Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - City Council - 09/16/2019CITY COUNCIL 16 SEPTEMBER 2019 The South Burlington City Council held a regular meeting on Monday, 16 September 2019, at 6:30 p.m., in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset Street. Members Present: H. Riehle, Chair; M. Emery, T. Barritt, T. Chittenden, D. Kaufman Also Present: K. Dorn, City Manager; T. Hubbard, Deputy City Manager; A. Bolduc, A. Lafferty, City Attorneys; P. Conner, Director of Planning & Zoning; J. & F. Kochman, B. Sullivan, J. Louisos, M. Mittag, A. Klugo, D. MacDonald, S. Homstead, B. Sirvis, D. Crawford, P. Snider, B. Brinkerhoff, C. Peters, T. Phillips, 1. Instructions on exiting building in case of emergency: Mr. Dorn provided instructions on emergency evacuation of the building. 2. Agenda Review: Additions, deletions or changes in order of agenda items: No changes were made to the Agenda. 3. Possible Executive Session to receive legal advice from City Attorney on matters related to permit appeals and on matters related to potential legal action: Mr. Barritt moved that the Council make a specific finding that premature general public knowledge of confidential attorney-client communications made for the purpose of providing professional legal services, pending litigation to which the City is a party and probable litigation to which the City may be party would clearly place the Council and the City at a substantial disadvantage. Ms. Emery seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Mr. Barritt then moved that the City Council having so found enter into executive session to consider confidential attorney-client communications made for the purpose of providing professional legal services to the City Council pending litigation to which the City is a party and probable litigation to which the City may be a party and to invite Messrs. Dorn, Hubbard, Conner and Bolduc and Ms. Lafferty to be present at the session. Ms. Emery seconded. Motion passed unanimously. The Council entered executive session at 6:39 and resumed open session at 7:37. 4. Public hearing on proposed Land Development Regulations amendments: a. LDR-19-01: Eliminate minimum parking requirements for all uses citywide except multi-family housing and accessory dwelling units, for which parking requirements are to be reduced b. LDR-19-02: Amend transfer of development rights requirements to be consistent with enabling statutes CITY COUNCIL 18 SEPTEMBER 2019 PAGE 2 c. LDR-19-03: Establish Citywide River Corridor Overlay District and make minor modifications to the Flood Plain Overlay District d. LDR-19-04: Eliminate duplicative surface water protection standards for land within 150’ of Lake Champlain and allowances for expansion of pre-existing structures within 100’ of Potash Brook within Queen City Park Zoning District e. LDR-19-05: Administrative Amendments: Authorize Administrative Officer to approve minor field changes to site plans & allow for a joint administrative approval & Zoning permit; minor technical corrections Ms. Emery moved to open the public hearing. Mr. Chittenden seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Ms. Louisos reviewed each of the proposed amendments as follows: a. Members engaged in much discussion as to whether to keep existing parking minimums or reduce them. They agreed 5-0 to eliminate the minimum standards. They felt this was in line with the Comprehensive plan which supports focusing not only on cars and to consider stormwater runoff. They were concerned with parking lots being sized for the busiest time of the year. Ms. Louisos stressed that this amendment doesn’t eliminate parking; it lets business owners do what makes sense for the business. Ms. Louisos also noted that a VTrans study said that proscribed parking numbers don’t work in Vermont. RPC did a study and found that there are about 7000 parking spaces in the city, 35% of which are used on a typical Saturday and 31% on a weekday, and 37% at Christmas time. The Planning Commission felt the city is missing out on other land uses that would be of more benefit to the city from the 8 acres of unused parking land. Ms. Louisos noted receipt of an email from Strong Towns regarding other communities that have done away with minimum parking standards, some of which are similar in size to South Burlington. She also noted that other parking standards won’t change. At the public hearing held by the Commission, those who supported the amendment included the Energy Committee, the Larkins, Corey Gottfried, and Sara Dopp. Mr. Conner noted that members of the Development Review Board had send a letter outlining their concerns. b. Ms. Louisos noted the TDR amendment is in response to a request from the City Council. The Commission worked on the with the City Attorney and consider it a technical fix in line with legal challenges and to address confusion among members of the public. CITY COUNCIL 16 SEPTEMBER 2019 PAGE 3 There were concerns expressed regarding current appeals that might change court the Court’s ruling. c. This is the first piece of protection to natural resources and creates a new protection for river corridor areas. It also protects citizens from erosion hazards. It received unanimous support of the Commission. d. Ms. Louisos explained that the City previously had this zone along the Lake. The State has recently instituted shoreline standards, and the Commission felt it best to have only one standard, and it made sense to go with the State’s. It is stricter in general. e. This amendment is for minor technical changes. Mr. Chittenden noted that in Dover, NH, one of the city’s mentioned as eliminated minimum parking requirements, there is a huge downtown parking area the city owns near the train station. He also cited the economic value of private parking. Mr. Barritt questioned the minor amendment for the administrative officer to issue a field change. Mr. Conner gave examples of when this would work. He noted that the site plan and zoning permit would be a single action, saving two weeks in the process. At least 2 people in the department would have to sign off before a decision is made. Public comment was then taken: Mr. Mittag: The whole TDR section may have to be redone when the TDR Interim Zoning Committee comes forward with changes. There is still the concern with having sending and receiving areas all in the Southeast Quadrant. Mr. Sullivan of the DRB, said the Board was unanimous in its objection to removal of the minimum parking standards. They share the Planning Commission’s goals of less car dependence and reducing runoff, but felt it was an overly broad conclusion to reach to have no parking standards for commercial development. It also reduces public participation when neighbors feel they have to bear the brunt of inadequate parking. Mr. Sullivan noted that no development has ever been denied for lack of minimum parking capability. Mr. Kochman said that no materials he has had access to indicate this is a national movement. He said in his research, no city has eliminated all minimum all over the city. Some have in specific areas. Most reduced the minimum number and have qualifications that there will be no public inconvenience. He cited the fact that this will take away from the public the ability to comment on what a neighbor is doing. Regarding the potential for public transportation, Mr. CITY COUNCIL 17 SEPTEMBER 2019 PAGE 4 Kochman said that is a function of population density. He quoted a study which said that no community with less than 4000 people per square mile has broken the need for car use. Ms. Servis was very concerned with doing away with all standards. She felt developers need to “get permission.” She cited the aging population of residents who will not be biking or walking. She felt that people may become one car families, but they will not become “no car” families. She felt developers should have to “come to the discussion,” and that the dialogue should not be cut off. Ms. Emery cited the potential for parking garages. Ms. Sirvis said she and many other people do not feel comfortable or safe in them, and they are also ugly. Mr. Crawford said he can’t get his head around eliminating minimum parking standards. He supported the DRB’s idea to give them to option to reduce parking up to 75%. As a taxpayer, he did not want his tax money spent on parking garages to solve parking issues that would arise from eliminating minimum parking standards. Mr. Snider spoke on behalf of the elimination of the minimum parking standards and felt the market would take care of itself. He noted that many of their tenants have requirements for parking as part of their lease agreements. He said that having to build additional parking takes away from affordability. Mr. Brinkerhoff felt the Council should wait before approving the TDR amendment because the committee hasn’t made its report yet. Ms. Peters also spoke against the TDR amendment and said there is no lack of development in the city As there was no further public comment, Ms. Emery moved to close the public hearing. Mr. Barritt seconded. The motion passed unanimously. 5. Public Hearing on Interim Zoning Application #IZ-19-03 of Tom and Kim Phillips to subdivide a 2.2 acre lot currently developed with a single family home into two parcels of approximately 1.1 acres each for the purposes of constructing a single family home on the newly established lot, 1430 Spear Street: Mr. Barritt moved to open the public hearing. Ms. Emery seconded. Motion passed unanimously. CITY COUNCIL 17 SEPTEMBER 2019 PAGE 5 Mr. Phillips said they bought the property last year and have spent time fixing it up. They will be moving up in June. They were told they could build more on the property. The old house had septic, but they will tie into the sewer. They have also redone the stormwater pond. Mr. Conner said the zoning for the property is NR. What the Phillips are proposing will require TDRs. Mr. Kaufman said he didn’t see an impact. He noted the previous owner had talked abut building another house there. Ms. Riehle agreed and said a single family house seems to be in keeping with the neighborhood. No other issues were raised. Mr. Barritt moved to close the public hearing. Ms. Emery seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Mr. Dorn said staff will provide a draft decision for the Council to review and deliberate on probably at the next meeting. 6. Public Hearing on Interim Zoning Application #IZ-19-04 of Scott McAllister to subdivide a 1.23 acre lot currently developed with a single family home into three lots of 27,580 sq. ft. (existing house), 12,000 sq. ft., and 12,000 sq. ft. and to construct a single family home on each of the two new lots, 1430 Hinesburg Road: Mr. Barritt moved to open the public hearing. Ms. Emery seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Mr. Homstead said the property fronts on 2 streets. The existing home fronts on Hinesburg Road. The new homes will front on Highland Terrace. They will hook up to the municipal sewer. Water will remain private as there is no municipal water service. They are applying concurrently to the DRB. The project will require a TDR. They could go to 4 units, but are applying for only 3. All lots will meet the minimum lot size requirement. Mr. Homstead noted that similar development has occurred on several other lots. No issues were raised. CITY COUNCIL 17 SEPTEMBER 2019 PAGE 6 Mr. Barritt moved to close the public hearing. Mr. Kaufman seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 7. Review public input and possible action to adopt proposed amendments to the Land Development Regulations: Ms. Riehle commented that it is unusual to have a committee oppose the work of another committee. She felt it was inappropriate for the DRB to have a vote on the work of another committee. Ms. Emery said she is ready to pass all the amendments. She felt that businesses count on parking, and parking will not go away. She also understood the arguments about TDRs, and stressed this is not the last word on TDRs. She noted there may not be a Supreme Court decision for 8 months. Ms. Riehle asked whether under the proposed parking amendment the DRB could deny a project because of inadequate parking. Mr. Conner said they could not. They could question it but not deny it. Mr. Barritt felt the parking amendment makes sense in the long term. He didn’t think developers would “shoot themselves in the foot.” He would like to find some common ground, possibly reducing minimums. He was OK with the TDR amendment. Mr. Kaufman agreed with Mr. Barritt and felt there needs to be additional discussion regarding parking. He suggested the Planning Commission and DRB get together and work something out. He felt the TDR amendment was OK. Mr. Chittenden agreed with reducing the minimum parking requirement and felt the DRB statement was very powerful. He felt the TDR amendment should be bundled into whatever the TDR-IZ committee comes up with. Ms. Riehle said she supports all the amendments and wasn’t sure the DRB and Planning Commission could reach common ground. Mr. Klugo said the Commission felt the market will determine and solve the parking situation. He felt asking the DRB and Planning Commission to meet jointly on the parking issue was mixing CITY COUNCIL 17 SEPTEMBER 2019 PAGE 7 policy and procedure. He was concerned with setting this precedent. Mr. Chittenden felt they should actually meet more often. Ms. Emery said she disagrees in principle with that. Mr. Kaufman said there is not “safety valve” in the parking amendment, no “wiggle room.” He did not like the current language. Mr. Klugo said if it doesn’t work, the Council can always go back and fix it. Mr. Chittenden responded that “you can’t unbuild a building.” Mr. Barritt said he was willing to vote yes on the parking amendment and take the chance. Mr. Chittenden said he had heard from many citizens asking for caution. He was concerned with shifting the cost of development to the taxpayers. Parking garages are very expensive. It is also not fair to people who have had to build adequate parking. He would support a reduction in minimums but not “using a sledge hammer instead of a scalpel.” Mr. Crawford stressed that the DRB did not take a vote as Ms. Riehle had stated. They acted as individual members. He added that he was very impressed they came to that conclusion. Mr. Kaufman said he would like to see additional wording that the DRB can mandate an alternative to a developer. Mr. Klugo noted the Planning Commission looks at “where we are going” while the DRB acts on “what we have today.” Members agreed to defer on voting on the parking amendment until the next meeting. Mr. Barritt moved to approve LDR-19-02 and to come back to LDR-19-01 on 7 October. Mr. Kaufman seconded. Motion passed 4-1 with Mr. Chittenden opposing. Mr. Kaufman then moved to approve LDR-19-03, LDR-19-04, and LDR-19-05 as written. Mr. Barritt seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 8. Comments and Questions from the public not related to the agenda: Ms. Riehle noted that she was asked by Roseann Greco to read something on her behalf. She then read a statement of concern regarding the potential hearing damage to children who are CITY COUNCIL 17 SEPTEMBER 2019 PAGE 8 outside when F35’s take off and/or land using afterburners. These planes are 4 times louder than the F16s. Ms. Greco also noted that the 65dbl is an average. 118 decibels can deafen a child or an adult. She said the city should ask for a schedule of takeoffs so people can be forewarned not to be outside. 9. Possible Action to approve a settlement agreement on Certificate of Occupancy for 148 Market Street: Mr. Conner noted 148 Market Street is one of the first new buildings in City Center. An agreement has been worked out to meet the overall objectives of City Center. A representative of 148 Market Street said the settlement is not ideal, but that willing to do this. Mr. Barritt then moved to approve the Stipulated Judgment Order in connection with the Vermont Superior Court matter docket no. 53-4-19 Vtec entitled Allard Square Limited Partnership CO, and affirm the City’s willingness, through the Department of Recreation and Parks or others, to identify appropriate public or community programs or events that Allard Square might host in its community room. Ms. Emery seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 10. Announcements and City Manager’s Report: Council members reported on meetings and events they had attended in recent weeks. Mr. Dorn: The City will be going for an RFP for a waste disposal system. SBBA will meet on Wednesday, 5 p.m. There will be a public forum on 30 September on the Williston Road Streetscape Project (bike path from Dorset St. to Hinesburg Rd., south side) The all-committees meeting will be held on 26 September, 4:30-9 p.m. The Airport Technical Advisory Committee will meet, 5 p.m., Thursday. This is said to be the final meeting. Ms. Riehle said she hoped the city’s comments are incorporated into the report. CITY COUNCIL 17 SEPTEMBER 2019 PAGE 9 A resident who lives inside the 75 dB line called. He is not eligible for anything but teardown but wants to stay in his home and have it insulated. There are arguments going on in the Legislature regarding huge TIF issues. Mr. Dorn felt this is very disappointing and has no idea where it is headed. He is beginning business visits at the request of the Economic Development Committee. The community forum on a Recreation Center will be held at 7 p.m. tomorrow 11. Consent Agenda: A. Approve and Sign Disbursement B. Approve Minutes for 17 June, 1 July, 15 July and 19 August C. Approve license agreement with the University of Vermont for land associated with the Jug Handle pedestrian facility D. Designate Coralee Holm to represent the City of South Burlington as a Delegate to the Vermont League of Cities and Towns 2019 Annual Meeting Mr. Chittenden moved to approve the Consent Agenda as presented. Mr. Barritt seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 12. Update on Council plans to host 2 forums on Domestic Violence in October: Domestic Violence Awareness Month and possible adoption of a resolution designating October as South Burlington Domestic Violence Awareness Month: Ms. Riehle read the resolution. Mr. Chittenden moved to approve the Resolution as written. Mr. Kaufman seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 13. Consider and possibly approve Budget Calendar for FY21: Mr. Hubbard noted the calendar is similar to last year’s. Mr. Chittenden said he would like to see the CIP track changes. Mr. Hubbard felt that can be done. Mr. Barritt moved to approve the Budget Calendar as presented. Mr. Kaufman seconded. Motion passed unanimously. CITY COUNCIL 17 SEPTEMBER 2019 PAGE 10 14. Overview, discussion and possible approval of Draft (unaudited) FY 19 June Financials: Mr. Hubbard said the good news is a surplus of $314,000 (unaudited). They have restored deficits to some special funds and allotted money to take care of labor agreements. The Council needs to decide how to allocate the $314,000 so the books can be closed out. Options include: a. Putting it all on the balance sheet b. Funding $275,000 for additional paving and putting the remainder on the balance sheet c. Utilizing the proposed cut in City Center Reserve Funding by $110,000 and reallocating it to the paving fund. This would put $149,000 on the balance sheet. Members agreed to put $195,000 into paving and the rest on the balance sheet. 15. Councilors Reports from Committee Assignments: Mr. Chittenden noted that Green Mountain Transit is looking for a new Director. They are also addressing funding issues. 16. Other Business: No issues were brought forth. As there was no further business to come before the Council, Mr. Kaufman moved to adjourn. Mr. Barritt seconded. Motion passed unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 10:48 p.m.