Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMS-91-0000 - Decision - 1170 Hinesburg RoadPLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF SOUTH BURL I NGTON s r 9. C, 00 RE: APPLICATION OF GREEN ACRES, INC. This matter came before the South Burlington Planning Commission pursuant to the provisions of Section 3.307 of the South Burling- ton Zoning Regulations on application of Green Acres, Inc., here- inafter "Applicant" for approval to alter and relocate a water- course within a Conservation District, Green Acres property, Hinesburg Road as depicted on a plan entitled "Green Acres", prepared by Trudell Consulting Engineers, Inc., and dated 2/9/87, with a stamped received date of 4/18/91. The applicant was present at all of the public meetings and as part of the applica- tion the Planning Commission hereby renders the following deci- sion on this application. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. Green Acres, Inc. is the record owner of the land which is the subject of this application which is commonly known as the Green Acres property located at 1170 Hinesburg Road. 2. The Applicant has altered and relocated a watercourse on this property located at 1170 Hinesburg Road without first obtaining approval from the Planning Commission as required under Section 3.307 of the zoning regulations. The relocated ditch is approxi- mately 2,600 feet in length and runs in an east -west direction with the water flowing in an easterly direction and draining into an existing pond. This pond drains to the north flowing eventu- ally into Potash Brook. 3. The proposed watercourse runs parallel to the northerly property line of the Ledge Knoll residential development and is shown to be located 50 feet to the north of the residential properties. 4. This property is located on the easterly side of Hinesburg Road just north of and abutting the Ledge Knoll development. According to the Applicant increased runoff from Ledge Knoll, Butler Farms and Oak Creek developments was flooding his farm, so the watercourse was relocated to control this runoff. S. According to calculations conducted by the City Engineer, the increased flow from the Oak Creek and Butler Farms developments, based on a ten (10) year storm, is estimated at 2.4%. 6. Section 3.307 of the South Burlington Zoning Regulations requires that input be obtained from the South Burlington Natural Resources Committee (NRC) before the Planning Commission can grant approval to alter and relocate any watercourse. The NRC conducted a site visit of the subject property on February 6, 1991 and submitted a report to the Planning Commission dated February 7, 1991. This report states in part the following: "The Natural Resources Committee's concerns relate to the integ- rity of the wetland and pond. Clear water enters the site at the upstream end of the channel disturbance. Within a short distance the channel has obviously high turbidity. This is due to the increased erosional capacity of the new channel. The channel is approximately three feet deep. The concern here is for an inter- sected water table. In the wetland the water table is very close to the surface, or intersecting the surface. A three foot ditch will intersect the watertable, allowing it do drop to -the lowest level of the drainage ditch. This would have an adverse affect on the plants in the wetland. Increased turbidity and runoff from lawns (insecticides and pesticides) and road contamination will change the chemical character of the pond that the channel drains into." The above comments are also applicable to the new proposed drainage way. 7. In the 1985 South Burlington Comprehensive Plan, Natural Resource Base chapter, it states that the protection of the City's water resources is an important goal of the Comprehen- sive Plan. It further states that "during development review efforts should be made to minimize potential adverse impacts ... on any of the City's water resources" (page 30). It also states that" ... drainageways, and intermittent streams of the City should be protected from diversion obliteration ..." (page 31). 8. The proposed 1991 South Burlington Comprehensive Plan con- tains the following statements pertaining to the alterations of streams and protection of wetlands: "Alterations to the major rivers and steams [sic] as well as smaller streams and tributaries can often have unexpected down- stream effects. Stream and river protection have long been recognized as the first step in maintaining a quality natural environment" (page 37). "South Burlington's wetlands are a vital link in the mainte- nance of the quality of surface and ground water, erosion and stream flow control, wildlife habitat, and as a critical part of open space preservation. As South Burlington approaches the final stages of the commercial and residential build out into the City's open space, we need to take special care that the remain- ing wetlands are carefully protected" (pages 37-38). I 9. The proposed drainage ditch would be steep banks. The applicant expressed installed as a barrier between the ditch dential development. relatively deep, with that a fence would be and the adjacent resi.- 10. The subject of this decision is not the relocated drainage way which was denied by the Planning Commission on 3/28/91 but a new proposed drainage way which would run parallel to this ditch and is shown as a yellow line on the plan submitted and referred to above and then would tie into the relocated drainageway east of the Ledgeknoll residences. 11. The proposed drainage way will be stoned lined for approxi- mately 800 feet from elevation 375 to elevation 350. Members of the South Burlington Natural Resources Committee have reviewed the plan submitted and it is their opinion that the stone lining will not eliminate turbidity and reduce velocity. It is their opinion that the stone lining may even increase turbidity. CONCLUSIONS 1. The Planning Commission concludes that the straightening of the ditch will increase the velocity of the runoff which will in turn decrease the ecological value of the stream. It further concludes that the higher velocity created will result in more erosion and siltation which will result in less chance for the clay soil and vegetation to filter out any pollutants. 2. The Planning Commission concludes that the ditch will ad- versely impact the adjacent wetland by intersecting the water table thereby allowing it to drop to the lowest level of the ditch. This lowering of the water table will in turn adversely affect the fauna and habitat in the wetland. 3. The Planning Commission concludes that the increased turbidi- ty and runoff from adjacent lawns will include insecticides, pesticides and road contamination which will change the chemical character of the pond into which the ditch drains. 4. The Planning Commission concludes that alteration and reloca- tion of this drainageway does not. conform with the goals and policies contained in both the 1985 and proposed 1991 South Burlington Comprehensive Plans. DECISION Based on the above Findings of Fact. and Conclusions, the Planning Commission makes the following decision: The Planning Commission hereby denies the Applicant's request to alter and relocate a watercourse within a Conservation District for the following reasons: 1. The increase in velocity of the runoff will decrease the ecological value of the stream, increase erosion and siltation and this will result in less chance for the clay soil and vegeta- tion to filer out any pollutants. 2. The proposed watercourse may lower the watertable in the adjacent wetland which would have a detrimental effect on the fauna and habitat in the wetland. 3. The increased turbidity and runoff from adjacent lawns will change the chemical character of the pond into which the relocat- ed drainageway drains. 4. The alteration and relocation of the drainageway which is the subject of this decision does not conform with the goals and policies contained in both the 1985 and proposed 1991 South Burlington Comprehensive Plans. Dated at. South Burlington, Vermont, this u?11 day of Logy 1991. Chairman of P an ing ommission