Loading...
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