Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSD-82-0001 - Decision - 0520 Shelburne RoadPLAiNNING COMMISSION 2. SEPTEMBER 28, 1962 2. A landscaping bond of Z14,400 and a sidewalk and street widening bond shall be provided. ;. This approval exlires in 6 months. The motion was seconded by Mr. Jacob. Mr. Wessel said his intent was to build the sidewalk. The motion carried with Mr. roger abstaining because he had not heard the full presentation. Application by Robert Leuang for final plat approval of a 2 lot subdivision on Shunpike Road Mr. Spitz said the 'Zoning Board had given a variance to allow frontages of 70' and 75' on these lots. This has been before the Commission for sketch plan review.. He noted that the second lot was large enough for a duplex. Mr. Woolery moved that the South Burlington Planning Commission approve the final plat application of Robert and Darla Leuang for a 2 lot subdivision at_76 Shun-oike Road as depicted on a plan entitled "Boundary Survey, Subdivision of Property of Robert and Darla Leuang", prepared by Krebs & Lansing Consulting Engineers, Inc., dated December, 1981, subject to the following stipulation: 1. The record copy of the final plat shall be recorded within 90 days. Xr. Jacob seconded the motion and it carried unanimously. Application by Attorne._ Lloyd Portnow 'for final plat approval of a sale of land from Thomas Farrell to Garden Way, Inc. Mr. Spitz said that when Garden Way came in to develop the Grand Way building, they said they would be buying a front parcel and a rear parcel. He understood that both parcels of land existed, but actually the back parcel was only a portion of a larger lot, so a subdivision was necessary, which had not taken place. The Kravco attorney discovered this when he was doing research in the land records for Kravco's purchase of land from Garden ;;'ay. Kravco has been granted Commission approval to develop parcel 1, in the front. This application is to subdivide parcel 2 from the balance of the land owned by Mr. Farrell. The Commission discussed access for the balance of land. It has quite a bit of frontage on Farrell Street. Mr. Woolery moved that the South Burlington Planning Commission approve the final plat application by Attorney Lloyd Portnow for a subdivision and sale of land from Thomas Farrell to Garden Way, Inc. on Farrell Street, as depicted on a plan entitled "Plat of Survey, Seaway Shopping Center Corporatic and Thomas A. Farrell," prepared by John subject to the following stipulations: 1. Approval is for subdivision of parcel 2 only. Parcel 1 is already a separate lot. Other surveyed lines are for purposes of the property owner only and —do not constitute approved subdivided parcels. 2. This approval is intended to validate a sale of land that has alre taken place. Since that t: n an approval da precede rather than to negate that subsequent modification. and 2 has been PLANNING C;;MMIS;.lON 3. JI. 'TEABEP, 28. 1982 3. The record copy of the final plat shall be recorded within 90 days. :fir. Mona seconded the motion, and all voted aye. Application by O'Brien Brothers Agency, Inc., for preliminary plat approval of a 35 unit residential development entitled College Woods on Fatchen Road west of I-89 Mr. Poger asked whether the name would be changed now or at final plat and was told it would be at final plat. Mr. apitz said there was a warning error on this application, and that legally it had been warned for tonight. There were some members of the audience present to hear the application, so Mr. Spitz felt I,ir. O'Brien should go over it. He noted that the plan had been to the Commission for sketch plan review and to the Zoning Board for a variance from the Interstate setback. Mr. O'Brien explained the project (see September 14, 1982 minutes). Mrs. Maher asked if there was enough parking to comply with requirements in R4 zoning and was told that with multi -family housing projects, parking spaces per unit were shown, while with individual homes, no parking is shown at all. This falls between the two. Ms. Desautels asked about traffic flow on Patchen Road and was told the volumes are fairly low and that this project would not degrade the level of service on the road. ahe asked about fencing to prevent people from crossing over onto the Desautels land next door. 1-1r. O'Brien said there was a natural ravine between the two properties. Zr. Heisler noted that there were horses on the Desautels land and they did not want to have to watch out for people coming onto the land. Mr. Mona felt the Desautels should erect the fencing if anyone did, but Mr. Heisler said there had been horses on the land for 15-20 years - it is people in the area which is new. 'Ns. Heisler said they would be able to see the new units from the Desautels land. Yx . floolery moved that the South Burlington Planning Commission approve the preliminary plat application by O'Brien Brothers Agency, Inc., for a 36 unit residential development on Patchen road as depicted on a plan entitled "College ',foods, Preliminary Plan," prepared by Fitzpatrick -Llewellyn Associates, dated June 1982, subject to the following stipulations: 1. Internal streets shall be widened to a paved width of 24 feet with 3 foot gravel shoulders on each side. In addition, the entrance street shall be widened to a oaved width of 30 feet, and a school bus urn -around and shelter shall be provided. 2. The need for walkways shall be reconsidered during final plat review. 3. Ownership of the sewage pumping station and force ;Hain shall be determined at final plat review. 4. Draft legal documents - including utility easements private street waivers a pedestrian trail easement homeowner's association bylaws if applicable - shall be submitted as ,)art of the final plat application. Mr. Mona seconded the motion. He asked whether there were any other areas in the city where the land was leased, as is one alternative here, and was told it was a new concept. He felt that between now and final plat the City Planner and City Attorney should explore the concept to see if there were any problems with it. He wanted the legal aspect cleared up before it was reviewed further. The motion carried unanimously.