax 802.658.7976 www.sburl.com Physical Address: 104 Landfill Road South Burlington To Whom it May Concern, The South Burlington Stormwater Utility is working to provide treatment of stormwater runoff generated from impervious surfaces in the Bartlett Brook watershed. A component of this work is the expansion of the Bartlett Brook Stormwater Treatment System (BBSTS) along Shelburne Road and Bartlett Bay Road. On August ___, 2017 the South Burlington City Council voted to support the Stormwater Utility’s plan to design and construct an expansion to this existing stormwater treatment system. In addition, City Council supports the Stormwater Utility’s grant application to the VTrans Municipal Highway and Stormwater Mitigation Program. We authorize our Deputy Director of Public Works, Thomas DiPietro Jr., to act as the City’s authorized representative when dealing with matters related to this project and the associated applications. Tom can be reached at (802) 658-7961 x6108 or tdipietro@sburl.com Sincerely, South Burlington City Council ____________________________________ ____________________________________ ____________________________________ ____________________________________ ____________________________________ Memo To: South Burlington City Council From: Tom DiPietro, Deputy Director of Public Works CC: Kevin Dorn, City Manager Justin Rabidoux Director of Public Works Date: August 2, 2017 Re: Grant Application for a Scoping Study Related to the Failed Kimball Avenue Culvert Earlier this year the culvert that carries Muddy Brook beneath Kimball Avenue failed. This failure became evident at the road surface where a significant sinkhole developed. At this time, the road was closed to protect the public and the nature of the failure was investigated. It was determined that the bottom of the steel plate metal culvert had corroded, which was allowing material around the pipe to wash into Muddy Brook. Due to the location, size, and amount of cover associated with this culvert crossing it was determined that there was no “quick fix” that could be put in place to repair the culvert and restore traffic flow. As a result the South Burlington DPW worked with the Vermont Agency of Transportation to obtain and install a temporary bridge in this location. Traffic was restored, but issues associated with the failure of this culvert were not addressed. We are proposing to submit a grant application to the VTrans Environmental Mitigation Grant program to complete a scoping study for replacement of the Kimball Avenue culvert. This scoping study would evaluate the different options available for us for correction of the failed culvert, identify any cultural or natural resource related issues that could arise as part of this work, provide cost estimates, and make a recommendation regarding next steps. Generally speaking, it would provide a “clear path forward” for restoration of the failed stream crossing. I am requesting that Council indicate their support for this work and the City’s grant application to the VTrans Environmental Mitigation Grant Program by taking a formal vote on this matter and signing the attached letter for inclusion with our grant application. If you have any questions, please contact me at (802) 658 – 7961 x6108 or tdipietro@sburl.com. City Of South Burlington, Grant Request Form Prior to applying for a grant please complete this form and submit to Assistant City Manager.. Please submit at least two weeks prior to City Council approval meeting. Extenuating circumstances which do not permit two weeks notice should be brought to the attention of the Assistant City Manager as soon as possible. Please attach actual grant application form – either blank or completed Tom DiPietro, Deputy Director August 2, 2017 Name and title of person completing this form (Project Manager) Date 1. Name/title of grant and submittal deadline date: Municipal Highway and Stormwater Mitigation Program. Submission deadline of August 15, 2017. 2. What specifically is the grant’s purpose? Funding for a scoping study to determine the appropriate remedy for the failed culvert under Kimball Avenue. This culvert failed unexpectedly. We currently have a temporary bridge in place, but this grant will allow us to determine the appropriate steps that need to be taken to replace the failed culvert. 3. What does the grant fund and not fund (be specific) The grant will fund 80% of the scoping study. 4. Total Project Cost: a. Amount of grant: Completion of the scoping study is estimated to cost $82,800. The grant would cover up to $66,240 of these costs. b. Is there a City match required, how much and in what fiscal year(s)? Yes the City will be required to provide a 20% match. c. Are there other grants “tied into” or being used as a match for this grant of which are matching funds for this grant? No. 5. From what budget line will match be paid, and is there unencumbered money to pay it? The match will be paid through the stormwater utility’s capital improvement line item. 6. Is there a cost to the city upon grant conclusion, and if yes, please describe? No. 7. Is grant for stand alone project, and if no, how does grant fit into another project (describe in some detail)? Grant funding will be for a scoping study that is part of a stand-alone project. 8. Length of grant - will the grant cross fiscal year(s)? Yes. It is likely that work will span both FY18 and FY19. 9. Who will apply for grant (name/title)? Tom DiPietro, Deputy Director of Public Works. 10. How much time will it take to complete grant application form? 2 hours. 11. How likely is it that we will receive grant? We have a good chance to receive this grant funding. The project meets all eligibility requirements indicated on the application form. 12. Who will manage (project manager) grant and grant paperwork if approved (if different person than who is filling out this form), Tom DiPietro what are any grant compliance requirements, how much time will this take and how is that time available? Compliance with the grant will require review by the Vermont Agency of Transportation (VTrans) program. Are there funds available in the grant to pay for our administrative costs? Can in-kind service be used as part of the City match? Stormwater utility staff will handle grant related work and paperwork. Yes, In-kind service can be used as part of City match. 13. Describe grant payment process – method of cash flow: The City would pay consultant expenses and then submit invoices and copies of cashed checks to VTrans for reimbursement. 14. Should a Council-appointed Committee, Board, or Commission review this request? If yes, please update status: A request for project support has been submitted to council to accompany the project’s grant application. 15. In terms of priority, with 5 being highest and 1 being lowest, please rate this grant in terms of how it fits into your primary mission as approved by City Council and current projects to complete that mission: 5. The scoping study will provide us with a clear path forward regarding replacement/repair of the failed culvert under Kimball Avenue. We currently have a temporary bridge in place, but we must determine the best way to address this issue for the long term. ___________________________________ _______________________________ Reviewed by Asst. City Manager, Date If approved, grant money will be in this fund ____________________________________ _______________________________ Approved by City Manager, Date Not Approved By City Manager, Date ___________________________________________ ______________________________________ Approved By City Council, Date Not Approved By City Council, Date 2/17/11 Procedure Regarding Grant Request Form 1) No City of South Burlington staff member or volunteer shall apply for a grant without completing and receiving approval of the attached Form. 2) All Form questions must be answered – if you need assistance on financial questions please contact the Assistant City Manager (846-4112). 3) As a rule the Form needs to be submitted to the Assistant City Manager at least two (2) weeks before the City Council Meeting where the application will be reviewed. Exceptions can be made especially when the funding source(s) do not provide sufficient lead time 4) Attach any supporting documentation to the Form. 5) Assistant City Manager will review Form for accuracy and completeness – Assistant City Manager does not approve or reject application. 6) After being reviewed if the Form is complete the Assistant City Manager will submit form to City Manager for approval or rejection. 7) City Manager may request meeting with applicant for clarification. 8) City Manager will determine whether to approve or reject the application and have the project manager informed of the decision. Project manager can request a meeting with City Manager prior to Form being reviewed by Council. 9) Whether Form is approved or rejected by City Manager the Form will be reviewed by the City Council. Project manager will be given the opportunity to discuss Form with Council. 10) Council will make final decision as to whether to approve or reject grant application. Council will also have to formally approve accepting the grant itself if/when it is awarded. 11) If Council approves Form the project manager will be expected to use his/her Form responses to guide the actual grant application. 12) Project manager will update Assistant City Manager in writing as to grant writing, submittal, approval, and implementation progress. 13) If grant is accepted by granting authority project manager will submit to Assistant City Manager and Deputy Finance Officer a monthly progress report on grant implementation and financials – upon request of project manager report time frame can be modified by Assistant City Manager based on actual grant conditions. 14) Deputy Finance Officer will maintain a spread sheet of all grants that tracks grant progress related to financials. 15) Grant spread sheet will be included in yearly Budget Book. 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.658.7961 fax 802.658.7976 www.sburl.com Physical Address: 104 Landfill Road South Burlington To Whom it May Concern, The City of South Burlington Department of Public Works is working to restore a failed stream crossing beneath Kimball Avenue. The first step in this process is to complete a scoping study that evaluates alternatives, identifies potential cultural and natural resource issues, estimates costs, and makes a recommendation for moving forward with repair/replacement of the existing culvert. On August ___, 2017 the South Burlington City Council voted to support the Department of Public Works plan to complete this scoping study. In addition, City Council supports the South Burlington Stormwater Utility’s grant application to the VTrans Environmental Mitigation Grant program. We authorize our Deputy Director of Public Works, Thomas DiPietro Jr., to act as the City’s authorized representative when dealing with matters related to this project and the associated applications. Tom can be reached at (802) 658-7961 x6108 or tdipietro@sburl.com Sincerely, South Burlington City Council ____________________________________ ____________________________________ ____________________________________ ____________________________________ ____________________________________ DRAFT CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION ON CLIMATE CHANGE Whereas – human greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are increasing global temperatures at an unprecedented rate, and continued GHG emissions will result in further destabilizing local and global climate systems; and Whereas – detrimental changes to the climate systems upon which all living creatures depend and upon which human societies depend will cause catastrophic impacts for the people of South Burlington, Vermont; the United States; and countries around the globe; and Whereas – the United States has withdrawn from the United Nations Climate Change Conference’s Paris Agreement, an international agreement to begin to deal with our collective GHG emissions; and a variety of states, municipalities, organizations, and businesses are stepping in to show the world that people in the United States ARE committed to tackling the looming climate crisis. Now Therefore – the South Burlington City Council hereby: 1. – joins the State of Vermont and other communities and businesses in the Vermont Climate Pledge Coalition, and in so doing, pledges to meet or exceed the obligations for the United States in the Paris Agreement, and 2. – directs the city staff to work with the appropriate committees and the public to undertake the creation of a South Burlington Climate Action Plan that a) includes specific goals b) identifies sectors of South Burlington (municipal, institutional, commercial, residential) that contribute to GHG emissions, and c) develops strategies that could effectively address these emissions. August 4, 2017 MEMO TO: City Council FROM: Kevin Dorn RE: Council appointment to the Chittenden Solid Waste District Item 11 on the Council agenda for your meeting Monday night is: “Consider and possibly approve the appointment of Paul Stabler to the Board of the Chittenden Solid Waste District.” It had been my recollection that when Paul appeared with the Executive Director of the CSWD during your May 15, 2017 meeting that the Council had effectively re-appointed Paul as your representative by acclamation of sorts. The minutes of that meeting, however, not your expression of appreciation to Paul for his service but do not actually reflect any form of re-appointment. I have added this provision to the agenda so that you could officially consider his re-appointment if you wish. You also have the option of holding back on the appointment and directing that the position be advertised along with other committee appointments you will be considering in the meetings ahead. Paul could still apply through that process if he was interested. 1 DRAFT 7/26/17 MOU on Cost Sharing for Member Communities of Chittenden County Public Safety Authority A. Introduction Following affirmative votes by a majority of citizens in three or more communities, the Chittenden County Public Safety Authority (CCPSA) will exist. It is not possible at this time to know which communities’ votes will be positive, resulting in membership. It is not possible to know at this time when the CCPSA will be ready to accept responsibility for operating dispatch services for each community. Nor is it possible to know precisely when communities will be ready to transition dispatch service to the CCPSA. Therefore, it is challenging to prepare a budget for the first year of operations— unless the CCPSA were to receive a budget for operating expenses in addition to the cost of local dispatch services. DeltaWRX, a consultant retained to assist with the creation and budgeting for a regional dispatch entity, proposed an additional allocation of $500,000 for pre-operational startup labor costs, together with $1.2M in startup capital. However, we believe that transitioning seven local dispatch operations to regional dispatch within the course of a single year may provide a recipe for failure. A complex operation like the CCPSA is more likely to find success through organic growth typical of the private sector, complete with beta testing and incremental expansion. Transitioning over time also provides the best opportunity for any necessary reduction in staffing to be accomplished through natural attrition rather than by way of layoffs. Therefore, in accordance with the Agreement to Create the Chittenden County Public Safety Authority (Agreement), the following system of initial contributions is established -- B. Initial Contributions • Member communities are initially authorized to commit to the contribution of financial resources budgeted towards their current dispatch operations, plus any additional funds said communities are willing to contribute. • The CCPSA budget will be comprised of voluntary contributions of members in this phase. o The expectation during this initial phase is that the CCPSA budget would grow annually at the approximate rate of dispatch budget growth in the member municipalities. • The costs of the first one and possibly two years of dispatch services provided by CCPSA would likely be funded from already approved municipal budgets. • Subsequent initial funding would be budgeted by the CCPSA board without a formula, in such a manner that a community’s initial contribution of their current budget would be continued with any increase equal to or approximating the increase in municipal dispatch budgets. o Any percentage increase shall be consistently applied to all communities in this phase of subsequent initial funding. 2 • Initial funding will continue until all members receive service for two full years. • Any deficits that accrue in the initial years of dispatch service operation by CCPSA, prior to the implementation of the Long Term Contributions, described below, shall be apportioned to those members to whom CCPSA provided dispatch services during the Initial Funding phase. This approach is expected to build up the CCPSA in a flexible, paced, and affordable manner. This incremental approach will help reduce the need to fund pre-operational startup operating and capital costs (not including radio costs) as recommended by the consultant. C. Long Term Contributions 1) Contribution Formula After one full fiscal year of service has been provided to all members that are parties to this MOU, the second full year of funding shall be based on the initial contribution outlined above. Funding in subsequent years shall be based on the following steps: • Step 1: Determine net costs, including operating expenses, capital expenses, capital reserves, grant revenues, PSAP revenues, contract revenues, excess initial contribution repayment and any CCPSA deficits. • Step 2: Determine the three year rolling average of calls for service in each member community, for the past three fiscal years (regardless of whether the member received service from CCPSA during that period) expressed as a percentage: • Calls for service in member communities are defined as: Calls for any emergency service agency (including non-municipal agencies serving the community) in a community including: police, fire, or rescue services. The calls are counted per agency responding, not per incident. Calls include agencies responding to mutual aid calls. Calls include anything that causes a public safety employee to take an action or expend agency resources, whether agency-initiated or citizen-initiated. • The Chittenden County Sheriff’s Department shall not pay for calls to avoid a charge back through the County tax. • Step 3: Apportion Step 1 net costs based on Step 2 percentages as defined above. For example, if on July 1, 2020 (FY 21) all members have been involved in the CCPSA for one full fiscal year, the CCPSA shall have entered the second full fiscal year based on the initial contributions. By September 2020 there will be first full year operating costs with all members participating in the CCPSA on which to base future decisions. If the net cost for FY22 (including operating, startup and capital) is $3.1M and average calls for service among member communities for FY’s 18, 19 and 20 are 143,652 and the Town of Colchester has 16,373 average annual calls for service during that time period (including Saint Michael’s College Rescue and a 3 few rescue calls from Burlington Fire), Colchester’s call share of the FY 22 costs would be 11.4% or $353,328. 2) Reimbursement for Excess Initial Contributions This section provides for the reimbursement of communities that provided excess initial contributions toward startup and operating expenses beyond the Initial Contributions, described above, which spreads such costs over all member communities. It provides for reimbursement over a five to ten year period, based on an individual community’s contributions and all communities’ shares as further described below. • Step 4: Determine excess initial contributions toward startup capital and operating expenses (i.e., contributions beyond the Initial Contributions, described above). o Excess capital contributions toward startup may include contributions of “capital equipment.”  Capital equipment shall include, but is not be limited to, the following: computer aided dispatch software purchase and license fees, including alteration thereof to serve more than one member of regional dispatch in linking to 911; GIS; law enforcement records management; fire records management; station alerting; NCIC/VCIC and related databases; voice logging and recording systems; facility improvements; electrical, telecom or IT wiring; telecom equipment; furniture; servers and IT network infrastructure; radio equipment; PSAP equipment, including design or engineering costs related to any of the above.  To qualify for reimbursement under this section, a contribution of capital equipment must have more than a one year useful lifespan or be valued at over $5,000, including multiple single items contributed contemporaneously for use by regional dispatch and having a combined total value of over $5,000.  Capital equipment contributions must be in use by regional dispatch at the time long term funding contributions by members are implemented and required.  Capital equipment reimbursable under this section shall not include any equipment purchased prior to July 1, 2017. All such equipment purchased prior to such date, which is usable and desired by regional dispatch, and not necessary to retain at local police departments, shall be contributed to regional dispatch as local dispatch transitions thereto at no charge or cost to CCPSA. o Qualifying excess contributions toward operating costs are those contributions that exceed municipally budgeted operating costs, or those that exceed assessments paid under Initial Contributions. Such contributions may include, but are not limited to, funding new regional dispatch resources such as managers, trainers, an executive director, IT staff and operating costs such as rent, utilities, consulting and other related costs and fees. o Excess initial contributions of resources (i.e., contributions in excess of annual funding as described in the Initial Contributions of shall be claimed by each member within 90 days of the creation of CCPSA if the expenditure was made prior to the creation of CCPSA or 60 days prior to the expenditure if after the expenditure was made after the creation of CCPSA. 4 CCPSA’s board shall consider the request and shall provide written notice to the contributing member regarding eligibility for reimbursement under this section within 60 days of such notice. In the event that a member is aggrieved by a determination of the CCPSA board regarding the eligibility of a contribution for reimbursement, that member may appeal to the board within 30 days of the date such notice and the board shall hold a hearing on the appeal of the matter. The aggrieved party shall be allowed to vote on the appeal, but not the initial determination. • Step 5: Allocate excess initial contributions to all members based on a three year rolling average of members’ call percentages to determine the first year’s net costs. • Step 6: Determine over/underpayments for excess initial contributions based on actual contributions of such resources, as designated and acknowledged by the CCPSA board. • Step 7: Combine formula funding with payback of excess initial contributions to determine net funding, and determine payback period such that reimbursement occurs over the shortest possible time without triggering the “Smoothing Formula,” described below. Under no circumstances shall reimbursement for excess initial contributions exceed ten years. 3) Smoothing Formula If the implementation of the above-described formula, after reimbursement for excess initial contributions , will increase any member’s contribution (including operating and capital expenses) by 5% or more in the first year: o The formula shall be implemented over time, not to exceed six years, and within that time, as short as possible, such that the impact of the formula is in any one member community is limited to an increase of 4.9 percent annually. o This smoothing formula shall apply to a member community only if CCPSA was providing all dispatch services to that community in the year before the formula is implemented. • Step 8: For all communities in which CCPSA is providing all dispatch services in the year prior to the implementation of the formula, determine if net funding plus reimbursement of excess initial contributions results in any community paying 5% or more than the currently budgeted year. • Step 9: Apply Smoothing formula o If any community would pay an increase of 5% or more in the first year of transition from initial funding to long term funding, to the extent possible, the long term funding formula shall be blended in over time, so as to require an increase of no more than 4.9% to the community or communities with a 5% or greater increase. 5  However, this blending shall not be implemented if it causes additional communities to incur an increase of more than 4.9%. • Step 10: Apply a 4.9% increase by taking the current year’s assessment of any member community experiencing a 5% or greater increase based on the net funding. o Convert the 4.9% increase to a dollar amount o Determine percentage of calls in all other communities, not including communities subject to smoothing, by totaling calls in such communities. o Fund dollar amount by percentage of calls in non-smoothing communities o Add smoothing funding to net funding to obtain adjusted funding D. MOU Adoption and Changes 1. An MOU shall be drafted by the CCPSA board and shall be approved by an affirmative vote of the majority of the CCPSA board. However, each member community’s legislative body shall be required to ratify the MOU before the community may receive services from the CCPSA and before the community shall become responsible for operating costs or capital costs of the CCPSA. 2. The MOU may be amended by an affirmative vote of the majority of the CCPSA board. Changes to the long term MOU must be ratified by the majority of the legislative bodies of the CCPSA. 6 DRAFT 7/25/17 Outline on Cost Sharing for Contracting Municipalities or Public Safety Agencies of Chittenden County Public Safety Authority Intention of Relationships: Any agreement for dispatch services shall be by and between the Chittenden County Public Safety Authority (CCPSA) and the public safety agency or entity with the most direct impact on and relationship to those dispatch service (i.e., the agency for which CCPSA will provide such dispatch services). For example, when a Vermont municipality has a not-for-profit fire department (i.e., a fire department that is not under the direction and control of the municipal legislative body for the municipality in which it is located), the agreement should be with the not-for-profit fire department, and the department should request funding for dispatch services at the time and in the manner that it requests other funding from the municipality or municipalities that it serves. In such instance, the non- municipal public safety agency may be required to provide surety, in a form acceptable to the CCPSA board, for the costs for dispatch services that it incurs under the agreement. Any agreement for less than $10,000 annually shall require a five year minimum relationship. Agreements with public safety agencies shall not be aggregated so as to bypass this minimum. The cost of dispatch services provided by the CCPSA to the contracting public safety agency will be billed on a [quarterly] basis in advance of service provision, with payment required within 30 days of billing. Any agreement for dispatch services may be terminated by either party, upon 90 days written notice to the other party, for any reason. In the event of such termination, any unpaid balances for dispatch services provided shall immediately become due. Contracting Municipalities or Public Safety Agencies shall not be bound to the long term capital costs of the CCPSA, beyond the commitments laid out in this agreement. Cost sharing shall be based on a CCPSA fee per call developed by estimating future year’s costs (operating costs, capital outlays, debt service, capital reserves startup cost repayment) net of secured and highly expected grants for equipment and PSAP operations and divided by expected calls, not including calls to the Chittenden County Sheriff. Each municipal or public safety agency’s cost shall be based on the average of the last three full fiscal years of calls in that community or agency according to the below definition of “calls for service.” Calls for service definition: Contracts with Municipalities: Calls for any emergency service agency response (including any response by non-municipal agencies serving the community) include all police, fire, and rescue service calls that cause a public safety employee to take an action or expend agency resources, whether agency-initiated or citizen-initiated. Calls shall be counted per agency responding, not per incident, and include agencies responding to mutual aid calls. Calls include anything that causes a public safety employee to take an action or expend agency resources, whether agency-initiated or citizen-initiated. 7 Contracts with Public Safety Agencies (independent of Towns): Any call to a public safety agency in communities where that agency has primarily response obligations, as well as any calls that the public safety agency responds to in communities that are not members of the CCPSA and/or do not contract directly with the CCPSA. Calls shall include police, fire, or rescue services. Calls shall be counted per agency responding, not per incident and include agencies responding to mutual aid calls. Calls include anything that causes a public safety employee to take an action or expend agency resources, whether agency-initiated or citizen-initiated. Any amendments or modifications to this agreement shall be in writing and signed by the parties thereto. Regional Governance Burlington International Airport Joint Resolution Whereas; • The Burlington International Airport (BIA) serves as a critical component of Vermont’s economic development and transportation infrastructure linking our state to the nation and world for both business and personal travel; and • Preserving and enhancing the vitality of the airport for passenger travel and air freight needs to be a high priority for the region and State of Vermont; and • A reduction in flight schedules or the loss of service by one or more airlines would have a devastating impact on the entire Vermont economy and jobs market; and • The State has a vital interest in ensuring the viability and continuance of major airline service into the BIA yet has no role in management or operations of the Airport, its marketing plans or its relations with major carriers; and • The State owns, operates and maintains most of the airports located in Vermont including Rutland-Southern Vermont Regional Airport, Edward H. Knapp State Airport (Berlin), William H. Morse State Airport (Bennington), Franklin County State Airport, Caledonia County Airport, Middlebury State Airport, Morrisville-Stowe State Airport, Newport State Airport, Post Mills Airport, Hartness State Airport (Springfield), and Warren-Sugarbush Airport; and • The Vermont Air Guard and the Vermont Army guard, both instruments of the State in their civilian mission, are the largest tenants of the Airport and therefore subject to decisions made by the City of Burlington with no direct oversight by the State; and • The State has broad jurisdiction and responsibility over statewide economic development initiatives and the infrastructure that supports economic development and job growth yet has no role whatsoever in management of a key element of that infrastructure, namely the BIA; and • Performance indicators (see below) at the BIA call into question its viability as an ongoing enterprise and component of our State’s economic development infrastructure; and Whereas; • The City of Burlington holds title to the 880+/- acres and various buildings that comprise the Burlington International Airport; and • The 880 +/- acres that comprise the BIA are wholly located within the borders of the City of South Burlington and not physically connected in any way to the City of Burlington; and • The residents of the City of South Burlington, the City of Winooski, the Town of Williston, the Town of Colchester, the Town of Essex, the Town of Shelburne and other adjacent communities are directly affected by the general operations of the BIA particularly from a noise, safety and traffic perspective; and • The residents of Burlington are not similarly affected by the general operations of the airport; and Whereas; • The Director of Aviation serves as the general manager of non-flight and non-military-related operations at the BIA and reports to and is solely accountable to the Mayor of the City of Burlington; and • The only authoritative oversight of the management of the Airport rests with the Burlington elected officials neglecting all other municipalities affected by airport operations and Champlain Valley airspace activity ; and • The Airport Commission is perfunctory in its role and is merely advisory as they do not exercise authority over BIA operations or the decisions of the Director of Aviation; and • Four Members of the five Member Commission are appointed by the Mayor and City Council of the City of Burlington with one Member representing the City of South Burlington appointed by the South Burlington City Council; and • The City of South Burlington has no meaningful role in BIA governance given the purely advisory nature of the Commission; and • No other affected communities have a seat on the Commission even though they are directly affected by activities using airspace in the Champlain Valley; and • According to the approved minutes of the April 24, 2017 meeting of the Airport Commission a member of the Commission stated, “It may be time for the Airport Commission and the City of Burlington to reevaluate having a member from South Burlington on the Airport Commission if this is no longer as beneficial as it once was or all parties could work on having a more understanding and constructive relationship” potentially calling into question the legitimacy and longevity of a South Burlington representative on the Commission; and • A Winooski City Council passed resolution (November 17, 2016) requesting that Winooski be granted a Commissioner position on the Burlington Airport Commission due to the impact of operations on the City has not been responded to by the City of Burlington; and • The citizens of the City of South Burlington, the City of Winooski, the Town of Williston, the Town of Colchester, the Town of Essex, and the Town of Shelburne and other adjacent communities are directly affected by the ongoing BIA operations on the ground and in the airspace over their communities yet have no ability to redress their concerns through shared governance in Airport decision making; and • The lack of broad accountability embedded in the BIA governance structure combined with the existence of the BIA located wholly within another municipality with its operational affects touching other communities and not the City of Burlington is rare if not unique in the United States; and Whereas; • The BIA has begun the planning process to develop a Noise Compatibility Program Update that will guide the investment of potential future FAA funds in approved noise abatement remedies that should set as a priority the protection and preservation of workforce housing; and • Under Part 150, the FAA requires that an “Advisory Committee” be established comprised of neighboring communities and other stakeholders; and • The recommendations developed by the Advisory Committee will be provided to the Director of Aviation; and, • The Director of Aviation alone will decide which measures he will present to the FAA as the final recommendations of the BIA for future noise abatement measures; and • None of these measures or investments will be made in the City of Burlington as no relevant impacts fall upon the residents of the City of Burlington from airport-generated noise; and • The communities that are actually affected by airport operation noise will have no role in actually deciding which investments will be best for or even wanted in their communities as only the Director of Aviation will have that authority to make these recommendations to the FAA and to apply for funding to support those measures; and Whereas; • The BIA operates as a separate Enterprise Fund within the departmental structure of the City of Burlington that is wholly self-sustaining deriving revenues from commercial carrier operations, the sale of goods and services, leases and significant funding from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA); and • The financial viability of BIA is wholly dependent on revenues derived from sources other than City of Burlington taxpayers; and • City of Burlington taxpayers have made no investments in the BIA or the property on which it sits since 1948 when the City taxpayers covered part of the cost of a runway extension; and, • All improvements to the BIA have been funded through the enterprise itself and the FAA, its major source of federal funding; and • The City of Burlington functions as a steward of BIA, an enterprise that is a regional asset serving a regional population and economy paid for by its own operations and FAA funding; and • While the City of Burlington holds “title” to the BIA it does not “own” BIA in the classic sense of having paid for it through taxpayer investments (as the context of ownership reflects who actually paid for the asset, revenues were provided through the enterprise by passengers from throughout Vermont and the world who have arrived or embarked from BIA, commercial lease holders and other customers and by the largest of its funders being the FAA); and, Whereas; • BIA Performance indicators as most accurately expressed though passenger enplanements (the annual number of passengers boarding scheduled flights) have declined dramatically since a peak in 2008; and • This decline in enplanements at BIA has occurred even as enplanements nationally have increased significantly; and • BIA enplanements fell from 759,021 in 2008 to 594,034 in 2015, (Source: BIA Website, BTV Monthly Passenger Enplanements) even as nationwide enplanements rose from 820,000,000 to 895,000,000 (Source: Bureau of Transportation Statistics, 2015 U.S. Based Traffic Data); and, • Enplanements at the BIA have fallen short of even the lowest forecasted projections by the BIA in its “Vision 2030 Airport Master Plan Update Summary Presentation” (Source: Chart - High, Medium, and Low Forecast Scenarios for Commercial Enplanements at BTV: 2008 – 2030) dated January 2011; and • The Vision 2030 Airport Master Plan Update Summary Presentation” dated January 2011 projected that enplanements in 2016 would be at roughly 750,000 under a “low” scenario, 1,000,000 under a “medium” scenario and 1,250,000 under a “high” scenario. Actual enplanements in 2015 were 594,034, well below the lowest predicted target (Source: Vision 2030 Airport Master Plan Update Summary Presentation, Chart - High, Medium, and Low Forecast Scenarios for Commercial Enplanements at BTV: 2008 – 2030); and Whereas; • A Committee established by the City of Burlington to develop a Strategic Plan for the BIA issued its report to the Burlington City Council and Mayor on June 10 2013 in an appearance before the Burlington City Council and Mayor that was featured in various news articles that included recommendations regarding Finances, Air Service Development, Staffing, Economic Development and Governance; and • As for the issue of governance, this Strategic Plan recommended the following “Action Step”— “Concurrently work with the State and other potential regional partners to create a regional authority model to be implemented …” yet four years later, there has been no effort to pursue this “Action Step,” again calling into question whether or not any other “Action Steps” have been pursued or accomplished; and • It is unclear as to whether or not progress has been made on any of the recommendations as there is no reference on the BIA website or on the City of Burlington website as to the matter of addressing the recommendations of the Plan; and • As the line of authority and communication between Airport management goes only to the Mayor, and to no other body of authority over BIA operations, it is unknown whether or not any of the recommendations are being pursued as had been intended; and Whereas; • A vital and growing Plattsburg International Airport (PIA) creates competitive pressure on the regional landscape that has devastating implications for the entire economy of Vermont; and • The State of New York and Clinton County have invested $54 million in a very recently completed expansion of the PIA terminal, tripling its size (Source: Seven Days, August 26, 2016); and • The new terminal is projected to be able to handle 300,000 enplanements a year and is on track to exceed 150,000 enplanements this year (Seven Days, August 26, 2016); and • The new PIA terminal has five existing gates, expandable to eight, fully staffed TSA function, two baggage carrousels, fully staffed rental car agencies, massive surface level parking capacity with accommodations for US customs and immigration functions to support international flights (Source: Tour of the Airport); and • Spirit, Allegiant and PanAir currently provide service out of PIA to Boston, South Carolina, Florida, the Caribbean and Latin countries (Plattsburgh International Airport Website); and • PIA has aggressively courted the Quebec market by branding itself “Montreal’s U.S. Airport” and catering to French speaking customers (Source: Plattsburgh International Airport Website, Seven Days, August 26, 2016); and • The State of New York and Clinton County have also pledged $38 million to upgrade the industrial park adjacent to the PIA focusing on air cargo and serving as a transportation hub (Source: Governor Andrew Cuomo State of the State Address, January 11, 2017); and • It is clear that this nearly $100 million in investment is designed to lure a full-scheduled air carrier to PIA that will compete head-to-head with carriers operating out of BIA—putting added competitive pressure on decisions regarding routes and equipment flying out of BIA; and • Loss of routes and a change in equipment would have a significant impact on the economy of northwest Vermont and the State; and • There is little recognition of any competitive pressures from PIA or other airports in either the 2030 Plan, the Airport Strategic Planning Committee recommendations of June 10, 2013 or any other materials relating to BIA marketing; and • The emergence of a strong PIA calls into serious question the “Airport Vision” as presented in the Airport Strategic Planning Committee Recommendations of June 10, 2013; “Our vision is to meet the air transportation needs of all the people and businesses of Vermont, northern New York, northern New Hampshire and southern Quebec for the duration of this century;” and Whereas; • Regional governance models for larger, commercial-service airports that are county–based or authority–based is the norm in the United States which brings all affected communities to the decision making table; and • All major airports in New York State are now governed by regional authorities with Syracuse being the most recent conversion in 2013; and • Other airports, such as Gerald Ford International Airport in Grand Rapids, Michigan have also recently converted to an “authority” structure of governance; and • Syracuse, among others, has found great success in a regional governance model increasing its economic viability and engaging the entire region in support of the airport as an economic driver; and • In the Airport Strategic Planning Committee Recommendations of June 10, 2013, the Strategic Planning Committee recognized the viability of moving toward a regional governance model for BIA by making the recommendation that it “...work with the state and other potential regional partners to create a regional authority model to be implemented as financial goals are realized” and in a later recommendation to “further explore the advantages/disadvantages of conversion to a regional airport authority governance model.” Four years later, a serious review and discussion of regional governance has yet to occur. Therefore, be it resolved that the undersigned communities and stakeholders request that: 1. The Burlington City Council consider and declare that it is in the best interest of the City of Burlington, the greater Northwest Vermont region and the State of Vermont that ownership of the Burlington International Airport be transferred to the State of Vermont and that a State/Regional governing board be established to provide oversight of the management of the Burlington International Airport that would include representation from Burlington as well as other affected communities in the region and the State; and 2. That the Mayor of Burlington cause to be formed a committee made up of representatives from Burlington, affected communities in the region appointed by their legislative bodies and the State as appointed by the Governor to prepare and implement a plan to transition Burlington International Airport ownership from the City of Burlington to the State of Vermont and to recommend that a governance structure be established that includes representatives from Burlington as well as other affected communities in the region and the State of Vermont; and 3. That should neither of the actions requested in the first two resolved clauses be initiated in a reasonable period of time as determined by the undersigned, that the Governor of the State of Vermont appoint a committee made up of representatives from affected communities in the region and the State to develop a plan to transition ownership of the Burlington International Airport from the City of Burlington to the State of Vermont to be governed by a board comprised of representatives from affected communities in the region and the State in a structure as determined by the committee. __________________________ _________________________ Helen Riehle, Chair Pat Nowak __________________________ _________________________ Meaghan Emery, Vice Chair Thomas Chittenden __________________________ Tim Barret, Clerk __________________________ Date 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4107 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburl.com To: Kevin Dorn, City Manager From: Ilona Blanchard, Project Director Subject: Market Street Reconstruction Project - STP 5200(17) Right of Way on Dorset Street and Market Street Date: August 4, 2017 Background: In order to construct the Market Street Reconstruction Project – STP 5200(17), the City needs to acquire additional land rights, including temporary and permanent easements. To efficiently proceed with the project, the City Council would need to commence the condemnation process by holding a necessity and compensation/damages hearing in the coming weeks. Staff anticipates that taking the rights from only four or five property owners will be at issue at the hearing. Due to the requirement that owners and others interested in the lands through which the road passes or abuts be given 30 days’ advanced notice of the hearing, it is desirable that ample time be provided. The hearing should be scheduled over three consecutive nights beginning on or after September 18th. At the hearing the Council will hear evidence and will ultimately need to determine if the public good, necessity and convenience of the inhabitants of the City require that certain property rights be taken in order to alter Dorset and Market Streets as shown on the project plans. Council will also hear evidence and will need to determine whether the land owners whose property rights are being acquired as part of the project are entitled to reasonable damages. Attachments: • Market Street Reconstruction Project – STP 5200(17) Right of Way Plans Recommendation: Consider making and approving this motion: Commence proceedings to alter the rights-of-way for Dorset Street (Town Highway 5) and Market Street (Town Highway 228) pursuant to 19 V.S.A. § 708(a) as depicted on the plan set entitled “Proposed Improvements, South Burlington, Vermont, County of Chittenden, STP 5200(17), Right-of-Way Plans,” Project No. STP 5200(17), Sheets 1 through 10, prepared by VHB. ... . ET S S S S S S SSSE E EEETE EE ET EEE S S S EXIST. SMHRIM= 310.93INV. IN= 302.54INV. OUT= 302.50 EXIST. SMHRIM= 309.50INV. IN= 301.58INV. OUT=301.52 EXIST. SMHRIM= 308.83INV. IN= 300.54 (N)INV. IN= 300.98 (W)INV. OUT= 300.51 (S)EXIST. SMHRIM= 310.34INV. IN= 300.50 (N)INV. IN= (W)INV. IN= (E)INV. OUT=300.41 (S) EXIST. SMH RIM= 310.48 INV.= 303.48 EXIST. PUMP STATION RIM= 310.04 EXIST. SMH RIM= 311.12 EXIST. PUMP STATION RIM= 310.55 INV OUT= 316.39 (6" PVC) INV IN= 316.39 (8" PVC) RIM= 322.64 FORCEMAIN OUTLET SMH RIM = 322.63 SMH D D D 8" DI 8" DI 8" DI 8" DI 8" DI 8" DI 8" DI 8" DI 8" DI D Exist. R.O.W. Exist. R.O.W.Exist. R.O.W. Exist. R.O.W.Exist. R.O.W. Exist. R.O.W.Exist. R.O.W. Exist. R.O.W. Exist. R.O.W. Exist. R.O.W. Exist. R.O.W. Exist. R.O.W.Exist. R.O.W. Exist. R.O.W.Exist. R.O.W.Exist. R.O.W .Exist. R.O.W .Exist. R.O .W.N VT STATE PLANE GRIDSCALE IN FEET 0 200 400 34x22=200 SCALE MARKET STREET D ORSET STREET T O HI NES B UR G(VT 116) HINESB UR G R O A D POT STA. 35+00.00 HINESBURG ROAD (VT 116 ML POE STA 131+00.99 = DORSET STREET POT STA. 15+00.00 ML POB STA 100+00.00 = LENGTH OF PROJECT:3040 FT = 0.58 MILES MARKET STREET PROJECT DESCRIPTION COUNTY OF CHITTENDEN MODIFICATIONS, AND OTHER ROADWAY RELATED ITEMS ON NEW HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL GEOMETRY. MODIFICATIONS, WATER, SIDEWALKS, CURBING, PAVEMENT MARKINGS, LIGHTING, LANDSCAPING, TRAFFIC SIGNAL WORK TO BE PERFORMED UNDER THIS PROJECT INCLUDES NEW PAVEMENT, NEW SUBBASE, DRAINAGE, SEWER GARDEN STREET PI STA. 20+00.00 ML POT STA 115+81.13 = T O B U RLIN GT O N D DORSET STREET(VT 116)HINESBURG ROADW I LLI STON ROAD100+00105+00110+00 115+00 120+00 1 2 5 +0 013 0 +0 0 12+47 15+00 18+34 15+0 024+8933+00 35+00 36+00 STP 5200(17) PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS HINESBURG RD (VT 116) INTERSECTION. BURLINGTON, AND EXTENDING SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG MARKET STREET FOR APPROXIMATELY 0.6 MILES TO THE BEGINNING AT THE INTERSECTION OF TH 5 (DORSET ST.) AND TH 228 (MARKET ST.) IN THE CITY OF SOUTH (FUTURE)GARDEN STREET9 8 +0 0 SHEET 1 OF 10 SHEETS STA. 99+01 BEGIN R.O.W. PROJECT STA. 130+74 END R.O.W. PROJECT RIGHT-OF-WAY PLANS INDEX OF SHEETS RIGHT-OF-WAY PLANS RIGHT-OF-WAY DETAIL SHEET SYMBOLOGY LEGEND SHEET PROJECT MANAGER : G.L. BAKOS PROJECT NAME : S. BURLINGTON-MARKET STREET PROJECT NUMBER : STP 5200(17) DATUM HORIZONTAL NAD 83 SURVEYED DATE : SURVEYED BY : QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM : LEVEL 2 VERTICAL NAVD 88 IN THESE PLANS. SPECIFICATIONS AND SPECIAL PROVISIONS AS ARE INCORPORATED INCLUDING ALL SUBSEQUENT REVISIONS AND SUCH REVISED ADMINISTRATION ON JULY 20, 2011 FOR USE ON THIS PROJECT, DATED 2011, AS APPROVED BY THE FEDERAL HIGHWAY TRANSPORTATION STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR CONSTRUCTION WITH THESE PLANS AND THE VERMONT AGENCY OF CONSTRUCTION IS TO BE CARRIED ON IN ACCORDANCE 4-10 3 2 8/4/2017 CZ DITCH FOUNDATION GARDEN HEDGE E L T R D BK AH STA POE POB PRC PCC PT CC PI PC CURVE EXTERNAL DISTANCE CURVE LENGTH OF CURVE TANGENT LENGTH CURVE RADUIS OF CURVE DEGREE OF (100FT) BACK STATION SUFFIX AHEAD STATION SUFFIX STATION PREFIX POINT OF ENDING POINT OF BEGINNING POINT OF REVERSE CURVE POINT OF COMPOUND CURVE POINT OF TANGENCY CENTER OF CURVE POINT OF INTERSECTION POINT OF CURVATURE WITH PROPOSED ANNOTATION. FEATURES WITH HEAVIER LINEWEIGHT, IN COMBINATION FOR EXISTING FEATURES, ALSO USED FOR PROPOSED THESE ARE COMMON VAOT SURVEY POINT SYMBOLS BODY OF WATER EDGE WOOD LINE STONE WALL ROAD EDGE PAVEMENT ROAD EDGE GRAVEL DRIVEWAY EDGE RAILROAD TRACKS LEDGE EXPOSED BRUSH LINE WALL SLOPE RIGHTS SURVEY LINE 6F PROPERTY BOUNDARY 4F PROPERTY BOUNDARY PROPERTY LINE (P/L) TOWN BOUNDARY LINE COUNTY BOUNDARY LINE STATE BOUNDARY LINE C FENCE STEEL POST FENCE (EXISTING) FENCE WOOD POST CULVERT (EXISTING) ELECTRIC+CABLE CABLE (TV) ELECTRIC+TELEPHONE UTILITY POLE GUY WIRE ELECTRIC+TELEPHONE PLAN LAYOUT MATCHLINE CLEAR ZONE TELEPHONE ELECTRIC CABLE+TELEPHONE ELECTRIC+CABLE+TELEP. ELECTRIC+TELEPHONE ELECTRIC+CABLE CABLE+TELEPHONE SANITARY SEWER (SEPTIC) ELECTRIC+CABLE+TELEP. WATER LINE GAS LINE TELEPHONE CABLE (TV) ELECTRIC CULVERT PROPOSED BOTTOM OF DITCH L STRUCTURE SUBSURFACE HISTORIC DIST ARCH T&E HISTORIC AG HABITAT FLOOD PLAIN .SR SR SR L P P L FILTER CURTAIN SILT FENCE SILT FENCE WOVEN WIRE EPSC MEASURES WETLAND BOUNDARY RIPARIAN BUFFER ZONE SOIL TYPE BOUNDARY HISTORIC STRUCTURE HISTORIC DISTRICT BOUNDARY HISTORIC AREA AGRICULTURAL LAND HAZARDOUS WASTE AREA ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES FISH & WILDLIFE HABITAT FLOOD PLAIN STORM WATER USDA FOREST SERVICE LANDS WILDLIFE HABITAT SUIT/CONN CHECK DAM ARCHEOLOGICAL BOUNDARY ARCHEOLOGICAL & HISTORIC UTILITY SYMBOLOGY UNDERGROUND UTILITIES ABOVE GROUND UTILITIES (AERIAL) PROJECT DESIGN & LAYOUT SYMBOLOGY CODE DESCRIPTIONPOINT COMMON TOPOGRAPHIC POINT SYMBOLS DESCRIPTION PROPOSED GEOMETRY CODES CODE BARRIER FENCE EPSC LAYOUT PLAN SYMBOLOGY PROJECT CONSTRUCTION SYMBOLOGY EROSION MATTING PROJECT CONSTRUCTION FEATURES STONE FILL TOE OF FILL SLOPE TOP OF CUT SLOPE CONVENTIONAL TOPOGRAPHIC SYMBOLOGY EXISTING FEATURES CONVENTIONAL BOUNDARY SYMBOLOGY STRIPING LINE REMOVAL REQUIRING RE-VEGETATION DISTURBED AREAS THREATENED & ENDANGERED SPECIES SHEET PILES HAZARDOUS WASTE PERMANENT EASEMENT LINE (P) TEMPORARY EASEMENT LINE (T) BOUNDARY LINES DESCRIPTIONCODE IRON PIN TO BE SET BNDNS IPNS CALC POINT STATE ROW TOWN ROW STATE ROW (LIMITED ACCESS) PROJECT DEMARCATION FENCE TREE PROTECTION ZONE (TPZ) PROPOSED STATE R.O.W. PROPOSED STATE R.O.W. (LIMITED ACCESS) BOUND TO BE SETBNDNS IPNS BOUND SET IRON PIN SET R.O.W. ABBREVIATIONS (CODES) & SYMBOLS OHW USED TO CLARIFY AS NEEDED. VARY, PLAN ANNOTATIONS AND NOTES SHOULD BE SHEET COVERS THE BASICS. SYMBOLOGY ON PLANS MAY AS NOTED ON PROJECT PLAN SHEETS. THIS LEGEND LINEWEIGHT, IN COMBINATION WITH PROJECT ANNOTATION, USED FOR EXISTING & PROPOSED FEATURES WITH HEAVIER STANDARD CONVENTIONAL SYMBOLOGY. THE SYMBOLOGY IS THE SYMBOLOGY ON THIS SHEET IS INTENDED TO COVER SYMBOLOGY LEGEND NOTE GENERAL INFORMATION ROAD GUARDRAIL PROW PROPOSED ROW POINT LENGTH LENGTH CARRIED ON NEXT SHEET EXISTING ROW POINT (T) (P) UE SR R&REP R&RES LAND I&M EC DRIVE DR DIT D&C CUL CONST CH TEMPORARY EASEMENT PERMANENT EASEMENT UTILITY EASEMENT SLOPE RIGHT REMOVE & REPLACE REMOVE & RESET LANDSCAPE EASEMENT INSTALL & MAINTAIN EASEMENT EROSION CONTROL DRIVEWAY EASEMENT DRAINAGE EASEMENT DITCH EASEMENT DISCONNECT & CONNECT CULVERT EASEMENT CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT CHANNEL EASEMENT PROPOSED UNDERDRAIN D.M. PECK G.L. BAKOS 51658.01_bdr_row.dgn STP 5200(17) S. BURLINGTON - MARKET STREET 8/3/2017 DESIGNED BY: PROJECT LEADER:DRAWN BY: PLOT DATE: CHECKED BY: PROJECT NAME: PROJECT NUMBER: FILE NAME: SHEET OF2 G.L. BAKOS K. D. WENTWORTH 10 BARRIER FENCE SYMBOLOGY LEGEND SHEET DMH WSO WELL VCTRL TSIGN TIE TEL STUMP SIGN SHRUB SAT S RRSL RRSIG POST PMK PM MM MH MB LI IPIPE IP HYD HVCTRL HCTRL H GV GUYW GUY GSO GP GASFIL FPOLE EL DITHR COMB CB BND BM APL PROPOSED DRAINAGE MANHOLE WATER SHUT OFF WELL CONTROL VERTICAL SIGN W/DOUBLE POST TIE TELEPHONE POLE STUMP SIGN SHRUB SATELLITE DISH TREE SOFTWOOD RAILROAD SWITCH LEVER RAILROAD SIGNAL POST STONE/WOOD PROJECT MARKER PARKING METER MILE MARKER MANHOLE (MH) MAILBOX LIGHT - STREET OR YARD IRON PIPE IRON PIN HYDRANT CONTROL HORIZ. & VERTICAL CONTROL HORIZONTAL TREE HARDWOOD GATE VALUE GUY WIRE GUY POLE GAS SHUT OFF GUIDE POST GAS FILLER FLAGPOLE ELECTRIC POWER POLE DROP INLET THROATED DNC COMBINATION POLE CATCH BASIN BOUND BENCH MARK BOUND APPARENT LOCATION ORDINARY HIGH WATER (OHW) WETLAND BUFFER ZONE D.M. PECK G.L. BAKOS 51658.01_bdr_row.dgn STP 5200(17) S. BURLINGTON - MARKET STREET 3 G.L. BAKOS K. D. WENTWORTH 10RIGHT-OF-WAY DETAIL SHEET 8/4/2017 DESIGNED BY: PROJECT LEADER:DRAWN BY: PLOT DATE: CHECKED BY: PROJECT NAME: PROJECT NUMBER: FILE NAME: SHEET OFUE SR C&T CUL. DRIVE CH. DIT. DR. (T) (P) DS UTILITY EASEMENT SLOPE RIGHT -CLEARING & TRIMMING RIGHT -CULVERT RIGHT -DRIVE RIGHT -CHANNEL RIGHT -DITCHING RIGHT -DRAINAGE RIGHT -TEMPORARY -PERMANENT -DORSET STREET SR CONST(T) PROPERTY LINE CLEAR ZONE TAKING WITHOUT ACCESS TAKING WITH ACCESS EXISTING RIGHT-OF-WAY PROJECT DEMARCATION FENCE CONSRUCTION RIGHT SLOPE RIGHT TOP OF CUT SLOPE BOTTOM OF FILL SLOPE E T E S 18" 18"36"36"36"8" DI 15" D15" D15" D15" D15" D 18" D SHARED USE PATH SHARED USE PATH 312.68 100+00 101+00 102+00 103+00 14+0015+0016+0098+00 99+00 Exist. R.O.W. Exist. R.O.W.Exist. R.O.W.Exist. R.O.W.Exist. R.O.W.Exist. R.O.W.Easment Exist. Sidewalk CONST(T) UTILITY(P)SIGNAL(P)EASEMENT EXISTING SIGNAL SIGNAL(P)HIGHWAY(P) SIGNAL(P) CONST (T) HIGHWAY(P) SCALE 20 400 IN FEET D.M. PECK G.L. BAKOS 51658.01_bdr_row.dgn STP 5200(17) S. BURLINGTON - MARKET STREET N VT STATE PLANE GRIDFalse Northing: 0.0000False Easting: 1640416.6667Origin Latitude: 42°30'00.0000"NCentral Meridian: 72°30'00.0000"WUS Survey FootTransverse MercatorNAD83 Vermont State PlanesVT83 RIGHT-OF-WAY PLANS 4 G.L. BAKOS K. D. WENTWORTH GROUP, LLC DORSET STREET INVESTMENT N/F 0570-00108 DORSET SQUARE ASSOCIATES N/F 0570-00150 MARKET STREET ENTRANCE UNIVERSITY MALL DORSET STREET10MATCHLINE TO STA.103+508/3/2017 DESIGNED BY: PROJECT LEADER:DRAWN BY: PLOT DATE: CHECKED BY: PROJECT NAME: PROJECT NUMBER: FILE NAME: SHEET OF DORSET STREET, LLC LBCMT 2007-C3 0570 - 00155 STA. DS 99+01 BEGIN ROW PROJECT 5' REM. TREES REM. TREES REM. TREES 13" RED MAPLE REMOVE LIGHT POLE RELOCATE LIGHT POLE RELOCATE LIGHT POLE RELOCATE 102+86 E D 12"12"12"15 " 18"18" D24"24"8" DI 8" DI D24"D cmp12"D pvc18" D 15" D18" D 15" D15" D 15" D 15" D18" D 15" D15" D15" D15" D18" D 24" D18" D 24" D15" D24"D 19 " x 3 0 " DSHARED USE PATH SHARED USE PATH 104+00 105+00 106+00 107+00 108+00Exist. R.O.W.Exist. R.O.W. Exist. R.O.W. Exist. R.O.W. Exist. Sidewalk Easment CONST (T )CONST(T) UT IL ITY (P )HIGHWAY(P)SLOPE (T)SLO PE (T)FUTURE MARY STREET CL & RESET (T) REMOVE REMOVE (T) CONST (T) CONST (T)CONST (T) 8/3/2017 DESIGNED BY: PROJECT LEADER:DRAWN BY: PLOT DATE: CHECKED BY: PROJECT NAME: PROJECT NUMBER: FILE NAME: SHEET OF SCALE 20 400 IN FEET D.M. PECK G.L. BAKOS 51658.01_bdr_row.dgn STP 5200(17) S. BURLINGTON - MARKET STREET N VT STATE PLANE GRIDFalse Northing: 0.0000False Easting: 1640416.6667Origin Latitude: 42°30'00.0000"NCentral Meridian: 72°30'00.0000"WUS Survey FootTransverse MercatorNAD83 Vermont State PlanesVT83 RIGHT-OF-WAY PLANS 5 G.L. BAKOS K. D. WENTWORTH DORSET SQUARE ASSOCIATES N/F 0570-00150 MARKET STREET 10MATCHLINE TO STA.108+75MATCHLINE TO STA.103+50POON TRUST, LLC N/F 0450-0005 SOUTH BURLINGTON CITY CENTER, LLC N/F 0450-0000 CENTURY PARTNERS, L.P. N/F 0570-00100 5' 14" 12" HONEY LOCUST TREES REMOVE 9" HONEY LOCUST TREES REMOVE LIGHT POLE REMOVE LIGHT POLE REMOVE LIGHT POLE RELOCATE 105+50 105+82 106+10 106+42 106+84 ACCESS EASEMENT HOTEL, LLC 24' RICH BURLINGTON S S8"S 18"15"24"15"8"ET 10"8" DI 8" DI 15" D15" D15" D15" D15" D15" D24" D 24" D 24" D 24" D 24" D 109+00 110+00 111+00 112+00 113+00 114+00 2 0 1 + 0 0 20 2+ 00 203+00 301+00Exist. R.O.W. Exist. R.O.W. CONST (T) CONST (T) CONST (T) & RESET (T) REMOVE INSTALL (T) INSTALL (T) DRIVE(T) DRIVE(T) UTILITY (P) UTILITY (P)SLOPE (T)SLOPE (T) SLOPE (T) SLOPE (T) REMOVE (T) REMOVE (T) REMOVE (T) STP 5200(17) G.L. BAKOS D.M. PECK S. BURLINGTON - MARKET STREET 51658.01_bdr_row.dgn 8/3/2017 DESIGNED BY: PROJECT LEADER:DRAWN BY: PLOT DATE: CHECKED BY: PROJECT NAME: PROJECT NUMBER: FILE NAME: SHEET OF SCALE 20 400 IN FEET N VT STATE PLANE GRIDFalse Nor thing: 0.0000False Easting: 1640416.6667O rigin Latitude: 42°30'00.0000"NCen tral Mer idian: 72°30'00.0000"WUS Survey FootTransverse Merca torNAD83 Vermont State PlanesVT83 RIGHT-OF-WAY PLANS 6 G.L. BAKOS K. D. WENTWORTH MARKET STREET D RI V E WA Y S C H O O L 10 SOUTH BURLINGTON CITY CENTER, LLC N/F 0450-0000MATCHLINE TO STA.108+75MATCHLINE TO STA.114+25SOUTH BURLINGTON CITY CENTER, LLC N/F 0450-0000 SOUTH BURLINGTON CITY CENTER, LLC N/F 0450-0000 POON TRUST, LLC N/F 0450-0005MATCHLINE TO STA. 1 0 8 +7 5 (SHEET )MATCHLINE TO STA.114+25 (SHEET ) SCALE 20 400 IN FEET 51658.01_bdr_row.dgn G.L. BAKOS D.M. PECK STP 5200(17) S. BURLINGTON - MARKET STREET 8/3/2017 DESIGNED BY: PROJECT LEADER:DRAWN BY: PLOT DATE: CHECKED BY: PROJECT NAME: PROJECT NUMBER: FILE NAME: SHEET OF N VT STATE PLANE GRIDFalse Northing: 0.0000Fa lse Easting: 1640416.6667Origin Latitude: 42°30'00.0000"NCen tral Mer idian: 72°30'00.0000"WUS Survey FootTransverse MercatorNAD83 Vermont S tate PlanesVT83 RIGHT-OF-WAY PLANS 7 G.L. BAKOS K. D. WENTWORTH SOUTH BURLINGTON CITY CENTER, LLC N/F 0450-0000 SOUTH BURLINGTON CITY CENTER, LLC N/F 0450-0000 SOUTH BURLINGTON CITY CENTER, LLC N/F 0450-0000 SOUTH BURLINGTON CITY CENTER, LLC N/F 0450-0000 MARKET STREET GARDEN STREET (FUTURE)(FUTURE)GARDEN STREET10MATCHLINE TO STA.120+25MATCHLINE TO STA.114+25MATCHLINE TO SHEET 9 S S8"S8"S 18"18"18"15"24"24"24"24"24"24" 8"8"D 8" DI 8" DI 15" D15" D15" D15" D1 5 " D15" D15" D15" D15" D15 " D15" D 24" D 24" D 30" D 30" D 30" D 3 0 " D24" D 15" D 15" D 15" D15" D3 0" D31115" D30" D MARKET STREET (FUTURE)GARDEN STREETGARDEN STREET (FUTURE)115+00 116+00 117+00 118+00 119+00 120+00 19+0020+0021+0022+00Exist. R.O.W. Exist. R.O.W. REMOVE(T) CONST (T) CONST (T) CONST (T) SLOPE (T) SLOPE (T)MAINTAIN (P)INSTALL &SLOPE (T) CONST (T) SLOPE (T) FUTURE STREET OF DEDICATION FOR IRREVOCABLE OFFER FUTURE STREET OF DEDICATION FOR IRREVOCABLE OFFER STP 5200(17) S. BURLINGTON - MARKET STREETPROJECT NAME:VT STATE PLANE GRIDFalse Northing: 0.0000Fa lse Easting: 1640416.6667Origin Latitude: 42°30'00.0000"NCen tral Mer idian: 72°30'00.0000"WUS Survey FootTransverse MercatorNAD83 Vermont S tate PlanesVT83 SOUTH BURLINGTON CITY CENTER, LLC N/F 0450-0000 SOUTH BURLINGTON CITY CENTER, LLC N/F 0450-0000 SOUTH BURLINGTON CITY CENTER, LLC N/F 0450-0000 SOUTH BURLINGTON CITY CENTER, LLC N/F 0450-0000 MARKET STREET GARDEN STREET (FUTURE)(FUTURE)GARDEN STREETMATCHLINE TO STA.120+25MATCHLINE TO STA.114+25MATCHLINE TO SHEET 9 S 48" RCP1 8 "18" 18" 18"18"18"15"27"8"18"S S S E E EEE T E 4" S FM S 8" DI 1 5 " D1 5 " D15" D 15" D 15" D15" D 15" D 15" D 15" D 15" D15 " D15" D15" DFB FB 24" D PROJECT IN 2017 UNDER SEPARATE TO BE CONSTRUCTED PROPOSED CULVERT 1 2 1 +0 0 122+00123+00 124+00 125+00 126+00 Exist. R.O.W. Exist. R.O.W. REMOVE(T)REM OVE(T) C ON S T (T )CONST (T) CONST (T) UTILITY (P) EASEMENT EXISTING UTILITY S L OP E ( T) SLOPE (T) SLOPE (T)MAINTAIN (P)INSTALL &MAINTAIN (P)INSTALL &STATION SEWER PUMP PARCEL FOR EXISTING CITY CONS T (T) CONST(T) 8/3/2017 DESIGNED BY: PROJECT LEADER:DRAWN BY: PLOT DATE: CHECKED BY: PROJECT NAME: PROJECT NUMBER: FILE NAME: SHEET OF SCALE 20 400 IN FEET N VT STATE PLANE GRIDFalse Northing: 0.0000False Easting: 1640416.6667Origin Latitude: 42°30'00.0000"NCentral Meridian: 72°30'00.0000"WUS Survey FootTransverse MercatorNAD83 Vermont State PlanesVT83 51658.01_bdr_row.dgn G.L. BAKOS D.M. PECK RIGHT-OF-WAY PLANS G.L. BAKOS K. D. WENTWORTH SOUTH BURLINGTON CITY CENTER, LLC N/F 0450-0000 SOUTH BURLINGTON CITY CENTER, LLC N/F 0450-0000 MARKET STREET 10 S. BURLINGTON - MARKET STREET STP 5200(17)MATCHLINE TO STA.120+25 MATCHLI NE TO S TA. 1 2 6 +2 5 8MATCHLINE TO SHEET 9 305307309309 311313 15" D 305 15" D 307309 305307309307 305 310310311 309 305307307I NSTALL & MAI NTAI N ( P )INSTALL & MAINTAIN (P)INSTALL & MAINTAIN (P)INSTALL & MAINTAIN (P)INSTALL & MAINTAIN (P)STATION SEWER PUMP PARCEL FOR EXISTING CITY STATIONSEWER PUMPPARCEL FOREXISTING CITY SOUTH BURLINGTON CITY CENTER, LLC N/F 0450-0000 8/3/2017 DESIGNED BY: PROJECT LEADER:DRAWN BY: PLOT DATE: CHECKED BY: PROJECT NAME: PROJECT NUMBER: FILE NAME: SHEET OF N VT STATE PLANE GRIDFalse Northing: 0.0000False Easting: 1640416.6667Origin Latitude: 42°30'00.0000"NCentral Meridian: 72°30'00.0000"WUS Survey FootTransverse MercatorNAD83 Vermont State PlanesVT83 SCALE 20 400 IN FEET 51658.01_bdr_row.dgn G.L. BAKOS D.M. PECK GENERAL PLANS STP 5200(17) S. BURLINGTON - MARKET STREET 109 K. WENTWORTH G.L. BAKOS MATCHLINE TO SHEET 7 MATCHLINE TO SHEET 8 CENTER, LLC SOUTH BURLINGTON CITY N/F 0450-0000 S EEE S 4" S FM 4" S FM 8" DI 15" D 15" D15" D 15" D15" D15" D 15" D15" D SSSSSSS127+00 128+00 129+00 130+00 131+00 33+0034+0035+0036+00Exist. R.O.W. Exist. R.O.W. CONST (T) REMOVE (T) SIGNAL (P) CONST(T)SLOPE (T) SLOPE (T) CONST (T) CHASTENAY ESTATES, INC. N/F 0860-00113 8/3/2017 DESIGNED BY: PROJECT LEADER:DRAWN BY: PLOT DATE: CHECKED BY: PROJECT NAME: PROJECT NUMBER: FILE NAME: SHEET OF N VT STATE PLANE GRIDFalse Northing: 0.0000False Easting: 1640416.6667Origin Latitude: 42°30'00.0000"NCentral Meridian: 72°30'00.0000"WUS Survey FootTransverse MercatorNAD83 Vermont State PlanesVT83 SCALE 20 400 IN FEET 51658.01_bdr_row.dgn G.L. BAKOS D.M. PECK RIGHT-OF-WAY PLANS G.L. BAKOS K. D. WENTWORTH SOUTH BURLINGTON CITY CENTER, LLC N/F 0450-0000 SOUTH BURLINGTON CITY CENTER, LLC N/F 0450-0000 MARKET STREET HINESBURG ROAD (VT 116)10 10 S. BURLINGTON - MARKET STREET STP 5200(17) BLACKBAY VENTURES VIII, LLC N/FMATCHLINE TO STA.126+25STA. 130+74 END ROW PROJECT