HomeMy WebLinkAboutSP-85-0000 - Supplemental - 0512 Shelburne RoadCITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON
SITE PLAN APPLICATION
1) NAME, ADDRESS, AND PHONE NUMBER OF:
a) Owner of Record AJQQirAIJ S• ' %%�X�V1S �. i),)0M4p
b) Applicant J,1/aVi` 4- ETC-zre/V
c) Contact Person E�cC C:u)1111XtjPj ,"ilkY4-)KICK»
2) PROJECT STREET ADDRESS: 5-I
3) PROPOSED USE (s) C jotATIF- 'S7bK '4-�
4) SIZE OF PROJECT: (i.e. Building Square Footage, #units, maximum
height and #floors f0a (,ci® �( _. � / AsrflOyL Cj,/' AA
S)
NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES (full
and part time):-.
"'?q zn/-"PLUYE�5S'
6)
LOT COVERAGE: Building
o;
Building, Parking, Outside
Storage: o
��CsJoJA.i tor�� r/ ^
8) COST ESTIMATES: Buildings: $4000 La ! scap ing $
Other Site Improvements: (Please list with cost) $
9) ESTIMATED PROJECT COMPLETION DATE:
�m i�X1Gr
10) ESTIMATED AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC (in and out) T)q Qr'1 ,Q1W- C'VA WW)o,y
11) PEAK HOUR(s) OF OPERATION: 5A M r T-0 3C- S-aerYl 1 TZ.p
12) PEAK DAY (s) OF OPERATION: SA r <!
SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT
SITE PLANS MUST SHOW THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION (PLEASE SUBMIT 4 COPIES)
Jt Lot Drawn to Scale (20' preferred)
Location of Streets, abutting properties, fire hydrants, existing
buildings and landscaping
Existing and proposed curbcuts, pavement, walkways
Proposed landscaping plan (#, variety, size) equal to or greater
than required amount in Zoning Regulations
# and location of parking spaces (9'xl8') with 22 or 24 foot aisles
as required
# and location of handicapped spaces
Location of Septic Tanks (etc) if on -site sewer
M Location of any easements
Lot coverage ratio for building alone ( foot print) and building,
parking and outside storage
Location of site (street # or lot #)
Name of person or firm preparing Site Plan and date
7/9/85
JSB
MOTION OF APPROVAL
That the South Burlington Planning Commission approve the Site
Plat application of Davis and Stern for the conversion of the
Agel-Corman building at 512 Shelburne Road to 6 retail stores
on the first floor and 6000 square feet of office space on the
second floor as depicted on a set of plans entitled: "Site Plan/
Parking layout, 518 Shelburne Road, South Burlington, Vermont",
as prepared by Michael Dugan, dated February 21,1 984 and revised
July 8, 1985 with the following stipulations:
1) The site plan shall show method of handling storm water;
the revised plan shall be approved by the City Engineer prior
to permit.
2) Revised plans shall show snow storage area.
3) Any new islands and landscaped areas shall be lined with
concrete curbs.
4) The Planning Commission approves 115 parking spaces and waives
34 spaces. Agreements shall be obtained from the land owners for
the improvements shown and to use the parking areas prior to permit.
5) A $7500 landscaping bond shall be posted prior to permit.
6) This plan is approved with the following parking space
allocations: Davis and Stern (Agel Corman) at 115 spaces,
WVNT at 20 spaces, Kravco-Factory Outlet at 616 spaces, Old Board
at 217 spaces shared with Kravco. Any further development of this
area may not designate any of these spaces.
7) Building permits shall be obtained within 6 months.
1
July 2, 1985
JLF
Roger Dickinson
Fitzpatrick -Llewellyn Associates
15 Brickyard Road
Essex Junction, Vermont 05452
Re: Stern & Davis, 512 Shelburne Road
Dear Roger:
DEnclosed are the agenda and a copy of my memo to the Planning
Commission. Please be prepared to explain the traffic study
you prepared. This should thin complete the discussion of this
application. Please be aware that I did not receive revised plans
for parking by July 1 as I requested.
- Sincerely,
V
Jane S. Bechtel,
City Planner
JSB/mcq
Encls
CC: William Forsyth
George Stern
Michael Dugan
Herman Thomas
Stewart McGonaughy
PLANNER
658-7955
City of South Burlington
575 DORSET STREET
SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05401
June 7, 1985
George Stern
488 Essex Street
Lawrence, Massachusetts 01840
Re: Stern and Davis, 518 Shelburne Road
Dear Mr. Stern:
ZONING ADMINISTRATOR
658-7958
I understand that you would like to table your site plan application
until July 9 when your traffic consultant will be available.
Please revise the site plans by July 1 to show the actual parking
spaces being claimed and any other items that may have changed.
Sincerely,
Jane S. Bechtel,
City Planner
JSB/mcg
cc: Roger Dickinson
Michael Dugan
Herman Thomas
Stewart McGonaughy
Bill Forsyth
M E M O R A N D U M
To: South Burlington Planning Commission
From: Jane S. Bechtel, City Planner
Re: June 4 Agenda items
Date: June 7, 1985
2) DAVIS AND STERN, SHELBURNE ROAD POSTPONED UNTIL JULY 9, 1985
The applicant will present traffic data to support this request.
The overlay zone permits 47 trips per peak hour from this use. The
ITE data, from a limited sample of "specialty retail centers"
estimates 81 trips per peak hour for this building and use. The
applicants data show this producing 733 per day and 81 per hour
on the adjacent street. Any waivers must be granted under the
criteria of Section 17.50. (As a Planned Commercial Development,
a level of C would be maintained as required, according to the
traffic study submitted by the applicant.)
The plan should be revised to delineate the 108 spaces that are
claimed by this applicant. It should be made clear that spaces
claimed by this applicant and approved by the Commission will not
be reallocated to future applicants with or without private deeds
for shared or in -common parking, unless the hours of operation are
significantly different. (POSTPONED UNTIL JULY 9, 1985)
3) FARRELL, 50 GREEN MOUNTAIN DRIVE
This application was postponed at the May 27, 1985 meeting in order
to 1) confirm the landscaping, 2) confirm the drainage plans;
3) review the building exterior and 4) confirm the access across
the abutting property. The following information has been received:
1) The landscaping plan now shows an increase in plantings to
meet the $17,500 bond requirement. Plantings are primarily cedar
'hedge, yews, juniper, maple, and crab. A number of the large existing
trees along the roadway should not be disturbed.
2) According to the applicant, the drainage plans are being re-
viewed by the engineering firm of Wagner, Heindel, & Noyse. A
report is expected by the meeting.
3) I have not seen plans showing the building facade. Plans may
be available at the meeting.
4) I have been told that, agreements are pending with the adjacent
landowners but have not seen them. If the Commission desires,
the plans could be approved pending this agreement.
May 31, 1985
George Stern
488 Essex Street
Lawrence, Massachusetts 01840
Re: Stern and Davis, 518 Shelburne Road
Dear Mr. Stern:
Enclosed are the minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of
May 28 at which the parking issue was discussed. You should be
thoroughly prepared to discuss the traffic issue on Tuesday,
June 11, 1985.
Sincerely,
Jane S. Bechtel,
City Planner
JSB/mcg
1 Encl
cc: Roger Dickinson
Michael Dugan
Herman Tbomas
Stewart McGonaughy
Bill Forsltth
J
M E M O R A N D U M
To: South Burlington Planning Commission
From: Jane S. Bechtel, City Planner
Re: May 28, 1985 Agenda items
Date: May 24, 1985
2) DAVIS AND STERN, SHELBURNE ROAD
The applicant will present traffic data to support this request.
The overlay zone permits 47 trips per peak hour from this use. The
ITE data, from a limited sample of "specialty retail centers"
\0 estimates 81 trips per peak hour for this building and use. The
r�" applicants data show this producing 733 per day and 81 per hour
rAl on the adjacent street. Any waivers must be granted under the
criteria of Section 17.50. (As a Planned Commercial Development,
a level of C would be maintained as required, according to the
traffic study submitted by the applicant.)
Parking: I have completed a study of parking spaces for the
Farrell/Kravco/Agel Corman development. (See attached) The re-
sults are as follows:
Kravco (Factory Outlet
Shopping Center
Agel Corman
Club New England — bW&"
WVNY
Required Spaces
615
149
160
Actual Spaces
616
124 (new plan)
50 - 100-217
am
The Factory Outlet has provided the number of spaces required by
the Planning Commission. This includes an area that is shared by
the Old Board in the evening. It does not include the spaces in
the O'Dell Parkway as originally suspected by Attorney McGonaughy.
I am satisfied that the Outlet Mall has met it's requirements.
The Old Board requires 160 spaces, based on the seating capacity
of 560. Some of these are available through an arrangement that
Farrell has with Kuntil 2002. The Old Board and T.V. Studio
may use 50 spaces during daytime business hours (prior to 6:00 P.M.)
and a maximum of 100 spaces on weekends and holidays. Since the
lot handles 217 vehicles, it should be sufficient. t rrlotC. 1� &MYC►4b allo-
you G\6i dl.
Agel Corman has a number of spaces parallel to its build'ing and
50 spaces in front, without infringing on the 50 foot right-of-
way. I do not know who has the legal rights to these spaces.
WVNY has 26 spaces immediately in front of its building which seems
sufficient.
r
Memorandum
May 28, 1985
May 24, 1985
Page 2
agenda items
There are unused (unclaimed?) spaces between the old O'Dell
Parkwziy and the new angled entrance drive as well as between Agel
Corman and the Old Board.
The Attorney for the Factory Outlet Center, Bill Schroeder told me
the 50 foot right-of-way and O'Dell Parkway provided an "L" shaped
access to Shelburne Road for the area establishments. The right-of-way
still exists in everyone's deeds but the angled driveway provides a
more direct traffic flow to a signalized intersection. This does
not ignore the fact that Mr. Thomas's parking lot was disrupted by
this through lane.
I believe the spaces proposed by the applicants are sufficient for
the use. However, it should be clear that if they are claimed and
counted for this use, they can not be reclaimed by anyone for a
future use, unless they are used in off -hours.
3) GEORGE E. WATSON, 40 BIRCH STREET
This sketch plan shows the re -subdivision of 3 existing lots into
2 lots. (Our tax maps show the 3 lots as one lot). It is located
on Birch Street, off of Sunset Avenue and Hinesburg Road. The area
is zoned R4.
One new lot will be .27 acres (12,000 square feet); '.he other will
be .38 acres and has an existing house. There seems to be an exist-
ing 50 r.o.w. on Ying Liu's land to the south. Prior to Final Plat,
the applicant should insure permanent access to the new lot across
this r.o.w. or provide access across the front lot to the new lot.
4) BURGER KING, 981 SHELBURNE ROAD
The applicant proposes to construct a 2938 square foot addition to
the Burger King Restaurant by expanding the building to 5050 square
feet. The Zoning Board granted approval for a multiple and
conditional use.
Access and Circulation: The existing driveway and curb cut will
remain. The parking lot is expanded and the drive -through entrance
is moved further west towards the back of the lot.
Parking: This restaurant requires and proposes 102 parking spaces.
May 24, 1985
George Stern
488 Essex Street
Lawrence, Massachusetts 01840
Re: Stern and Davis, 518 Shelburne Road
Dear Mr. Stern:
Enclosed are the agenda and a copy of my memo to the Planning
Commission. Please be sure someone is present to represent
your application on Tuesday, May 28, 1985.
Sincerely,
Jane S. Bechtel,
City Planner
JSB/mcg
Encls
cc: Roger Dickinson
Michael Dugan
Herman Thomas
Stewart McGonaughy
PLANNING COMMISSION
MAY 28, 1985
The South Burlington Planning Commission held a regular meeting on Tuesday,
May 28, 1985 at 7:30 pm in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset St.
Members Present
Peter Jacob, Vice Chairman; John Dooley, Judy Hurd, Mary -Barbara Maher, William
Burgess, John Belter
Others Present
Jane Bechtel, City Planner; Ruth Poger, The Other Paper; Bill Forsyth, Michael
Dugan, Richard Lary, Maurice Adams, Raymond Creteau, W. Robert Stamp, Anna &
Carl Lavallee, Bill Schroeder, George Watson, Bill Green, James Rameka,
Matt Marcellino,, Peter Collins, Stewart McConaughy, Gary Farrell, Colin
Lindberg, Gerry Kittle, David Brown
Minutes of May 14, 1985
The May 14, 1985 minutes were approved on a motion by Mr. Burgess, a
second by Mrs. Hurd, and a unanimous vote.
Continue site plan application of Mr. Stern and Mr. Davis for conversion of
Agel-Corman building to 6 retail shops at 518 Shelburne Road
Mr. Jacob noted that the applicants wanted to limit discussion to the
parking issue tonight, and take up traffic at the next meeting.
Mr. Forsyth said there had been a lot of discussion about the status of
parking in this area. It looks like the 16 arking spaces to the east of the
building (but not right against the building do not belong to Mr. Thomas. He
probably cannot claim them.
Mrs. Maher came in at this time.
Mr. Forsyth said Mr. Thomas agreed not to park in the diagonal traffic
area if he can park in the O'Dell Parkway area, and Kravco agreed to give up
rights to parking in the O'Dell area in order to maintain that diagonal flow
pattern. He noted that Kravco had not needed the spaces in the O'Dell area
for its parking requirements anyway. Mr. Forsyth said the only spaces in
question now were the 4 close to :'Jhelburne Road and within the 50' right of
way to the Citgo station. The station does not want that access blocked. He
said that they felt they could provide 108 parking spaces, but that it would
take a little time to get the various agreements signed by all parties. The
parking requirement for this plan is 149 spaces. It was noted that accepting
the 108 spaces would require a waiver of 27 The Commission can waive up to
5(;'�.
Mr. Dooley came in at this point.
The questionAof that would happen if the Commission allowed the application
to go through with the 108 spaces and Mr. Farrell then came in later and wanted
to use some of those spaces. Mr. Burgess felt the City Attorney should be asked
whether the Commission could deny a later use based on a lack of available
parking, because these spaces had already been counted.
Mrs. Maher said she could not vote for the plan because she felt the layout
was atrocious. Mrs. Hurd felt 27% was too much to waive in this high density
commercial area. Mr. Burgess was also concerned about waiving that many spaces,
and Mr. Jacob was concerned about the amount of parking in this area for the
type of traffic present. He felt 120-125 might be a better figure.
9
PLANNING COMMISSION
MAY 28, 1985
i�Ir. Burgess moved to continue the site plan until two weeks from tonight,
June 11, at 7:30 pm at City Hall. Mr. Belter seconded the motion and all
voted for it.
Consider sketch plan application of George E. Watson for two lot subdivision
located at 40 Birch Street
Mr. Watson noted that Birch Street was a dirt road and had not been
accepted by the City yet. He said he owned 3 lots and would like to enlarge
one and build a new house.
No one had any problem with the plan.
Consider site plan application of Shelburne Road Trust, Peter Collins, agent
for construction of a 2900 sq. ft. addition to Burger King, located at 981
Shelburne Road
Mr. Collins noted that the building was 10 years old and in need of some
renovation. They want to enclose the present patio area and make a play
room and function room. In addition, they will add an office to the north
side of the building. They now have 86 indoor seats and a total of 134, and
after the renovation they wili.have 118 seats inside and none outside. One
of the Burger King representatives said that after the renovation there would
be 80 seats where there are now 86 and the function room would pick up the
rest of the seats. This will be an area for birthday parties, etc., but it can
be used for ordinary seating as well.
Mr. Collins noted that Burger King did not feel that more parking spaces
had been needed, but they added some because the regulations required it. fie
said the lot was never full now, and he said that in Burger King's e)P erience,
improvements like this meant that year-round the restaurant would be full more
often, but peak traffic would not increase. Mrs. Maher did not feel the
additions would add many more cars.
Landscaping was discussed. It will be redesigned in front, but the back
will not be touched. The Commission mentioned removing 18 spaces to the rear
of the lot and putting grass in there. If the spaces are needed in the future,
they can be paved and striped.
Mr. Dooley said he was not convinced on the traffic issue.
Mr. Dooley moved that the aouth Burlington Planning Commission approve the
site plan application of -helburne Road Trust for the construction of a 2938
sQ^ ft addition to the Burger King Restaurant at 981 Shelburne Road as
depicted on a set of plans entitled "Burger King Restaurant, Shelburne Road,
South Burlington, Vermont" prepared by Jan Company, Inc. of Johnston, Rhode
Island and Judd Brown Designs, dated 7 25 85 and 4 12 85 with the following
stipulations:
1. The sidewalk shall be continuous across the driveway and at the same
elevation relative to the road curbing as the existing sidewalk.
2. The landscaped islands shall be protected with concrete curbs.
3. A $7,000 landscaping bond shall be posted prior to permit.
'r
4. 18 parking spaces are waived. The applicant may remove the 18 spaces
to the west of the lot and in the center and grass over that area.
May 17, 1985
George Stern
488 Essex Street
Lawrence, Massachusetts 01840
Re: Stern and David - 518 Shelburne Road
Dear Mr. Stern:
Enclosed are the minutes of the Planning Commission meeting.
Please settle the parking space allotment by May 22 so that I
can include this item on the May 28 agenda.
Sincerely,
Jane S. Bechtel,
City Planner
JSB/mcg
1 Encl
cc: Roger Diclainson
Michael Dugan
Herman Thomas
Stewart McGonaughy
PLANNING COM14ISSION
J•
MAY 14, 1985
on each side of Ethan Allen Drive, a formula for the cost of road improvements
that the city would do (Berard to pay $5,000 and Belter to pay $15,000), and
the dedication of land for the right turn lane. The $20,000 is to widen, ditch,
and drain the area. Mr. Spitz said Mr. Belter was suggesting that he be
given credit towards his $15,000 cost for the value of the land for the right
turn lane. Perhaps instead of just giving the amount of land needed for the
improvement, the city should take the entire lot. The area needed was, very
roughly 1112 an acre, Mr. Spitz gviessed. The entire lot is about 1 acre.
Mr. Dooley said he would prefer to let the City Manager make any deals of that
kind. Mr. Poger said that the Commission wanted any such deal made before final
plat, or they would require enough land for the lane.
Mr. Dooley moved that the South Burlington Planning Commission approve the
preliminary plat application of John Belter for the 13 lot industrial subdivision
of Ethan Allen Farm as depicted on a plan entitled "Ethan Allen Farm, Industrial
subdivision lots 9-21", as prepared by Warren A Robenstein, dated April 1985,
with the following stipulations:
1. The final plat shall show a 15 foot drainage easement between lot #13
and the Belter Farm to drain the low area of Ethan Allen Drive. The exact
location of the easement will be determined by the applicant and the City Engineer
prior to final plat. Legal documents shall be submitted to the City Attorney
for approval.
2. The applicant shall pay the amount of $15,000 for improvements to
Ethan Allen Drive.
3. Land shall be dedicated to the city along the southern side of
Airport Parkway to Shamrock Road to allow for a right turn into Ethan Allen
Drive.
4• A five foot dedication of land along both sides of Ethan Allen Drive
shall be made to the city to upgrade the road Legal documents shall be
submitted to the City Attorney for approval
5. `the need for additional fire hydrants will be determined by the Fire
Chief at site plan review of individual lots. _
6. All septic systems shall be installed for future hookup to the street.
7. Th_is approval expires in 12 months.
Mrs. Maher seconded the motion and all voted for it.
Mr. Belter rejoined the Commission.
Consider site plan application of George Stern and Stan Davis, arerit to convert
the 18,000 sq. ft. Agel-Corman Furniture building into six retail shops and
6,000 sq. ft. of office space located at 518 Shelburne Road
Ms. 3echtel said the Zoning Board had approved the uiultiple use of the
building, out had been concerned about barking. She noted that there was
existing office space on the second floor of the building.
Mr. Dugan said the second floor would remain unchanged. Entrances to the
proposed retail stores would be on the south side of the building. He said
there was a diagonal right of way from the entrance across from Home Avenue
heading toward the Factory Outlet building. This will remain, and they would
like to use timber edged planters to direct traffic in the lot. Parking to the
4.
PLANNING COMMISSION
MAY 14, 1985
south of the building would be diagonal. Mr. Jacob felt the rows of parking
closest -to Shelburne Road should be closed at the ends along the diagonal
right of way, but it was noted that a 50' right of way existed parallel to
Shelburne Road in that area, so those aisles could not be closed, without the
permissi n of everyone with rights to the right of way. Mr. Poger noted that
if that right of way had to remain, he was not sure parking could be put in it.
The parking reduces the 50' width to much less than that.
It was noted that Mr. Thomas owned the building and the land under it, but
the land around the building was owned by Mr. Farrell. Mr. Thomas said the
parking to the west of the building was parking in common and he had rights to
that. He said no one was currently using that parking with him, of Mr. Farrell's
tenants. If Mr. Farrell decided to develop further in the future, he has rights
to this parking in common and it would have to be shared.
Mr. Dooley noted that 124 parking spaces were shown and 149 were required.
He asked if 25 more could be obtained. Mr. Thomas said people could park in the
Old Board lot during the day when that lot is not used by the Old Board. Mr.
Thomas said he had enough parking - he has rights in the Kravco lot.
Mr. Poger said again that he wished Mr. Farrell would show the Commission
a plan for what he wants to do with the whole area.
Mr. McConaughy, representing Mr. Farrell, stated that there was an area
known as O'Dell Parkway or Market Square. This is a right of way which was
once considered as a possible public street connecting eventually to Farrell St.
Kravco said it would not use this right of way, preferring the diagonal one, so
they put parking in that area, which they have no rights to. He said he was
concerned that the Commission had counted those spaces for the Outlet and might
count them again for Mr. Thomas. He said Mr. Farrell might want those spaces
in the future.
Mr. McConaughy said Mr. Thomas owned his building and the land under it,
and had exclusive rights to parking between the south line of his property
and the northern line of Market Square (25-30'), about 10' of space to the
north of the building, and about 25' of space to the east. In addition to that,
he has rights in common with others for parking in the area between the west
side of the building and Shelburne Road in an area bounded by the extension of
the north and south lines of the building to the west. This produces a rectangular
area the same depth as the building.
Mr. Poger noted that if he were shopping in the area, he would just take
a space where he could find it and he wondered if there were enough parking in
the area for the proposed use plus the existing uses. Mrs. Maher asked the
Planner to take the square footage of the Thomas building plus the Outlet
building and weigh the parking requirements against the total spaces available.
She noted, however, that she was negative on this plan and did not feel it
should be approved without enough spaces.
Mr. Dooley asked about the 16 spaces to the east of the building and Mr.
McConaughy said he did not know who had rights there.
Mr. Poger asked the applicant and Mr. Farrell to discuss with the Planner
whether there were enough spaces here, before the next meeting. Mr. Dooley
wanted to know how often the spaces Kravco claimed are actually used by Outlet
customers. Mxs. Maher was not sure she wanted to waive a lot of spaces, since
she felt parking was bad in that area now. Mr. Burgess felt the right of way
issue had to be settled and Mr. Belter agreed.
Mr. Dooley said he had thought the parking was going to be the easy issue.
He said he did not feel he could vote for it because it was so far out of
compliance with the traffic overlay zone. Mr. Poger warned the applicants that
even if the parking were settled, it did not mean approval would be given, and
5•
PLANNING COMMISSION
MAY 14, 1985
he noted that instead of 6 retail stores, perhaps fewer stores and more office
uses could be proposed.
Mrs. Maher moved to postpone the application until two weeks from tonight.
Mr. Dooley seconded the motion and all voted aye.
Consider site plan application of South Burlington Realty Corporation and K.
W. Ventures to construct a 108 room motel and 120 seat restaurant at 1860
Williston Road
Ms. Bechtel said this application had been withdrawn for 30 days.
Consider site plan application of Leland and Patricia Calkins, Walt Adams,
agent to construct an 8400 sq. ft. building on lot ##1, Calkins Court
Ms. Bechtel noted that the first extension had expired on May 13•
Mr. Adams said the structure was the same square footage, but instead
of 2 small extensions off the front of the building, there will now be one
larger one.
Mr. Dooley moved that the aouth Burlington Planning Commission approve
the site plan application of Leland and Patricia Calkins for construction of
an 8400 sa. ft. wholesale light manufacturing building on lot 1, Calkins
Court. -as depicted on a plan entitled "Leland and Patricia Calkins. Calkins
Court, South Burlington, Vermont," dated April 11, 1984 and revised March,
1985, prepared by Adams Construction Company, Inc., with the following stipulations:
1. The sewer allocation shall be 250 gpd and is part of the Calkins
Court allocation.
2. That a landscaping bond of $5100 and a curb work bond of $700 be
posted prior to permit.
3. The site plan shall show a drainage plan that shall be approved by
the City Engineer prior to permit.
4. The street shall be completed as specified at the subdivision final
plat prior to a building permit, or if required, an occupancy permit,whichever
is later, being issued.
5. The building permit shall be obtained within 6 months.
Mr. Jacob seconded the motion and all voted aye.
Other business
PIr. Dooley felt a legal opinion was needed on the parking spaces claimed
by Kravco in the Market square area. He wondered if the Commission could force
them not to occupy some space in the building in order to compensate for the loss
of those spaces which they have no right to.
Mr. ?oger said it had been a pleasure to work with the Commission. He said
he had been impressed by the seriousness and care taken by its members over the
years and he felt they had done a good job in often trying circumstances.
The meeting was adjourned at 10:00 pm.
Clerk
May 10, 1985
Roger Dickinson
Fitzpatrick -Llewellyn
15 Brickyard Road
Essex Junction, Vermont 05401
Re: Stern & Davis - Agel Corman Building
Dear Roger:
Enclosed are the agenda and a copy of my memo to the Planning
Commission. Also enclosed are Jim Goddette's and Bill Szymanski's
comments. Please forward this to Davis and Stern since I do not
have their address.
Sincerely,
Jane S. Bechtel,
City Planner
JSB/mcg
cc: Michael Dugan
Encls
M E M O R A N D U M
To: South Burlington Planning Commission
From: William J. Szymanski, City Manager
he: May 14, 1985 agenda items
Date: May 10, 1985
2) BOURDEAU-RYE, HINESBURG ROAD
1. A sidewalk should be included along access road to connect to
sidewalk on Hinesburg Road.
2. Paved areas should include concrete curbs to protect landscaped
areas except along the 24 foot entrance drive.
3) JOHN BELTER, 13 LOT INDUSTRIAL SUBDIVISION
1. There should be a 15' drainage easement along the east side
of lot 13 to drain the low area of Ethan Allen Drive.
2. The service road to serve 19, 20 & 21 should be out or along
the limits of the floor zone area.
3. The intersection of Airport Parkway and Shamrock Road can be
improved by adding a turning lane along the south side of Air-
port Parkway to accommodate right turns and movements to Ethan
Allen Drive. The land should be dedicated to the City and we will
construct it.
� EL CORMAN FURNITURE, 518 SHELBURNE ROAD
1. Site plan should show method of handling storm water.
2. Site has no area for snow storage.
3. The islands and landscaped areas should be lined with concrete
curbs.
5) K.W. VENTURES, WILLISTON ROAD
1. Very undesireable location for this type of use. Being in the
runway flight path, where there had been aircraft accidents in
the past, the site should be a low people volume use.
2. There may be a stream setback that should be observed. The
area, including downstream has to be carefull studied because the
site serves as a ponding area. No permits should be issued until
a study is completed to determine the impact and such study is
approved by the City.
1- 41
M E M O R A N D U M
To: South Burlington Planning Commission
From: Jane S. Bechtel, City Planner
Re: 'kay 14, 19851 agenda items
Date: .5/10/85
2) BOURDEAU-RYE, HINESBURG ROAD
The applicant has revised this plan to show 24 units on 4 acres.
All setbacks have been maintained and the distance between
buildings equals or exceeds 30 feet in all cases. The driveways
are 30' wide internally with a 24" wide entrance drive. See Bill's
memo and letter from Chief Goddette.
3) JOHN BELTER, 13 LOT INDUSTRIAL SUBDIVISION
John Belter proposes to subdivide a portion of his farm into 13
additional industrial lots in the Industrial -Commercial District.
Ten lots (#9 - #18 are located between the Berard lots and the
farm. Each one measures .96 acres. The floodplain is at the
northern edge of five lots and should not obstruct construction.
Lots #19, 20, 20 are located at the beginning of Ethan Allen Drive
by the Airport Parkway/Shamrock Road intersection. These will be
served by a 30 foot private road.onto Ethan Allen Drive. Bill
has suggested that the private driveway should be removed from
the floodplain. These lots are approximately 2 acres each.
Ethan Allen Road must be improved. The Commission designed a formula
at Mr. Berards`subdivision to assess Mr. Belter $15,000 and Mr.
Berard $5,000 for the required improvements that include draining
and ditching the road. A 5 foot dedication along both sides of
Ethan Allen Drive is also required in order to upgrade the road to
a width of 24 feet with 3 foot shoulders.
The intersection at Shamrock Road and Ethan Allen Drive is poorly
designed. There was no resolution of this problem at the Berard
subdivision. Belters first subdivision urged resolution of this
prior to further subdivision of this land. See Bill's memo.
4) DAVIS AND STERN, 512 SHELBURNE ROAD
The applicant proposes to convert the Agel-Corman Furniture Store
into 6 retail specialty shops (first floor) and retain the existing
office space on the second floor. The property is zoned Cl.
Circulation and Access: This property is part of the Farrell land.
When the Outlet Mall was approved, the traffic was rerouted in this
area. The curb cut is directly across from Home Avenue. The plan
improves the traffic flow through this lot since it is now poorly
defined and somewhat dangerous.
Memorandum
May 14, 1985
May .10, 1985
Page 2
agenda items
Park_i_nq: The retail shops and 6000 square foot Hof office space
require 149 parking spaces'. The plan shows;124., requiring a waiver
of 25 spaces or 17% of the total. Thirty tliik=�6' spaces are shown -
in an area that is now used infrequently. It may make these spaces
more efficiently used. Agreements should be obtained from the
owners to make these improvements and use this area prior to permit.
Landscapin : The proposed building improvements require $7500 in
landscaping. The parking lot landscaping should improve the
traffic flow.
Traffic: The applicant has submitted a traffic study (enclosed).
The proposed use is in traffic overlay zone 1 that allows 47 trips
ends per hour. The proposed use generates 81,trips ends. The
applicant recommends that the factors liste6"on page 4 of his study
(A-D) justify a waiver of the overlay criteria.
The study also finds that a level of service C will be achieved
in 1985 at the Home Avenue/Shelburne Road intersection with or
without this project. Level D will be reached in 1990 with or
without this project. The 1985 level requres a right turn arrow on
Home Avenue that is simultaneous with the Shelburne Road left turn
phase. These figures do not account for the Southern Connector
which would ease the situation.
5) K.W. VENTURES, 1860 WILLISTON ROAD
The applicant proposes to construct a 108 room hotel and 120 seat
restaurant on a 3.1 acre parcel located south of the airport and
west of Avis Rent-A-Car on Williston Road. The area is zoned
Industrial -Commercial. The Zoning Board will consider a Conditional
use and Multiple use request on May 13, 1985.
Circulation and Access: The property is served by one curb cut
from Williston Road that is shared with the Avis lot to the west.
It is located over 800 feet from the Kennedy Drive intersection.
Complete circulation is given around the hotel and restaurant.
Parking: 163 spaces are required for both the hotel and the
restaurant. The plans show 168 including 3 handicapped.
Landscaping: A $27,500 landscaping plan is proposed as required.
Traffic: This property is in traffic overlay zone 2. The zone
would allow 54 rooms/40,000 square feet lot or 187 rooms maximum
—*out4 Nurlington .dire Repartment
f 575 Borset street
#out4 Nurlington, Igermont 05401
OFFICE OF
JAMES W. GODDETTE, SR.
CHIEF
863-6455
May 9,1985
Ms. Jane Bechtel Planner
City Of South Burlington
575 Dorset Street
SO. Burlington, VErmont 05401
Dear Jane,
Plans have been reviewed by this department on the
change to the Agel-Corman property on Shelburne Road.
At this time the only problem I see is the road way
on the South side of the building between the building and
O'Dell Parkway must be at least 18 Ft. for a fire lane
instead of 15 Ft. as the show onrthe plan.
If you have any questions please feel free to call
me.
incerely t
James W. Go
Chief
�4LMC) o-xuut 1 �:,PaCZ4 0,
--7 )q]-J-S
-��g
would improve the situation more than the retention pond.
Mr. Jacob seconded, and the motion passed 4-2 with Mrs. Maher
and Mrs. Hurd voting against.
Continue_ Site Plan Application of Stern & Davis for the
conversi6n of thege Al Corman building intof_ retail
specialty shops located at 512 Shelburne Rd.
Mr. Forsythe advised that they had revised the parking to
remove the angled parking. There is a total of 115 spaces,
and they have a verbal agreement with Rick Davis & Fred
Teballi that they should be able to give the project 20 more
spaces, for a total of 135. The developer would not build
until this is confirmed in writing by all parties. Ms.
Bechtel noted the requirement is for 149 spaces, which would
require a waiver of 23% with the 115 present spaces. The
other 20 would be a bonus. The Commission is allowed to
waive up to 25%. Mr. Dooley asked whether the 115 spaces are
for the exclusive use of the development or whether they
would be shared. Mr. Stern replied they have no agreement
with the Farrells regarding parking and they do not have
exclusive rights to the parking. He felt there was enough
parking to satisfy the needs of the others. Ms. Bechtel said
the City Attorney has confirmed that if this developer claims
these spaces and they have been allotted only once, it would
not matter whether there is a. agreement. Mrs.
Hurd pointed out there were 8 spaces in a right of way which
reduces the right of way from 50 ft. to 20 ft.
Members were polled as to how many parking spaces they would
require: Mr. Jacob, Mr. Dooley, Ms. Hurd, and Mr. Belter all
felt 135 should be required; Mr. Burgess said 126 would
satisfy him.
Mr. Dickinson reported on the traffic study. The traffic
overlay zone allows for 47 trips per peak hour. This project
would have 81, but this requirement can be waived under
certain conditions and he felt the estimate was conservative.
The study does not take into account multiple entrances but
assumed all would enter from Odell Parkway. They felt that
turning movements would be complicated and that certain
adjustments in signalling might be required. They also per-
formed a critical movement analysis. There are 1,098
vehicles per hour which puts the intersection into Level C,
with or without the proposed project. They felt that even
though the project would generate 80 vehicles per hour, the
functional increase in traffic which would affect the
operation of the intersection would only increase by 23
vehciles per hour.
Mr. Burgess felt waiving 34 trips per hour was a significant
number considering holdups and the risk of accidents. Mr.
Belter said he had no problems as there was already a signal
there. Mrs. Hurd said she would not favor waiving the
-6-
standard. Mr. Jacob acknowledged the situation was a mess at
best but felt the traffic signals could control it. Both Mr.
Dooley and Mrs. Maher opposed a waiver.
Mr. Dooley moved that the Planning Commission approve the
site plan application of Stern & Davis for the conversion of
the Agel-Corman building into 6 retail specialty shops
located at 512 Shelburne Rd. with respect only to the traffic
factor, with the understanding that if the motion passes the
Planning Commission would continue discussion on the parking
aspect. Mr. Jacob seconded. The vote on the motion was 3-3
with Mrs. Maher, Mrs. Hurd and Mr. Dooley opposing. The
motion failed for lack of a majority.
Public Hearing on the application of Homer and Marie Dubois
for a planned unit development known as "Butler Farms" with
148 single family lots and over 20 acres of open space,
located approximately 1 mile south of I-89 on the west side
of Hinesburg Road.
Tyler Hart noted that there are now 147 single family lots,
including the 2 present homes. The deeds to lots 68 and 85
will be kept with the City until the City wants them. All
streets have been named. The school bus stop would be at the
turnout for mail delivery.
The Commission then considered the request of the Marceaus
for a barrier on the border of their land. The land is open
and is leased for haying. They requested a chain link fence
and evergreen plantings along it. Mrs. Marceau said the Act
250 hearing felt there should be some kind of fence. Members
felt that an American wire fence which would wrap around lot
68 would be adequate.
Mr. Cobb noted that until the city sends a letter that sewage
capacity is available, the pump station can't be put in.
They would like to tie occupancy to capacity instead. Ms.
Bechtel advised that occupancy permits are not issued on
single famil,� developments. Mr. Cobb said they would like
to know when capacity will be available so they can start
building. Members were reluctant to waiver anything
regarding sewage.
Mr. Dooley moved that the South Burlington Planning
Commission approve the Final Plat application of Homer and
Marie Dubois for the sulZdivision of 93 acres on the west side
of Hinesburg Road into 145 buildable lots and 2 existing
homes entitled "Butler Farms" as depicted on a plan entitled
"Subdivision Plat of Butler Farms, owned 1�Homer and Marie
Dubois, Hinesburg Road, South Burlington, Vermont." prepared
Trudell Consulting Engineers, Inc., dated 1/17/85 with the
following stipulations:
1. The development shall consist of 145 new single-family
Lo / o�
..uPSI&, 0s CodDD a�{
Al
�S-ja%(7
Tvw`�t— 3�`�
N'\,g--D U
� �� i
co 6 LA,�,,--
rf-�
lseac wcewr—O---------------------
9��
Cato
Vyv
- Y-10 ,
-�0(4-`7 ` l 3
s0.0j
FAC,
SPAS
VAC• mC ouJian N.RANCO
wvNy
A&E-L•C~kw (-T1wmo-%)
5c
ra
47
Ao
oo,-
-to q�eB l
G � /s a
GU��er Wir`/�
l01 to
ap
so -too • vi t
6 O °N w cs% ' n'
V
h
Oil
h
CRO:%
U
�o
rx
GOUR-rs
�qq SPACES
1 -T-C ��
q , e 7X sa v TA
S7 �
No Text
No Text
-M.Py,
L.7--
LIC)1, C.103
45t
i-_
CO/
FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED
Engineering and Planning Services
The Kiln • 15 Brickyard Road • Essex Junction • Vermont • 05452 • (802) 878-3000
May 3, 1985
Mr. George B. Stern
488 Essex Street
Lawrence, Massachusetts 01840
RE: Traffic Impact Evaluation
518 Shelburne Road, South Burlington
FILE: 85045
Dear Mr. Stern:
At your request, we have analyzed the potential traffic impacts of the
conversion of a portion of the above referenced building from use as a
furniture store to a six -store specialty retail center. This evaluation
focuses primarly on the impact of additional traffic generated by this
Project on adjacent street traffic. Internal traffic circulation and
parking, as shown on a plan entitled "Site Plan/Parking Layout, 518
Shelburne Road, South Burlington, Vt. ", by Michael Dugan, A. I. A. , dated
February 21, 1984, are not evaluated, in detail, herein.
Information regarding traffic volumes on streets and intersections
adjacent to this Project were obtained from a recent traffic impact
evaluation prepared by FitzPatrick-Llewellyn Incorporated for a proposed
residential project (South Meadow) on a nearby parcel located west of
Shelburne Road in the City of Burlington. That evaluation included an
analysis of existing and future traffic conditions at the Shelburne
Road/Home Avenue intersection, which also serves as the primary access
point for traffic generated by this project. Background information
concerning existing traffic conditions Has also obtained from a report
entitled "Traffic Impact Analysis for South Burlington Factory Outlet
Center, Shelburne Road, South Burlington, Vermont", by Trans/Op, Inc.,
dated April 1982.
Traffic count data from these two reports Here used to develop design
hourly volumes (DHV) on adjacent streets and intersections. The DHV is
defined as the 30th highest hourly traffic volume which occurs on an
annual basis, and is used as a design parameter in the design of highways
and traffic control systems. This volume typically occurs on a weekday
during the P.M. peak hour from 4: 00 to 5: 00 p.m.
Once the DIIV's and corresponding turning movement volumes at intersections
Here determined, it was necessary to estimate the volumes and directional
Design • Inspection • Studies • Permitting
Mr. George B. Stern
FILE: 85045
May 3, 1985
Page 2
patterns of the additional vehicular traffic which this Project Hill
generate.
The major determinant of vehicular traffic generation is the type and size
of proposed land use. An estimate of the additional traffic volumes which
this project will generate was developed through the use of trip
generation rates from the "ITE Informational Report, Trip Generation, 3rd
Edition". This report outlines the results of trip generation studies for
"average weekdays" and periods of peak traffic volumes. The land use
catgories used Were "Specialty Retail Center" and Furniture Store". Table
1, below, outlines the projected additional vehicular trip volumes which
Hill be generated by this Project.
TABLE_1
PROJECTED_VEHICULAR_TRIP_VOLUMES
EXISTING PROPOSED, --.ADDITIONAL
Average weekday 13 VTE/day �, (3 TE/day j720 VTE/day
Vehicular Trip Ends 44 971 �y �yy Cllf,�� 0
P.M. Peak Hour of 1 VTE/hour 81 VT /hour 80 VTE/hour
Adjacent Street Traffic
The directional distribution of traffic entering and exiting this Project
during the P.M. peak hour of adjacent street traffic was estimated from
existing turning movement patterns at the Shelburne Road/Home Avenue
intersection. Since this intersection is directly in front of the
Project, it was estimated, for purposes of determining potential traffic
impacts, that all additional traffic generated by this Project Hould enter
and exit via this intersection. In actuality, this most likely will not
occur, as several other routes are available to access Shelburne Road; via
the main entrance/exit of the Factory Outlet Center, and via Bacon Street.
Existing and future traffic conditions, both without this Project (but
including the South Meadow residential development traffic) and Hith this
project Here determined by performing intersection capacity analysis. The
methodology used to determine intersection capacity, and corresponding
levels of service, Has that which is presented in "Transportation Research
Circular, Interim_Materials_on_Highxay_Caeacity, Number 212, January 1980,
for signalized intersections.
Table 2, on the following page, presents the results of the intersection
capacity analyses.
FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED
Engineering and Planning Services
Mr. George B. Stern
FILE: 85045
May 3, 1985
Page 3
TABLE-2
DESIGN -HOUR -LEVELS -OF -SERVICE
SHELBURNE-ROAD[HOIjE_AVENUE_INTERSECTION
RITHOUT
HITH
YEAR
PROJECT
PROJECT
1985
L. 0. S. C
L. 0. S. C
1990
L. 0. S. D
L. 0. S. D
Urban streets and intersections are generally designed to maintain Level
of Service (L.O.S.) C to D during DHV conditions. These levels of service
have been defined to represent reasonable ranges in the degree of loading,
resulting vehicular delays, and average travel speeds on streets and
intersections. L.O.S. A represents very lox traffic loading with ample
reserve capacity and no vehicular delays, whereas L.O.S. E represents a
street or intersection operating at capacity, thereby causing very long
delays and queues.
Level of Service C, which the Shelburne Road/Home Avenue intersection is
projected to operate at during existing (1985) DHV conditions, is typified
by average delays and queues. During future (1990) DHV conditions, the
projected level of service Hill deteriorate, primarily because of
increased traffic volumes on Shelburne Road and Home Avenue, to L.O.S. D,
Hhich is typified by long delays. Appendices A-D outline the calculations
involved in performing the intersection capacity analyses.
The results of these analyses indicate that this Project Hill not
significantly impact upon existing or future traffic flow conditions on
Shelburne Road.
An examination of the requirements of the City of South Burlington Zoning
Regulations, particularly with respect to the requirements of the Traffic
Overlay District, was also performed. This Project is located Hithin Zone
1, Hhich allows a maximum of ` vehicular trip ends during the peak hour
per 40,000 sq. ft. of lot size... Hith a reported Project parcel size of
126,000 sq. ft., the maximum allowed trip generation volume equals 47
trips ends per hour.
Obviously, the projected additional traffic volumes generated by this
Project Hill exceed the permitted tri eneration. He believe, however,
that this Project may qualify for a waiver as provided by Section 17.50 of
the Zoning Regulations due to several factors:
FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED
Engineering and Planning Services
Mr. George B. Stern
FILE: 85045
May 3, 1985
Page 4
A) This Project is located immediately adjacant to the South
Burlington Factory Outlet Center and other businesses. All share
the same internal traffic circulation netRork and access points to
adjacent streets.
B) Internal traffic circulation Hill be improved through the
installation of traffic control islands to segregate parking areas
from designated vehicular travel paths.
C) Existing (1985) DHV traffic conditions at the primary access point
of this Project (Shelburne Road/Home Avenue intersection) Rill
remain at L. 0. S. C after completion of this Project.
D) Future (1990) DHV traffic conditions are projected to deteriorate
to L.O.S. D. Planned roadHay and traffic control improvements
(i.e. construction of the Southern Connector, modifications to
Shelburne Road, and associated replacement of existing signal
systems from Home Avenue south) are anticipated to be completed by
this date, thereby improving traffic floes conditions to L.O.S. C or
better on Shelburne Road in the immediate vicinity of this project.
In summary, additional traffic generated by the proposed conversion of a
portion of the existing building at 518 Shelburne Road to a specialty
retail center Hill not significantly impact upon existing or future
traffic conditions. erlay
District Hill be required, however, to allo µ, e.
He Nish to thank you for this opportunity to be of service. Should you
have any questions concerning this report and its conclusions, or if He
may be of further assistance, please feel free to contact us.
Sincerely,
FITZPATRICK-LLEHELLYN INCORPORATED
Roge Dickinson, P. E.
cc: Jane Bechtel, City of South Burlington
RJD: eeb
FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED
Engineering and Planning Services
APPENDIX_A
INTERSECTION_CAPACITY_ANALYSIS
1485_NIIHOUT_PROJECT
FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED
Engineering and Planning Services
Critical Movement Analysis: PLANNING
Calculation Form 1
$ntersection Nornc Ave 4 SHe�_SyRtve RD, Design Hour 198E wIo RROlW
Problem Statement TCi'CA► w'I _ L_ Q S .
SteIdentify Lane Geometry
N
Approach 3
SNE,�aur?NE
I 1 I
I t 1
N
Ic
U
A `O
0
a a
Q Q
I �I
t I
i I I
5NCL1 (►QNE
Approach 4
Step 2. Identify Volumes, in vphI
\,9 >n Approach 3
RT = 100
TH U II II 3 1
H J LTCC
=
N
t t
0 0
n n
a
LT =
TH = 35 (_I
RT = 97 Id u u u
t- 2 f-
Approac -' I- Cr
A3 AL4
3313 9
�-� A) ha aiz P aS I
Al A3 + 131 B3
A2 f A4 t B2 B4
Step 4. Left Turn Check
a. Number of
1
2 3 4
yV
��
change intervals
per hour
b. Left turn capacity
G
gU
on change interval,
Ob
in vph
e. G/C
as
.aa
Ratio
d. Opposing volume
513
in vph
e. Left turn
capacity on
13`7
U
green, in vph
(. Left turn
capacity in vph
a�rl
v
(b+e)
g. Left turn volume
3 �
'� y
in vph
h. Is volume > capac-
ity (g > 0?
N
A)
Step 5. Assign Lane Volumes,
in vph
Approach 3
Y
88S Sf36 lay
GI !�rQ.
o
a a
a �� M7 FS IyY586 Sb5 a
Ppr7C oach 4
Step 6a. Critical Volumes, in
(two phase signal)
Approach 3
V N
3`i
of 5`66 �--� o
Q I --� H't$ 1Q
I H'i
Approach 4
Step 6b. Volume Adjustment for
Multiphase Signal Overlap
Possible Volume Adjusted
Probable Critical Carryover Critical
Phase Volume to next Volume
in vph phase in vph
AI'6a Lln-6 Iyy 33q
Step 7. Sum of Critical Volumes
SIK6 + 331.4
= 104 x vph
Step 8. Intersection Level of
Service
(compare Step 7 with Table 6)
Step 9. Recalculate
Geometric Change
Signal Change
Volume Change
Comments
WI PYR0JC1(f_1C--0 S0UT)-1
I11t<nZ0J TAAF-FiC,
at1 LO
It..
�►1iit � ra
APPENDI%_B
INTERSECTION_CAPACITY_ANALYSIS
I965_HI1H_PRO499T
FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED
Engineering and Planning Services
Critical Movement Analysis: PLANNING
Calculation Form 1
Vtersection Nome f4c # S►4cL'aLA4Nc 90At Design Hour N85 t.,I PRwccr
Problem Statement TGTG�m I"Cho. S .
Step 1. Identify Lane Geometry Step 4. Left Turn Check Step 6b. Volume Adjustment for
Multiphase Signal Overlap
Approach 3 Approach Possible Volume Adjusted
Probable Critical Carryover Critical
1 2 3 4 Phase Volume to next Volume
a. Number of in vph phase in vph
change intervals yU ulu alga �
per hour L rl � I uI L'I 3 3 LI
b. Left turn capacity
on change interval, to
N in vph
t c. G/C 22 /�•
m Ratio
S/gYY1L Q d. Opposing volume
1 n in vph S� C Ca
Q Q e. left turn
capacity on II 11
green, in vph
f. Left turn
capacity in vph I y Ll 1� V
(b+e) p
g. Left turn volume 3 1 y l
in vph
Approach 4 h. Is volume > capac-
ity I
(g>n? A)/v
Step 2. Identify Volumes, in vph Step 5. Assign Lane Volumes, Step 7. Sum of Critical Volumes
in vph
M M Approach 3 RT _ I 1 5 Approach 3 Jr� + y+ `I y+ y
�I TH = 3 5 = I I'� I _vph
C[ J LT = `1g- 14a Step 8. Intersection Level of
sss ss� Service
N 115 _ N (compare Step 7 with Table 6)
t
U U 1)EQ
° �7y Sys— cc
n a a
a a n
y,;8 5y_y 594 a Step 9. Recalculate
LT=
3 I r lyy Geometric Change
TH = N3 = Signal Change
N7 � u u u
RT =�_ Volume Change
Approach H � pproach
Step 3. Identify Phasing Step 6a. Critical Volumes, in vph Comments
S ramp (two phase signal)
Approach 3
= L
O p
n Jr 9 y n
a
Al — ► A3 + B1 83
A2 A4 B2 84 Approach 4
AEMPIX_C
INTENSECTION_CAPACITY_ANALYSIS
14g0_HITHOUT_PROJECT
FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED
Engineering and Planning Services
Critical Movement Analysis: PLANNING
Calculation Form 1
'intersection N001c A\Jc 4 RofYD Design Hour 1920(,J U ?Eu?c� �
Problem Statement
Step 1. Identify Lane Ge fm etry
Approach 3 I
� N
L L
SAI)I e. "
m
o
a a
a n
a a
Approach 4
Step 2. Identify Volumes, in vphI
Approach 3
N> �� RT = to
TH = °Z6
� � J LT =
36
N
L L
U U
O O
a a
a a
a a
ell
LT = 32 I OI
TH =
RT = _
ycfc� u u
Approach ►— ¢
0
0
0
0
0
0
SA Mt
Al —► A3 + B1 F 83
A2 f A4 } B2 _J B4 I�
Step 4. Left Turn Check
Approach
1 2 3• 4
a. Number of
change intervals
q0
N o
per hour
b. Left turn capacity
�U
on change interval,
in vph
c. G/C
Ratio
d. sing volume
3,_
536
in vph
I
e. Left turn
capacity on
I3o2
green, in vph
f. Left turn
v
capacity in vph
(b + e)
S. Left turn volume
3'.
36
in vph
h. Is volume > capac-
/
%U
ity (g > f)?
I
Step 5. Assign Lane Volumes,
in vph
Approach 3
131
61,1 loy ^�
L21_t
4a
a---� 914 61 a
150�
pprA oath 4
Step 6a. Critical Volumes, in vph
(two phase signal)
Approach 3
N
o >� 3G o
a n
a � yqq �6t3 a
Approach 4
Step 6b. Volume Adjustment for
Multiphase Signal Overlap
Possible Volume Adjusted
Probable Critical Carryover Critical
Phase volume to next Volume
in vph phase in vph
ai3a H99 Iso 399
Step 7. Sum of Critical Volumes
613+3_49+I5D ?�
vph
Step 8. Intersection Level of
Service
(compare Step 7 with Table 6)
Step 9. Recalculate
Geometric Change
Signal Change
Volume Change
Comments
wv P�OJGCTC7 SuLk i li
O11E11DU,--) 1-9/))-
TNiiF L 0. � , C-
L,U S. J 1S cr4mc))L
UOLU� 0V II90 V1?1j
AEPENQIg_I2
INTERSECTION_CAPACITY_ANALYSIS
1940_gITN_EROJE91
FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED
Engineering and Planning Services
Critical Movement Analysis: PLANNING
Calculation Form 1
�_ ntersection Non)c Ayc t SNec.-8uan.c VcwD __ Design Hour I9YO wI r'�c cT
Problem Statement�>l�}�
Step 1. Identify Lane Geometry
Step 4. Left Turn Check
Step 6b. Volume Adjustment for
Multiphase Signal Overlap
Volume Adjusted
Approach 3
Approach
1 2 3 4
a. Number of U
intervals IU U
changeper
Possible
Probable Critical Carryover Critical
Phase Volume to next Volume
in vph phase in vph
'Q� y 9 q 'CJC) 3 y 1
hour
u hour
� I
b. Left turn capacity
on change interval, jU -60
w
in vph
L t
o Sla)1�E
c. Gic
Ratio
0 0
Q.
d. Opposing volume 5 5 5i �(
in vph
n Q
e. Left turn
U9capacity on I —
green, in vph
f. Left turn
capacity in vph 18 U
(b + e)
g. Left turn volume '3 a 5
in vph
Approach 4
h. Is volume > capac-
ity (g > f) N N
Step 2. Identify Volumes, in vph
Step 5. Assign Lane Volumes,
Step 7. Sum of Critical Volumes
in vph
l� Approach 3
TH = 36
LT = 51
Approach 3
I r /l
G� +�3� +�+
= L1 vph
a:J
�
Step 8. Intersection Level of
• 14$
61 a
Service
L L
U U
O O
N
L L
U U
o 0
7'7 �7
(compare Step 7 with Table 6)
ED
a n
a
Q
Step 9. Recalculate
LT = 3
TH = US Njl
15Q /y�
Geometric Change
Signal Change
RT = `/9 q
-J Cc
pproach 4
Volume Change
Approac ►_-
Step 3. Identify Phasing
Step 6a. Critical Volumes, in vph
Comments
(two phase signal)
SA,YIE
Approach
�
��
LL c
b
O O
a qqq L
Gal a
Al — ► A3 +
B1 B3
A2 A4
B2 B4 �.
APProech 4
SUMMARY OF TRIP GENERATION RATES
Land Use/Building Type Speciality Retni_l Center ITE Land Use Code 814
Independent Variable —Trips per L,0-0.0 Gross Square Feet of Leasahl e Area
Average
Trip
Rate
Maximum
Rate
Minimum
Rate
Correlation
Coefficient
Number
of
Studies
Average Size of
Independent
Variable/Study
Average Weekday Vehicle Trip Ends
40. 7
21.3
3
2 7.7
Peak
Hour
of
A.M.
Between
7 and 9
Enter
Exit
Total
Adjacent
Street
Traffic
P.M.
Between
4 and 6
Enter
Exit
Total
Peak
Hour
of
A.M.
Enter
Exit
Total
Generator
P.M.
Enter
Exit
Ka
Total
Saturday Vehicle Trip Ends
Peak
Hour of
Generator
Enter
Exit
Total
Sunday Vehicle Trip Ends
Peak
Hour of
Generator
Enter
Exit
Total
Source Numbers 100
ITE Technical Committee 6A-6—Trip Generation Rates
Date: 1982
SUMMARY OF TRIP GENERATION RATES
Land Use/Building Type Shopping Center, Under 50,000 G:S.-FITE Land Use Code 82 n
.
Independent Variable -Trips per 1_j 000 Gross Sgua're Feet of T.PasahI P Area
Average
Trip
Rate
Maximum
Rate
Minimum
Rate
Correlation
Coefficient
Number
of
Studies
Average Size of
Independent
Variable/Study
Average Weekday Vehicle Trip Ends
11 .
Peak
Hour
of
A.M.
Between
7 and 9
Enter
0.91
1.93
0.2
Exit
0.80
1.60
0.2
Total
2.93
7.76
5.71
Adjacent
Street
Traffic
P.M.
Between
4 and 6
Enter
5.77
11.43
1.42
9
2
Exit
5.81
11.43
1.73
8
25.0
Total
14.42.
29.27
3.15
1
1.0
Peak
Hour
of
A.M.
Enter
2.07
3.00
1.03
3
23.
Exit
2.03
2.63
1.43
2
Total
8.88
15-13
2.47
1
Generator
P.M.
Enter
6.84
12.57
1.
Exit
7 , 0
12.57
2.04
Total
15.51.
2 . 8
Saturday Vehicle Trip Ends
-
Peak
Hour of
Generator
Enter
. 2 0
Exit
9.75
11.25
Total
12 . 2
1
Sunday Vehicle Trip Ends
72.5
4
Peak
Hour of
Generator
Enter
Exit
Total
Source Numbers 3;46 . _145_.96_4�72}__-75}_ 78,g8 , 124___ _
ITE Technical Committee 6A-6-Trip Generation Rates
Date: 1975, Rev. 1982
G.S.F. = Gross Square Feet of Leasable Area
fy)
777
U:E'i C,5%14 __
Or - mc �HL
vx--1
{fin
\k'Av-" -4-
----------
5Pu � ,
.1 5m�-
c r\ - corn wpm L"-�
n PC A,(A�
f
c..
O � -
OBURN
and
EELEY
REAL ESTATE, INC.
Ms. Jane S. Bechtel
City Planner
City of So. Burlington
575 Dorset St.
So. Burlington, VT
Dear Jane:
June 7, 1985
Would you please postpone the Planning Commission review of the
Stern and Davis proposal for 518 Shelburne Rd. until July 9. The
reason for this request is that Roger Dickenson - who will present
the results of his traffic study to the Planning Commission - will
be out of town until then.
Thank you for your consideration.
Very truly yours,
William H. Forsyth
WHF/ed
CC: George Stern
P.O. BOX 923 125 COLLEGE STREET BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05402
(802) 658-6666 """°
July 16, 1985
Mr. George Stern
488 Essex Street
Lawrence, Massachusetts 01840
Re: Stern and Davis, 518 Shelburne Road
Dear Mr. Stern:
Enclosed are the minutes of the Planning Commission meeting at
which your site plan approval was denied. I will send you the
Findings of Fact under separate cover.
Sincerely,
Jane S. Bechtel,
City Planner
JSB/mcg
1 Encl
cc: Roger Dickinson
Stewart McGonaughy
Herman Tbomas
Michael Dugan
William Forsyth
J,)) 6-,40 CCVA
711 Lo
lj�P-O�l CIC1,611
cj�
coo