Selectboard Meeting Minutes

TOWN OF SHELBURNE SELECTBOARD MINUTES OF MEETING JUNE 11, 2002 MEMBERS PRESENT: Steve Dates, Acting Chairman\; Steve Good, George Faris, Norm Silcox. (Ken Albert was absent.) STAFF PRESENT: Paul Bohne, Town Manager\; Peter Frankenberg, Financial Officer. OTHERS PRESENT: Gloria Good, Suzanne Fay, John Guilmette, Frankie Galaop, Paul Goodrich, Barbara Mann, Andrea VanHoven, Becky Wang, Don Aichroth, Chuck Dunham, Chris Dion, Clark Hermance, Tom Nold, Ed Koehler, Jim Dudley, Sue Fisher, Shawn Fisher, David Hillman, Luce Hillman, Art Merchant, Tom Moreau, Tom Clavelle, Steve Baietti, Liz Curry, Susan Davis, Shelburne News. 1. CALL TO ORDER Mr. Dates, Acting Chairman, called the meeting to order at 7:10 p.m. 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA There were no changes to the agenda. 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES MOTION by Mr. Silcox, seconded by Mr. Faris, to approve the minutes of 05/28/02 as written. VOTE: 3 ayes, 1 abstention (Mr. Good)\; motion carried. 4. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION Mr. Hillman spoke in support of the current delinquent tax fine assessment policy and asked if there had been a decision regarding a change in the policy. Mr. Dates replied that no decision had been made at this time. 5. CHAMPLAIN SOLID WASTE DISTRICT – Approval of Amendment Mr. Moreau explained the amendments to the current agreement, including extending the contract and an alternative backup landfill site in Moretown (a backup site in the United States was necessary since the September 11th incident, which had caused a hold up of trucks at the Canadian border). Mr. Dates asked for clarification of the use of smaller trailers. Mr. Moreau explained the Shelburne facility will use 33’ trailers which the CSWD would purchase. MOTION by Mr. Faris, seconded by Mr. Silcox, to approve the amendment to the Residuals Management Agreement with New England Organics, dated 05/20/02, as presented. VOTE: unanimous (4-0) motion carried. 6. APPROVAL OF PLANS TO MAKE IMPROVEMENTS TO THE BAY ROAD FISHING ACCESS Mr. Dates introduced John Guilmette, State Natural Resources Agency representative. Mr. Bohne gave a brief history of the land gift of 100 acres to the Town of Shelburne by Shelburne Farms. The fishing access was leased to the State for a 10-year period recently. The State would be responsible for maintenance, improvements, and moving forward with the permit process. There were no restrictions on the 100 acres except for use as an access. Mr. Guilmette reviewed Fish and Wildlife fishing access areas along Lake Champlain and river sites including Shelburne Bay. There would be no dredging in the Shelburne Bay delta, funding was a combination of federal money, and revenue from gas tax and boat registration fees. Two options for a parking design were explained, including Option 1: a gravel lot without striping for parking spaces, a dock platform, paving the entrance, a concrete boat launch ramp, construction of a two-lane ramp upstream, stone fill for erosion control, a dock for boat traffic direction, landscaping, motorless boat launch, and landscaping. Option 2 was the same as Option 1 but with paved/striping parking and an additional 66 spaces in an overflow lot. Option 1 would use 2.9 acres. Option 2 would need an additional 1.3 acres. PUBLIC COMMENTS Mr. Hubbard asked if there were plans to upgrade the motorless launch ramp. Mr. Guilmette replied no. Natural material would be placed in the canoe area. There were no plans to install public facilities. When public funds were used, the State must provide public access to everyone. There was further discussion of Option1 parking with 40-50 spaces currently, parking design to accommodate trucks and trailers, the length of the permit process (2-3 months), requests by the audience to pave the parking lot to prevent rutting, and how to educate the public on proper parking of vehicles to maximize the number of spaces in Option 1. Ms. Mann commented that the land was a gift to the Town and should not be paved (this would minimize surface run-off into the lake). There are 300,000 gallons of treated wastewater being discharged into the Bay per day. Ms. Mann asked how pollution from boats could be contained. Mr. Guilmette replied that most boaters would travel to the Coast Guard Station launch in Burlington where there was deep water. There would be no dredging of the Bay delta and that would restrict use. An analysis of daily use numbers has not been done, though an estimate of 300-500 for July/August was a good guess. Peak use numbers of 40-50 per day seemed a reasonable number. After the improvements, the area should accommodate 20 more vehicles per week. There was lengthy discussion regarding paving versus gravel lots (gravel was cheaper over the long term), using landscaping timbers to “slot” drivers into diagonal parking configurations, winter maintenance, and storm water discharge containment. Mr. Guilmette explained that the project would go through the environmental permit process and review. Paving would trigger storm water solutions such as pitch or collection. The toilet facilities location would remain the same. Mr. Good requested picnic benches at the site. Mr. Dion spoke in favor of the proposed Option 2 improvements, noting that he lived near the access, but had to drive to Burlington to launch his boat. A resident asked how boats waiting to be launched would be handled. Mr. Guilmette explained that a tie-down area could be used as a ready area. Also, the double lane launch area would be striped. A resident asked what would be done to keep people from parking on the grassy areas as they do now. Mr. Merchant asked if traffic impacts to Bay Road were considered. Mr. Guilmette replied there was no data. No traffic problems have been lodged with the department in 25 years regarding significant increases in traffic. Ms. VanHoven, Shelburne Natural Resources and Conservation Commission representative, reported the Commission members had conducted a site visit to the access area. Questions/concerns by the Commission included the number of parking spaces, parking reconfiguration, the impact on the Bay, the addition of two boat ramps, the size of boats, run-off if the parking lot was paved, and the impact on the water quality of the Bay. Ms. VanHoven noted that new Storm Water regulations needed to be considered, and what the recreation quality would be if more boats used the access. Also, the long range plan for water use in the area related to the Yacht Club marina, wildlife impacts, etc, needs consideration. Additional concerns are encroachment on the green space and if other folks (non-boaters) could use the area for hiking or biking. There were wetlands close to the second boat ramp and how prop wash would affect the wetlands needs review. There were other areas in Shelburne to launch boats other than the Bay. Safety at the Railroad underpass was a concern. The Commission recommendation was to step back and examine more thoroughly the impact on the Town and natural areas, said Ms. VanHoven. Mr. Good pointed out that the Town has waited since 1964 for improvements at the access area. Environmental impacts would go through a rigid review during the permit process and the cost would be totally funded by the State. Mr. Guilmette reviewed the following issues: · The size of boats would be restricted by the delta which would remain untouched · The permit process included public comment · The wetlands would go through a specific review process · The area would be subject to Historic Preservation review · A Natural Heritage group would review habitat · There would not be much difference between gravel or paved surface runoff · A vegetative buffer space would be kept Mr. Silcox noted that the Town, through the MPO TIP, would handle the railroad underpass improvements. A resident asked if the lease might be extended. Mr. Guilmette replied that the State might consider requesting an extension if the cost of improvements exceeded $100,00-$150,000. Mr. Baietti commented that both options encroached upon the green space, especially Option 2. Mr. Dates noted that the Town would explore Option 1 first. Mr. Guilmette said that the State was open to phasing the project. Ms. Mann noted that there has been poor stewardship of the access area with bags of trash, bottles and cans littering the area. The Shelburne Police were called to handle complaints of vandalism, break-ins, suspicious persons, etc. There was an impact on the Township, stated Ms. Mann. The Selectboard members spoke in favor of moving forward. Mr. Good spoke in favor of Option 1. Mr. Silcox asked the likelihood of future funding if Option 2 was delayed. Mr. Guilmette replied that the State had a 35-year plan in place. Money would not be spent unnecessarily. Mr. Silcox suggested signage to direct canoe and kayak users to the motorless launch area and parking lot. Mr. Guilmette said that signs for parking trailer-less vehicles could be done as well as for the regular parking lot. Mr. Silcox explained that the MPO was exploring three Shelburne bridge projects that included the Bostwick Road, LaPlatte River, and Bay Road bridges. Also, the Recreation Department has tried to provide programs that included recreation paths, boat launches, fishing, hiking trails in the summer, and ice fishing in the winter. Mr. Silcox said he supported Option 1 with the potential to revisit Option 2 if necessary. Mr. Faris spoke in favor of Option 1 with a design for Option 2 if/when warranted. A concern was the impact on natural resources, but the review process would safeguard the natural areas. Mr. Silcox reported that the Shelburne Bay Boat Club supported the project. Mr. Dates supported additional parking spaces as proposed in Option 2. MOTION by Mr. Good, seconded by Mr. Silcox, to approve Option 1 as presented by the Natural Resource Agency. VOTE: unanimous (4-0)\; motion carried. 7. EDUCATION IMPACT FEE – Discussion Mr. Frankenburg, Shelburne Financial Officer, reviewed a proposed Education Impact Fee. Currently, impact fees were designated for Community School capital projects. The school was currently over-capacity with 885 students in FY02. The proposed impact fee was triggered by new capacity. Mr. Frankenburg explained that the calculation of the impact fee was $6,809 for a new single family home, less credits, and $2,383, less credits, for new multi-family units. Total (Town) impact fees for a single-family home were $13,183. There was discussion regarding the cost of constructing a new home in Shelburne, which was averaged at $200,000-$300,000, the number of estimated students moving into new homes versus existing homes, existing homes that paid for schools via the property tax, and tax credits which was a 34% correction as an offset for impact fee versus tax payments. Mr. Frankenburg noted that the Town can not charge both an impact fee upfront and property taxes. Therefore, a tax credit was built into the calculation. Mr. Silcox suggested basing impact fees on the number of bedrooms versus the status (single/multi-family) of new units. Mr. Clavelle explained that the committee compared CVU renovation costs, land factors, including additional components such as library, parking, and equipment to finalize Option 2. Mr. Silcox thanked Mr. Clavelle for working with Town staff and suggested that the School Board issue a statement of support for a collaborative effort at the First Reading in June of the proposed Educational Impact Fees. Mr. Clavelle noted that the School Board reviewed the proposal and had no comments. The proposal was an agenda item at the School Board meeting scheduled for 06/12/02. The proposed impact fees were not “tax dollars” and, therefore, the income would go to the school. The net effect on Act 60 was zero, said Mr. Clavelle. Mr. Frankenburg explained that theoretically the impact fees were paid directly to the bond payment (debt service). Mr. Frankenburg would contact Burnt Rock consultants regarding basing impact fees on single and/or multi-family dwellings versus the number of bedrooms. Mr. Silcox asked if retirement facilities/homes were exempt from impact fees. Mr. Frankenburg said not at this time, other than Wake Robin, but that could be built into the ordinance. Mr. Silcox asked if fire/rescue impact fees should be considered. Mr. Frankenburg pointed out that capital items due to growth triggered impact fees. If a third ambulance was purchased due to growth, then the Town could consider an impact fee. Mr. Dates commented that a six-year strategy/forecast should be conducted before considering further impact fees. The Town can accumulate impact fees for six years which would be in place as long as there was excess capacity at the school. There was further discussion regarding “leveling out” new people moving into an existing structure versus new construction, Selectboard authority for waiving impact fees for affordable housing and elderly housing projects, addressing employee housing that brings in children via deed restrictions, and the collection of impact fees which would sunset once the bond debt was paid off. Mr. Frankenburg will research the status of apartment buildings as multi-family dwellings. Mr. Clavelle noted that the consultant advised yearly reviews of the proposed ordinance. Mr. Frankenburg said that capital projects should be reviewed yearly as well, so a review should be coordinated at the same time. It was the consensus of the Selectboard to warn a First Hearing for the next Selectboard meeting, and to consider basing fees on the number of bedrooms versus single/multi-family units, and authority to waive fees. 8. AUTHORIZATION TO ENTER INTO AGREEMENTS WITH LAKE CHAMPLAIN HOUSING/AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT Mr. Bohne reviewed a proposed affordable housing project on Route 7 in partnership with the Lake Champlain Housing Agency. A $40,000 planning grant for engineering and planning would be submitted. The Town was the grant recipient. The Lake Champlain Housing Agency was seeking motions for the following action: 1. Authorize the Town Manager to sign the grant agreement 2. Sub-grantee was the Lake Champlain Housing Agency 3. Administrative services agreement in which the Town contracts with the Lake Champlain Housing Agency to provide audits, reports, maintain files, etc. 4. Adopt municipal policies and forms. MOTION by Mr. Faris, seconded by Mr. Silcox, to authorize the Town Manager to sign a Vermont Community Development Grant Agreement between the State of Vermont, the Lake Champlain Housing Development Corporation, and the Town of Shelburne. VOTE: unanimous (3-0)\; motion carried. [Mr. Good not present for vote.] MOTION by Mr. Faris, seconded by Mr. Silcox, to authorize the Town Manager to execute a Sub-grant Agreement with Lake Champlain Housing Development Corporation to coordinate feasibility studies required to submit complete local and Act 250 permit applications as presented. VOTE: unanimous (4-0)\; motion carried. [Mr. Good not present for vote.] MOTION by Mr. Faris, seconded by Mr. Silcox, to authorize the Town Manager to execute Administrative Services and Professional Services to administer the Vermont Community Development Grant in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Grant Agreement on behalf of the Town of Shelburne. VOTE: unanimous (4-0)\; motion carried. [Mr. Good not present for vote.] MOTION by Mr. Faris, seconded by Mr. Silcox, to authorize the Lake Champlain Housing Development Corporation to contract with Liz Curry for consulting services and administering the Vermont Community Development Grant. VOTE: unanimous (4-0)\; motion carried. [Mr. Good not present for vote.] MOTION by Mr. Faris, seconded by Mr. Silcox, to adopt the Municipal Policies and Codes as set forth in Form MP-1. VOTE: unanimous (4-0)\; motion carried. [Mr. Good not present for vote.] MOTION by Mr. Faris, seconded by Mr. Silcox, that the Shelburne Town Manager be designated as the person with overall responsibility for the Vermont Community Development Program activities related to this Grant Agreement including the authority to execute the Grant Agreement and such other documents as may be necessary to secure these funds. VOTE: unanimous (4-0)\; motion carried. [Mr. Good not present for vote.] MOTION by Mr. Faris, seconded by Mr. Silcox, to designate the Charter One Bank as the depository for the Vermont Community Development funds received under this Grant Agreement as set forth in Form FM-1. Vote: unanimous (4-0)\; motion carried. [Mr. Good not present for vote.] The Selectboard signed the Grant Agreement Resolutions and Forms. MOTION by Mr. Faris, seconded by Mr. Silcox, to authorize the Shelburne Town Manager, the Shelburne Financial Officer, and the Shelburne Town Clerk as signatories for Requisition of Vermont Community Development Program funds, Form FM-2. VOTE: unanimous (3-0)\; motion carried. [Mr. Good not present for vote.] 9. SUPPORT LETTER FOR A REGIONAL EARLY LEARNING CENTER MOTION by Mr. Faris, seconded by Mr. Silcox, to send a letter of support regarding an Early Childhood Council as recipient of a grant for a regional Early Childhood Learning Center. DISCUSSION: Mr. Silcox asked who would use the funds and how would the program be sustained. Also, what benefit would Shelburne receive for their support. Mr. Dates noted that the request did not specify where the money went or who controlled it. Mr. Faris pointed out that any questions were to be directed to the Community and Economic Development Office in Burlington. Mr. Silcox said that he would vote in favor of the request because it was for the “community”, but he would like to know “why” the request was made. CALL THE QUESTION by Mr. Faris. Discussion ceased. VOTE: unanimous (3-0)\; motion carried. [Mr. Good not present for vote.] 10. BUDGET STATUS, WATER AND WASTEWATER Mr. Dates asked who was responsible for over runs related to late start up costs (at the Wastewater Treatment Plants). Mr. Bohne replied that the project engineer was liable for the costs. There would be recovery for some of the expenditures. 11. REQUEST FOR RELIEF FORM DELINQUENT TAX PENATLY MOTION by Mr. Faris, seconded by Mr. Silcox, to grant relief from delinquent tax penalty For Jerry LaGreca in the amount of $90.22. VOTE: 0 ayes, 3 nays\; motion failed. 12. TOWN MANAGER’S REPORT Mr. Bohne explained that the Neighborhood Path Committee was seeking $2,000 in local matching funds for a $20,000 technical assistance grant. Mr. Bohne recommended that the funds be taken from the Reserve Fund. MOTION by Mr. Silcox, seconded by Mr. Faris, to approve using $2,000 from the Reserve Fund as a local match for a $20,000 VTrans Sidewalk Study. DISCUSSION: Mr. Bohne said the matching funds could come from Bay Park or Landscaping funds. VOTE: unanimous (3-0)\; motion carried. [Mr. Good not present for vote.] 13. BOARD MEMBER CONCERNS There were no Board concerns. 14. ADJOURNMENT MOTION by Mr. Faris, seconded by Mr. Silcox, to adjourn the meeting. VOTE: unanimous (3-0)\; motion carried. [Mr. Good not present for vote.] The meeting adjourned at 10:08 p.m. Minutes respectfully submitted by Kathlyn Furr, Recording Secretary. These minutes are subject to correction by the Shelburne Selectboard. Changes, if any, will be recorded in the minutes of the next meeting of the Board. DRAFT MINUTES