HomeMy WebLinkAboutVR-84-0000 - Supplemental - 0000 Old Farm RoadPLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 14, 1984
The South Burlington Planning Commission held a regular meeting on Tuesday,
February 14, 1984 at 7:30 pm in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset St.
Members Present
George Mona, Vice Chairman; Mary -Barbara Maher, Judy Hurd, John Belter, William
Burgess
Members Absent
Sidney Poger, Chairman; Peter Jacob
Others Present
Richard Ward, acting Planner; Jim Cheng, Free Press; Pat Burgmeier, The Other
Paper; Robert Perry, Duncan & Olivia Brown, Mary Roy, Gwendolyn & Arthur Rye,
Tim Brisson, Gene Beaudoin, Dave Miller, Edwin Granai, Robert Ryan, Ethan Sims,
Dorothy Sims, John Caulo, William Schuele, Lowell Krassner, Gardner Hopwood,
Sylvia Smith, George Khouri, Dennis McElroy, Albert Audette, Superintendent of
Streets
Minutes of January 24, 1984
On page 5, there should be no "c" in Aquifer.
Mrs. Maher moved to approve the January 24, 1984 minutes as corrected.
Mrs. Hurd seconded the motion and all voted for it.
Public hearin final plat application for Green Mountain Power Real Estate
_Division for two lot subdivision of lot #17, of original National Life
subdivision, 25 Green Mountain Drive, Attorney Robert Perry
Mr. Ward said the plan had been revised to meet the concerns of the
Commission. Mr. Perry said he thought that it could be a condition of
approval that the right of way location could be changed contingent on the
future approval or development of the 3.8 acre lot.
Mrs. vaher moved that the South Burlington Planning Commission approve
the final plat application of G.M.Y. Real Estate Corporation for a two lot
subdivision original lot #17 of National Life as depicted on a plat entitled
"Green Mountain Power Corporation Corporate Headquarters - location plan'
prepared by Sargent, Webster, Crenshaw and Folley, dated March 22, 1983,
revised January 10 and 25, 1984, subject to the following stipulations:
1. That the Green Mountain Power Corporation reserve a 24 foot right of
way to parcel f2 (3.8 acre parcel). The east 150' shall be subject to relocation
on site -plan approval for the 3.8 acre parcel.
2. That the final plat be recorded within 90 days.
Mr. Belter seconded the motion, which carried wi r. urgess abstaining because
he had missed the majority of the presentation, which occurred at the last
meeting.
Consider request from residents 2± Old Farm Road to c_lg5e roadpetition
presented to City Council
Mr. Duncan Brown spoke for the residents. He said the city had first
PLANNING COMMISSION
GO �
•o
0 0
'sw,1
•w
e
been petitioned on this 4 or 5 years ago, but it could not be done because the
road was on the Urban Systems Map. It has now been removed from the Map. He
said this was one of the older roads in the city and used to carry traffic
from Hinesburg Road to the Limekiln Bridge. With the extension of the airport`
runway and the construction of Kennedy Drive, this road became less of a link
to Winooski and Colchester. The construction of Kimball Avenue also has impacted
the road. Mr. Brown said it was just as fast to get to Williston Road from
Hinesburg Road by using Kennedy Drive as Old Farm Road, so he felt the road
no longer served people going north. In addition, he felt there was a safety
question. The grade is steep on the north side of the road and there are high
shoulders. If a car coming down Old Farm Road loses control on a bad day, cars
coming along Kimball Avenue cannot see that car skidding down the hill. Mr.
Brown said there had been an increase in cars using the road due to the development
on Kimball Avenue and he expected there would be a further increase. He felt
the neighborhood could survive the industrial development which will take place
in the area if the road is,closed.
Mrs. Maher said she had talked with the Street Superintendent, the City
Manager, and the Fire Chief and they had all felt strongly that the road
should not be closed. She noted that the road was only 20' wide, without
shoulders and she did not see how it could be safely closed unless it were
30' wide with shoulders- and a regulation cul-de-sac.' She said she could not
recommend to close it because she felt that even if the existing residents
were willing to take a chance on the safety in the area, future residents
might not be and this decision would impact them as well as the existing residents.
She noted that it could not be maintained and plowed without a cul-de-sac. Mrs.
Hurd said she might feel different as the industrial development grew around
this area, but for now she agreed with Mrs. Maher. She questioned whether
there was room for a cul-de-sac, who would build it, and who would pay for it.
Mr. Mona felt the fact that the road was narrow could be an argument not to
maintain it as a through street and he mentioned a moveable barrier.
Mrs. I✓iaher noted that if the road were closed, the property on which the
to -be -unused road site would revert to the O'Briens.
Mr. Belter said the Commission had not yet seen a plan with a cul-de-sac,
and Mr. Burgess noted that he had read the Council minutes regarding the
petition. They just want the Commission's input or comments from a planning
perspective on the closing. He felt the Commission should urge the Council
to obtain information from the department heads mentioned by Mrs. Maher. He
did not feel the Commission was being asked to bring in the department heads
and have a hearing on the closing, nor was it being asked to make the decision
itself, it was just being asked for comments. Mr. Mona noted that the Council
could ask the department heads' opinions as easily as the Commission could,
and Mr. Burgess noted that the Commission could recommend that the Council do
that. Mr. Mona said that from a planning point of view he would say that if
the road were closed, there should be a cul-de-sac built.
Street Superintendent Albert Audette was present and was asked his opinion
on closing the road. He did not favor it. He felt there would be a problem
getting to the area if an accident closed one of the intersections. He also
noted that it takes a long time to plow when the city has a lot of dead-end
streets, and that putting in a cul-de-sac would take a lot of land and would
have to be far enough from the last house so that it might have to be built on
the slope, which would create problems.
Mr. Mona asked the commissioners how they felt about the concept of
closing roads in general or this road in particular. Mrs. Hurd felt that if
something could be worked out (and she was not sure it could be in this case),
FEBRUARY 14, lqu
e
I
•
PLANNING COMMISSION
3.
FEBRUARY 14, 1984
she would be willing to look at it. Mr. Belter did not like it. He pointed
out that the Commission has gone to a lot of trouble in the past to be sure
they don't have situations like this with only one access. He also noted that
the car counts done by Mr. Ward were very low. He did not think the city
would pay for a cul-de-sac, and he was not sure the residents would either.
Mr. Burgess agreed with Mrs. Hurd - the principle of road closing did not bother
him as much as other people, but he felt the Council should listen to its
department heads. He felt he could support closing the road if everything
else worked. Mrs. Maher felt voting to close the road would be inconsistent
with her votes on other through roads in the city. She said the Commission
always insisted on through streets for safety and she felt this should remain
a through street. Mr. Mona did not op,.ose the principle of closing a street
with only 10 houses on it. Mrs. Hurd clarified that she did not favor closing
Old Farm Road. She did not feel that anything satisfactory could be worked out
in tnis particular case. As a concept, however, she would be willing to look
at other road closings.
Mr. Mona asked the Commission how they would feel if a proper turnaround
could be built without city land or money being involved. Mrs. Hurd said she
would have to look at the proposal, and it was pointed out that all commissioners
would be willing to listen to a plan.
Mrs. Maher moved that the Planning Commission at this point in time does
not favor closing Old Farm Road. Mr. Belter seconded the motion and it carried
with Messrs. Burgess and Mona dissenting. Mrs. Maher then moved that the
Planning Commission would consider the possible closing of Old Farm Road if
plans which provide for a suitable cul-de-sac are presented to them for their
consideration. Mrs. Hurd seconded the motion and all voted for it. Mr. Mona
felt this bordered on heavy-handedness.
Sketch plan review of application by Arthur Rye for a two lot subdivision at
1075 Hinesburg Road
Mrs. Hurd removed herself from the discussion because she is an abutter.
Mr. Ward said this was a simple two lot subdivision. Both lots exceed
city standards far the area. The proposal is for a duplex on the 10 acre lot
with the 15 acre lot being set aside. There are no plans for that land now.
The land is zoned Agricultural -Industrial. Mr. Mona was concerned about
creating a lot too small for an industrial use, but Mr. Ward said the entire
piece was already too small. Mr. Burgess felt that if the subdivision took
place, it would negate the grandfathering of any use other than residential.
Irlr. Mona wanted the applicant to understand that if he subdivides in order to
sell the 15 acre piece for industrial, he may not be able to use it for that.
He directed Mr. 'lord to obtain a ruling from the City Attorney on this question.
Mr. Rye said they had no plans for the lot at this point, but he could not
say what might happen in 15 or 20 years.
to one on the Commission expressed any objection to the subdivision line
as shown on the map. Mr. Schuele wanted to be sure that this action under
discussion could not later qualify the Ryes for a zoning variance based on
a Commission -created hardship.
Mrs. Hurd returned to the Commission at this time.
Sketch plan review of application by University Mall Realty Trust for a two
phase expansion at University Mall, Dorset St., Mr. George Khouri
Mr. 'Ward said this was the first step for a major subdivision. A 211,000
sq. ft, addition to the entire parcel is planned in two phases, on an additional
/Vt
N
AXOA 7- 5-0 t.,, 7-�1
1SO41-,OV-4 19 0 4W, ^40
/- �19- 0 1/ �? " 0 0 — 4/,' 0 o"ov"02')
7-e "�4 6 7-2114 -1
77,0/14
CITY COUNCIL
JANUARY 161 1984
The South Burlington City Council held a Regular Meeting on
Monday, January 16, 1984, at 7:30 pm, in the Conference Room,
City Hall, 575 Dorset Street.
Members Present
Hugh Marvin, Chairman; Paul Farrar, Michael Flaherty, William
Peters
Member Absent
Leona Lansing
Others Present
William Szymanski, City Manager; David Minnich, Assistant City
Manager; David Kaufman, Robert Chittenden, City Representatives;
Margaret Picard, City Clerk/Treasurer; Albert C. Audette, Street
Department; Ruth Poger, The Other Paper; Jim Cheng, Burlington
Free Press; Ken Jarvis
Report From Rep. David Kaufman:
a) Correctional Center expansion: Rep. Kaufman indicated that
the Representatives had issued a press release stating the views
of the city, and they were not sure why the administration had
then gone ahead with the push to expand the Chittenden County
facility. Even the Corrections Commissioner feels a new
facility in another part of the state would be better. The
Woodstock facility is in deplorable condition, and it would be
more cost efficient to build a new prison. Even if the South
Burlington facility is enlarged, there is nothing in the plans
to indicate that staff will be added or that programs for the
inmates would be upgraded. The Representatives indicated they
will oppose expansion right down the line, and that other County
Representatives and Senators will be encouraged to do the same.
Rep. Chittenden suggested that a letter from the Council stating
their feelings to the Representatives and Senators could be of
help.
Mr. Flaherty moved that the City Manager write to all Chittenden
County State Senators and Representatives outlining the City's
osition on the Zroposed expansion of the Chittenden Count
Correctional Center and that this letter be sent as soon as
possible. Mr. Farrar seconded with unanimous approval.
b) Dorset St. improvements: The first portion of Williston Rd.
is a17 set for work this summer. The portion of Dorset St.
from Kennedy Drive to Williston Rd. will require the acquisition
of some right of way because of the necessity to have side-
walks on both sides. If the plans show which right-of-ways are
needed, and if the City can move quickly, then the work can be
expedited and there is a chance it can be begun this summer.
In any case, it can be done next summer, which is still two
years ahead of schedule.
CITY COUNCIL
January 16, 1984
page 2
Mr. Flaherty questioned the planned use of the increase in the
Property Transfer Tax and noted that the proposed formula
does not take into account the different types of income in
the community. Mr. Chittenden said he didn't think any more
agencies were needed and he would rather see the money come
back to the towns.
Mr. Szymanski referred to House Bill 549 which changes the funding
for sewers. He said that at a hearing last week he learned that
this bill eliminates funding for phosphorus removal, which in the
City's case, means $300,000 and has serious implications for the
Airport Parkway upgrading. Mr. Kaufman indicated he would check
on this.
Mr. Audette noted that the Chamber of Commerce has come up with
a plan to try to tie state aid in to the capacity that roads are
being used at. He felt the time was coming to consider this
seriously. Mr. Kaufman said the going would be tough because
Chittenden County has only 20% of the votes and other areas
would not like the idea.
Comments and questions from the public not related to items on
the Agenda
There was no discussion in this area.
Consider appointment of Auditors for 1983-84 City Audit
Messrs. Szymanski and Minnich indicated they had been satisfied
with the work of Sullivan and Powers this year.
Mr. Flaherty then moved that Sullivan & Powers be appointed for
the second and final year of the agreement for the 1985-8 City
Audit Mr. Farrar seconded with unanimous approval.
Review 1984-85 Budget Preparation Calendar
Mr.
witn unanimous approval.
et Calendar for fiscal
Consider adoption of a Resolution increasing the Landfill Carters
Fee
Mr. Szymanski indicated the new fees will be in line with those
in Burlington. New fees represent a 2596 increase. Mr. Marvin
asked if anyone charges for residential use. Mr. Audette said
Burlington does but they are the only ones. He added that it
had been felt they didn't want to burden the taxpayers with a
fee and that any shortfall was paid for by the taxpayer anyway.
CITY COUNCIL
January 16, 1984
page 3
Mr. Farrar then moved that the Council sign the Resolution dated
January lb, 1984, establishing charges for use oT the South
Burlington Sanitary Landfill. the effective date being February
ters seconded with unanimous approval.
Progress Reports
a) Formation of Metropolitan Planning Organization: Mr. Szymanski
advise this is moving along quite well. There will be a contract
with the state and with Regional Planning...bb descriptions have
been prepared for two persons who should be on board soon. Mr.
Farrar added that Regional Planning will do about 80% of the
dollar volume of planning; the State will do the rest. They have
all documents needed to satisfy the Federal Government and no
significant problems are anticipated. There will probably be
more interesting discussions in the next 2 years as they start
to set priorities, but at least it will be local people involved
in the decision making. There will be some costs to local com-
munities and these will have to be in the new budget.
Mr. Audette asked the status of the 4-R's program. Mr. Farrar
said they have accepted the State's formula for allocation.
The City will get its funds and if other communities cannot do
their projects, the City might get additional money. The MPO
will not rule on these projects and they will be done as the
City submitted them. Mr. Szymanski said he had heard that the
State wants to handle all the bidding, even for the smallest
paving job. Mr. Kaufman said he would check on this.
b) Upgrading Sewage Treatment Facility: Mr. Szymanski reported
that a value engineering study was done last week on Airport
Parkway in order to meet requirements that an outside firm come
in after 30% of the plan is done and evaluate the work. This
firm came up with a lot of good ideas, including cost cutting,
and hopefully costs can be reduced. He hoped they will be in a
position for a bond issue this May. Mr. Farrar noted the City
is next in line to Rutland where they are having a problem, and
that the City should push for it because funding on the project
will change after this year. Mr. Szymanski reiterated the bad
news about the elimination of phosphorus funding. Mr. Peters
asked if the public will have a chance to input on what this
project will do to the character of the City, as it will be al-
most impossible to control planning after the expansion of the
facility. Mr. Szymanski said that with regard to funding, one
advantage is that the old sewer will be paid for at the same time.
Mr. Farrar stressed that a planning proposal can be denied be-
cause of its impact on any service (schools, roads, police, etc.)
and that the community has grown very little in the last few
years. The tax rate has effectively decreased and taxpayers are
paying a smaller portion of their income now than in past years.
He said the question was one of on -site or City sewage. Mr.
Flaherty said the City Attorneys should investigate the legal
implications to the City and whether development can be held up
CITY COUNCIL
January 16, 1984
page 4
because there is no sewer capacity. Mr. Marvin said they should
also have figures on what will happen if the City loses the
current percentage of State and Federal funding. He added that
when all the facts are available, an entire evening can be de-
voted to the topic.
Mr. Szymanski added that they are getting close to capacity at
Bartletts Bay facility and that a new project is in planning
that will take all the available capacity.
Mr. Chittenden said it would be advisable to have a statement
of future goals of the City for the next few years.
Other Business
a) Mr. Flaherty asked whether the Airport Commission got a sign
for Williston Rd. directing traffic to the Airport. Mr.
Szymanski said Mr Houghton was going to approach the State
but he had not heard further.
b) Mr. Marvin advised that he had received a letter from Everett
Reed offering his immediate resignation from the Zoning Board
for reasons of ill health. Mr. Szymanski advised that the
position will be advertised as soon as possible.
Mr. Farrar moved that the Council accept with deep regret and
appreciation for past service Mr. Reed's resignation. Mr.
Flaherty seconded with unanimous approval.
Mr. Szymanski will prepare a Certificate of Appreciation.
c) Mr. Marvin noted that a letter had been received from Duncan
Brown representing people on Old Farm Rd. who would like to
close the road to the top of the hill as they feel it is very
dangerous, especially in winter. The City Attorneys will be
consulted to see if there are any problems with this.
Mr. Farrar moved that Mr. Brown's letter be referred to the
City Attorney and Planning Commission for their input. Mr.
Flaherty seconded with unanimous consent.
d) Mr. Szymanski presented a dog damage claim from Gene Theret
for injuries to a sheep. He is asking $75 for this sheep, plus
$50 from the last claim for rounding up sheep and fixing the
fence. Mr. Szymanski said he would check to see if the amount
is reasonable. The owner of the dog is known and an attempt
will be made to secure reimpursement.
Mr. FlahertV moved to accept the City Manager's recommendation
on t e sheep problem, with settlement not to exceed 5. Mr.
Farrar seconded with unanimous approval.
CITY COUNCIL
January 16, 1984
page 5
e) Mr. Flaherty asked if the hiring freeze would affect the
replacement of the person in the Sanitation who left. Mr.
Szymanski said no action would be needed until March or April.
f) Mr. Peters asked what month has the most earning power for
the City. Mr. Minnich advised that July is probably the highest
as some people pay the whole year's taxes at once.
g) Mr. Marvin advised he had received a letter from Fred Maher
asking why voting machines are not considered, and also asking
about sidewalks on Hinesburg Rd. Mr. Marvin will let him know
what was done about investigating voting machines.
Minutes of January 3, 1984
Mr. Farrar moved that the Minutes of January 3 1984 be approved
as printed. Mr. Flaherty seconded with unanimous approval.
Sign Distribution Orders
Distribution orders were signed.
Liquor Control Board
Mr. Farrar moved that the City Council adjourn and convene as the
Liquor Control Board. Mr. Flaherty seconded with unanimous consent.
Mr. Szymanski presented another request from Vinny's Hot Spot for
an entertainment permit for use of the "Monster" on January 25,
1984. He indicated there had been no previous problems.
Mr. Farrar moved that the request from Vinn 's Hot Spot for an
entertainment permit for January 25, 1984 be approved. Mr.
Flaherty seconded with unanimous approval.
As there was no further business to come before the Board, the
meeting adjourned at 8:50 pm.
Clerk
L; J VAT
CII�I��
January 9, 1984
Hugh Marvin, Chairman
Council of the City of South Burlington
575 Dorset Street,
South Burlington, VT 05401 Old Farm Road
Dear Chairman Marvin:
Five years ago all the residents of Old Farm Road signed a petition
requesting that our road be converted to a dead end with access only
at the Southern end from Hinesburg Road. Council members responded
favorably after a public hearing, but it was found that action could
not be taken until Old Farm Road was removed from the Federal Urban
Systems Map. This has now been done. Please see the attached letter
to Patrick Garahan, Secretary of the Agency of Transportation, from
George A. Jensen, Acting Division Administrator, Federal Highways
Administration.
All the residents of Old Farm Road have signed a new petition and re-
quest that you terminate Old Farm Road at the brow of the hill north
of the Leo O'Brien residence.
Our reasons for this request are
1) safety and
2) the fact that our road is no longer an effective route
between Hinesburg Road and Williston Road.
The intersection with Kimball Drive is at the foot of a steep slope
and visibility is restricted by the banks on either side. This makes
for very unsafe conditions in winter: northbound vehicles may skid out
into Kimball Drive and, on account of the banks, oncoming traffic may
not be able to avoid them with the potential for a very serious
accident. Because of the grade southbound cars have difficulty
ascending the hill under snow or icy conditions and those which can
not make the grade are forced to back into Kimball Drive. School
buses will not use the north end of the road under these conditions.
We have made time trials between Hinesburg Road and Williston Road in
both directions under favorable driving conditions and can testify
that Old Farm Road is no longer an effective shortcut in terms of
time. If proceeding northbound at the legal speed limit, it is more
effective to continue on Hinesburg Road to Kennedy Drive and then to
Williston Road. Further it probably is more fuel efficient since it
only involves one deceleration and a 60% chance of stopping for a red
light whereas the Old Farm Road route involves one deceleration and
two full stops. A similar pattern evolves for southbound cars except
that there is more potential delay for the left turn at Kennedy and
Hinesburg Road. Our tests were made before the additional right turn
lane was added to the Hinesburg/Kennedy intersection.
At present a number of vehicles think of Old Farm Road as a shortcut
and pay no attention to the posted limit of 25 mph. This is partic-
ularly true for northbound vehicles which have been at or above the
50 mph limit on Hinesburg Road.
The Old Farm Road residents look forward to a favorable response from
the Council.
Sincerely yours,
Duncan F. Brown
M
We, the undersigned, being all the residents of Old Farm Road, do
hereby petition the Council of the City of South Burlington, Vermont,
to convert Old Farm Road to a dead end street with access only from
Hinesburg Road.
NAME
Residence
r
-7,5 04�.�.u�.
74 0-ej '.
P69 , r
_3 O-Q-0 4 &"
r-6
% pep,— 100*
ace Ft'hw R.fl ,
iLarch 3, 198`3
?:x. Patrick J. Garahan, Sacratary
Au
eacy of Trans-ortation
.1ontpelier, Vermont 05602
Dear :Ir. Garanan:
Viv fe? !aral. aid urban syst m changes for the greater uurlinF ton area, requested
ir_ your ?ebruary 25 letter, are approved. iris approval is limited to those changes
:;p..cifically re:,•uested in your letter, that is, relocation of the i<urlington
Soutzern Connector to a nroj.cted locatio.:crest of Pine Street, retention of Pine
Street from .lain Street to Flynn Avenue as urban s,rstem, and deletion of Old Far,.0
Road in South hurlir.�ton from y the urban sstem. The Federal -aid urban system
Dunear revisions and ot1her system changes reflected on therinteri.m map provided
With your February 25 litter, are not approved at this time.
T:le sionatureg of the local officials on the interim man included with your
7ubmission, provide sufficient evidence of local participation and approval of
tha requested changes. The functional classification of fine Street as a collector,
as cliscussZd in your letter, is also approved. This change is being noted on our
Me- copy of tiie greater i;urliagton urban area functional classification map. The
approved urban GyStem revisions are also being noted on the approved greater Lurlington
Federal -aid urban system mao and in the approved Federal -aid urban system route
descriptions. This urban system Modification is identified as sequence aunfoer
VT-U-•13-01. The increase in system milea;e on Pine Street is nearly offset by
t1le reduction on Old Farri Road, so that the total isurlington area urban system
iuilaaFge renains 69.969 miles including projected mileage.
The ai)proval of t:iese system changes is given with the understanding that a revised
Fed,_ral-aid url) ate system boundary and systara modification covcriln'- t1le full census-
desi-,nated urbanized arna will be prepared in cooperation wit1. the 'letropol-tan
'Planning Organization, soon to he designated, and submitted for Fi:'WA a l s
soon as possible.
Sincerely yours,
G. A. JENSEN
George A. Jensen j
Acting D vi-ion Administrator
cc: Washington Office
IMP-14
for
RECEIVED
JAN 10 1984
MANAGER'S OFFICE
CITY .SO. BURLINGTON
January 9, 1984
Hugh Marvin, Chairman
Council of the City of South Burlington
575 Dorset Street,
South Burlington, VT 15401 Old Farm Road
Dear Chairman Marvin:
Five years ago all the residents of Old Farm Road signed a petition
requesting that our road be converted to a dead end with access only
at the Southern end from Hinesburg Road. Council members responded
favorably after a public hearing, but it was found that action could
not be taken until Old Farm Road was removed from the Federal Urban
Systems Map. This has now been done. Please see the attached letter
to Patrick Garahan, Secretary of the Agency of Transportation, from
George A. Jensen, Acting Division Administrator, Federal Highways
Administration.
All the residents of Old Farm Road have signed a new petition and re-
quest that you terminate Old Farm Road at the brow of the hill north
of the Leo O'Brien residence.
Our reasons for this request are
1) safety and
2) the fact that our road is no longer an effective route
between Hinesburg Road and Williston Road.
The intersection with Kimball Drive is at the foot of a steep slope
and visibility is restricted by the banks on either side. This makes
for very unsafe conditions in winter: northbound vehicles may skid out
into Kimball Drive and, on account of the banks, oncoming traffic may
not be able to avoid them with the potential for a very serious
accident. Because of the grade southbound cars have difficulty
ascending the hill under snow or icy conditions and those which can
not make the grade are forced to back into Kimball Drive. School
buses will not use the north end of the road under these conditions.
We have made time trials between Hinesburg Road and Williston Road in
both directions under favorable driving conditions and can testify
that Old Farm Road is no longer an effective shortcut in terms of
time. If proceeding northbound at the legal speed limit, it is more
effective to continue on Hinesburg Road to Kennedy Drive and then to
Williston Road. Further it probably is more fuel efficient since it
only involves one deceleration and a 60% chance of stopping for a red
light whereas the Old Farm Road route involves one deceleration and
two full stops. A similar pattern evolves for southbound cars except
that there is more potential delay for the left turn at Kennedy and
Hinesburg Road. Our tests were made before the additional right turn
lane was added to the Hinesburg/Kennedy intersection.
At present a number of vehicles think of Old Farm Road as a shortcut
and pay no attention to the posted limit of 25 mph. This is partic-
ularly true for northbound vehicles which have been at or above the
50 mph limit on Hinesburg Road.
The Old Farm Road residents look forward to a favorable response from
the Council.
Sincerely yours,
i
Duncan F. Brown
We, the undersigned, being all the residents of Old Farm Road, do
hereby petition the Council of the City of South Burlington, Vermont,
to convert Old Farm Road to a dead end street with access only from
Hinesburg Road.
NAME Residence
V Tw�
0���'<< ,2ii-� �. dam(
5i 1r -3
f6 �A-A-
'A
A,C g W le"I
aw
41
M
;o : 1i er. V,.r;,...
i(Tirch 3, 19i 3
Patrick J. Carahan, Sacrc.-tary
�. ency of Tran4ortation
.iontpelier, Vermont 056-:)2
Dear iir. Garanan:
brie Fo_ !eral-ai(l urbaan s .,;tam cllangas for the greater :uurlin,gton area, requested
in Your ?ebruary 25 letter, are approved. 'Pais approval is limited to those changes
�h::c:fic Illy re:,ue ,ted in your letter, titat is, relocation of the i<urlington
� ut:lern Connector to 7 projected locatio-n l-Te:it of Pine Street, retention of Pine
Street from :;air. Street to Flynn Avenue as urban s'istenl, and deletion of Old Farm
toad in South nurlinaton front y the urban system. em. The Federal --aid urban systein
ouncary revisions and otter system changes reflected on therinterim map provided
with your February 25 letter, are not approved at this time.
T.-,e signatures of the local officials on the interiri man included with your
subiaission, provide :sufficient evidence of local participation and ai)proval of
the requested cltanues. The functional classification of Pine Street as a collector,
as discussed in your letter, is also approved. This change is being noted on our
file_ cope of the greater i:urliagtoa urban area functional classification map. The
approved urban oy:,tem revisions are also beinF, noted on the npProved greater Lurlington
Federal -aid urban systemmai) and in the approved federal -aid urban system -route
descri7ptions. Pais urban system wodification is identified as sequence number
VT-U- 3-01. The increase in system mileage on Fine Street is nearly offset by
the reduction on Old Farm Road, so tliat the total Burlington area urban system
wilanF,e remains 69.969 miles including projected mileage.
The ap-proval of t:iese system changes is given with the understanding; that a revised
Fed-ral-ai.d urbau system boundary and systara modificati n, covcrinv tiie full census-
desi^nated urbanized area will be prepared in cooperation with the Tletropolitan
nlan:iin- Organization, soon to he designated, and submitted for FKWA a 1
soon as possible.
Sincerely yours,
G. A. JENSEN
George A. Jensen
Actin; D vi-ion Administrator
cc: :Jashingt011 Office---
MiP-14 } r .�
o ��