HomeMy WebLinkAboutBATCH - Supplemental - 0000 Ridgewood Drive (4)M E M O R A N D U M
To: South Burlington Planning Commission
From: David H. Spitz, City Planner
Re: Next week's agenda items
Date: 7/8/83
3) V.L. Properties
Legal documents have been submitted and appear to cover all relevant
concerns. The City Attorney's review should be complete by Tuesday's
meeting. I see no other problems with this revised application.
4) Indian Creek Pool
At the subdivision hearing several months ago, Indian Creek developers
indicated they would return shortly to present plans for a swimming pool.
/This hearing is for the pool only and any other unresolved issues, such as
road connections, are not appropriate for review now. The pool itself is
a simple addition to the private recreation area and presents no problems.
5) Tilley, Hinesburg Road
Russell Tilley has done a survey and has provided two rights -of -way
to Hinesburg Road as requested. The only remaining issue is the location
of the r-o-w closest to I-89. The applicant wishes the r-o-w to run right
along the interstate fence. The zoning regulations state that "access drives
may be permitted to cross the CO District". The Planning Commission must
determine whether a 750 foot drive along the length of the CO District
constitutes a "crossing" or whether the drive must be located outside of
the 150 foot wide CO strip.
After the final r-o-w is determined the applicant will have to submit
appropriate legal documents.
6) Davis, Imperial Drive
Many of the revisions requested at the last meeting have been provided:
(a) Landscaping has been modified including a row of yews in front
of the existing hedge.
(b) One row of parking (12 spaces) has been removed and will be con-
structed only if needed.
(c) One new centrally -located curb cut has replaced the proposed two
curb cuts.
(d) The Fire Chief has reviewed and approved the plans.
(e) The City Manager has reviewed storm drainage. The problem area
identified at the last meeting will not be affected by this development.
(f) Lighting information has been added.
In addition to the above, I have asked the applicant to give more detail
at the meeting on his client's traffic volumes.
FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN ASSOCIATES
Engineering and Planning Services
The Kiln • Brickyard Road • Essex Junction • Vermont • 05452 • (802) 878-3000
October 26, 1981
Mr. Dick Ward
City of South Burlington
575 Dorset Street
South Burlington, Vermont 05401
Re: Ridgewood Estates, Phase III, site development permit
Dear Mr. Ward:
At the request of the developer's attorney, Peter Sidel, we would
like a site development permit issued at your earliest convenience.
This permit would be for earth moving, grubbing, and clearing associated
with the construction of the three northernmost buildings (11 dwelling
units) in Cluster 2, and associated utilities.
Either I or some other representative of the developer will come
by within the next day or two to pick up the permit.
SSP:pk
cc: Peter Sidel
Yours truly,
FITZPATRICK-TT,FTnELLYN ASSOCIATES
Stephen S. Page
Design 0 Inspection 0 Studies 9 Permitting
RICHARD A. SPOKES
JAMES D. FOLEY
JOSEPH F. OBUCHOWSKI
STEVEN F. STITZEL
SPOKES, FOLEY & 0BUCIIOWSKI
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
184 SOUTH WINOOSKI AVENUE
P. 0. BOX 966
BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05402
October 26, 1981
Peter S. Side1, Esq.
P. 0. sox 115
Route 100
Waitsafield, Vermont 05673
Ridgewood
Dear Peter:
(802) 862-6451
(802) 863-2857
15AAC N. P. STOKES
COUNSEL
I have the following suggestions in regard to the docu-
ments you submitted to me on October 15, 19811
(1) Agreement and waiver pertaining to private
roads and. streets. This is fines as drafted.
(2) warranty need to street. Since the City may
be acquiring title to this segment of the road system,
it will be necessary for the final plat to include
mates and bounds. I believe David Spitz has communi-
cated this to your engineer. it would also be bene-
ficial if the final plat could depict the 45-Moot strip
which is being conveyed to Ridgewood by Faith United
Methodist Church and in turn conveyed by Ridgewood to
the City. I had some difficulty understanding the
first full paragraph of the attachment and perhaps this
language~ can be clarified.
(3) warranty Deed and easement to fire lane.
Main, the fire lane must be depicted on the final plat
and I believe your engineer is aware of this require-
ment.
(4) warranty Dead and easement pertaining to
utilities!, etc. It is conceivable that the City will
be accepting the utility easements and the pedestrian
easement at different times. Thus # the peedestrian
easement should be included in a separate do". I
understand the pedestrian easement will arose phase one
and this should be clearly expressed in the pedestrian
easement deed as well as an appropriate notation placed
can the final plat..
Peter S. Sidel, Esq. - 2 October 26, 1981
In regard to the water line and sewer line ease-
ments, the City would like any reference to "drainage"
deleted. In addition, the water and sewer line ease-
ments only pertain to eight -inch lines. I realise your
language specifies this but we have had some confusion
with other projects. Thus, I would like to see a
sentence added along the following lines:
"This easement does not pertain to any sewer or
water lines lose than eight inches in diameter.
Any lines less than eight inches in diameter are
owned by and shall be maintained by the within
Grantor an4 its successors and assigns."
We are checking out on our end the drainage ease-
ment near the pump station. I'm not sure exactly what
the City requires in this regard and I will get back to
you as soon as I get the necessary information.
(5) Offer of dedication. This is fine as drafted
but I would prefer to refer to a "strip of land" in-
stead of a "right of way" since the City is acquiring
or may be acquiring the fee. The use of the language
"right of way" is sometimes confusing. A copy of the
descriptive portion of the Warranty Deed will be attached
to the offer as Exhibit A. We also would like the
utility easements and pedestrian easement covered by
D the offer. There should be a sentence to the effect
that the City can accept one of the items without
accepting the others. I think you can use one offer of
dedication but perhaps have an Exhibit A pertaining to
the street, an Exhibit B pertaining to the utility
easements and an Exhibit C pertaining to the pedestrian
easement. Again, the simplest force for the exhibits
would be copies of the descriptive portions of the
respective deeds.
(6) Ridgewood--Robenstein dead. I have no prob-
lem with this document but perhaps Robenstesin would
like the easement to be in joint name with his wife.
(7) Ridgewood --Myers deed. I have no problem
with this document.
(8) Agreement and waiver for Myers. This docu-
ment makes no sense to me and perhaps you can let me
know what it is designed to accomplish.
0
P
111
Peter S . Sideal - 3 - October 26, 1981
(9) Vermont Property Transfer Returns. When you
make your final filing, the Transfer Returns should be
fully completed, including as statement as to what is
being conveyed to the City in each case.
As I mentioned above, the Final plat will awed to be
revised so that certain information will coincides with the
legal documents. Any reference in your documents to the
final plat may need to be changed to include as new revision
date.
With your final submissions® we would pike a certifi-
cate of titles pertaining to all items to be conveyed to the
City. We also would like partial releases from any mortgagee
or some sort of subordination agreement clearly indicating
that the City' as interest is superior to that of any mortgages.
Please call if you have any questions.
cot Mr. Richard ward
Mr, David spits
very truly yours,
Richard A. Spokes
SPoKEs, FOLEY & ®IBucx®wsKI
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
184 SOUTH WINOOSKI AVENUE
P. O. BOX 986
BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05402
RICHARD A. SPOKES
JAMES D. FOLEY
JOSEPH F. OBUCHOWSKI
STEVEN F. STITZEL
December 4, 1981
Peter S. Sidel, Esq.
P. O. Box 115 Route 100
Waitsfield, Vermont 05673
Re: Ridgewood
Dear Peter:
(002) 862-6451
(802) 863-2857
ISAAC N. P. STOKES
COUNSEL
The documents you sent me by letter dated November 17, 1981 are
fine with one minor exception. When the word "drainage" was
deleted from the waterline and sewerline easement deed a couple
of additional words were inadvertently deleted. It looks like
the words "control of" should be added before the word "sewer"
in the second line from the bottom of page 1, and before the
word "water" in line 4 of paragraph number 2 on page 2 of the
deed.
My approval of the documents is contingent upon the necessary
changes being made to the final plat, along with submission of
a. certificate of title and the necessary partial releases.
Please let me know if you have any questions.
Very truly yours,
Richard A. Spokes
RAS:mil
cc: Richard Ward,
Zoning Administrator
David Spitz,
City Planner
M
PETER S. SIDEL Attu mey at Law
November 17, 1981
Richard A. Spokes, Esq.
Spokes, Foley & Obuchowski
P.O. Box 986
Burlington, Vermont 05402
Re: Ridgewood
Dear Dick:
P.O. BOX 115, ROUTE 100
WAITSFIELD, VERMONT 05673
802-496-3277
First I'd like to thank you very much for your cooperation.
Relative to your request under letter of October 26, 1981,
I believe I have made them in accordance with your requests
but I will, using that letter, a copy of which I attach
to this letter, go through the changes.
(1) o.k. as drafted.
(2) I have asked the engineer to contact David Spitz
relative to the metes and bounds of the road system. I
have redrafted the first full paragraph of the attachment.
I have tried to make clear that from the road system to
the property of the church, there is a sixty (60') foot
strip of property since the church property does not
abut the road system.
(3) I have contacted the engineer relative to the fire
lane and depicting the same on the Final Plat.
(4) I have made separate deeds for the pedestrian
easement and the utility easements. PLEASE NOTE: The
pedestrian easement does not cross Phase I. --I-have
added the language concerning the eight (8") inch diameter
and have taken the liberty to add a word or two to your
description. I have received your note concerning the
drainage easement which I understand is o.k.
' Richard A. Spokes, Esq., Page 2
(5) I have changed the right-of-way to a strip of land.
I have also added the discussion concerning the pedestrian
easement and the utility easements. The exhibits, hope-
fully, if it is alright with you, can be the actual deeds
that I have prepared. If not, I will draft out only the
descriptive portions of the deeds.
(6) I have added Edith Robenstein to the deed and will
be contacting them immediately.
(7) o.k. as drafted.
(8) I have stricken that document altogether since I
misunderstood myself what was to have occured relative to
the Myers deed.
(9) I have completed the property transfer returns as
fully as I can at the moment.
The Final Plat will be revised and if the documents need to
be revised accordingly I will do so.
The Certificate of Title will be forthcoming together with
the mortgage discharges or subordination of same. I have
completed the title search and have a rough draft title
certificate. I will get this to you immediately.
Thank you.
Very truly yours,
T(_t_'
Peter S. Sidel
PSS/bds
cc: Richard Ward
David Spitz
Fitzpatrick -Llewellyn
SPOKES, FOLEY & 013UCHOWSKI
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
164 SOUTH WINOOSKI AVENUE
P. 0. BOX 966
BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05402
RICHARD A. SPOKES
JAMES D. FOLEY
JOSEPH F. OSUCHOWSKI
STEVEN F. STITZEL
Peter S. Sidel, Esq.
P. O. Box 115
Route 100
Waitsfield, Vermont 05673
Re. Ridgewood
Dear Prater:
November 11, 1981
(602) 662-6451
(602) 963-28S7
ISAAC N. P. STOKES
COUNSEL
In my letter to you of October 26, 1981 I indicated I would check
out the easement situation near the existing pump station. The
language in your initial proposed deed seems fine. I wait for
your revised documents.
Very truly yours,
4�
Richard A. Spokes
RAS:mil
CC: David Spitz -
Richard Ward
No Text
MEMORANDUM —
To: South Burlington Planning Commission
Fran: David H. Spitz, City Planner
Re: Next week's agenda items
Date: 9/4/81
2) Dr. Brown
Proposed Shunpike Road entrance is now located so that it could accomodate
a future public street. Also, it is approximately 150 feet to the north of
Lavallee's property and will not enter directly across from any houses on the
other side of the street. Separation distance from Williston Road is adequate.
Funds for a sidewalk along Williston Road must still be provided.
3) Rebecca Square
After a meeting with the neighbors, the applicant has decided to withdraw
his proposal for a 20 unit multi -family project. A new application for pre-
dominantly single-family homes will be presented shortly.
A meeting has been held with the fire chief and the applicant's engineer
and architect. The compromise solution is that the same layout will be retained,
however, new emergency connections will be added at the end of each dead-end
driveway. These connections will be 16 feet wide, will have a complete road
sub -base, a vegetative cover, and will be plowes in a manner so that 2 or 3
inches of snow will be left on the ground to protect the vegetation. Complete
details on emergency road materials and proposed maintenance procedures should be
submitted to and approved by both city manager and fire chief before final plat
approval is granted.
The concerns addressed in the city manager's memo, dated 8/18/81, must
still be resolved.
The easement to the adjacent property to the north for a possible public
street connection must still be provided.
5) Farrell Warehouse
The access drive has been shifted slightly to the east to prevent any conflict
with the proposed South Burlington connector.
There are no other major problems with this application.
6) Liu
Applicant now owns approximately 15 acres on Highland Terrace. He plans to
buy 5 acres of rear land from a large parcel owned by Smart Associates, and then
to subdivide into 2 long "bowling alleys" lots. Length to width ratio will well
exceed the 5 to 1 standard of Section 402 of the subdivision regulations.
DHS
9/81
MOTION OF APPROVAL
For the Final Plat Application by Ridgewood Estates Development Inc. for a revision
to Phase III of Ridgewood Estates, consisting of 59 units, as depicted on a
10 page set of plans plus one attachment, entitled "Ridgewood Estates", prepared
by Fitzpatrick -Llewellyn Associates, dated July 1981 and stamped September 8, 1981:
Stipulations:
1) All plans shall be stamped by the project engineer.
2) The application shall receive approval from the City water department prior
to issuance of the first building permit.
3) Rights -of -way shall be granted to the adjacent Robenstein and i�Iy rs pr)o r ies,
and shall be marked on the final plan
4) A 60-foot wide offer -of -dedication for a potential city street extending from
Dorset St. to the abutting Economou property to the north shall be provided.
If access cannot be obtained across the Methodist Church property then the
60-foot strip shall be provided entirely across the Ridgewood property, and
revised plans must be submitted for approval.dr
5) No building permit may be issued for Cluster until all offers of dedication
for the potential street connection to the Economou property have been
submitted.
6) All legal documents - including pedestrian and utility easements, offers of
dedication for potential streets, and proposed covenants - shall be submitted
to and approved by the City Attorney prior to issuance of the first building
permit. Covenants shall specifically include provisions for plowing, main-
tenance, and repair of fire access lanes.
7) A landscaping bond of $ 3 0,060 shall be provided.
8) The applicant shall complete construction of the walkway on the westerly
side of Dorset Street and shall screen the recreational vehicle parking
area, as agreed to in the letter from the project engineer, Douglas Fitz-
patrick, dated September 7, 1981.
9) A revised final plat shall be submitted, incorporating required changes from
stipulations 1, 3, and 4.
10) This approval expires in 18 months.
60000O
q 0' 0D U
30� vex
Faith United Methodist Church
899 DORSET STREET, SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05401
Stephen C. Butler, Pastor Telephone: (802) 863-6764
September 8, 1981
South Burlington Planning Commission
575 Dorset Street
South Burlington, Vermont 05401
Gentlemen:
Faith United Methodist Church was contacted on Friday, September 4th
concerning the possibility of extending an easterly to westerly right of way
across the westerly boundry of land owned by the church at 899 Dorset Street.
Such a right of way would facilitate access from the Ridgewood development
to property owned by Economou.
The Chairman of the Church's administrative board has been informed of this
request and has agreed to place this matter on the September adgenda. Given
such short notice it is simply not possible at this time to indicate whether
or not, and under what conditions, such an easement might be granted. However,
I can indicate that the matter will be given serious consideration, and negotiations
will follow between the church and Ridgewood Associates.
Very truly yours,
Fred G. Smith
Chairman, Board of Trustees
FGS/lbm
AOTICE OF TRANSMI-11 AL
<J RIST-FROST, ASSOCIATES
Consulting Engineers
21 Bay Street
Glens Falls, N.Y. 12801,
Area Code 518 793-4141
TO: City of South Burlington
RECEIVED
!."hY 21 1915
MANAGER'S OFFICE
CITY SO. 13URLINGTON
Municipal Bldg., U.S. Rt. 2 _ _ DATE: May 20, 1975
South Burlington, Vermont 05401 JOB NO. 2179
ATTENTION: Mr. William Szymanski —RE: Ridgewood Estates
City Engineer
WE ARE FORWARDING ❑ UNDER SEPARATE COVER ® HEREWITH
❑ DRAWINGS ❑ SPECIFICATIONS ❑ SHOP DRAWINGS ❑ CATALOG DATA
❑ SAMPLES ❑ ADDENDUM(S) ❑ SUBMITTALS ❑ OTHER
THE FOLLOWING:
Prints of typical sections for walkway area along Dorset Street.
THESE ARE: ❑ FOR YOUR FILE ❑ APPROVED ❑ DISAPPROVED ❑ AS NOTED
REMARKS:— If this approach is satisfactory, we shall proceed in
this fashion.
ja
VERY TRULY YOURS,
Timothy J. Schaffernoth, P.E.
F 0R. G-403-A
i;
�n��
Z
IFZ
�
U1
A r
c
Z
0
U 3
z_
DUl
r
Z
#
p;
�o
r
m
m
0
n r
D
-�
(!1
Ln }2d
46.
Ex/sr/NG
P,4VED
AREA 8'-0 WALK
Z, o"
24
/
Ro U/vo 4,
VERrI CAL
CURVE
MIN. <o" TopSO/L
\
CRU$NEO STONEFOl2 SEEO/NG
,
Vr. D.O.H. 4Y704_I7 (X rn
CX/Srwa GRADE
S1-000ES VARY
SAND 602ROW AS /'ER
V r. Q. 0 . K• tt 703.03 TO 72 /ir-lL /
SC COMPACTED //V t2, /
I-AYEA25 TO 95% A,7AX.
ORY OENs/rY
7-YP/ c.4L WALi< 5EcTiolv
IN )=/L L AREA
SCALC: / "= 40'
0
ExlSrinic,- 42.aDE �
SLOPES VARY
Ex/S7"/NGI �
PAVF_D 2'O•`
AREA 8 -0 WALK lot
mwzmm
�, ..J,.` ,..Y'-.r-1,•::.•.r.•. _r— M/N. err TOl�SOlL
FAQ 5CEDfAfCj
CQUS"4ffO STONE
6" DEEP, AS P,-k RIP -RAP D/rCH W/r"
Vr. D.O.H. tf704 . /7 TYPE I 5 roNE r/LG
AS PER Vr. O•o•H. `r 706.OS
3ANO BORQOW A 3 PEQ
Vr. O.O. H. a 703.033 TO
r BE COMPACTED 7"0 951%
MAX D/?Y DEN3/TY, /2 "oeEP
TYPICAL WALK SECTION
IN CUT AREA
FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN ASSOCIATES
Engineering and Planning Services
The Kiln • Brickyard Road • Essex Junction • Vermont • 05452 • (802) 878-3000
7 September 1981
Mr. David Spitz, Planner
City of South Burlington
City Hall
Dorset Street
South Burlington, Vermont 05401
Re: Ridgewood Development Phase III
File: 8042
Dear Mr. Spitz:
On behalf of our client, Ridgewood Estates Development, Inc., we are
herewith submitting three (3) sets of plans modified to incorporate
the results of recent meetings with City Officials and the items re-
quested at the hearing held on 25 August.
Easements
(1) Sheet 2 now shows a 15-foot pedestrian easement in the general
location suggested by the City, with appropriate notes regarding
its final location. The Project's lawyer has prepared documents
that address this easement.
(2) Sheets 2 and 3 now show a 60-foot easement granting access to the
abutting landowner (Methodist Church) in order that the Economou
property will have access to this Project's road system in the
future, as tile City requested.
Enclosed is a letter from the Methodist Church acknowledging their
participation in this access to the Economou property.
(3) Sheets 2 and 3 now show a driveway access easement in favor of
the abutting property owner, Ms. William Robenstein, as the City
requested. The location of the access has been discussed with Mr.
Rubenstein and meets his expressed desires. We see no reason why
minor field adjustments in the access location can't be undertaken
at the time of construction, should Mr. Robenstein desire them.
Design • Inspection • Studies • Permitting
Mr. David Spitz -2- 7 September 1981
As the plans indicate, the paved surface and fill necessary for
the access will be carried to the Project's property line, with
the abutter continuing construction on his property.
(4) Sheet 4 now shows additional utility easements to be deeded to the
City for future maintenance and construction of sewerage imrovements,
as requested by Mr. Szymanski. These easements parallel the "standard"
20-foot easement along the sanitary sewer, but have been expanded to
the dimensions suggested by Mr. Szymanski.
Fire -vehicle emergence access
After our meeting with the Fire Chief, an agreement was reached to:
(1) reduce the depth of the "back -around" area near each garage from
fifteen (15) feet to ten (10) feet to discourage parking in this
area. This was a concern of the City in that people would use this
back -around area for casual parking and thereby block emergency
vehicles from direct access to the (±welling structures. We be-
lieve we have alleviated, if not eliminated, this concern.
(2) provide an emergency firelane connecting each "dead -ended" parking
area, so that fire trucks would have the capability of driving from
one parking area to the next, if necessary. In an attempt to
preserve the aesthetics of areas to be included in the firelane,
the 16-foot firelanes will be topsoiled and seeded, while underlain
by eighteen (18) inches of gravel to provide structural support
for the fire vehicles. This cross-section is detailed on sheet 10
of the plans.
The Fire Chief feels this approach will adequately provide the access
he needs, while not providing areas that appear to be for general
vehicle access, with the resulting through traffic and parking
problems that could result.
We are also enclosing for your review revised planting plans that
show the accommodation of the firelaries.
The Project's lawyer has amended the by-laws of the condominium associa-
tion to include agreements on plowing, so that the access to the pump
station will be plowed along with the private road system, as requested
by the City.
We believe we have answered the concerns expressed by the City during
the hearing on 25 August, and have altered the plans to satisfy these
concerns.
FITZPATRICK-LLEWE LLYN ASSOCIATES
Engineering and Planning Services
Mr. David Spitz -3- 1 7 September 1981
Briefly addressing a couple of other points that may seem yet unresolved,
we submit that at the hearing on 25 August the Applicant's representative
responded to questions regarding screening of the recreational vehicle
parking area constructed in the earlier phases of the Project. The
representative said under Phase III construction he would screen the area,
using the same procedures planned for Phase III screening. If the City
desires, a plan can be created and submitted showing the proposed screening.
The second issue concerns the completion of the walkway along Dorset
Street, from the point where the existing force main enters Dorset Street
to the new access point near Mr. Robenstein's dwelling. Again, at the
hearing on 25 August, the representative agreed to finish the walkway on
the westerly side of Dorset Street, as previously approved under the earlier
phases. Specifically, the agreed -upon improvements mould be as indicated
in the sketches prepared by Rist-Frost Associates, and as submitted to the
City on 20 May 1975; we are enclosing copies of the sketches and the
transmittal memo for your reference.
To the best of our knowledge, these two points were the only outstanding
concerns of the City regarding earlier construction that have not been
fully settled.
We thank you again for taking your time to meet with the Fire Chief and us,
and to assist in the resolution of the other questions the City has had.
Please don't hesitate to call us at your convenience should you have any
questions on the enclosed information.
Sincerely yours,
VA'. Y _tip M
DRF/cd-rb
CC: Mr.
Creedon
CBT
Mr.
Goddette
Mr.
Szymanski
FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN ASSOCIATES
Engineering and Planning Services
P'/ V4) u,
- Al S <-, A At a �a
� -.IMA I*, k.4, /1-14
4jfA4A , / ¢ wolt-t4t. % NxNe
/'"`4- 44.v-hut �Afe44 ^Vxl��t Vot — 'v"*gd*�'
-a4 x
lVer-1411117Y
9 �
,,,4f - ylql(Z�M
r"tz/79
aNIT
71
.C/4 ;7
71
e.%417q-nt✓.,P�� nwd°�c U"""_ �� �eyos�a'(tr..�'_U'/ /r�✓�7��..�`c-✓��
_o_w
M�
4.
PLANNING COMIMISSION AUGUST 25, 1981
Mr. Thibeault warned the developer that the neighbors would take the
covenant issue to court.
Mr. Kimel asked about a traffic study and expressed concern about
drainage. Mr. Poger said that at sketch plan the Commission had felt
that it did not want access off Williston Road, which is heavily traveled.
The added turning movements which would be created here would be bad for
the road, especially since this is so close to Victory Drive. Mr. Kimel
felt the development would double or triple traffic in the area. Mr. Spitz
said actual counts in the area could be taken and an estimate of what
kind of traffic the development would generate could be made. fir. Kimel
did not want this kind of development in the middle of an area of single
family homes.
Mr. Larkin was asked what kind of units these would be and said they
would be two -bedroom apartments, renting for about $450 per month.
An area resident stated that the neighbors would prefer to have owned,
not rented units, in their midst.
Mr. Sanborn was concerned that there was only one entrance here, but
was told that with 50 units or more a second entrance is required. Mr.
Mona wanted to review the minutes of the discussion regarding one entrance
or two.
Mr. Poger read the fire chief's letter on this proposal.
Mr. Kimel expressed concern for esthetics and compatibility.
The possibility of regarning because of the omission of Mr. Ploof's
notice was discussed. IA's. Ploof wanted to wait a month until the next
hearing because he had not had a vacation in 5 years and he said he might
take one. Mr. Spitz apologized for the omission, but noted that virtually
all the abuttors had been notified and said he felt a 2 week continuation
was appropriate considering what had actually happened tonight.
An audience member asked if it was normal for the city engineer to call
neighbors to discuss drainage problems. He was told it was not, but that
the neighbors could call the engineer.
?fir. Woolery moved to continue the preliminary plat application of LTH
Associates for a 20 unit PUD on Williston Road, Victory Drive and Helen
Avenue until September 8 at 7:30 pm at City liall. Mr. Ewing seconded the
motion and all voted aye.
Site plan application by Farrell Distributing Corporation for a 30,000
sq. ft. addition to an existing warehouse on Holmes Road
Because the hour was late, Mr. Lamphere was asked if he would mind
a continuation of this item. He said that would be all right.
Mr. Ewing moved to continue the site plan application by Farrell
DistributinCorporation _until two weeks from tonip-ht at 7:30 pm at Citv
Hall. Mr. Woolery seconded the motion and all voted for it.
Application by Ridgewood Estates Development Inc for revised final plat
ttpproval of Ihase units LL6Y-R-la'ew- ood-Estates
Mr. Poger noted that the Commission had received a letter from the
fire chief on the proposal (dated August 14 and on file with the planner).
He does not feel he can give protection to these buildings as they are
presently laid out.
Mr. Page showed the previously approved plan, which included 13 single
family lots. Those have been eliminated.
5.
PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 25, 1981
Mr. Spitz said the fire chief's objection to the plan was the distance
the buildings were set from what he considered proper access. He feels he
will have to go between two carports and will have trouble getting two
trucks to a building.
Mr. Page noted that the landscaping budget for the project was substantially
greater than normal for this kind of development, and he said there was a
lot of off-street parking. There will be 1 covered and 1 open space per
unit plus a guest space for every two units. Of the 59 units, 12 are 3
bedrooms and 47 are 2 bedrooms. There will be a pedestrian easement on the
land. As far as the fire chief's concerns, Mr. Page said he had to go back
to the approved plan, and he felt this was a better or at least equal
.proposal. Mr. Poger noted that this was the strongest letter he had ever
seen the chief write on a proposal and he did not want to take it lightly.
Mr. Sacarus, who is responsible for the site plan, said public safety
had been kept in mind when it was designed. He noted that the carports
were detached from the living units, thus keeping the gas in the car tanks
away from the homes in case of a fire. He noted that they did not feel
people would park on the street because of the way the project had been
lgid out and because of the ample number of parking spaces. The end of
the macadam is 32-36' from the living units and he felt the chief could
reach the units from there. He did not feel people would park at the end
of the macadam, but said that area could be made smaller to further
discourage it, and he added that the homeowner's association could discourage
it also.
Mr. Spitz said the chief objected to the long entrance, to the fact that
the carports were in front of the building, to the possibility that he might
be blocked off from getting to the buildings, and to having only one way
to fight a fire. Mr. Fitzpatrick felt two trucks could fit side by side here.
There will be 24-30' of space for them.
Mr. Spitz said the collector streets were 24' wide, and the loop road
is 20' wide. Mr. Woolery noted that the turning radius on Swift St. was not
large enough for the school bus to turn around. It picks up children from
this development so they do not have to wait on the street. He wondered if
that loop should be expanded.
Mr. Poger said the fire chief would have to review the plans again with
the developers and come back with his comments.
Mr. Walsh asked about screening the RV area and was told it would be done.
Mr. Wo.olery felt it would be nice to have that done first.
Mr. Spitz raised the question of access to the Economou land to the north.
Mr. Page said such access would have to be from either extreme edge of the
property, or from the middle. He did not see a compelling need for access
for Economou, which has access both from the east and west, and he felt that
one disadvantage of this better site plan was that it did not provide access
for Economou. Mr. Spitz was not aware that Economou had access from Spear
bt., but said the Dorset St. access was on a hill, which would not be a good
location. Mr. Walsh said his understanding had been that this developer
would talk to the church about going across the church land. Mr. Page said
they had not done that yet and Mr. Poger felt they should. He said that
perhaps the developers would be able to show the Commission that access through
their land was not necessary.
The gravel shoulder on Dorset St. was mentioned. Mr. Page found the
design for the original walkway and said that to the beat of his knowledge,
it had been installed partway to the project. Mr. Spitz was asked to check
on that.
r
6.
PLA.i'�Z?�G COM"IISSIUb'
AUGUST 25, 1981
The Commission was told that when the Dorset St. access is built, an
abuttor, Mr. Robenstein, was to be given access to the new road. It was
felt by Mr. Mona that Mr. Robenstein should have a one-time choice to
make a commitment as to whether he wanted to keep his old access or have
a new one. Mr. Spitz was asked to research this item also. Mr. Poger
felt that if Mr. Robenstein did not want the new access, he should not be
forced to take it, but if he did take it, he would have to cut off his
existing drive. The access should be shown on the plan anyway.
Mr. Woolery moved to continue the revised final plat application for
59 units at Ridgewood until September 8 at 7:30pm at City Hall. Mr.
Ewing seconded the motion and it passed unanimously.
The meeting was adjourned at 11:10 pa.
Clerk
FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN A' )CIATES
Engineering & Planning Services
The Kiln - Brickyard Road
ESSEX JUNCTION, VERMONT 05452
Phone 878-3000 c -,
TO
n
LIEU -An Oo GF un000 uuma
WE ARE SENDING YOU Attached IJ Under separate cover viathe following items:
�\�� �3 -
Shop drawings El Prints �611 Plans, ❑ Sample L] Specifications
❑ Copy of letter ❑ Change order ut
COPIES DATE NO.
DESCRIPTION
THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below:
1 For approval ❑ Approved as submitted
J For your use ❑ Approved as noted
As requested ❑ Returned for corrections
For review and comment ❑
FOR BIDS DUE 19
REMARKS oNQ 0 k—,j _ c-
❑ Resubmitcopies for approval
-1 Submit __—_copies for distribution
I J Return corrected prints
❑ PRINTS RETURNE AFTER LOAN TO US
lJf t
1umm11 Zan: -, ". " 'Wao- ", '
SIGNED
If enclosures arc not a nvt,, i +Iy notify us at once
PETER S. SIDEL Attorney at Lazo
P.O. BOX 115, ROUTE 100
WAITSFIELD, VERMONT 05673
802-496-3277
September 15, 1981
Agency of Environmental Conservation
c/o District Coordinator
111 West Street
Essex Junction, Vermont 05452
Vermont Regional Planning Commission
58 Pearl Street
Essex Junction, Vermont 05452
Selectmen -City of
575 Dorset Street
South Burlington,
South Burlington
Vermont 05401
South Burlington Planning Commission
575 Dorset Street
South Burlington, Vermont 05401
RE: AMENDMENT REQUEST FOR
LAND USE PERMIT #4C0161-2
Ladies and Gentlemen:
I have enclosed:
1. Amendment form for Land Use Permit #4C0161-2
2. Representative documents for the proposed townhouses:
a. Administrative Rules (3 pages)
b. Declaration, Section 18, as usually employed by
me, pertaining to the obligation of the Association
to abide by requirements under the Permit (11 vii)
3. Locator Map -shown on sheet 1 of Engineer's Plans
Land Use Permit #4C0161-2 contemplates a three (3) phase project
with a total of 101 townhouse units and 13 lots on which could
be built single family residences.
Ridgewood Page Two n
i
Phase I was to contain 32 townhouse units, Phase(II_was to con-
tain 35 townhouse units, and Phase III was to contain 34 townhouse
units, together with 13 lots. As actually constructed and com-
pleted as of the date of this letter, Phase I consists of 32
townhouse units, Phase II consists of 23 townhouse units,
and there are no buildings in Phase III.
It is the intention of this request to amend the Permit to allow
a rearrangement of the project by shifting the 12 townhouse units
from Phase II to Phase III and by converting the 13 single lots
in Phase III to townhouse units. The result would be a project
with the identical number of dwelling units as presently approved,
a total of 114 townhouse units.
The requested amendment has little effect upon the original
determinations under the 10 criteria, as the number of living
units is identical to the number permitted under the present
Land Use Permit. The entrance to the property for Phase III is
from the same intersection as was approved under the Permit.
The roadway leading from Phase I at the recreation site, together
with the lots, on the western border of the property has
been eliminated and in their place is a large greenbelt.
The rearrangement is a result of a reconsideration by the
developers for the best use of their remaining property. The
new arrangement is a cluster of units using less of the
property, while providing a good environment for living for
the occupants. It is believed that the number of individuals
who will actually occupy the proposed townhouses will be less
in number than under the original plan.
With respect to the criteria, it is emphasized that many of the
criteria necessary to be examined for the issuance of permits
has been addressed, completed and approved under the original
application and the Land Use Permit issued. The only criteria
effected by reason of this requested amendment are Criteria 1,
4, 7(C) and 8. Although criteria 7 and 8 are not the Applicant's
burden, it is to be noted that local approval has been granted
and the residents of the existing townhouses in Ridgewood
have likewise approved.
It is our position that both Criterion 1 and 4 are satisfied.
The project will not create undue water or air pollution, as
waste water will be treated by municipal services and runoff
will not affect streams or waterways, as neither exist in or
immediately adjacent to the property.
D U
1;r
s Ridgewood Page Three
The plans submitted with this cover letter satisfy Criterion 4
and shows that the project will not create an unreasonable soil
erosion or reduction in capacity of the land to hold water so
as to create dangerous or unhealthy conditions. The maps
display the preventative measures for erosion control and show
the contours before and after. The site is suitable for the
requested rearrangement,'
Energy -conservation measures include'low flow water closets,
insulation of the walls giving a rating of R-19 and for the
ceiling a rating of R-38. The landscaping and the position of
the buildings is done with an effort to maximize energy
conservation. As to the landscape plan itself, there will be
a determination, based upon further consideration, as to the
relative percentages of hardwoods to softwoods. Lighting
will be of the downlight type.
The other criteria, as previously mentioned, have already been
addressed and satisfied under the original application. The
water comes from the Champlain Water District and as the project
is merely a rearrangement of the same number of units, and per-
haps lesser occupants, it will not create an unreasonable
burden on water supply. The traffic entrance and exit is as
originally approved. The use of the municipal services for
education is the same as that originally approved and perhaps
lesser given the fact that there are no longer going to be 13
single family residences, but instead townhouse units. The
same is true of police services as is stated for educational
services.
Criteria 9 and 10 have been answered/by the,.origiftah_,pe+rmit. The
project has been throughly reviewed by the South Burlington
Planning Commission and approval has been granted.
If there are any questions, do not hesitate to contact me.
Very, truly yours,
Peter S. Sidel
ENCLOSURES
FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN ASSOCIATES
Engineering and Planning Services
The Kiln • Brickyard Road • Essex Junction • Vermont • 05452 • (802) 878-3000
September 15, 1981
Dr. Edward R. Schlegel, Coordinator
District #4 Environmental Commission
111 West Street
Essex Junction, Vermont 05452
Re: Ridgewood Estates Development, Inc.,
Amendment to Land Use Permit #4CO161-2
File: 8042
Dear Dr. Schlegel:
As a technically -oriented supplement to the information contained
in Mr. Sidel's letter, we are submitting on behalf of Ridgewood Develop-
ment Inc., the following items:
1. Seven (7) sets of Engineering and Landscaping plans.
2. Seven (7) sets of lighting "cuts" and specifications from
manufacturer's catalog.
3. Seven (7) copies of 8 September 1981 hearing minutes approving
revised plans, City of South Burlington.
4. Seven (7) copies of approval letter from Department of Water
Resources regarding stormwater.
5. Seven (7) copies of drawing D-236, an illustrative site plan
of originally -approved Project.
6. Seven (7) copies of drawing D-237, an illustrative site plan
of the Project as it would appear with revisions to Phase III.
7. List of adjoining landowners and addresses.
A copy of each of the foregoing items has also been sent to each
statutory party.
Also included herein, for the use of the Regional Engineer, are three
(3) sets of plumbing/riser diagrams, along with sheets Al-A6 of architectural
plans, to be used in conjunction with the public building review and issuance
of a Certification of Compliance.
Design • Inspection 9 Studies 9 Permitting
Dr. Edward R. Schlegel, Coordinator
15 September 1981
Page 2
The illustrative site plans, drawings number D-236 and D-237, are
included only as a review "aid" to assist the Commission in visualizing
the proposed amendment to Phase III and its relationship to the overall
Project.
Drawing D-236 shows the overall Project layout as originally approved.
Phase III is represented on this Drawing by the structures that are not
numbered plus the proposed single-family Lots.
Drawing D-237 represents the Project as it would appear with the
proposed Phase III layout. The twelve (12) dwelling units numbered
42, 43 and 46 through 55 on D-236 will never be constructed where shown,
but will be incorporated into the proposed Phase III structures.
The plans for the revised stormwater system have been submitted to
the Department of Water Resources for their review under the existing
discharge permit. A copy of their approval letter is enclosed.
Plans for the water supply system will be reviewed by the Department
of Health, with comments transmitted to the Regional Engineer as soon as
they are available.
The City of South Burlington has granted approval (final plat) to
the proposed Phase III revision. A copy of the hearing minutes at which
approval was voted is included, along with referenced documents.
The landscaping plan showing a typical cluster planting indicates the
locations and species of the proposed plantings, while the illustrative
landscaping plan shows the overall concept for the Project sought by
the Developer. In accord with the City's formula on landscaping costs,
the Developer has agreed to provide at least $30,000 of landscaping,
equivalent to about $500 per unit.
Developer has stated that about 300 of the landscaping budget will
be spent on street landscaping, while the remainder will be spent
landscaping foundations, parking areas, and areaways. A landscaping
bond of $30,OOO is required by the City.
Drawing L1 also shows the proposed outside lighting for the Phase III
Project. Although the "Heritage Series" lights (see manufacturer's cuts)
are a departure from, the Town & Country series utilized in Phases I & II,
it is felt the proposed lighting will be an improvement over the existing
lighting fixtures.
FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN ASSOCIATES
Engineering and Planning Services
e
Dr. Edward R. Schlegel, Coordinator „1
15 September 1981
Page 3
Should you have any questions on the material submitted with or
contained in this letter, please don't hesitate to contact us.
Sincerely yours,
FITZ TRI I ASSOCIATES
Douglas R. FitzPatrick, P.E.
DRF:pk
Encl.
CC: Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission
Clerk, City of South Burlington
South Burlington Planning Commission
FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN ASSOCIATES
Engineering and Planning Services
m'"
.. _a
AAL
t
y
. , 1
..n
ii
L R ,xfM �yrt1v t +�
�� 1•.. y's:.
eRt, c
Heritage Series y , �`-2v
pay,
_ S fit v4y � � � � .Ar � ,.i3 �K '�§r;•5 J+L
4 t k l
. • r `t T� 4 l���'�` "�' ,,,,,,,,��� P' i.,� �;: � � b,. "�te�.vk ��i�y.,. ~' t ,r ti k y i y a � ^a .[�
A go—
"Ni
•�- m4x � £k „ram � ����'� .e, a 5�;,'���'�' K � ., is �� �
P a °" i+ *r'w.r•n-+" r ^a a .a� k a.`�'� "'w"� r •" '
j� I ,Yw� "'r� # ° , J• r*r �,- 4�� tt ' v!M`� " ��� '", � ,�{Y , � �,'��� � Al s.�.
♦ L',Afi � s .A r $.. 4l � F ` F � :' T +. ppM b `� +T
a
v
..-
1 r
'Weir
=,"L L
Luminalre
Wei ht
LV'atts i' Order Number LDescription
Lbs. Kq.
SUPER METAL HALIDE
Luminaire w/ Drop Acrylic b)�Tjrj_�__
LQOU H E- OG- SM H- Vo I ts i trical Refractor 40 1 18.
400 Luminaire w/ Drop Acrylic Symmetrical Refrac 40 18.2
1
F -LIE-DX-O-DX-V -11 �91,�L wl Drop Acrylic Symmetrical Refractor 35 F17.3
HIGH PRESSURE SODIUM
5
2 -volts Luminaire wl Drop Acrylic Symmetrical Refractor 38 24.1
-400-HPS-�, s
40_0 HE Lumiraire w/ Drop Acrylic SSxrnmE�.!ica!
to 47 264
Refrar r :ZJ
N,c,::!� fy l-,,3 ll as! voltage 120, 2108, 240, 277 or 4151 volts and
finish, S-1,.ck: stan;'arcl,
_,ils Bronze orkVhile.
Flat -:;!ass Lens —
Polycailbor-ale Lens —
3
Replaciai-lient Parts Prices
Item
2
Part Number
40001
Description
Ref lector
Socket -Super Metal Halide
Socket -Mercury Vapor -Metal Halide
2
24001
2
24003
Socket -High Pressure Sodi;jm
Drop Acrylic Lens & Frame Assembly with Hardware
3
42001
3
42008
Flat Class Lens and Frame Assembly with Hardware
4
52001
Ballast Cover
5
52008-2
Upper Capacitor Clamp
6
—
For replacement ballasts see page(Intro.8).
7
For replacement lamps see page (Intro. 8).
9 f
(513) 793-3 OO
AF-2
i SinqIE ,..... F�,..n . �n ...� ,.;� ... , ng Type)
For A;:';":iGn3; Heitrts ^Fe "P^Ies 8 Brackets" S'ectro^
Weight
' Height I Order Number
Material
i Bolt Size
Lbs.
' Kg.
12' HE-SO-12
5" Sq. 11 Ga.
3/4" x 30"
114
51.8
14' _1HE-SQ-14
5" Sq. 11 Ga.
3/4" x 30"
130
59.0
16 HE-SO-16
5" Sq. 11 Ga.
3i4" x 30"
148
67.2
18' HE-SQ-18
5" Sq. 11 Ga
3/4" x 30" i
160
72.7
'A-'d suffix (D) for Twin Mounting (1800 Standard, 90" must be Specified). For Triple or Quad Mounting
add suffix (T) Triple or (Q) Quad
Optional: 5 B.C. Base Cover.
Brackets for 5" Square Poles
(Single Arm Only, For Multiple Mounting Order One Arm Per Fixture)
For Additional Brackets See "Poles & Brackets" Section_
_Wei
ht
Length T Order Number
Description — _
Lbs.
Kg.
16" ! ;tE-BK-SQ-16"
1' --- H,:--BK-SQ-1
12' I HE-BK-SQ-2
- ----- rt - - — ----
HE-8K-SQ-3
5" x 5" Steel Bracket
2" x 4" Steel Bracket---------
18
8.2
5
2.3
j 2" x 4" Steel Bracket
9
--- -
14
4.1
—
-- — --- .- -- —
2" x 4" Steel Bracket
6.4
�.s
4' HE-BK-SO-4
2" x 4" Steel Bracket
19
8.6
4" Square Poles
(With 2" Nipple)
For Additional Heights See "Poles & Brackets" Section
WeigI
Number
Material
Bolt Size
Lbs.
F
_Heig_h_t,Order
12'
HE-4SQN-12
_
4" Sq. 11 Ga.
314" x 30"
95
4
14'
4" Sq. 11 Ga.
3/4" x 30'
108
4
16'
_HE-4SQN-14
HE-4SQN-16
4" Sq. 11 Ga.
314" x 30'
121
5
18'
HE-4SQN-18
4" Sq. 11 Ga_
3/4" x 30"
134
6
Optional: 4 B-C. Base Cover.
Single Bracket
(For Poles with Vertical Nipple)
I For Additional Brackets See "Poles & Brackets" Section
Wei
I
Length
Order Number
T Description —_--
Lbs.
I
1'
HE-BK-ST-1
2" x 4" Steel Bracket
13
2'
HE-BK-ST-2
2" x 4" Steel Bracket
17
3'
HE-BK-ST-3
2" x 4" Steel Bracket
21
4'
HE-BK-ST-4
2" x 4" Steel Bracket
25
1
Twin Bracket
(For Poles with Vertical Nipple, 1800 Standard, 900 Must Be Specified)
For Additional
Brackets See "Poles & Brackets" Section
Wei I
Length
Order Number
Description
Lbs.
1
1'
HE-BK-ST-1-D
_
Twin 2" x 4" Steel Bracket
25
1
2'
HE-BK-ST_-2-D
Twin 2" x 4" Steel Bracket
29
1
1 3'
HE-BK-ST-3-D
_
Twin 2" x 4" Steel Bracket
33
1
4'
HE-BK-ST-4-D
Twin 2" x 4" Steel Sr,icket
37 �1
Note: When ordering brackets for existing poles. Specify slipfitter size, 2." Star
a..
r --
6pec11 ica lion
Ir 7structiorIs
Start with luminaire
model (number
selected from
pages 2 thru 11)
(example) 15-10V277
3. Specify Height
and Style
using Pore No
15-10V277115S
4. Select pole and
mounting position
15-10V27711 SHL
Nc,c,en
15-10V277115SHB3
6 i,�are Special
c'%' �h (straight
Po'e only)
15-10V277115SHB3CS
Your specification is now complete. It
includes the luminaire type, style of
pole, and modifications to both
luminaire and pole.
Referto Pages 1617
for Pole Embedment Data
and availability.
A
i
�
r
r
W
a`
L
,
i
A
B
C
A
B
Pole
Above
TcTal
S,- ead
Pole
Above
Total
No.
Ground
No.
Ground
10S
1010"
13'6"—
2'9"
—'------SIh1GLE
12S
12'0"
15'6"
to
12C
12'9"
16'3"
15S
15'0"
1910"
810"
15C
15110"
19,0"
20S)
20'0" .
See
20C
20'l0"
25'4"
j24'6"
Crossarm
-----------------
----------------------
DOUBLE
20XS
20 0"
25'0"
Chan
12CD
12'9"
16'3"
25S
25'0"
30'0"
15CD
15'9"
1910"
30P
30'0"
36'0"
20CD
20'10"
2514"
35P
3510"
41'6"
40P
40'0"
47'0"
Spread
1'9'/2"
1'11"
1'11"
3'8Y "
3'11 Y2"
3'l 1 Y2"
4. MOUNTING POSITIONS
3, 6. 7, 15', 16 and 29 Lines
tom' -Al F:� ',zw
k.
C CD H L 2H T21
rLA HB LB
*15-53/75 may be specified for H, L, 2H and 2L Mounting Positions only.
12
(vi) _1 share of a member in the funs. Id assets of the
Association can not be assigned, hypothecated, or transferred in any
manner except as an appurtenance to his unit.
(vii) The --Association shall be responsible for the performance
of any conditions required by the Planning Commission of South Burlington,
all as recorded on the munutes for-8 September 1981 from said Planning
Commission. As a part of the approval by said Planning Commission of
South Burlington, the Association must maintain the sidewalks, landscaping
and roads as approved, said agreement from maintenance at the sole expense
of the Association may not be abrogated without the specific consent of
the Planning Commission of South Burlington.
5. The affairs of the Association shall be conducted by a Board of
Directors who shall be designated in the manner provided for in the Bylaws,
and who shall have for such purpose, all the authority of the Association
as is permitted by laws, including the authority to delegate all or a
portion of the authority to a manager as agent.
6. Every Director and every officer and agent of the Association
shall be indemnified by the Association against all expenses and liabilities,
including counsel fees, reasonably incurred by or imposed upon him in
connection with any proceedings to which he may be a party, or in which
he may become involved, by reason of his being or having been a director
or officer or agent of the Association, or any settlement thereof,
whether or not he is a director or officer or agent at the time these
expenses are incurred, except in the case where the director or officer or
agent is
a
1 0.,4i Tt`., TEN C0UiU_r COURT
F,w£u IN UtcR (S OffiCE
STATE OF VERMONT JAW 141985
CHITTENDEN COUNTY, SS CoAtVC,S 11.
In Re: EXISTENCE Or AN
OPEN CONNECTINC ROAD
BETWEEN RIDGEWOOD ESTATES
and
INDIAN CREEK DEVELOP IENTS
a ,
i
CIIITTENDEN SUPERIOR COURT
DOCKET NO. 512-83 CnM
EINDiNUS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW, AND ORDER
The petitioner appealed tt.e decision of the South Burlington
Planning Cor,lmission which required that a road running throu-h
two developments known as Ridgewood Estates and Indian Creels be
kept open for traffic. The causo was tried on the merits before
the undersigned, sitring without Assistant Judges, who acre
unavailable. Ea.^ed upon the credible evidence introduced at the
hearing, the
exhibits, stipulations entered by
counsel,
memoranda
submitted, and
arguments of counsel, the court
makes
the rollou- {
ing findings of fact, conclusions of law, and order:
T17 1T T\T 1T,, C,
1
1. Ridgewood.. -fates Homeowncr. s Association, Inc.
(Ridge°wood) i:; a non-Firofit corporation located in the City of
South Burli;i ton and is a condoninium establishes pursuant to
Vermont law. Articles of association and bylaws are on file in
the South Burlin-ton land records. As the name implies, it is a
condominium ho,T.,eo Greg^ association. In 197' , Ridgewood Este�i. tee_
i
Developmcnt, ?;1c. {3.E.D. Inc.) planned a co^dor,,iniu� d^velopnerlt
on the northwest co.r:ier of Dorsct and SwI`t streets in South
Burlington. r'fifty--seven acres 'were involved. About one hundred
units. to bE corstructed ;.n three phases, inc' ud nF; some
Sl,i7�`a fiia1i:;v ho::s'S �:lG rec'�•st.1,ona���G'Ll1tiCS F,t:C` ;tS cl P001
1
ZO'd 3ni b6-6l-8dV
and tennis courts. All these were slio,.:n on a plan which was
eventually filad ir. the City Clerk's office. (Defendant's Q)
The aj.t_°real roads a;,re shown on defendant's Q, including the
section cf the rosduray in di. pate. The Planning Commission
approved the plan on Sr pte;,iber 19, 1974.
2. to June 1975, the City approved Phase I of the project.
R.E.D, Ir.c. conveyed the common aroas to Ridgewood in July, 1977.
3. Phase :I was approved by the City September 27, 1977.
P.E.i?., Inc. conveyed the common areas of Phase II to Ridgewood
on. October 19, 1979.
4. Phase I!I was approved by the City in April, 1979.
(defendant's D)
The 1'base III Dylan
was siryned as approved Junc
12, 1979. The
plan for Phase III was filed July 11., 1979. (See
defendant's X.)
The connecting read
that is in dispute in this
i
litigation was
shown on the filTd
plan. (defendant's N.) The
plan showed 12
private residential
units, 40 town hav5es,
internal roads,
:3nra o recreation
facilities. The Court finds
that at this point,
r`!e connectin;
road in dispute was considered
i
by -,11 parties
as part of the plan
and :f^s rewired. This: had
been the understanding sine the first general approve:. in 1974.
5. Phase
III never came into
being as shown on Defendant's
\. R. '.D. 1n!�.
went bankrupt after
the approval nor Phase ill
but before it lliijd
completed Phase
Ti. 4n5trL'CtiOn of !r'1ase ITT
never stal-teu.
. �
On December 3, 1981,
,..:,,,��. I::u. c:or.vcye its
' `
remaining property to Lr=e Vermont
federal SavJags !Tld Loan Ass_- -
ciation, a bent: : in '3urlington. L? - je'ed (P lai;ltiff's 5) Contains
3 jetail -,3 Metes :a!1d bounds. it does not rofer to
4
b9;5t 3n b6-6t-ddd
1
a plan. The lanij conveyed is the same land upon which Phase .III
of ;:id-ewood Estates would have been develop -ad, 9t this point,
tho lan l t1hat -,oulu been part of Ridge-:ood Estates, and
known as Phase' Ili, r,ai,e tinder separate ownership. :k.E.J. Inc.
and the Piidgcwood Estates Homeowners Association no longer had.
1 anything; to do with it and no longer had a control, or
1
potontial control, over the development of the common areas.
$. It is not rl--r f h evidence .a from the e x .ence jEst what happened '
next., but it seems that a gontleman by the, namc of Osgood carte
i
into the ;:I,ic:tuare during the suaimer of 1981. A new plan was
I i
developed for the land that would have been Phase III, and a
r�visecJ ''plat" was prepared for which approval was given by the
! i
PIan„ins Comr:issi.on on September 8, 19S1. It was recorded in the
,land records. It became Defendant's O at the trial. ':'he con-
necting road in dispute is shown. Although in the name of
Ridgewood Estates, it is quite clear that this shows a different f
plan of deveiopmerct—czan that for Phase III shorn on Defendant's
!
LN and approved. Ny the�tlann,ina Co..mmission in 1979. These revised
i
plans seem to have received Commission approval without anyone an
the Planning Cortmiss:ion beam, aware that thw land in Phase 111
lwas to change rLanda, and that the owner; in Phases 13r.d T1 ;.,quld !
I '
kkI no lodger be pt rt of the so-called Phase TII. They r:ere unaware 1
1
that they were clezl.in^, wit?Z an entirely net; dcaoloprtent, which !
j� was to have its O'rij7 scltarate tbyl-aws and articles of association.
,0 to court finds that the Plannin- Commission `was not told b
r '
ma`s O")d that this not P :rase IiT of the or. i-inal Rid e•.,00_'
flovelopment, and ?;'at the idgewood Homeowners er Association id
3
3nJ,
not be involveC in C?t: land under consideration. ur�her, the
Court finds that. the Planning Co;�.mk$si.on erafi r.ot told tilat what
Was formerly to .c Phase III was now to be c _til_' Ir.diar C -eeK.
7. Osgood built the connecting road in the summ^.r of 1312.
the homeowners in Phases I and II squawked. They went before the
Planning Comriission to have the road beLween the developments
closed, Among other things, people were drIvin- through t.hc
development for the: purpose of going between Dorset and Swift.
Streets, thereby avoiding the traffic at the corner. The plan-
ning Commission decided it best to keep the connecting road open,
although there were no;,; two separate developments on ghat %ras
originally to be Ri dizewood Estates, The Planning Commission,
however, did rc-quirr the developer to make a new plan entitled
Indian Creek, which plan was approved and 41i2el,1 zn 1983.
(Deferzdar.t's P) I'. shows the same layout as DeZendant's U.
S. The partj.es stipulated that at all ti.r3ac the rot^ds
t:ithin ic.gt ror,c r` u^te.s were to be private. So too were the
roads in Indian CreeZ', AS matters stood after the land for Phaso
III was conveyed to the bank, the Ridgewood domeowncrs Associa-
tion woold no loaner have all t!1e roads under its control. It
would be forced t"e) s ;are a connecting road rith mother develop--
me.nt, althoi7h this was not clear to anyone in tho association
un4i? the connacti::g road was built in the sum me.r of 1982. The
residents of 'Ziaget:,00d could use the connecting road to go to
Dorset S► reec, rund in ,?,o d,oing they would :r:;e unly a snort
porn iu% of the '-:t'ian Creekk access road for that purpose. T hose
*w.?!,i:ed to _7,o ,f �Zwift. Strmit, would
4
4
50'd 5 . ini ti6-61-M)
be driving tl:rough a major portion of the Ridgewood developr.'.ent.
`let they would nol be c-ontz-1-butla to t:}le r_nst of Upt eep of the
reads they use -I. tinder the original. Plan dc:v:i;Ed in 1976, all
residents o.`. a t three phases could have been obligated to share
the cost of road Lipk,aep and snow removal. Once the properties
were split into separa.- oviDership, on the ether hand, the effect
was to require th,�- uk ii-3r s in ,Ri dloewood to 'feet^, up their roads for
the benefit of owners in another development, without a corre—
sponding benefit running the other way.
9. The cost of snowj!lowino is significant. Ridgewood pays
about $17,000 per year to plow its portion of tile develop« ont.
:.e roads in too o deve"opment wore not constructed to town
specifications because ;.:ley were not to be public roads.
IAdd4tional wear on the roads from use by others outside the
develODment was not contemplated kit the timo of the original
!approvals and should not ,)e 1mpo!5ed upon ;?id;ewood now fron
Indian Creek, whose -'residents
will iiot be
bearing
an., portion
of
the cost of
up:,eeD. '?the Oou.rt
-finds that
the only
le„itimate
use
of the connr.:cting rood between the developments is for hmnrgancy
F such a l R 'g t d r o ti
vehicles ...u4:. uS -3.C:� �:1P.d ���,�SL'�BnCp. :�ldve:/0�u 3a�ee., that �.7e
conaecting road sy he aiatai-ra'-d for mor,4`ncy purposes, but it
proposes to dose the road for general iublic, usc. The Court
finds nothin- in the evidencee that required the connecting road
to be open tc; t_ha general public. 7f,e only rcquirc^rent that t e
Court can --rzz. that ?1nases 1T an-' 1tT would be connected t
I,
requira' en!: ? i`['.�P4t$ T., T_T, F:ilii ITT Tti::13i,nurj Linder Cn.^.lmOrl
i
S
1
i
li
90 'd 9 9 11d, b6-6 [ --�,JV
oanershi,p,
espcc:k�-illy
as the:ro were to bo
no recreational
facilities
on the land
;or P-r<t�e III, anti
residents -.Would "avc
reedod the
connecti-.,8
road to reach them
in the other part of the
development.
10. One of the ar u-nsnts of Ridgewood is that it owns title
to the connecting road. The city, on the other hand, asserts
that because of confusion in the instruments of conveyance, the
Vermont Federal Savings owns the connecting- road. The Court
finds that Rid e—uood obtained title to the land for the
connecting road in a deed from R.E.D. Inc. dated October 23,
179. (See laintiff's 4) This deed purported to convey to
Ridgewood Phases 2A. 2113, and 2C. The individual lots were
excluded. Thus the common areas were conveyed. The d ed
specifically stated _hat it was intended to convey the common
areas in Phase II. In the deed it said that the lands conveyed
were shown, on plans on file with the city. -No volu:mc or P'ge '
number was typed deed, but on the first page "Vol 1.53 Page
j
7 is handwritL67n at'Vhe end of the first paragraph of the
description. T.he trouble is that this gives no indication of an '
1
i
official reference. It. so happens, however, that in Vol. 153 on
page 7 is a plan (?laintiff's i) which shoes Ri.dgewood's Phase I
and what seems to be parcel:> 2A, 2E, and "_'C. The Court is t
i
i
satisfied by a preponderance of the evidence that the handwritten #
I
plan reference on the dee<! (Plaintiff's 4) is <�r.curate, and what
the deed rcfcrs to as "Pha yes 2A, 213, ant; 2C" are in fact "parcel
2A," "parce; 2 ," enJI "parcel 2C." as sil0wn 01, t7le Plan in Vol.
153. p.j,-e 7, o f t*he Ci t y'z land records. (iJ17 t +.1: c's 7'
R
?.0 'd 99 : 9 [ 101 b6-6 [ -add
0
1
11. 'there aaozher reason that the Court is inclined to
find that wa, conveyed the Land in the location of the
ccnncctin-, road in October, 1979. It is interesting to compare �
i
the metes and bounds ;a.:-!t uut on tho plan in Plaintiff's 7 with ;
the ziete�; and bounds description in Plaintiff's 5. the deed from
PR,E.D., Inc. to 6,ermont Federal dated December 3-3, 1981, If one
takes the time to start on thw p.liia at tine southeast corner of
Phase I, and --heEi write dawn each description from, the plan goi.np,
in a Clockwise uir.ection around Phase I and the parcels 24, 21 ,
and 2C, it will be found that the description matches the
description in Plaintiff's 5, R.tE.D., inc.'s deed to the Vermont
Federal. Of importance is the :Alesc.ription along the northerly
side of .hat is shown as "parcel 2C" on Plaintiff's 7. Plainly,
Vermont Federal hot no part of "parcel 2C" as claimed by the City
in its memorandum of May 17, 1984. it is not disputed that
Indian Creek got r►o more land than what R.`..D., Inc. conv_yed to
Vermont Federal, arr4,;—Vermont Federal , of no portion of parcel 2C.
The same description�as shown on Plaintiff's 1, the overall plan
for Indian Lreek and Rid;ewood, dated 19�'A. The division line
between the developments is shown and is the same line as shown
on Plaintiff's 7 along the northerly Line of parcel 2A. I, as
the City claims, Ridgewood does not o r, par` of "parcell 2C," then
ownership is still in R.E.D., Inc. The Co,.;rr., however, finds to
ti'>e contrary. :Rlidbewood owns the connecting ro?C in "pa: ccl. 2A."
12. As to the. City's last irgum,elt, the Court does not find
tii,'st the City �;GinBd the right r.:e:� insist that :`e rase r.....4i.n
open on Ridgewood's laild by v.lr�uue of tfa fact tC:c"l.t 2-id,;ewood did
7
90 'd q y ; � i Hni �6--e i -Had
not 3ppG'31 the planning '•anrti.�sion's clecisior n
The Court finds that the City ap?roved the cormecting road only
i
as a route Between parts of Lhe sh;,e ( eveloptmeit. It dJ.d not
approve the road as a required ca«nection between two
devclopmcnts .ider separata ownership.
1.3. The Cour finds that when the three phases of Ridgewood
Estates was firs~ approved by the City, there was e potenticl
benefit to the private residents in the development in having the
connecting road for travel to and from re4reatiora areas and
visits among nei ghbc,r. 5 in t?:c same condominium association.
Except for emergency vehicle access, however, the Court can find
in the evidence no material be refit to the comMiinity of South
Burlington. Now that Phase III is no longer part of'Ridgewood
'states, the CourL can find in the evidence no benefit to the i
residents of these developments in having a road between them.
All parties agree that emergency access is desirable, and they
stipulate that tine -:road can be maintained for Lhat purpose.
R' CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
Ridgewood Estates started out as a single development in
three phases. Had all gone according to plan, there would have
been today a sir,;,ie owner of the commaon areas in what is now
Ridgewood and Indian Creek. Instead, today them: are two owners.
through no invo'vemeat oil Ridgewood who had no control. over the
situation. :leither devolopmcrt is responsible for the upkocp or
plOW4 ng of the roads in the other developmont. All tho roads in
thcsc develop-ne-its .'are ?rivate. They are not toddy, :tor wore
they ever, in.toZG'edi Tor general Public us= by ;'.szC'eats it 10 live
81
60 'd Kj : 5 [ III b6-61-t dV
in other areas o* the t.o:,n. facl� d ,veloprent today has its '.)UM
recreation area. —Iiiere is no nA+Ba for the residents of one to go
to the other. izi.-it is true tL,, t t1.-,9 conner_tinw road was
t
always co;jtemplatedl from the !re in ;i.n; or` Plar.ni.ng Co, mission
t;t
involvement wi ch Ridgewood Est3Les, ul cil- showed up, there i
i
never was any question, but tkiat the common areas in the entire
area would be owned by Ridgewood. z%s it turned out, however, the
three phases of Ridgewood were never completed. The Court can
see no reason ashy a condition that was necessary and appropriato,
when the entire property eras to be developed tender common
ownership, should De i ,posed on Ridgewood, who i.s now an adjacent
land owner, This Court concludes that the City cannot now wmposQ
the addod exponse o£ Indian Creek traffic :•.hen the latter makes
no contribution coward the upkeep of roads in the Ridgewood
development. Ridge -wood may close the connecting road to all but
emergency vehicles.
_--� ORDER
IT IS FI 2EBX O: D"'RED AND AD.iUDGED that the City of South
Burlington nay not require that the connecting read betwcen
Ridgewood Estates and Indian Creek be open to the public., exce?t i
for the passage of emergency vehicles.
Dated at Burlington, County of Chittenden, this /AX day of
January. 1935.
--
:;��n�rior Judie
01 'd
9
t5:51 3AI b6-61-NdV
ia
Ri)LES ?"�D REGULATIG,JS Or
R7 DGEWOOD ESTATES
These Administrative Rules and Regulations are promulgated
under the authority of the Bylaws of Ridgewood Estates and
the Vermont Condominium Ownership Act Title 27, Chapter 15
of the Vermont Statutes Annotated.
1. Modification of any kind, to the exterior of any
building or the appearance thereof, including but not limited
to, awning, sun shades, patio covers, patio enclosures, .
fences, external radio or television antennas, air conditioning
devices, fans, window guards, flags, or bunting may not be
made without approval of the Board of Directors.
2. Outside clothesline or other clothes drying or
airing facilities are not permitted. No clothes or other
materials can be hung or shaken from windows, placed on
windowsills or on an outside clothesline, draped from a
balcony, railing, or fence, or otherwise left or placed in
such a way as to be exposed to public view.
3. No owner maN7 use or permit,his unit to be used for
conumercial or dormitory use, or for any use which is not
compatible with single famnily living. 'No immoral, improper,
offensive, or unlawful use shall be made of any unit or
common area and all valid laws and regulations of all govern-
mental bodies having jurisdiction thereof shall be observed.
No nuisance or use or practice shall be allowed, or anything
done or placed on any private or common area which may be
deemed a source of unreasonable annoyance, embarrassment, or
disturbance to other occupants which interferes with the
peaceful possession or proper use of other units by their
owners or their lessees. This rule does not preclude corporate
ownership.
4. :any consent or approval gi-en under these rules by
the Board of Directors or the President shall be revocable
at any time.
5. Tools, sporting goods, cooking equipment, bicycles,
or other personal articlesandequipment must be kept within
the unit or in any storage area established by the Board of
Directors.
6. All landscaping, maintenance, and improvement of
common areas shall be done by or at the request of the Board
of Directors.
7. Owners nay not post signs on their property on the
cc- n^n Erea for any purrose, including signs, &avertising
the sale or rent of property.
8. Cor. :ion areas imamediately adjacent to neighboring
units shall not be used for camping, picnicing, organized
sports, and activities, or for any activity which may be
deemed objectionable to neighboring owners or their lessees,
or which will otherwise interfere with the use by others of
the common areas. Areas of the property will, where feasible,
be designated and approved for such uses. There shall be no
use of common areas which will injure or scar the common
areas of the ve<,etation thereon or increase the cost of
maintenance thereof.
i
9. Fir.;good w 11 t be -torea outdoors except in
�• a_-c3rd�nce wit,, t::e i I:_ �_ .ctions or �:,e Board of Directors.
10. The unit owner will keep clean and free from
unsightly objects and walkway and stairs to his unit.
11. All vehicles shall be restricted to designated
roads and parking areas and shall be driven in a safe and
reasonable manner. No vehicle shall be left standing in
such a manner as to prevent ready access to the units or so
as to impede the access of firefighting equipment. Motorcycles
or motor scooters, bicycles, and the like are restricted to
roads. The Board of Directors reserves the right to discontinue
and relocate such roads and parking areas.
12. All boats, trailers, and campers are forbidden to
park within the confines of the condominium on any road or
parking lot.
13. Household pets of owners will be allowed provided
that the pet does not constitute a nuisance for other owners
or their lessees. If pets create noise or create a disturbance
or unpleasantness, the Board of Directors will be authorized
to order the owner to remove them. The owners shall hold
all persons harmless against loss or liability for any
actions of his p-,ts within the condominium area.
14. No owner may burn trash or refuse. All trash or
refluse shall be stored in containers and kept in a location
not visible frcm, an adjoining -property. No :external fires
will be permitted. No owner shall engage in or permit any
conduct or use, or maintain any device in or adjacent to any
unit which will increase the risk of Fire or the cost of
Tire insurance. This shall not preclude the proper installation
and use of a fireplace connected to the flue built into the
unit.
15. Water closets and other water apparatus shall not
be uscd for c:nv uurpose . other than those for which they were
constructed, nor shall any sweepings, rags, or any other
into :..:.e . =:ny d��a �e to co--L:.0n fac-1 -t i es
f ry M i.-LsLase oI rater C1OSct5 or other ap uarctus
shall be repaired at the .expense of the person caus?na the
16. Co -.-on teas 7. ay be used For such tF--oorary outdoor
-_`. - ��-+ - 1�l�ifis Z_n tr �ii_e, +ut
shall require prior approval from the Board of Directors,
`'?C!7 use may no'- i c? 1'.3n_'I�t1V alCer Or ^-.a to 1all�7 iI,Jlire
} e I - .dscane or =_nr_ earance of the a-r en land.
17. No owner or lessee shall engage any employee of
the-.ssoci ation on any private business without the consent
o= Boas ,Directors.
S rCire .'e 13nsibl fo;- the actions of
tl-,e-ir chiluran .a::d their guests.
19. No :`,;I: r :i.ay do or cause to be done any construction,
�-C,r r , or a l t u _--ation work c• hatsoeve�-, exce�: t inside the
of ;pis unit as defined in t�:e D-cla_ation. No
v-r;: of any kind is to be done upon exterior building walls
Or 1:=tei?o: building walls with ut first the
Gf the Board Of Di1" 'C �GZ"S .
r
10. The Po.-:rd c)f _.�t- ors and its representatives are
a,athorized to eater any ui:i t a_t any reasonable time in order
to accomplish repairs, insi_ction or similar activity.
21. The Manager, if one is appointed by the Board of
Directors, may promulgate additional reasonable regulations
as shall imple.-nent the foregoing from time to time, which,
unless revoked by the Board of Directors, shall be enforced
as an Administrative Rule and Regulation adopted pursuant to
the Declaration and the Bylaws.
22. All of the Administrative Rules and Regulations
adopted pursuant to the Declaration and the Bylaws shall be
deemed to complement or implement the provisions of the
Declaration and Bylaws, which provisions shall in all cases
be controlling in the event of any inconsistency.
S E P 1 5 1981 .
A
State of Vermont
Department of Fish and Game
Department of Forests, Parks, and Recreation
Department of Water Resources
Environmental Board
Division of Environmental Engineering
Division of Environmental Protection
Natural Resources Conservation Council
FitzPatrick-Llewellyn Associates
The Kiln - Brickyard Road
Essex Junction, Vermont
05452
Gentlemen:
AGENCY OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION
Montpelier, Vermont 05602
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING
September 14, 1981
Re: Ridgewood Estates - Phase III
South Burlington, Vermont
File No. 04-14-006
Your File No. 8042
We have reviewed the plans on the above referenced project which you
submitted to us recently, and your proposed treatment of the stormwater
runoff from the site.
We find that your proposal conforms in essence with the originally -
issued Discharge Permit No. 1-239 for Ridgewood Estates, and should have no
difficulty in drafting a Temporary Pollution Permit for the total stormwater
discharge prior to the old permit's expiration on July 1, 1982.
A completed application for the new permit should be submitted to this
office by April 1, 1982.
Sincerely,
Charles Streator
Environmental Engineer
Permits and Compliance Section
CS/bb
cc: Dr. Edward Schlagel
District Coordinator
District Environmental Commission #4
111 West Street
Essex Junction, VT 05452
0)04 Nurlington Nire DepaAment
f 575 Dorset —*treet r
i1
*outll Nurlington, Vermont 85401
OFFICE OF
JAMES W. GODDETTE, SR.
CHIEF
863-6455
August 14,1981
Mr. Sidney Poger Chairman
So. Burlington City Planning Commission
S7S Dorset Street
So. Burlington, Vermont 05401
Dear Mr. Poger,
Plans have been reviewed by the fire department on the
remainding property at the Ridgewood Estate off Swift Street.
It was found through the review that the lay out of the carports
and parking spaces in front of the units as designed will make it
impossible for us to give fire protection.
At this time I feel the Planning Commission must turn
down this plan until a better design is given for fire protection.
If you have any questions or would like me to attend a
meeting please feel free to call me.
`1
S' cerely ;
J `• a e" -.
�ai6s "W. �Goddette Sr.
'Chief
FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN ASSOCIATES
Engineering and Planning Services
The Kiln • Brickyard Road • Essex Junction • Vermont • 05452 • (802) 878-3000
August 21, 1981
Mr. David Spitz, Planner
City of South Burlington
South Burlington, Vermont 05401
Re: Ridgewood Development, Phase III
File: 8042
Dear Mr. Spitz:
Please find enclosed three (3) updated sets of plans for your review
and use at the hearing scheduled for the 25th.
The plans contain no substantial changes, but clarify some of the
points raised in discussions with the City regarding other Projects. For
example, we have incorporated Mr. Gardner's and Mr. Szymanski's most
recent comments on specifications and construction procedures.
We have also included more detail on site grading, rather than
utilizing spot elevations, and have shown exact invert elevations on
all the sanitary and storm sewers.
Since we are ready to submit the plans to the State for the Act 250
amendment, they now show all the erosion control information required
by the State.
In response to your comment on building set -back, we have clarified
the building location along the westerly boundary and have dimensioned
a 30-foot set -back to eliminate any ccnfusicnlz-
Since Mr. Szymanski is on vacation until Monday, I have taken the
liberty of dropping a set of plans off at his office to expedite his
review (along with a copy of this letter).
Should you or Mr. Szymanski have any questions on the plans,
please call me at your earliest convenience and let's plan to meet some-
time on Monday or Tuesday.
Hope you had an enjoyable vacation!
Sincerely yours,
FITZPA 7FT T, ASSOCIATES
DRF:pk atrick, .E.
Encl.
cc: Mr. Creedon
Mr. Szymanski
Design • Inspection • Studies • Permitting
MEMORANDUM
To: South Burlington Planning Commission
from: William J. Szymanski, City Manager
Re: Next week's agenda items
Date: 8/18/81
5) Ridgewood Estates
1. The sewage pumping station must have a turnaround. Access to this station
must be defined. Since this station is planned to serve Swift Estates and
the area southerly, an area of about 50'x50' should be deeded to the city for
future expansion.
2. The units parking areas are the furtherest away from the units this will
encourage parking in the backup areas which are the closest to the units. This
is of concern especially near the sewage pumping station aooess drive which
must be kept open at all times.
3. Sewer pipe to be bedded in 3/8 crushed stone.
4. Curb and sidewalks not shown on plan.
5. Drainage plans not complete as of 1 /17/81.
6) Farrell Distributors Additions, Holmes Road
1. The city sewer main crossing the property should be shown on the plan.
2. The original site plan was approved with a minimum set back from the
railroad R.O.W. to allow for the proposed Southern Connector road. This
reserved strip is now being infringed upon by a proposed drive to the rear
of building parking area. It is my recommendation that the drive be along
the east side of the building.
CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON
Subdivision Application - FINAL PLAT
I Name of Applicant RIDGEWOOD ESTATES DEVELOPMENT,_UK-
II
Name of
Subdivision PIDGEWOOD ESTATES PHASE
III
III
Indicate
any changesito name, address,
or phone number of
owner of record, applicant, contact person, engineer, sur-
veyor, attorney or plat designer since preliminary plat
application: SEE I ABOVE FOR APPLICANT; ENGINEER: FITZPATRIC'K-T,T,FwFr YN AS-gDCTATE _
ESSEX JUNCTION, VERMONT; ATTORNEY: PETER SEIDEL, WAITSFIELD, VERMONT;
IV Indicate any changes to the subdivision, such as number of lots
or units, property lines, applicant's legal interest in the
property, developmental timetable, since preliminary plat
application TOTAL NUMBER OF APPROVED UNITS (114.) IT T PR(1 04n S UNGI* _
ALL SINGLE FAMILY LOTS IN PHASE III HAVE BEEN DELETED, THUS, All 59 TTNTTS IN PT4ASE ITT
(final phase) ARE MULTI -FAMILY UNITS.
V Attach a final plat drawing (originals not needed) showing the
following information:
(1) Proposed subdivision name or identifying title, the name
and address of the record owner and subdivider, the name,
license number and seal of the licensed land surveyor, the
boundaries of the subdivision and its general location in
relation to existing streets or other land marks, scale
(numerical and graphic), date and true north arrow.
(2) Street names and lines, pedestrial ways, lots, reservations,
easements, and areas to be dedicated to public use.
(3) Sufficient data acceptable to the City Engineer to determine
readily the location, bearing and length of every street line,
lot line, bou`dary line and to reproduce such lines upon the
around. Sere applicable these should be tied to reference
points previously established by the city.
-2-
(4) The length of all straight lines, the deflection angles,
radii, length of curves and central angles of all curves,
tangent distances and tangent bearings for each street.
(5) By property designation on such Plat, all public space
for which offers of cession are made by the subdivider
and those spaces title to which is reserved by him.
(6) Lots within the subdivision nu_�bered in numerical order
within blocks, and blocks le-L-tered in alphabetical order.
(7) The location of all of the ii::iprovements re -(erred to in
Section 301.1*and in a6cition thereto the location of
all utility poles, sa:age disposal systemis, S:Yater supply
systems and rough grading and other devices and methods
of draining the area affecting the swrivision.-� s�k
(8) Permanent reference monu_ients sho-.-r-n thus: "=V" and lot
corner ,Markers shoNn thus: "0".
(9) Construction drawings of all :.-eduired irzprovenents.
VI ---'nic'_ose supporting documents listed belo;-r or request that they
be requirec as a condition of final plat approval:
(1) Copies of proposed deeds, agreaments or other 6ocu-i3nts
showing the manner in which open space, including part:
and recreational areas and school site areas, are to be
dedicated, reserved and maintained and a certificate of
the City Attorney that these documents are satisfactory.
(2) A certificate of the City :Incineer as to the satisfactory
co.-�pletion of all improvements required by the Comcmission,
or, in lieu of any required improvements not so completed,
a performance bond to secure completion of such improvements
and their T.,,aintenance for a period of two years, and
written evidence that the Citv Council is satisfied
either with the bonding or surety company or with security
furnished by the subdivider.
i
(3) A copy of such covenants or dead restrictions as are in-
tended to cover all or part of the tract.
(4) A prospectus describing the management organization if one
is required.
(5) In the case of a subdivision or development served by a
privately o:m ed and/or maintained street:.
(a) a copy of all proposed deeds, agreements, or other
documents which convey or relate to the use of a
privately ow-ned street or right--of-way, and a certi-
fic=te of the City Attorney that these docu_-aents are
satisfactory.
-3-
(b) a completed contract between the lanoo,;mer and the
city regarding the number of lots or dwelling units
to be served by the proposed right-of-way or private
street and the responsibility for the roadway maint-
enance, along with a certificate of the Ci°:.-� yttornev
that the contract is satisfactory.
ct person
Douglas R. FitzPatrick,
4 August 1981
Cate
'/C. 11�' �V 0
PUBLIC HEARING
SCUMi BURLI%= PLANNING CCMMISSION
The South Burlington Planning Commission will hold a public hearing at the
South Burlington City Hall, Conference Room, 575 Dorset Street, South Burlington,
Vermont on Tuesday, August 25 1981, at 7:30 P.M. to consider the
following:
1) Application by LTH Associates for Preliminary Plat approval of a 20 unit
planned unit development, entitled Rebecca Square,on Williston Road, Victory
Drive_,_ and Helen Avenue. Property is bounded on the north by Grimes, Gadecki,
and Helen Avenue; on the east by Desranleau, Watson, Bishop, Navin, Morton,
Pzcine and Victory Drive; on the south by Perry and Schmucker, NCR Corporation,
I,awrc•nc(,, Merriam -Graves, and Williston Road; and on the west by Collins, St.
Dennis, Slack, Corey, and Billings.
2) Application by Ridgewood Estates Development, Inc. for revised Final Plat
approval of Phase III of Ridgewood Estates, consisting of 59 units. Property is
bounded on the north by Economou Farms; on the east by Faith Methodist Church,
Myers, and Dorset Street; on the south by Church of Latter Day Saints and Ridgewood
Ph,i-es I and II; and on the we -It by Edlund and Whittlesey.
Copies of the applications are available for
P public inspection at the
South Burlington City Hall.
Sidney B. Poger,
Chairman,
South Burlington
Planning Carission
August 8, 1981
FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN ASSOCIATES
Engineering and Planning Services
The Kiln • Brickyard Road • Essex Junction • Vermont • 05452 • (802) 878-3000
4 August 1981
Mr. David Spitz, City Planner
City of South Burlington
575 Dorset Street
South Burlington, Vermont 05401
Re: Revised Final Plat, Ridgewood Estates
Dear Mr. Spitz:
Enclosed please find 4 copies of the revised final plat
application for Ridgewood Estates. The application consists of
a 10 page plan set, a landscaping/lighting plan, and a project
summary sheet. We are planning on an August 25 hearing date.
Don't hesitate to call if you have any questions.
DRF:pk
Encl.
cc: Carl Creedon
Sincerely yours,
a la • •
�. ,
Design • Inspection • Studies • Permitting
PROJECT SUMMARY
RIDGEWOOD ESTATES PHASE III
- Total nunber of units: 59 (total project size of 114 units
remains unchanged)
- Unit breakdown: 47 two bedroom units @ 1520 sq. ft. each
12 three bedroom units @ 1750 sq. ft. each
- Water and sewer mains to be publicly owned and maintained
- Access: via 2200' of 24' wide paved roadway, to be privately
owned and maintained
- Recreational amenities: 2 tennis courts and common open space
- Parking: one open and one covered space per unit, plus guest
parking spaces
- Landscaping: new plantings for the full amount required by the
ordinance will be installed, in addition to the existing trees
which are being saved
FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN ASSOCIATES
Engineering and Planning Services
January 14, 1982
Attorney Richard Spokes
Spokes, Foley & Obuchowski
P.O. Box 986
-~ Burlington, Vermont 05402
Re: Ridgewood
Dear Dick:
In your next connnunication to Mr. Sidel would you kindly remind him that the
legal documents must be completed before any permits are issuea by the City.
Also that the unit presently under construction is in violation.
t� Either he finishes the documents soon or stops construction, no more month
delay.
Thanks
0/ Very truly,
Richard Ward,
Zoning Administrative Officer
IM/mcg
January 5, 1982
Peter S. Sidel, Esquire
P.O. Box 115, Route 100
Waitsfield, Vermont U5673
Re: Ridgewood
Dear Peter:
On December 4, 1981 you received a letter from Attorney Spokes spelling out
a few minor changes to the legal documents for Ridgewood. I believe Attorney
Spokes approved the documents upon completion of the changes.
D
As of this date no further action has been taken by your office.
As you are aware a building has started without permits. 1 need not express
my concerns any further. Your cooperation in this matter would be greatly
appreciated.
Very truly,
Richard Ward,
Zoning Administrative officer
9
SP®KEs, F®LF:Y & 01BUC;HowsKI
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
164 SOUTH WINOOSKI AVENUE
P. 0. BOX 996
BURLINGTON, VERMONT OS402
RICHARD A. SPOKES
JAMES D. FOLEY
JOSEPH F. OBUCHOWSKI
STEVEN F. STITZEL
December 4, 1981
Peter S. Sidel, Esq..
P. O. Box 115 Route 100
Waitsfield, Vermont 05673
Re: Ridgewood
Dear Peter:
(SO2) B62--5451
(602) 883-2B57
ISAAC N. P. STOKES
COUNSEL
The documents you sent me by letter dated November 17, 1981 are
fine with one minor exception. When the word "drainage" was
deleted from the waterline and sewerline easement deed a couple
of additional words were inadvertently deleted. It looks like
the words "control of" should be added before the word "sewer"
in the second line from the bottom of page 1, and before the
word "water" in line 4 of paragraph number 2 on page 2 of the
deed.
My approval of the documents is contingent upon the necessary
changes being made to the final plat, along with submission of
a certificate of title and the necessary partial releases.
Please let me know if you have any questions.
Very truly yours,
Richard A. Spokes
RAS:mi1
cc: Richard Ward,
Zoning Administrator
David Spitz,
City Planner
e
P,Ej.rER S. SIDEL Attorney at Law
P.O. BOX 115, ROUTE 100
WAITSFIELD, VERMONT 05673
802-496.3277
January 13, 1982
Richard Spokes, Esli.
184 South Winooski Avenue
P.O. Box 986
Burlington, Vermont 05402
Re: Ridgewood Estates
Dear Dick:
The documents you are concerned with are as
follows:
1. Agreement and Waiver for Private Roads and
Streets.
2. Warranty Deed for Right -of -Way of Road.
3. Property Transfer Return for same.
4. Warranty Deed for Easement of Sewer, Water and
Water Pump.
ti 5. Property Transfer Return for same.
6. Warranty Deed for Pedestrian Right -of -Way.
7. Property Transfer Return for same.
8. Offer of Irrevocable Dedication for above
mentioned easements.
9. Warranty Deed for Fire Lanes.
10. Property Transfer Return for same.
i
Relative to the documents you have seen and written
me a letter about in keeping with the above
numbered paragraphs, the following are my comments:
1. O.K. as drafted.
2. Pages 1 and 2 need insertion of book and pages
of referred to deeds and maps.
3. Insertion of social security numbers, value and
�� land use numbers.
4. In keepii., )with your request of Dec( ler 4,
1981, the words "control of,, must be inserted on
page 1 and page 2. Also page 1 needs the insertion
of book and pages for referenced documents.
5. Social security number, value and land use
number must be added.
6. Page 1 must have the insertion of book and
pages for referenced documents.
7. Social security number, value and land use
number must be added.
8. Exhibits A, B and C are the warranty deeds
under paragraphs 2, 4 and 6 above, which must have
the insertions as noted.
9. Page 1 must have the insertion of book and
pages for referenced documents.
10. Social security numbers, values and land use
numbers must be added.
PLEASE NOTE: The delay in getting you the executed
documents was occasioned by two factors:
A. The holiday season is the most difficult season
for a condominium developer in Waitsfield-Warren,
Vermont since there are approximaely 52 closings
that occur between December loth and December 25th
for the reason that the owners must own for the ski
season.
B. All the documents that I have previously sent
to you had to be redone to reflect the change in
ownership from Ridgewood Estates to Vermont Federal
Savings and Loan Association. My office was just
plain incapable of doing those documents together
with the closings previously mentioned. Also the
closing relative to the church property was delayed
until recently.
Relative to the documents that I had previously
mentioned and in the same order I submit for your
review copies of the revised documents with the
following comments, asking you to note that all
documents now submitted are identical to the
previously submitted documents with the exceptions
as noted below.
1. Agreement and Waiver for Private Roads and
Streets: shows the change in owner -developer being
-2-
vermont reaerai Jav1ng5 arlu Luarl ouu
the first paragraph commencing with WHEREAS has the
appropriate real Plat dates.
2. Warranty Deed for Road Right -of -Way shows
changes of ownership to Vermont Federal Savings and
Loan Association, the correct introductory
paragraph showing the actual Final Plat, and all
book and pages for referenced documents being
included, except the warranty deed from Faith
Methodist Church to Vermont Federal Savings and
Loan Association, which will be recorded on January
14, 1982.
3. Property Transfer Return: shows change of
ownership and includes the Land Use Permits.
4. Warranty Deed for Sewer, Water and Water Pump:
shows the change of ownership, the inclusion of
book and pages for referenced documents and the
insertion words "conrol of" in the appropriate
places.
5. Property Transfer Return: shows the change of
ownership and includes the Land Use Permit Numbers.
6. Warranty Deed for Pedestrian Right -of -Way:
shows the change of ownership and the inclusion of
the referenced documents with their book and pages.
7. Property Transfer Return: shows the change of
ownership and the Land Use Permit numbers.
8. Offer of Irrevocable Dedication: shows the
change of ownership and has the appropriate
Exhibits A-Cl as previously attached.
9. Warranty Deed for Fire Lane: shows change of
ownership and inclusion of book and pages for
referenced documents.
10. Property Transfer Return: shows change of
ownership and Land Use Permit numbers.
You will note that the introductory paragraph
referring to the Final Plat on the revised
documents is different than the introductory
paragraphs on the documents you have previously
seen. This change reflects the appropriate title
and dates. Other than that, as you will note, the
only changes are the change of ownership and
therefore the referenced document is no longer CBC
Realty and Myers to Ridgewood Estates Development,
Inc. but the newly created and recorded document
-3-
from Ridgewood Estates Development, Inc. to Vermont
Federal Savi -`s and Loan Association. i
I can arrange a closing at any time that you
desire.
I have enclosd the following:
A. All previously reviewed documents by you
showing generally in red the areas I have changed.
B. The revised documents in keeping with this
letter concerning Vermont Federal Savings and Loan
Association.
C. A copy of theFinalPlat Plan.
D. A Certificate of Title.
E. A copy of the dischages for the mortgages
mentioned.
I am sorry one again for the delays, but I have
avoided too much communication since I could not
know when I could keep my promises to anyone. I am
embarassed due to my silence but I am not certain I
could have done anything any quicker given the
circumstances.
Very truly yours,
Peter S. Sidel
ENCLOSURES
-4-
RICHARD A. SPOKES
JAMES D. FOLEY
JOSEPH F. OBUCHOWSKI
STEVEN F. STITZEL
Mr. David Spitz
City Planner
575 Dorset Street
South Burlington,
Re: Ridgewood
Dear David:
SPOKES,FOLEY & OBUGHOH SKI
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
184 SOUTH WINOOSKI AVENUE
POST OFFICE BOX 986
BURLINGTON. VERMONT 05402
February 23, 1982
Vermont 05401
(802) 862-6451
(802)863-2857
ISAAC N. P. STOKES
COUNSEL
Enclosed please find Attorney Sidel's original title certifi-
cate which should be placed in the Ridgewood file.
Very truly yob,
Richa'�d Spok
RAS:mil
::::�7�
Enclosure
PETER S. SIDEL Attorney at Lazo
P.O. BOX 115, ROUTE 100
WAITSFIELD, VERMONT 05673
802-496-3277
January 13, 1982
City of South Burlington
South Burlington, Vt. 05401
Attention: Richard Spokes, Esquire
Winooski Avenue
Burlington, Vermont 05401
Re: Ridgewood Estates Development, Inc.
To the City of South Burlington:
I have examined the land records of the City of South
Burlington relative to real estate described as follows:
Being all in the same land and premises conveyed
to Vermont Federal Savings and Loan Association
by warranty deed of Ridgewood Estates Develop-
ment, Inc., dated December 3, 1981 and recorded
in Book 175, pages 444-447 in the land records
of the Town of South Burlington, Vermont.
Theme is a second parcel, being all and the same
land and premises conveyed to Vermont Federal
Savings and Loan Association by warranty deed
of Faith Methodist Church of South Burlington,
Vermont, Inc., dated January 14, 1981 and re-
corded in Book , page
Matters which appear of record affecting title to the real
estate described above are as follows:
1. 1981-82 real estate taxes to the City of South
Burlington are paid to date on both above described par-
cels,
2. The City of South Burlington has perminent zoning
and requires approvals for various other items as well.
3. UTILITY EASEMENTS
a) Right-of-way and easement for gas lines con-
veyed to Vermont Gas Systems, Inc. by deed of Ridgewood
Estates Development, Inc. dated July 14, 1977 and recorded
in Book 131, pages 416-419;
PAGE TWO
b) Easement for utilities conveyed to Green Mountain
Power Corporation by deed of Ridgewood Estates Development, Inc.
dated June 3, 1977 and recorded in Book 131, page 453;
c) Right-of-way and easement for gas lines conveyed
to Vermont Gas Systems, Inc. by deed of Ridgewood Estates
Development, Inc. dated September 21, 1978 and recorded in
Book 143, pages 277-281;
d) Right-of-way and easement for gas lines conveyed
to Vermont Gas Systems, Inc. by deed of Ridgewood Estates
Development, Inc. dated September 5, 1978 and recorded in
Book 143, pages 236-241; and
e) Easement for sewer lines conveyed to the City
of South Burlington by deed of Ridgewood Estates Development,
Inc. dated July 12, 1978 and recorded in Book 141, pages 53-
55, which deed was corrected by deed dated January 10, 1979
and recorded in Book 141, page 152.
4. LAND USE PERMITS ISSUED BY THE STATE OF VERMONT TO
RIDGEWOOD ESTATES DEVELOPMENT, INC.
a) Permit #4C0161
b) Permit #4C0161-1
c) Permit #4C0161-2, recorded in Book 157, page 327
d) Permit #4C0161-3, dated November 2, 1981 and
recorded in Book 176, pages 192-196.
5. Regulatory Agreement for Land Development Projects
Under Title X between Ridgewood Estates Development, Inc. and
the Federal Housing Administration dated January 14, 1977 and
recorded in Book 131, pages 125-129.
6. Modification Agreemez'_ hetween Ridgewood Estates
Development, Inc. and Vermont Federal Savings & Loan Association
dated March 29, 1978 and recorded in Book 136, pages 325-327.
7. Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions
dated January 14, 1977 and recorded in Book 131, pages 93-107
and amended by Amendments dated July 8, 1977 and recorded in
Book 143, page 205; and Amendment without date recorded in
Book 143, page 339.
8. Contract between Ridgewood Estates Development, Inc.
and the City of South Burlington dated December 23, 1976 and
recorded in Book 123, page 495.
PAGE THREE
9. In a deed in the chain of title from Mr. & Mrs. Myers
to CBC Realty dated June 28, 1971 and recorded in Book 102,
pages 190-192, there is recited the following:
"Grantors, their heirs and assigns, reserve the right to extend
a roadway westerly from the westerly sideline of said parcel
and except and reserve a right-of-way for ingress and egress
over said parcel to any such roadway until such time as said
parcel shall be conveyed to the City of South Burlington as a
public street whereupon said easement shall terminate."
"It is expressly agreed that the Grantee herein, its successors
and assigns, shall place all necessary drainage pipes, etc., in,
along and under said Parcel B so that the present flow of water
on said land shall not be impaired."
In a deed from CBC Realty to Myers dated June 29, 1971 and
recorded in Book 102, page 193, a parcel of land is conveyed
described as
"...that piece or parcel of land which is used as a right-of-way
or entrance to the within Grantor's lands and premises which
leads in a westerly direction from the westerly side of Dorset
Street, and which said parcel of land has a frontage on Dorset
Street of 45 feet, a northerly side line of 250 feet and a
southerly side line of 337.93 feet."
It is further stated that "the purpose of this conveyance is tc
extinguish the existing right-of-way as it was originally set
out as a portion of the conveyance from the within Grantees to
the Discalced Carmelite Nuns of the Diocese of Burlington, Inc.
and is given back to the within Grantees with the express
understanding and in consideration of the fact that the within
Grantees are contemporaneously herewith conveying to the with-
in Grantor two other rights -of -way, one 100 foot in width
leading from Swift Street in a northerly direction to the
within Grantor's lands and premises, and another 60 feet in
width leading from the westerly side of Dorset Street in a
westerly direction to the lands and premises of the within
Grantor."
10. In a warranty deed from Mr. & Mrs. Myers to Discalced
Carmelite Nuns of the Diocese of Burlington, Inc., recorded
in Book 85, page 360, it is recited that "it is expressly
agreed that the grantees herein shall place necessary drainage
pipes, etc., in that strip of land being 45 feet wide and not
less than 250 feet deep, leading from Dorset Street to the
land hereby conveyed, so that the present flow of water on such
lands shall not be impaired."
PAGE FOUR
11. RELATIVE TO PROPERTY CONVEYED BY FAITH UNITED
METHODIST CHURCH OF SOUTH BURLINGTON, INC.
1. Exempt from taxes.
2. Mortgage in the amount of $120,000.00 granted to
Burlington Federal Savings and Loan Association (now
Vermont Federal Savings and Loan Association) dated
August 7, 1969 and recorded in Book 92, pages 45-47
is not discharged of record.
3. Utilities
a) Warranty deed from Faith Methodist Church
of South Burlington, Vermont, Inc. to Town of
South Burlington, dated August 9, 1966 and re-
corded in Book 78, page 473 conveys a perpetual
easement for sewer pipes, although by map recorded
in Book 82, page 125 the same does not appear to
effect the subject of this opinion.
b) Faith United Methodist Church of South
Burlington, Vermont, Inc. to Green Mountain
Power Company,dated August 19, 1969 and recorded
in Book 89, page 305 grants utility right-of-way.
My examination could not reveal:
1. Rights or claims or parties in possession not
disclosed of record. Mechanics' or materialmens', land
gains tax or other liens not of record.
2. Boundaries or other facts as may be shown by a
physical inspection and/or accurate survey of the
subject of this opinion.
3. Effects, if any, of laws, ordinances or regulations
of governmental bodies governing the subdivision, sale
or development of real estate, including use, zoning
and building restrictions.
4. Existence or sufficiency of access to public roads
or rights -of -way.
5. Errors or omissions in the filing, indexing or
maintenance of the land records or any entry therein.
6. Compliance with the provisions of either the "Real
Estate Settlement Procedures Act of 1974" or the "National
Flood Disaster Act of 1973."
PAGE FIVE
7. Probate, bankruptcy and other Court records, and
records of birth, death, marriage and divorce. Rights
dependent upon competency, death, survivorship, marital
status, or upon the records thereof.
Subject to the foregoing, it is my opinion that marketable
fee simple title to the real estate described above was
vested in Ridgewood Estates Development, Inc. on December 1,
1981 at 10:30 a.m.
This opinion covers the time period as far back as June 29,
1940.
All book and page references are to the land records of the
City of South Burlington, Vermont.
This letter is personal and its representations are not
transferable.
Very truly , y urs ,
1
Peter S. Sidbi, Esq.
PSS/ncm
Any development of this parcel should also consider combined development
with the Church of God property, another long and narrow parcel.
Much of the property is seasonally wet, and detailed drainage plans will
ho needed to prove developability of the site. Two specific CO zones cross the
cast and west ends of the site. Setbacks from Potash Brook appear sufficient
but elevations should be checked.
Other initial ccments: (1) buildings must be setback at least 75 feet
frcxn Kennedy Drive and Hinesburg Road; (2) internal walkways and a sidewalk along
Hinesburg Road may bercAiuited; (3) parking spaces should be 2 per unit; (4)
location of pedestrian trails must be discussed; (5) use of "storage" building near
Hinesburg Road must be explained.
(4) ( R i d�wc�od
This project has had sane major financial problems. In the interest of
completing the project (65 units remain to be build out of an originally approved
112 units), the new landowner is proposing the elimination of the single-family
lots and replacement with a newly -designed clustered condominium arrangement.
The total number of units will not change.
Tuesday's meeting will be equivalent to a sketch plan discussion. Subsequently,
since this is a revision to an existing approval, there only needs to be a revised
final plat public hearing. The City Council is not required to participate in the
revises] approval, but the members involved in the original approval have been notified.
I have not yet c(.npleted my review of previous Ridgewood files. Revised access
patterns must certainly be reviewed, and there may be additional relevant points.
(5) Cardinal Woods
Proposed changes for this revised final plat application are relatively minor.
The only major point for consideration is whether the modified driveway and gravel
road layout will still satisfy the fire chief's requirements for access. His imput
should be available by Tuesday's meeting.
(6) Rezoning
If time permits, proposals for general industrial and commercial rezoning will
be presented. Discussion of new industrial zoning for the Hinesburg Road area
should be continued until the next regular work session.
(7) Other business
A joint meeting with the City Council is tentatively scheduled for Tuesday,
April 21 at 7:30 p.m. The work session that had been scheduled for that evening
should be rescheduled, perhaps to the following evening.
M E M O R A N D U M
To: City Councilmen Paul Farrar and Michael Flaherty
From: David H. Spitz, City Planner
Re: Ridgewood Estates - Revised Application
Date: 2/11/81
The new owners of Ridgwood Estates have held some preliminary
discussions with me regarding proposed revisions to the remainder
of the Ridgewood development. Currently, 100 multi -family units
and 12 single-family lots have been approved. (Approximately 2 of
the multi -family units have been built.) The developers would now
like to delete the 12 single-family lots and replace them with
12 multi -family units. There would be no increase in overall
density.
The development was originally approved in 1974 by both City
Council and Planning Commission. The Council reviewed the 14 PUD
criteria and made several findings during the course of its approval.
The currently proposed revision does not appear to be in conflict
with any of the Council's comments or findings.
If the proposed revision would have a significant impact on
any of the Council's previsions discussions, I feel that the Council
would again have to join the Planning Commission in reviewing the
revised proposal. However, that does not appear to be the case; and
therefore, Planning Commission review alone should be sufficient.
Please advise if any of your recollections are different from what
the minutes and files have indicated. Otherwise I shall proceed with
the normal Planning Commission review.
FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN
ASSOCIATES
Engineering & Planning Services
The Kiln -Brickyard Road
ESSEX JUNCTION, VERMONT 05452
Phone 878-3000
llf
[L[EUU h @)F VIR SOMOU a.
DATE �C
I JOB NO.
ATTENTION
Mr,
R \
WE ARE SENDING YOl Attached ❑ Under separate cover via'%,�5c- ate" the following items:
❑ Shop drawings Prints ❑ Plans ❑ Samples ❑ Specifications
❑ Copy of letter ❑ Change order ❑
COPIES
DATE
NO.
DESCRIPTION
31a
,
THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below:
❑ For approval ❑ Approved as submitted
For your use ❑ Approved as noted
❑ As requested ❑ Returned for corrections
----m For review and comment ❑
fl FnR RIDS nIIF 19
REMARKS
❑ Resubmit copies for approval
❑ Submit copies for distribution
❑ Return corrected prints
M PRINTS RFTI IRNFr) AFTFR 1 (lON TO I IS s-�.�1. N44
COPY TO
r \
S 1 '
PRODUCT W ® Im. GmtHk Wa 01471.
SIGN
enclosures are not as noted, kindly notify us
1 - WW W
W-3
►�W Im ir,
Subject
Speed Message
From FI i L =! - _ ' :_ ! ► 1, A UGC I C—J
ENGINEERING & PLAW.41ING SERVICES
159 PEARL STREET
ESSEX JCT., VT. 05452
✓� i �� . '�� �' its .I .� v\.� �� '`-
.► ` �� — I fell • h .-��
kao" pzm I
_1 � ♦ C, 117 • �• III/
WilsonJones 379
GRAYUNE CORM 44.9„ .'.-PART
® 1970 • PRINTEO IN U.S.A.
FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN ASF^gIATES
Engineering & Planning S es
The Kiln - Brickyard Road
ESSEX JUNCTION, VERMONT 05452
Phone 878-3000
TO 'r, t w�
LETT A OF TUO RnCjOD'TTQO
DATE
ATTENTION
RE:
WE ARE SENDING YOU Attached ❑ Under separate cover via j�o�{^ the following items:
❑ Shop drawings Prints ❑ Plans ❑ Samples ❑ Specifications
❑ Copy of letter ❑ Change order ❑
COPIES
DATE
NO.
DESCRIPTION
T
4
THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below:
❑ For approval
\� For your use
1 As requested
❑ For review and comment
❑ FOR BIDS DUE
REM
❑ Approved as submitted
❑ Approved as noted
❑ Returned for corrections
19
❑ Resubmit copies for approval
❑ Submit copies for distribution
❑ Return corrected prints
❑ PRINTS RETURNED AFTER LOAN TO US
COPY
SIGNED-,N
PRODUCT 240-2 � Inc, Dmt., M- 01450 If enclosures are not as noted, kindly notify us
STATE. OF VEP.MONT
INTERAGENCY ACT 250 REVIEW COMMITTEE
-AGENCY OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION
RE: -Ridgewood Estates Development, Inc. ) DISTRICT ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION IV
Revised site plan for Phase III of )
Ridgewood Estates ) APPLICATION NUMBER 4C0161-3
South Burlington, Vermont )
OCTOBER 7, 1981
ENTRY OF APPEARANCE
Please enter the appearance of the Agency of Environmental Conservation,
State of Vermont, in the above captioned matter.
PRE -HEARING COMMENTS
The Agency of Environmental Conservation recommends that an additional
access to the lots and condominiums at the end of the cul-de-sac be
included in the plans as an emergency access for the project.
I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing Agency ENTRY OF APPEARANCE
and PRE -HEARING CO1,1MENTS was sent by U. S. Mail (Postage Prepaid) to all
statutory parties.
Done on this 7th day of October, 1981, at Montpelier, Vermont.
Respectfully submitted,
STATE OF VERMONT
INTERAGENCY ACT 250 REVIEW COMMITTEE
AGENCY OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION
Dana J. le/ Levesque
Land User. ministrat r
NOTE TO THE APPLICANT AND OTHERS CONCERNED: The preceding comments are
the result of the State's review of this case in its role as a party in
the Act 250 permit process. These'couunents are not binding upon the
District Environmental Commission.
State of Vermont
Department of Fish and Game
Department of Forests, Parks, and Recreation
Department of Water Resources
Division of Environmental Engineering
Division of Environmental Protection
Natural Resources Conservation Council
Ridgewood Estates Development
c/o Mr. Peter Sidel
P.O. Box 115, Route 100
Waitsfield, VT 05673
AGENCY OF ENVIRONNIENTAL CONSERVATION
Montpelier, Vermont 05602
DIVISION OF PROTECTION
October 7, 1981
Ill West Street
Essex Junction, VT 05452
RE: Case No. 4CO161-3, Phase III of Ridgewood Estates, Dorset Street, South Burling-
ton, Vermont.
Dear Mr. Sidel:
Our office has completed an initial review of the above referenced project and have
determined that the additional information listed below will be needed before approval
can be granted. Please note that those comments concerning the interior waste and
water distribution and ventilation plans were prepared by Mr. Robert Hood, Environ-
mental Technician.
PLAN P-1 (2-BEDROOM UNIT TYPE 2A)
(1) Submit plumbing plan for the required air gap of the dishwasher drain.
(2) The 3/4" water service entrance into the slab of the first floor cannot be ap-
proved as it is within 32' of the 2" lavatory waste drain also -located in the
slab.
(3) Indicate the size of the hot and cold water lines serving the second floor fix-
tures. Indicate the size of the individual branch supply lines for these fix-
tures also. .
PLAN P-2 (3-BEDROOM UNIT TYPE 3A)
(1) Submit plumbing plan for required air gap of the dishwasher drain.
(2) The 3/4" water service entrance into the building and within the building cannot
be approved as it will be within 10' of the sewer line outside and 10' of the
soil line inside the building.
(3) The 2" hot and cold water lines to the first floor lavatory, water closet and
bathtub must be increased to 3/4" to the last fixture supply fitting before the
bathtub individual supply fittings, as the bathtub supply lines are required to
be 2" in diameter.
Ridgewood Estates Development
October 7, 1981
Page 2
(4) Indicate the size of the hot and cold water lines serving the second floor fix-
tures. Indicate the size of the individual branch supply lines for these fixtures.
PLAN P-3 (2-BEDROOM UNIT TYPE 2B)
(1) Submit plumbing plan for the required air gap of the dishwasher drain.
(2) The 3/4" water service entrance into the building and within the building cannot
be approved as it will be within 10' of the sewer line outside and 10' of the
soil line inside the building.
(3) The hot water line to the branch fitting serving the kitchen sink and lavatory
must be 3/4" in diameter.
(4) The 2" hot and cold water lines to the second floor lavatory, water closet and
bathtub must be increased to 3/4" to the last fixture supply fitting before the
bathtub individual supply fittings, as the bathtub supply lines are required to
be 2" in diameter.
FOR ALL UNITS
(1) Submit exhaust ventilation plans for all the toilet rooms for the buildings.
(2) Submit plumbing specifications and a fixture schedule. Indicate the type of
pipe material to be used for waste, vent and water distribution above and below
grade within these buildings.
The sewer extension is presently under review and you shall be notified of our findings.
Upon receipt of the above items, we shall continue our review. Should there be any
further questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
Ernest P. Christianson
Regional Engineer
CC: P. Howard Flanders
Edward Schlegel /
City Planning Commission✓
Fire Prevention
Health Department
FitzPatrick-Llewellyn Associates
Childs B.ertman Tseckaras & Casendino, Inc.
Pinitsas/Zade Associates
tg
A
STATE OF VERMONT
AGENCY OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION
CERTIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE
Re: 4CO194 ) Certified to comply with Vermont State
Mr, Frederick G, Blais ) Board of Health Regulations, Chapter 5,
Ridgewood Estates ) Sanitary Engineering, Subchapter 10,
South Burlington, Vermont ) Part 1, Subdivisions
This project,consisting of 32 townhouses, a clubhouse for a pool and
tennis courts, and exterior water and sewer lines �eferred to as Phase I
of the total project, known as Ridgewood Estates, -'located in South Burling-
ton, Vermont, is hereby certified to satisfy the requirements of the
regulations named above if the following conditions are met:
(1) The Phase I portion must be completed as shown on the plans prepared
by the office of Terrence J. Boyle on May 30, 1975 and sanitary sewerage
system serving Phase I must be completed as shown on the plans prepared by
Harold E. Rist, P.E. on July 31, 1975 and which have been certified by the
Division of Environmental Engineering and approved by the Department of
Water Resources.
(2) The sewage must be disposed of into the City of South Burlington
municipal sewerage system. No other means of sewage disposal shall be
authorized for these units without the expressed written approval of the
Agency of Environmental Conservation.
(3) The 32 townhouses and the clubhouse are approved for connection to the
South Burlington public water system, No other method of obtaining
drinking water shall be authorized for these units without the expressed
written approval of the Agency of Environmental. Conservation. Plans and
specifications involving the design of the South Burlington public water
system including water mains, pumps, reservoirs and other appurtenances,
as necessary, `shall'be approved by the State Department of Health pursuant
to the public water system regulations, Construction of the water system
shall comply in all respects with the Department of Health approved
plans, specifications and conditions, including all requirements for
resident inspection and certification. No buildings shall be sold or
completed for occupancy until such time as the water system is constructed
to the extent that said system can supply the building with potable
water of suitable quantity under suitable pressure,
(4) The 32 townhouses are approved for sale as owner -occupied residential
units. Renting or leasing these units by the permittee would constitute a
public building within the meaning of 18 V.S.A., ® 1301 and are not allowed
unless interior plans are submitted to and approved by the Agency of
Environmental Conservation in accordance with the appropriate regulations.
The proposed clubhouse will be a public building and interior plans must be
submitted to the Agency and approval obtained prior to the start of
construction on that building.
4C0164
Mr. Frederick G. Blais
Ridgewood Estates
August 18, 1975
(5) Each prospective purchaser of the units shall be shown a copy of the
approved plot plan, the engineer's site report and the Land Use Permit
before any written contract of sale is entered into.
(6) These plans have been approved and no alteration of same shall be
allowed except where written application has been made to the Agency of
Environmental Conservation and approval obtained.
(7) A copy of the approved plans and the Land Use Permit shall remain on
the project during all phases of construction, and, upon request, shall be
made available for inspection by State or local personnel.
�07
CESs>
P. Howard Flanders, P.E.
Review Engineer
Benson Sargent, .E.
Section Head
For the Division of Environmental
Engineering
cc to Ken Stone
Department of Health
115 Colchester Avenue
Burlington, Vermont 05401
Dated in Montpelier, Vermont, this 18th day of August, 1975
STATE OF wjmw
AGENCY OF ENVIROWENTAL CONSERVATION
CERTIFICATION OF COTITLIANCE
RE: AC0161-1 Certified to co
Ridgewood Estates Development, Inc. Vermont State Board off comply
P. 0. Box 2245 Regulations, Chpater 5, Sanit
South Burlington, VT 05401 Engineers �
Engineering, Subchapter 1, Public
BUildi.ngs and Subchapter 15, Plumbing
This project, consisting of a recreation building located on Swift Street, South Burlington, Vermont, is hereby certified to satisfy the requirements of the regulations named above if the following conditions are met:
CONDITIONS
(1) The project must be completed as shown on the plans prepared by
Calcagni - Frazier and Zajchowski on July 30, 1976, and which have
been certified by the Division of Protection. No alteration of these
plans shall be allowed except where written application has been made
to the Agency of Environmental Conservation and approval obtained.
(2) A copy of the approved plans and the Land Use Permit shall remain on
the project during all phases of construction and, upon request, shall be made available for inspection by State or local personnel.
For`h'e�sion of vironmental
Alan L. Protection
Nye, Regio Engineer
Dated at Essex Junction, Vermont,
this 27th day of August, 1976.
STATE OF VERMONT
AGENCY OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION
CERTIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE
RE: 4C0161-2 ) Certified to comply with Vermont State
Ridgewood Estates ) Board of Health Regulations, Chapter 5,
Phase II ) Sanitary Engineering, Subchapter 10,
P.O. Box 2245 ) Part I - Subdivisions
South Burlington
Vermont 05401
This project, consisting of 35 townhouses, units 33-67, identified as
Phase II of Ridgewood Estates, located off Swift Street in South
Burlington, Vermont, is hereby certified to satisfy the requirements
named above if the following conditions are met:
1. The subdivision must be completed as shown on the sanitary plans
sheet 1 of 1 prepared by Douglas Fitzpatrick, P.E. on October 2,
1979, and sheets 7669, 7669A, and 7669B prepared by Fred Koerner,
P.E. in May, 1978, and which have been stamped "Approved" by
the Division of Protection. No changes shall be made to the ap-
proved plans without prior written approval from the Agency of
Environmental Conservation.
2. This project is approved for municipal water supply and sewage
treatment through the facilities of the City of South Burlington.
3. All sewer apurtenances are approved as shown on the plans stamped
"Approved" by this office under the Certification of Compliance
4C0161, dated August 18, 1975.
4. The water lines are approved providing all repair work outlined
in Steven Goodkind's approval letter, dated December 18, 1979 is
performed. As noted in Mr. Goodkind's letter all repair work
must be completed by April 30, 1980.
S. The 35 townhouses are approved for sale as owner -occupied
residential units. Renting or leasing these units would consti-
tute a public building within the meaning of 18 V.S.A., § 1301 and
are not allowed unless interior plans are submitted to and
approved by this Agency in accordance with the appropriate
regulations.
FOR THE DIVISION OF PROTECTION
EB/lsw
Eric B1 , Asst. Regional Engineer
Dated at Essex Junction, Vermont, this 20th day of December, 1979.
cc: Susan H. Cain
STATE OF VERMONT
DISTRICT ENV RONJ N'i'AL CCIT4ISSION #4
RE: Ridgewood Estates
Swift & Ibrset Streets
South Burlington
Application #4C0161-2
Finding of Fact and
Conclusions of Law
Amendment Application
10 VSA, Chapter 151 (Act 250)
On September 17, 1979, an application for an Act 250 permit amendment was
filed by Ridgewood Estates Development,.Inc., P.O. Box 2245, South Burling-
ton, for an amendment to the project approved in Land Use Permit #4C0161,
and generally described as the extension of the construction completion
date for Phase II. The scope of the request to extend the date to Novem-
ber 1, 1983, has been limited to Phase II. Phase III will be re -reviewed
by the District Commission prior to commencement of construction.
Based upon a review of the application, and evidence received at a hearing
held on November 1, 1979, the District Environmental Commission finds
that there will be no undue, unreasonable or adverse impacts resulting
from the project as amended herein, under any of the 10 environmental cri-
teria of 10 VSA §6086(a) 1-10.
It is, therefore, the conclusion of this District Environmental Commission
that the project described in the application referred to herein, if conr
pleted and maintained in conformance with all of the terms and conditions
of that application, and of Land Use Permit Amendment #4C0161-2, will not
cause or result in a detriment to the public health, safety or general
welfare under the criteria described in 10 VSA, 96086(a) and that, pur-
suant to such section, a permit is therefore issued.
Dated at Essex Junction, Vermont, this 20th day of December, 1979.
Members participating BY
in this decision: Susan H. Cain, District Coordinator
Duncan Brawn
Helen Lawrence
Charles Tetzlaff
STATE OF VERMONT
AGENCY OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION
CERTIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE
CASE NO. 4CO161-3 ) Certified to comply with Vermont
APPLICANT Ridgewood Estates Development, Inc. ) State Board of Health Regulations,
ADDRESS P.O. Box 115 ) Chanter 5, Sanitary Engineering,
Waitsfield, VT 05673 ) Subchapter 1, Public Buildings,
EXTERIOR WATER &•SEDER APPROVAL ONLY.
This project, consisting of Phase III of Ridgewood Estates which is to include
59 townhouse units to complete the project and brinq the total number of units to
114 townhouses, located off Dorset Street in the City of South Burlington, Vermont,
is hereby approved under the requirements of the regulations named above, subject to
the following conditions:
(1) The project must be completed as shown on:
PLAN PREPARED BY DATE REVISION DATE
Sheet 2 of 10 Douglas R. FitzPatrick duly 1981 September 1981 & October 1981
It3 of 10 " " It
"
it 4 of 10 It
It
5 of 10 itit
7 of 10 " "
It
9 of 10 it it
if 10 of 10 " "
and which have been stamped "Approved" by the Division of Protection. No altera-
tions of these plans shall be allowed except where written application has been
made to the Agency of Environmental Conservation and approval obtained.
(2) A copy of the approved plans and the Land Use Permit shall remain on the project
during all phases of construction and, upon request, shall be made available for
inspection by State or local personnel.
(3) The Vermont Department of Health is to be contacted in regards to any regulations
and/or licenses required by their department. (They may be reached at 60 Main
Street, Burlington, Vermont, or b:y phoning 802-862-5701 ext. 321.)
(4)_ The project is approved to be served by the City of South Burlington's municipal
water supply provided the water main extension is constructed in accordance with
the Department of Health's "Letter of Approval" to Peter Sidel, dated October
14, 1981.
(5) The project is approved to connect to the City of South Burlington's municipal
sewer system provided the sewer extension is constructed in accordance with the
stamped approved plans. In addition, the sewer extension is to be constructed
under the supervision of a professional engineer, registered in the State of
Vermont, who, upon completion of all work, is to submit a written certification
to the Division of Protection stating all construction was- completed in accor-
dance with the approved plans and this Certification of Compliance. The engineer's
Certification of Compliance
#4C0161-3
Page 2
certification is to include, but not be limited to, the results of the infiltra-
tion/exfiltration testing on all sewers and manholes, dates of inspections, and
items inspected.
(6) The engineer's certification identified in Condition #5 above is to be submitted
to the Division of Protection prior to the occupancy of any unit to be served
by said sewer extension.
(7) The applicant is authorized to commence with site and foundation work on the 59
townhouse units with the requirement that no further work, which includes any
interior plumbing installation or the framing of the units, is undertaken without
first receiving written approval for the interior plumbing and ventilation from
the Division of Protection. Failure to comply with this condition shall be
grounds for enforcement actions.
Dated at Essex Junction, Vermont,
this 29th day of October, 1981.
CC: P. Howard Flanders
City Planning Commission,'/
Katherine Powers
Fire Prevention
Health Department
Douglas R. FitzPatri'ck
tg
FOR THE DIVIShON OF PROTECTION
Ernest P. Christianson, Regional Engineer
STATE OF VERMONT
AGENCY OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION
CERTIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE
CASE NO. 4CO161-3A ) Certified to comply with Vermont
APPLICANT Ridgewood Estates Development, Inc. ) State Board of Health P.eaulations,
ADDRESS P.O. Box 115 ) Chapter 5, Sanitary Engineering,
Waitsfield, VT 05673 ) Subchapter 1, Public Buildings,
and Subchapter 15, Plumbing.
This project, consisting of the interior plumbing and ventilation plan review
for the 59 townhouse units which makes up Phase III of Ridgewood Estates (exterior
sewer and water approval issued in Certification of Compliance #4CO161-3 dated
October 29, 1981), located off Dorset Street in the City of South Burlington, Vermont,
is hereby approved under the requirements of the regulations named above, subject to
the following conditions:
(1) The project must be completed as shown on:
SHEET PREPARED BY
P-1 Childs, Bertman, Tseckares & Casendino, Inc.
and by Panitsas/Zade Associates, Inc.
P-2 "
P-2A "
P-3
P-4 "
P-5 it
P-5A "
P-6
P- 6A
P-7
P-7A
P-8
DATED
and which have been stamped "Approved' by the Division of Protection. No altera-
tions of these plans shall be allowed except where written application has been
made to the Agency of Environmental Conservation and approval obtained.
(2) A copy of the approved plans and the Land Use Permit shall remain on the project
during all phases of construction and, upon request, shall be made available for
inspection by State or local personnel.
(3)_ The Vermont Department of Health is to be contacted in regards to any regulations
and/or licenses required by their department. (They may be reached at 60 Main
Street, Burlington, Vermont, or by phoning 802-862-5701 ext. 321.)
(4) The applicant is reminded that all plumbing material and workmanship must meet
the standards of the Vermont Health Regulations, Chapter 5, Subchapter 15 -
Plumbing; the National Plumbing Code; and the requirements of the Vermont Fire
Prevention Section of the Department of Labor and Industry.
Certification of Compliance
#4C0161-3A
Page 2
(5) Upon completion of the rough -in for the waste plumbing, and prior to said
plumbing being covered or closed -in, the Agency of Environmental Conservation
is to be contacted so that we may have the opportunity to inspect the workmanship.
(6) By the issuance of this Certification of Compliance, condition #7 of Certification
of Compliance #4C0161-3 is voided and construction of each townhouse unit may
proceed beyond foundations. All other conditions of Certification of Compliance
#4C0161-3 shall remain in effect.
Dated at Essex Junction, Vermont, FOR THE DIVISION OF PROTECTION
this 7th day of December, 1981.
Ernest P. Christianson, Regional Engineer
CC: P. Howard Flanders /
City Planning Commission L/
Katherine Powers
Fire Prevention
Health Department
Childs, Bertman, Tseckares & Casendino, Inc.
Panitsas/Zade Associates, Inc.
tg
STATE OF VERMONT
AGENCY OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION
CERTIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE
CASE NO. 4CO161-4 LAWS/REGULATIONS INVOLVED
APPLICANT Ridgewood Estates Develop., Inc. ) Vermont State Board of Health
ADDRESS P.O. Box 115 ) Regulations, Chapter 5, Sanitary
Waitsfield, VT 05673 ) Engineering, Subchapter 1, Public
Buildings
This project, consisting of extending the water and sewer lines pre-
viously approved in Certification of Compliance 4CO161-3 dated October 29,
1981 to now terminate at the property line of the United Methodist Church.
(Sewer extension for cluster 2), located off Dorset Street in the City of
South Burlington, Vermont, is hereby approved under the requirements of the
regulations named above, subject to the following conditions:
(1) The project must be completed as shown on the plans, sheet 2 of 10,
dated July, 19,81, last revision December, 1981, sheet 4 of 10, dated
July, 1981, last revision December 1981, sheet 7 of 10, dated July,
1981, last revision December 1981 prepared by Douglas R. Fitzpatrick,
P.E. and which have been stamped !!APPROVED" by the Division of Pro-
tection. No alterations of these plans shall be allowed except where
written application has been made to the Agency of Environmental
Conservation and approval obtained.
(2) A copy of the approved plans and the Land Use Permit shall remain on
the project during all phases of construction and, upon request,
shall be made available for inspection by State or local personnel.
(3) All conditions listed in Certification of Compliance 4CO161-3 shall
also pertain to the sewer extension (specifically extending the sewer
from M.N. #12 to the United Methodist property line) being approved
in this Certification of Compliance.
(4) This Certification of Compliance is to be attached to, and be made
a part of Certification of Compliance 4CO161-3.
Dated this 15th day of March, 1982
in the Town of Essex Jct., Vermont
EPC/bmg
cc: P. Howard Flanders
Katherine Powers
City of South Burlington
Health Department
Douglas R. Fitzpatrick
FOR THE DIVISION OF PROTECTION
Ernest P. Christianson, Regional Engineer
SPOKES, F(-)i.EY & 0BUCHOWSKI
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
184 SOUTH WINOOSKI AVENUE
P. O. [BOX 986
BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05402
MCHARD A. SPOKES
JAMES D. FOLEY
JOSEPH F. OBUCHOWSKI
STEVEN F. STITZE:L
Peter S. didel Esq.
P. 0. Box lld
Route 100
Waitsf ieeld r
Dear Peter¢
Vermont 05673
LI .'. ..r
(802) 662-6451
(802) 663-2857
ISAAC N. P. STOKES
COUNSEL
I have the following suggestions in regard to the docu-
ments you submitted to me on October IS # 19611
1) Agreement and waiver pertaining to private
roads and street*. This is fine as drafted.
(2) Warranty Dee to street. Since the City may
be acquiring title to this segment of the road system,
it will be necessary for the final plat to include
metes and bounds. I believe David spits has cuni-
eateed this to your engineer. It would also be bens-
ficial if the final plat could depict the 4S-foot strip
which is being conveyed to Ridgewood by Faith United
Methodist Church and in turn conveyed by Ridgewood to
the City. I had some difficulty understanding the
first full paragraph of the attachment and perhaps this
language can be clarified.
(3) Warranty faced and easement ent to fire lane.
Again, the fire large must be depicted on the final plat:
and I believe your engineer is aware of this require-
ment.
(4) Warranty geld and easement pertaining to
utilities, eats. It is conceivable that the City will
be accepting the utility easements and the pedestrian
easomut at different times. Thus, the pedestrian
easement should be included in a separate deed. I.
understand the pedestrian easement will cross phase one
and this should be clearly expressed in the pedestrian
easement dead as well as an appropriate notation placed
on the final plat.
Peter S. Sidal, Esq. - 2 ® October 26, 1981
In regard to the water line and sewer line ease-
ments, the City would like any reference to "drainage"
deleted. In addition, the water and sewer line ease-
ments only pertain to eight -inch lines. I realise your
language specifies this but we have had some confusion
with other projects. Thus, I would like to see a
sentence added along the following linesc
°This easement does not pertain to any sewer or
crater lines less than eight inches in diameter.
Any lines less than eight inches in diameter are
owned by and ,shall be maintained by the within
Grantor and its successor* and assigns."
We are checking out on our rend the drainage ease-
ment near the, pump station. I'm not sure exactly what
the City requires in this regard and I will get back to
you as soon as I get the necessary information.
(5) Offer of dedication. This is fine as drafted
but I would prefer to refer to a *strip of land" in-
stead of a "right of gray" since the City is acquiring
or may be acquiring the fee. The use of the language
aright of way" is sometimes confusing. A copy of the
descriptive portion of the Worra my geed will be attached
to the offer as Exhibit A. We also would like the
utility easements and pedestrian easement covered by
D the offer. There should be a sentence to the effect
that the City can accept one of the items without
accepting the others. I think you can use one offer of
dedication but perhaps have an Exhibit A pertaining to
the street, an Exhibit H pertaining to the utility
easements and an Exhibit C pertaining to the pedestrian
eases ent. Again# the simplest form for the exhibits
would be copies of the descriptive portions of the
respective deeds.
(6) Ridgewood--Robenstein deed. I have no prob-
lem with this document but perhaps Robenst+ein would
like the easement to be in joint name with his wife.
(7) Ridgewood --Myers deed. I have no problem
with this document.
(8) Agreement and waiver for Myers. This docu-
ment makes no sense to me and perhaps you can let me
know what it is designed to accomplish.
P
Yi
Peter S. Sidel - 3 . October 26# 1981
(9) Ve=aont Property Transfer Pteturns. when you
make your final filingF the Transfer Returns should be
fully a oMplet*d # including a statement as to what is
being conveyed to the City in each case.
s Y rationed above, the final plat will need to be
revised so that certain information will coincide with the
legal documents, Any reference in your documents to the
final plat may need to be changed to include a new revision
datee
With your final submissions,. we would like a certifi-
cate of tide pertaining to all items to be conveyed to the
City. We also would litre partial releases from any mortgagee
or somo sort of subordination agreement clearly indicating
that the City r s inteareest is superior to that of any mortgagee,
Pleas* call if you have any questions.
cc: Mr. Richard turd
r. David Spitz
Very truly Fours,
Richard A. Spokes
City of South Burlington
WATER DEPARTMENT
400 DORSET STREET
SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05401 RECEIVED
TEL. 864-4361
OCT - 6 1981
October 2, 1981 MANAGER'S OFFICE
CITY SO. BURLT"GTON
Mr. Douglas Fitzpatrick
Fitzpatrick -Llewellyn Associates
Brickyard Road
Essex Junction, Vermont 05452
RE: Ridgewood Esates Phase III, Plans and Specifications
dated July, 1981 with revisions of September, 1981
Dear Sir,
I have reviewed and approved the above referenced plans
and specifications. At least five (5) days prior to
starting the construction of the water utilities I require
a preconstruction conference with you and the contractor's
representative in attendance.
If you have any questions or I can be of further
assistance please do not hesitate to call.
Sincerely,
SOUTH BURLINGTON WATER DEPARTMENT
Robert L. Gardner
Superintendent
cc: Ed Blake
Dave Spitz
Bill Szymanski
/4 r d 911-167A/
909 Dorset Street
So. Burlington, VT
August 20, 1981
Dick Ward
City of South Burlington
South Burlington, VT
Dear Dick:
About six years ago, the Zoning Board of Adjustment suggested that I close
my curb cut to 909 Dorset Street when Ridgewood Estates development con-
structed their easterly entry on to Dorset Street.
I will comply with this request if you can assure me access to Dorset Street
over the Ridgewood Estates private roadway. I will not close my entry
point without proper approval to use their right-of-way.
I feel this is your area of responsibility and should be handled in your
approval process as a condition of development acceptance.
Very truly yors,
Bill Robenstein
Memo )
August 24, 1981
page 2
S.Q. P. C.
4). Layout is virtually the same as that presented at previous meetings. Landscaping
has been designed to protect headlights from shining onto neighbors' properties.
Fire chief wants one building turned sideways for improved fire access.
20 garages and 23 open parking spaces are provided for the 20 units. There is
room for an RV storage area or for additional parking if desired.
5). Ridgewood
Applicants are presenting a very interesting architectural design; unfortunately
that design seems to conflict with some of the City's guidelines related to fire
protection. There needs to be a dialogue between the parties involved to try to
achieve both goals of fire protection and aesthetically pleasing design. That
dialogue has not takenplace yet.
Also, the applicants have not yet provided an easement to the adjacent property
to the north for a possible street connection.
2.
PLANNING COMXISSION
APRIL 14, 1981
to Hinesburg Road would be close to the intersection and that he would be
happier if, until the intersection or the road were fixed, the development
take place toward the Kennedy Drive side of the lot and that access to it
be from there. he said phasing might be the answer.
Mr. Walsh shared the concern about the number of units. Mr. Jacob
wanted to look at the site first and Mr. Levesque wanted the City Engineer
to look at it.
Mr. Bob Ryan said that 3 112 years ago he had contacted the city to
see if' there was any interest in buyinp_ that land from him. An appraisal
was done, but it was more than the city wanted to pay, so the land was not
bought.
Mr. Poger sug-ested that until Hinesburg Road was widened or made safer
or the intersection improved, the access to that road not be opened.
The applicant was told that a sidewalk would be required.
Application by Richard and Dawn Derridinger for sketch plan review of a
subdivision to create 1 ten acre lot on Dorset 6treet in the southeast
quadrant
Mr. ipitz showed the area on a slide. he said there was a right of
way across the Yawney property and that in 1975 there had been discussion
about which right of way to use. The applicant wanted availability of
the right of way in case the other one was blocked off and he was granted
use of it. The proposal is to have the right of way also serve this 10
acre pitrcel. Mr. Yawney, who was in the audience, said that as far as he
knew, the berridingers had the right to use the right of wry.
Mr. Bob Cain represented the Derridingers and said there was no question
that they had a right of way across the Yawney land and he added that they
will locate the house on the lot so as not to create any setback problems
from the stream on the land.
It was noted that the Commission usually allowed 3 houses on a private
right of way. When the 4th one went in, a city street was required. Mr.
Cain said the owners were aware of that.
Application by Ridgewood Estates Development Inc for general discussion of
changes for a revised final plat
Mr. Spitz said this project had received approval for phases 1, 2 and
3 from the Planning Commission and approval for the overall project from
both Council and Commission in the mid-70's. The approval was for 112-114
units of which 13 were single family homes. They now want to make those
single homes into multi -family units. There are some access questions -
a through road to Dorset Street and a right of way for Economou. A pedestrian
easement location will have to be determined and the recreational vehicle
storage area will have to be screened.
It was noted that the Commission had originally asked for a bikepath/
walkway and what it had gotten was a gravelled area.
Mr. i'age showed the location of the existing units and the proposed
layout for the rest of the project. It is 57 acres and 114 units are proposed.
There will be a more economical layout and more amenities in the new area.
Mr. Levesque noted that there were no trees in the present project, and
he felt that for every tree the developers took out for the new units, they
should put one more in in phases 1 and 2. He said the equivalent dollar
value should be planted. Mr. Poger agreed the area would look better with
some trees. Mr. Page said they would save as many trees as possible and he
J 3.
PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 14, 1981
added that he was not sure the required landscaping had been installed. Mr.
Spitz said he would check into that. If it is not installed, Mr. Poger felt
it should be done before any more buildings were erected. If the requirement
in the front was met and the Commission felt it was not enough, Mr. Poger
indicated that they would be willing to negotiate. Mr. Page asked for
credit for every tree they did not damage and he added that the trees were
an amenity and that it was in the developer's interest to save as many an
possible. w
Ifr. Page said they proposed to complete the second access to Dorset St
The width of the road and the configuration will be the same as in the
multi -family area now (20-24' wide with no parking).
These will be townhouse units. The major road loops were designed to
provide access for emergency vehicles and the areas inside the loops will
be left treed. There will be 2 and 3 bedroom units in the same ratio in
phase 3 as in the other phases and the developers have been before the
School Board.
Mr. Spitz said the fire chief was not happy with the long single
entrance and wants to be sure he can get his trucks in from both points
around the loops.
It was noted that if the provision to leave a 60' right of way in
this development was to serve another development, that would have to be
a city street. Going across the rear of the church lot with the right of
way was mentioned, but the church would have to ai-rne.
Mr. } ar,e showed the ;previously approved elan for the area.
Mr. Levesque wanted trees planted and he wanted Dorset :.;treat widened
to provide a safe place for bicycles and for people to walk. The developers
were asked to check into the cost of topping the gravel off.
Mr. Jacob felt the plan was nice. Mr. Poger shared Mr. Levesque's
concerns about saving the trews and landscaping in front. He said the
storage area should be screened also.
Application by Timberlane Associates for revised final plat approval of
Cardinal Woods
Mr. Bill Dorf said they did not want to change the number of units,
but they wanted to take one group of units and slide them to the north to
give more distance from the right of way line. The gravel access road will
be taken to the corner of the parking lot and the tennis courts will be
shielded with a L-shaped ,parkin; structure. They have talked to the fire
chief' about this.
Mr. Mona moved that the :south Burlington Planning Commission approve
the application of Timberlane Associates for. revised_ final__p.14 apt ro_v
of a _120 unit condominium complex previously entitled "Townhouses at
Timberlane" as depicted _fir "T1mh�rlane__JCardinal...Wood,
Revised Site Plan, :�outhwest Cluster." dated March _1991, _prepared, by
t'iLzjatrick-Llewel_ly,n As3ociates, subject to the following stimulations:
1. All stipulations from the previous final_plat_approval:_dated March
11,_j 80, shall remain in_effect._
2. The revised final plat shall be recorded within 90 days.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Jacob and carried unanimously.
I
I
mqev f 6" lb
nH
t
I
Childs Beqrtmon Tseckares & Cosendino Ift.
Ar(4�K tore LW41K3oe, ATTu te - tufe Ne*Qr)Kwnow pi&-, nq w4etK-
v
Yp
"7,t ft