Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBATCH - Supplemental - 0520 Shelburne Roadf�f CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON + HAA L Subdivision Application - PRELIMINARY^ PLAT 1) Name of Applicant Kravco, Inc. 2) Name of Subdivision South Burlington Factory Outlet Center 3) Submit Subdivision Fee $27.00 4) Describe Subdivision (i.e. total acreage, number of lots or units, type of land use, gross floor area for commercial or industrial uses): Commercial Complex -- Renovation of vacant Grandway store into enclosed sho=inTmall for retail stores Gross floor area (leaseable) Qf mall = 61,800 acr ff_ Center will occupy 9.79 acres of land, con is_inc; of nri"inal 8_35 ar�rP parcel (Parcel 1), plus additional 1.44 acres from adjoining parcel (Parcel 2). 5) Indicate any changes to name, address, or phone number of owner of record, applicant, or contact person since sketch plan application: nnnp A; - i 6) Name, address, and phone number of: Architect:. a, 25gUVQW Richard K. McMullan, Linenthal Eisenberg Anderson, Inc., 75 Kneeland St., Boston, MA 02111 617-426-6300 i b. Surveyor Fred C. Koerner, C.E., 53 Birchcliff Parkway, Burlington, VT 05401 862-5256 c. Attorneys Downs Rachlin & Martin, 100 Dorset St., South Burlington, VT 05401 (William w. Schroeder) 863-2375 g d. Plat Designer See Surveyor, Architect i 7) Indicate any changes to the subdivision such as number of lots or units, property lines, applicant's legal interest in the property, etc., since sketch plan application: Applicant is in proces,.J of redefining existing easement over Farrell Corporation property; otherwise, no change in legal interest or property lines. 8) List names and mailing addresses of owners of record of all contiguous properties: Thomas A. Farrell c/o Farrell Corporation, 5 Holmes Rd., South Burlington, VT 05401 9) State title, drawing number, date of original plus any revisions, and designer(s) of the preliminary map(s) accompanying this application: Site Layout and Lease Plan: Dwg. No. Lr-1; original date 4/2/82, revised 4/5/82, 4/16/82; designed by R.K. McMullan Topographical Survey: No drawing number; original date 6/81, property lines added 4 2 (including Marsh survey lines), revised 4 16 82, 4 19 8 ; designed by F.C. Koerner Typical Engineering Details: no dates or numbers; designed by R.K. McMullan 10) COST ESTIMATES for Planned Unit Developments,multi-family projects, and commercial and industrial complexes: (a) Buildings $974,000 (b) Landscaping $16;000 (c) All Other Site Improvements (e.g., curb work) $10,000 11) ESTIMATED TRAFFIC for Planned Unit Developments, multi -family projects, and commercial and industrial complexes (2-way traffic, to be supplied in Trans -Op traffic study due 4/26/82 A.M. Peak hour P.M. peak hour Average da it traffic % of trucks in plus out): 12) Attach four copies of a preliminary map showing the following information: 1) Proposed subdivision name or identifying title and the name of the city. 2) Name and address of owner of record,subdivider and designer of Prelim- inary Plat. 3) Number of acres within the proposed subdivision, location of property lines, structures, watercourses, wooded areas,and other essential exist- ing physical features. -2- w 4) The names of all subdivisions immediately adjacent and the names of owners of record of adjacent acreage. 5) The location and size of any existing sewers and water mains, culverts and drains on the property or serving the property to be subdivided. 6) Location, names and widths of existing and proposed streets, private ways, sidewalks, curb cuts, paths, easements, parks and other public or privately maintained open spaces as well as similar facts regarding adjacent property. 7) Contour lines at intervals of five feet, based on United States Geolog- ical Survey datum of existing grades and also of proposed finished grades where change of existing ground elevation will be five feet or more. 8) Complete survey of subdivision tract by a licensed land surveyor. 9) Numerical and graphic scale, date and true north'.arrow. 10) Details of proposed connection with existing water supply or alternative means of providipg water supply to the proposed subdivision. 11) Details of proposed connection with the existing sanitary sewage disposal system or adequate provisions for on -site disposal of septic wastes. i 12) If on -site sewage disposal system is proposedflocationand results of tests jto ascertain subsurface soil, rock and ground water conditions, depth to ground water unless pits are dry at depth of five feet; location and j results of percolation tests. 13) Provisions for collecting and discharging storm drainage in the form of drainage plan. 14) Preliminary designs of any bridges or culverts which may be required. 15) The location of temporary markers adequate to enable the Commission to locate readily and appraise the basic layout in the field. Unless an existing street intersection is shown, the distance along a street from one corner of the property to the nearest existing street intersection shall be shown. -3- 16) All parcels of land proposed to be dedicated or reserved for public use and the conditions of such dedication or reservation. 13) Developmental timetable (including number of phases, and start and completion dates) One phase Construction start-up: July 1, 1982 Completion and ready for occupancy: October 1, 1982 14) List the waivers applicant desires from the requirements of these regulations: 15) Attach a vicinity map showing the following: 1) All existing subdivisions, approximate tract lines and acreage of adjacent parcels, together with the names of the record owners of all adjacent parcels of land, namely, those directly abutting or directly across any street adjoining the proposed subdivision. 2) Locations, widths and names of existing, filed or proposed streets, curb i cuts, easements, building lines and alleys pertaining to the proposed sub -- division and to the adjacent properties as designated in paragraph 1 above. 3) An outline of the platted area together with its street system and an indication of the future probable street system of the remaining portion of the tract, if the Preliminary Plat submitted covers only part of the subdivider's entire holding. C/ I , L, / (signature) appl cant or ntact person 4/20/82 date (4) I " CITY OF SOUM BURLIN19MN Subdivision Application - FINAL PLAT P 1) Name of Applicant Kravco, Inc. 2) Name of Subdivision South Burlington Factory Outlet Center 3) Indicate any changes to name, address, or phone number of owner of record, applicant, contact person, engineer, surveyor, attorney or plat designer since preliminary plat application: none 4) Indicate any changes to the subdivision, such as number of lots or units, i property lines, applicant's legal interest in the property, or developmental :i timetable, since preliminary plat application: none 1 i 5) Submit four copies of a final set of plans consisting of a final plat plus engineering drawings and containing all information required under section 202.1 of the subdivision regulations for a minor subdivision and under section 204.1(a) for a major subdivision. 6) Submit tfo draft copies of all legal documents required under section 202.1 (11) and (12) of the subdivision regulations for a minor subdivision and under section 204.1(b) for a major subdivision. 4/20/82 (Signature) applicant or contact person Date ;March 25, 1983 Fred Margosian 151 Coolidqe Avenue Watertown, ;V,assachusetts 02172 Dear Fred, City T.hgineer William Szymanski and I checked the curve radius at your northerly entrance to the Factory Outlet Shopping Center this morning. By our calcu&ations it Treasures to 20 feet rather than the required 40 feet. It further appears that a full 40 feet radius would require remaval or relocation of the "Club New England" sign. Since sign removal was indicated on your approved plan, we assumed you had the power to remove it. if you are now unable to do so, it must tie considered a violation of your approval. :tie would be glad to discuss with you possible options for resolving this problem. Also, P.ichard lard has informed me that you may erect an unlimited number of directional signs (for truck routing, etc.), as long as such signs are 3 square feet or less. The enterior of, your developlment looks good, and I hope we can re- solve these exterior questions cuickl . Sincerely, Davit] H. Spitz, City Planner DHS/Rc-g Fred 'Aargosian 151 Coolidge Avenue ktiatertown, •Massachusetts 02172 Dear Fred, February 28, 1983 ry iOn Of the parking After considerable observa erred that conditions are aless ethan tQ� al. Cutlet Shopping Center, I any co It inay be to the benefit of tL11 parttOtcompleted ather look at tYic� situation before permanent. parking lot landscaping gs I would like to arrange a meeting to discuss the situation. Please let know when would be a convenient time for you. Sincerely, David H. Spitz, City Planner DES/rnc9 cc; 4villiam Schroeder ...........City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05401 PLANNER 863-2882 July 30, 1982 William Schroeder Downs, Rachlin, and Martin 100 Dorset Street South Burlington, Vermont 05401 Dear Mr. Schroeder: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-2486 Concerning the apparent lack of a subdivision approval for Garden Way's purchase of 10.1 acres of land fronting on Farrell Road from Thomas A. Farrell, I will ask Garden Way to correct tht situation. We had understood that 10.1 acres of land was previously subdivided from the balance of Mr. Farrell's land. If that cannot be proved, then Garden Way will have to correct the error with a final plat application to the South Burlington Planning Commission. In substance, the area of land to be subdivided and purchased by Kravco is no different whether the land was subdivided from the entire original Farrell parcel or from the smaller Garden Way property. The details of the proposed Kravco development are unaffected, therefore I see no reason to prevent Kravco's purchase of the land or to withhold a zoning permit for the approved development. The apparent technical oversight regarding the previous subdivision will have to be corrected by Garden Way, but that is a separate matter. Sincerely, David H. Spitz, 47 City Planner DHS/df State of Vermont �1b Department of Fish and Game Department of Forests, Parks, and Recreation Department of Water Resources & Environmental Engineering Natural Resources Conservation Council Kra�Wi Inc. c o liamSchroeder 234 Goddard Boulevard King of Prussia, PA 19406 Dear Mr. Schroeder: AGENCY OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION Montpelier, Vermont 05602 Department of Rater Resources and Environmental Engineering DIVISION OF PROTECTION 111 West Street Essex Junction, VT 05452 July 20, 1982 Telephone: 879-6563 RE: Renovation of vacant Grand Way store (PB-4-0734 On behalf of the Division of Protection of the Agency of Environmental Conservation, I acknowledge receipt of the application for renovation of vacant Grand Way store into enclosed mall shopping complex located at Route 89 and Shelburne Road (Route 7), So. Burlington, Vermont. If you have not already done so, you should check with town officials regarding any local requirements that you may need to meet. Meanwhile, if you have any questions, do not hesitate to contact this office at the phone/address above. CC: Town Planning Commission FOR THE DIVISION OF PROTECTION Ernest P. Christianson Regional Engineer This letter fulfills the notice requirements of 18 V.S.A. 91218. Engineers • Architects • Planners 75 Kneeland Street Boston, Massachusetts 02111 617.426-6300 June 4, 1982 South Burlington Planning Commission City Hall 575 Dorset Street South Burlington,V T 05401 Attn: Mr. David H. Spitz, City Planner Re: Proposed South Burlington Factory Outlet Center South Burlington, Vermont LEA Proiect No. 82091 Dear Mr. Spitz: As per your request, I have made an on -site inspection of the parking lot lighting at the proposed South Burlington Factory Outlet Center Complex, formally the Seaway Shopping Center. The lighting consists of approximately 40' high poles with hooded clusters of four mercury vapor street lamps on each pole. The four poles on the west (Shelburne Road) side of the building are approximately 160' apart. The three poles on the south (Route I-189) side are approximately 140' apart. The four poles on the east (rear) side are in a rectangle approxi- mately 110' x 170'. In addition, there are similar light fixtures on the north side of O'Dell Parkway approximately 170' apart in line with fix- tures on this property. Except for the two southerly lights in the rear parking area, all the lights appear to be in working order. The southwest rear light and pole are missing from the concrete base and the bolts are bent. The base will be repaired as required to receive the existing pole, which is on the ground beside the parking lot, and a new hooded cluster will be installed as part of the remodelling project. The southeast rear light cluster is missing from the pole and the base is tipped. The pole will be straightened and a new light cluster installed as part of the remodelling project. Nor- mal fixture relamping and painting of the poles are part of the on -going tenant maintenance program and will be done as required. ��� GROUP South Burlington Planning Commission Mr. David H. Spitz June 4, 1982 Page Two We have reviewed the fixture layout and lighting levels expected from this type of configuration and feel that it is satisfactory for general public safety and the movement of automobiles in the parking lot. If you have any questions in this regard, please do not hesitate to call me. Very truly yours, LEA GROUP Richard K. McMullan, A.I.A. REM: cd Engineers • Architects • Planners 75 Kneeland Street Boston, Massachusetts 02111 617.426-6300 June 4, 1982 South Burlington Planning Commission City Hall 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05401 Attn: Mr. David H. Spitz, City Planner Re: Proposed South Burlington Factory Outlet Center South Burlington, Vermont LEA Proiect No. 82091 Dear Mr. Spitz: Enclosed are two copies and a reduced mylar original of the site layout for the South Burlington Factory Outlet Center on Shelburne Road prepared by Linenthal Eisenberg Anderson Group to be filed with the Planning Commission. This plan reflects changes to the plan submitted on May 11, 1982 at the Public Hearing as stipulated at that hearing and as further agreed upon by us on June 1, 1982. The following changes have been made to the May llth plan: I. Parking spaces on the main entrance aisle have been removed and a grass strip installed. 2. Approval requirement by City Manager of southwest corner drainage at time of acquisition by Vermont A.O.T. of .53 acre parcel noted. 3. Indicated sidewalk to be built according to City of Burlington standards and as may be modified by William Rockwell of Burlington Highway Department. 4. Existing southwest corner drainage swale and drop inlet shown. 5. Relocated northerly fire hydrant and supply pipe as per request of Cheif Goddette. 6. Redesigned curb cut for O'Dell Parkway after discussion with David Spitz, City Planner, and Frank Evans, Vermont A.O.T. to reduce opening while maintaining 50' truck access. We hope these changes meet with your approval and satisfy the stipulation of the Planning Commission. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call us. Very truly yours, LEA GROUP Richard K. McMullan, A.I.A. EIYM: cd PUBLIC HEARING SOUTH BURLINGTON PLANNING COMMISSION 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, May 11 , 1982, at 7:30 P.M. to consider the following: Final Plat Application by Kravco Inc. for development of an enclosed shopping mall in the vacant Grandway store on Shelburne Road. Application also includes a modification of a boundary line between the Grandway property and a vacant parcel to the east owned by Garden Way. Property is bounded on the north by land owned by Thomas Farrell, on the east by Farrell Road, on the south by Interstate-189, and on the west by Shelburne Road. Copies of the application are available for public inspection at the South Burlington City Hall. Sidney B. Poger Chairman, South Burlington Planning Commission f n11�y� I V 1 ` 4. 1 !, Ytl � 0�•,,, a,, 0 MAY 11, 1982 the exi:.;ting shrubs moved to the side. A stockade fence will be erected. Cars for sale will be new and used and the service area will be behind the shop, in the rear. Yr. Levesque felt the original proposal had been to upgrade vehicles here, not have them in front to sell, so he opposed the application. He did not think there had been a display area in the last approval. He felt the display area should be screened from Airport Parkway. Mr. Spitz felt the concern had been that there be no additional paving between this area and the apartments. He thought that cars could be displayed on the side of the lot without adding additional paving. Mr. Jacob felt that would look better. There is a wooded area between this and the apartments. The business needs 3 customer parking spaces. Mr. Poger felt cars on display did not need to be close to the road, since most people coming here would have been sent over specifically. He felt the display area should be heavily landscaped and be near the customer parking. He sut;Yested that 3 of the "customer" parking spaces be used for display cars. Mr. Ewing suggested cutting off 16' of the display area shown on the plan, so it would only be in front of the building. Mr. Caron said he only wanted 1 row of ears across the front of the building, not 2. Mr. Poger said 16' of paving in front should be eliminated and no more than 5 cars parked there, with the other 3 to go on the side of the building. Mr. Ewing moved that Vie South Burlington_ Planning Commission approve the site pinn a lication of Richard Caron at 615 Airport Parkway as depicted on a. plan erititled "Caron's Auto Sales and Service",- date1 / 2, subject t the �'ol lowinl; stipulations: 1. A maximum display of eight cars shall be permitted. No more than ---------- five of' these _ shall be in front of the building and three shall be in the area designated "customer park_" 2. There shall be no expansion of pavement or removal of trees t o the south of the driveway. — --� 3. This aroval expires in 6 months. 4. Trie display area on the map shall be reduced by 16' on the north side of the building. 5. All changes shall be noted on the plan of record. 6. Thdi ction iction of the sign shall be removed from the plan. Mr. Jac,)b seconded the motion. Mr. Mona asked that the re -drawn plan say "Caron's Auto Sales and Service, 615 Airport Parkway" so the location was fixed. .��r. Ewing noted that the Commission was not approving the sign. The motion carried with Mr. Levesuqe voting no. Final tl,it application bj Kravco Inc. for development of an enclosed shopping mull ii the vacant Grandway s on Shelburne Road; also for modification of a t;�;undary line between the Grandway property and a vacant parcel to the east o.<r.ed by Garden 'Wa Mr. Woolery came in at this time. Mr. Spitz said the applicants had hired Mr. Oppenlander to do traffic 5. PLANNING COMMISSION MAY 11, 1982 work for the project. He has talked with the State and Burlington and with the owner of the nears mall across the street. There have been some problems with the reliability of the existing signals in the area and there will be some p:,tchwork solutions to those to keepthem operating until the Southern Connector is built. The date for that is several years away, but work may start soon on the intersection of Route 7 and the Interstate. There have been discussions about a traffic light at the end of the Interstate exit ramp going north, and an opening into the Sears parking lot across from that ramp. :r. Bill Schroeder introduced Messrs. Jeff Levy, Fred Margosian, Richard McMullan and J. C. Oppenlander. He noted that the applicants, Messrs. Levy and Margosian, were asking for final plat approval, site plan approval, and a minor parking reduction. Mr. Margosian gave an overview of the project and noted that since the last meeting they had had a traffic report done and had received an A rating for the ability of the road to handle the traffic. They have changed the circulation pattern and met with the bank and its architect regarding circulation in that area. They have improved the radii on the lot to make truck traffic to the back of the stores easier. The number of stores within the mall has not been set yet. Mr. McMullan, the applicants' architect, went over the plan. 'There art three parking areas of 266, 92 and 217 spaces. There are also 66 spaces behind the former restaurant which will be employee parking. Cars will be able to get to the mall from 3 entrances. The Seaway entrance is across from the ;ears entrance. Cars coming from the south will use the existing deceleration lane and,so there will not be conflicts between them and cars comint; straight across from ears, the lane will be 2 cars wide and there will be a yield sign for the deceleration lane, so that if there is any stacking, it will be there. Cars leaving the center going north can have a free flow exit to Shelburne Road. Cars wishing to go to Sears or south will have two lanes to stack in. Cars coming from the north will probably turn left into the project at the home Avenue access and trucks will be encouraged to use this access rather than the deceleration lane. Xr. XcMullan said the bank area had caused some concern. He passed out copies of a solution agreeable to both the bank and the applicants. There will be room for 15-20 cars to stack and traffic coming out will not be great. The only problem with the solution is that there are other approvals needed from landowners and those have not been settled yet. The applicants would like to propose this option, but if it cannot be worked out, they would like to have another option. They would call the original solution option #1 and this one option #2. Mr. Poger said the Commission could approve one and give its opinion on the other. If #1 is approved, and #2 can be worked out, he said the applicants could amend the plan later without opposition from the Commission. Messrs. Ewing, Poger and Mona liked the second option better than the original one. The Senior Vice President of the bank, Mr. Richard Fletcher, noted that the bank also favored the second option. Mr. Jacob asked if anyone had talked to Mr. Farrell about possibly using the road from the back of this center over to Farrell Street. Mr. Poger said the Com:T.ission would look with favor on that as an additional access to the center. Mr. Schroeder said they could look into it, but they do not own the land. Yr. McMullan said deliveries would be made at off-peak hours. Mr. Mona felt the parking spaces along both sides of the main mixing entrance lane should be eliminated so cars would not be backing into that area. . "/- 6. PLANINTNG COMMISSION MAY 11, 1982 Mr. cJer agreed it made sense to eliminate those 18 spaces, even if it meant the center lost that number of spaces. He suggested replacing the spaces with tree;. 'r. Woolery wondered if the center could prevent people from parking right in front of the stores. i"r. Mona asked about the 24+ parking spaces noted on the plan. He was told there was enough room there for about 24 cars, but that was not the applicants' land and is not part of their parking numbers. Xr. McMullan told the Commission what the applicants intended to plant for 1,=cndscaping. Mr. Spitz said it met the ordinance requirements. Yr. Poger said that normally the Commission required that applicants guarantee the plantings' survival for two growing seasons, but Mr. Mona felt the rhodedendrons should be guaranteed for four. Mr. Woolery added that concrete curbs also protected plantings better than bituminous. Mr. McMullan said drainage had been discussed with the City Engineer. The applicants are willing to take care of drainage problems on their land. Mr. Schroeder said that the traffic study done suggested that the road could easily handle traffic from the development. The numbers were calculated both with and without the Southern Connector. Mr. Oppenlander said if the lightri were timed correctly the level of service on the road would be A. He said the State's predictions for 1985 were higher than the applicants', so the State figures were used. Traffic figures will be lower with the Connector in. Mr. Margosian said Grand Union was open 24 hours. The center will probably run from 10 am to 9 pm. Mr. Mona asked about the traffic contribution of this development. Yr. Spitz said they had less traffic than the old Grand Way did. Under the C1/C2 zoning the road conditions are evaluated, and if a use has more traffic than the previous one, it cannot go in. Mr. Oppenlander said the figures in the report included the mall traffic. Mr. Schroeder said they would put in the number of fire hydrants the Fire Chief wants, and they will re -bulb and repair the lights on the lot now. The number of parking spaces was discussed. Mr. Spitz noted that national standards were lower than the city's, because the city needed to protect itself. He did feel that the proposal for spaces here would be adequate. The requirement would be for 748 and they propose 641 minus the 18 discussed before. The number proposed would be more than University Mall has on a gross leasable area standard. Messrs. Jacob, Poger and Mona felt the proposal was reasonable. Mr. -Ewing asked about snow removal to keep the spaces open and Mr. Poger said that could be stipulated. They will be allowed to dump snow in the rear on the Garden Way land, but if they lose that, they may have to remove it. Mr. Mona asked about a sidewalk in front of the property. Mr. Spitz said that would be done with work on the Southern Connector. Mr. Mona felt the :Mate might not do it along the entire frontage. It was suggested that some money be put in escrow so if the State did not do it, the sidewalk could still be rebuilt. There was a question on whether the sidewalk was in Burlington or South Burlington. Mr. Poger said Burlington should be contacted about it. ',Ir. Ernest Pomerleau spoke in favor of the project and told the Commission what had been done about traffic in the area. ::r. Woolery moved that the South Burlington Planning Commission approve the,,._A.:n �—p t_ p�lication by Kravco. Inc. for modification of an existing bound pry_ —fie between two parcels currently owned by Garden Warr fronting on hel : rre and Farrell Roads�and for development of the westerly parcel into an enclosed shopping mall in the vacant Grandway building ^ Application is eicted on two lens• 1 A survey -- — _�,.._ p _ y titled "Factory Outlet Center, Site Survey, 7. PLA''+':1�' C )vr;I"LION ti _^ . MAY 11, 1982 Shelburne Road prepared by Fred C. Koerner, dated — April 1982, and (2) a — — -- site pinn entitled "South Burlington Factory Outlet Center, Site Layout and Lease Man _preparesenberg, Anderson Inc., last revised 51ZL?�_AAiect to the following stipulations: 1. A bond for landscaping (916,000) plus curb work and sign removal shall be 2. The lighting shall be reviewed and a roved b the Ciif Planner. -- —��--. _ _ _�_' -- 3. A drainage plan of the southwest _portion of the parcel shall be e submitted for the approval of the City Manager at the time of acquisition ,o- f _,4j acres n_that vicinity__by the erm_ont Apenc�of Tranoportation. _ 4. No snow shall be stored in drainage ditches, on sidewalks or on ---- ---- - --- -- _ —• — arkinr islands. If snow storage on the vacant Carden Way parcel to the east t;--comes unavailable, then snow may be stored on a portion of the Parkingr area if the City Planner determines that sufficient Qarking is avail,ole elsewhere on the site. Otherwise snow shall be removed from the site _and brought to a suitable location. "---- 5. This approval expires in 6 months. 6. The sidewalk not in the State construction area shall be built or repair, d per direction of the_City Engineer-#—g-Q�jJUQDed _on he City_Planner obtainin9_approval from the city of Burlington. if necessary. 7. Parking spaces on the main entrance aisle'•Seaway entrance") shown n the Flan shall be removed eliminatin 1 arkin spaces from the overall_ ,plan rx, that area. The mixing area shall be defined by a barrier and these _ —e chanfF shall be noted on the flan of record 8. The number of parking spaces is waived from the ordinance requirement to 615. _ — Mr. Jacob seconded the motion. Mr. Poger noted that if option i#2 were approved, the Commission would approve it without opposition. Mr. Iona felt the main entrance aisle should be defined by a barrier, as it is at University gall. He moved to add to the motion that the mixing area ho defined by a barrier. Mr. Ewing seconded the motion and it carried with X, srs. Levesque and Jacob voting no, and was incorporated into the motion. motion passed unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 11:00 pm. Clerk Memc_>randum Nex week's agenda items 5/7/82 Pagc , 2 be wc,11 used with a stockage fence around a work/storage area. However, several items must still be resolved at the front and south side of the proix>rty: (1) No additional paving should be allowed on the south side next to re:.idonces. This is unclear on the site plan. A different area may be needed for customer parking. (2) The front of the building is now well landscaped. It is unclear what will happen to these shrubs. Also, size and type of any new trees should be marked. (3) It is unclear whether the front line is the property line or the road edge. --H-o-p�efully, some of these questions can be resolved before Tuesday's meeting. �­5) Kravco Considerable discussion on traffic matters has taken place since the last meeting on this application. The highlights are as follows: (1) The Kravco development is anticipated to generate no more traffic than the previous Grandway use (see traffic report that was previously given to you). (2) The State is confident that there are no major roadblocks that will prevent construction of the Southern Connector. Current timetable is start of construction within two years and a construction period of 1� years. The State will also make improvements along Shelburne Road to tie into the Connector. (3) Ir the interim period, Sears and the City of Burlington have agreed on some temporary measures that should improve reliability of the existing signals. More information on any of these items will be available at Tuesday's meeting. However, I do not feel that there are any improvements that should be charged to this developer since the area already seems adequately planned for. The most important concern is that on -site circulation be adequately designed to prevent any tie-ups on Shelburne Road. This is being done, but several circulation details must still be resolved prior to Tuesday's meeting. The applicants have also submitted a parking report (enclosed). I feel they have adequately met their burden of proof concerning the number of parking spaces, and I recommend that their parking proposal be approved. Several details must still be resolved on drainage, fire hyrdants, and lighting prior to Tuesday's meeting. TRANS/OP INC. SYSTEMS ENGINEERS AND CONSULTANTS P. O. BOX 2304 - SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05401 Phone (802) R78-5977 lay 6, 1982 Cravco, Inc. 151 Coolidge Avenue ?aaterto�%Tn, Tvlassachusetts 02172 Attn: I"r. Frederick F. 1�'iArgosian Dear �Ir. :argosian: i,Ir.. David F. Soitz, City Planner for South Burlington, has requested two additional traffic evaluations for the or000sed. South Burlington Factory Outlet Center. In the first instance, capacity analyses for all approaches to the intersections of Shelburne goad and. Seaway and Sears Driveways and of c:>helburne Road and u'Dell Parkway and Home Avenue were preoared as a comparative check on the results of the critical movement analyses that were summarized in the traffic impact report. In all cases, levels of service 'A' were determined for the 1985 p.m. peak -hour volumes that were forecasted from data supplied by the Vermont Agency of Transportation. Only the critical case that does not include the Burlington 13outhern Connector was evaluated in the capacity computations. The second item involves the storage of entering vehicles and their conflict titirith exiting. traffic at the ' eaway Driveway. A proposed design to optimize this situation is indicated. in red on the attach- ed drawing. In addition, redesign of the O'Dell Parkway leg is also provided in red to assist your architect in arranging; for the right - turning trucks from }helburne Road. Please advise of any further needs in regard to this development. Thank you. Very truly yours, Joseph C. Oppenlander, P.E. Vice -President JC0snjk r.►ew Nroa.,.Nr Est vrr•� �. $X1 STIPA (:- Gu2k'i GVi 2. PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 13, 1982 ?r. Ewing poved that the South Burlington Planning Commission approve the site plan application by W.A.Sandri,_Inc. for a ca^ was service staiion ---- -- -- as depicted on a plan entitled "Proposed Car Wash Alteration for A.R. Sandri, 1143 Williston Road, prepared by R.G. Blanchard Design Associates, dated j�A2, subject to_the _following stipulations_ 1. A $1000 landscaping bond shall be provided. 2. The applicant shall provide a 6 foot wide offer of dedication along Williston Road for future street widening and this shall be shown on the plan of record. 3. This approval expires in 6 months. 4. No more than two cars per day shall be allowed for the hand waxing service. Mr. Walsh seconded the motion. Mr. Behn was told the landscaping bond should cover two growing seasons. Mr. Ewing told him that no approval of the sign shown on the plan was included in this approvalnDtion. The motion carried unanimously. Application by Wiemann-Lamphere Architects for site plan approval of an 1800 sq. ft. building for Federal Express at the Burlington International Airaort Mr. Spitz said the request had been withdrawn. Sketch plan review of proposal by Kraveo, Inc.'for renovation of the Grandway building into an enclosed shopping mall Mr. Spitz said the building would be divided into smaller stores inside and that he felt it should be reviewed as a commercial complex under the city's subdivision regulations.Because it is an existing building, it could be considered as a revised plan. He said there would be this sketch -plan review, and then a final plat review. The area is zoned Cl. Mr. Margosian said the old Grandway store was 72,000 sq. ft. When it is renovated into small stores, there will be 61,800 sq. ft. of selling space. They will renovate but not otherwise change the store exterior. He showed pictures of a similar project recently undertaken in New Hampshire. Mr. Margosian noted that they would be buying two parcels of land, as well b3 another 1/2 acre if the State took 1/2 acre of what is now parking area for the new ramps for the Burlington Southern Connector interchange with Uhelburne Road. GardenWay, which now owns the land, will retain some of it. Mr. Margosian said parking would be changed to be 900 and that there would be 653 spaces. The spaces will be 9' x 18' with 24' aisles. They feel 653 is more than adequate for parking, although Mr. Margosian noted that the city's ordinances required them to have 749, which is 6.16 cars per 1,000 sq. ft. He said the International Council of Shopping Centers had had a study done which found that centers of 25,000 sq. ft. to 400,000 sq. ft. should have 4 spaces per 1,000 sq. ft., and he noted that they would exceed that by 50. He noted that their previous experience would indicate that the lower figure was correct. Mr. Spitz replied that the city's requirements 3. PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 13, 1982 were expressed in different terms. He said that as the zoning regulations were being revised, he had looked at national parking standards and had found that in Chittenden County standards tended to be more restrictive than national standards. He noted that "retail" covered a wide area of uses, and pointed to the fact that the Commission could waive up to 50% of the spaces if it felt it should. He said he would like to check the developers' material on number of spaces at other malls in the city. Mr. Margosian said they would have entrances to the mall from both front and rear, and they hoped to have a strong store in the rear to draw people back there to use those parking spaces. He added that the parking area in the back would be visible to people coming off the Interstate. They will also have signs. Mr. McMullan, the developers' architect, said they would extend the present island on the north side of the property to close off the traffic which now moves across the lot parallel to Shelburne Road. They also want to have one-way circulation around the parking lot. There will be problems with circulation around the bank area and they are talking with the architect over there about the best way to handle that. The developers own the land in that area also and will try to come up with a solution acceptable to all. Mr. Walsh was concerned about cars mixing when exiting through the main entrance. Mr. Spitz also raised concern about cars coming from the center and left sides of the lot blocking cars waiting to get out. The Commission was told the developers are thinking about firming up the right of way on the property which allows access to stores away from the road. Mr. Larry Starr felt that if this were successful, there might be great congestion problems in this area, which would cut Burlington off from Shelburne at certain times of the day. Mr. Poger said traffic would be reviewed under the Cl criteria. Mr. Levy said a traffic study was being done and Commission members asked that it be given to them as soon as the Planner received it, so they could study it before the hearing. Mr. Walsh noted that one problem in the area which was off this property was cars coming off the Interstate and cutting across traffic to get into the left -turn lane into the Sears plaza. He felt that was dangerous. Mr. Poger mentioned a traffic light at the intersection of the ramp and Shelburne Road and Mr. Ewing suggested that the problem would be better when the Southern Connector went in. Mr. Ewing noted that Shelburne Road in that area was in Burlington. Mr. Spitz was asked to contact them to let them know what the Commission was doing here. Mr. Margosian said that as leases came due for the other stores in the center, the exteriors would be changed. Mr. Mona mentioned reopening the access between the Grand Union and the former Grand Way. Mr. Poger said he did not want dumping to go on in the ravine behind the property, as it has in the past. Mr. Mona said he would be looking at the mixing pattern at the entrance for the next hearing, and also the number of parking spaces. Mr. Walsh agreed and added concerns about mixing at the exit ramp. Mr. Poger wanted to be sure traffic was encouraged to use the rear lot. Continue discussion on agricultural land use study Mr. Spitz asked the Commission where it wanted to go from here - there is no legal requirement left on this. He felt that eventually the City Council would have to express a city policy on the issue. He plans to make the same presentation to them. Mr. Mona suggested a formal report, but MEMORANDUM To: South Burlington Planning Commission From: David H. Spitz, City Planner Re: Next week's agenda items Date: 4/9/82 2) Sandri This car wash/gas station has already been approved by the Planning Commission under traffic criteria and by the City Council under use criteria. This meeting is for normal site plan issues, i.e. landscaping and circulation. A generous amount of landscaping has been proposed including a cedar hedge along the entire rear and west side of the property. Circulation is adequate for all car wash and gas pump use. I see no problems with this application. 3) Federal Express Proposal is for an 1800 square foot building on airport property. This portion of the airport, containing a new snow removal equipment garage,the free trade zone, and a national guard building, is accessible via a private road from Williston Road. Because of several recent concerns about utilities (see City Manager's memo), development within airport boundaries is being reviewed for the first time. I have few comments on this particular application, but I feel that dialogue about future plans for this area -including access, fire protection, sewer allocations, etc. -must take place between the airport and the City before any further development is approved. 4) Kravco Proposal is to renovate the existing Grandway building into 19 individual stores ranging from 1000 to 6630 square feet in size within an enclosed mall. More in- formation on the mall, described as a "factory outlet center", will be provided at the meeting. Parking and circulation will be similar to the existing arrangement, but exact details must be proposed and reviewed. Application includes both development as a "commercial complex" and a boundary modification between two existing parcels. Subdivision review in conjunction with site plan review is required; however, since the project is essentially re -use of an existing site it will be sufficient to hold sketch plan and (revised) final plat hearings. In any case, complete data on parking and traffic in addition to normal landscaping requirements will be essential in the review of this application. 5) Agricultural Study There should be some discussion on the direction in which the agricultural study should move - further development of information, discussion by the Planning Commission, or presentation to the City Council. Ht^E- 1-ip&rH '-,cL:rH b--t 4c taw -`F- w' - -e 1 I � IN I CA I� j No Text DHS 5/11/82 MOTION OF APPROVAL For the Final Plat Application by Kravco, Inc. for modification of an existing boundary line between two parcels currently owned by Garden Way fronting on Shelburne and Farrell Roads, and for development of the west- erly parcel into an enclosed shopping mall in the vacant Grandway building. Application is depicted on two plans: (1) A survey titled "Factory Outlet Center, Site Survey, Shelburne Road," prepared by Fred C. Koerner, dated April 1982, and (2) a site plan entitled "South Burlington Factory Outlet Center, Site Layout and Lease Plan, "prepared by Linenthal, Eisenberg, Anderson, Inc., last revised 5/7/82. Stipulations: 1) A bond for landscaping ($16,000) plus curb work and sign removal shall be provided. 2) The lighting shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planner. 3) A drainage plan of the southwest portion of the parcel shall be sub- mitted for the approval of the City Manager at the time of acquisition of .53 acres in that vicinity by the Vermont Agency of Transportation. 4) No snow shall be stored in drainage ditches, on sidewalks, or on parking islands. If snow storage on the vacant Garden Way parcel to the east becomes inavailable, then snow may be stored on a portion of the parking area if the City Planner determines that sufficient parking is available elsewhere on the site. Otherwise snow shall be removed from the site and brought to a suitable location. 5) This approval expires in 6 months. 'WI�T,N P�/i/v � r 3 8a --''� ' �, a _a,. P 677/0 �►,�,� �,,� ems- G� 4 MEMORANDUM 1b: South Burlington Planning Commission From: William J. Szymanski, City Manager Re: South Burlington Factory Outlet Center Date: 5/7/82 5) South Burlington Factory Outlet Center 1. Sewer manhole near bank should have its cast iron cover replaced. 2. Drainage inlet at northwest corner of parking lot must be reconstructed. 3. Plan should show method of handling parking lot drainage. 4. Site has no provisions for winter snow storage. This is a problem for about 5 months of the year. TO: South Burlington Planning Commission FROM: Kravco, Inc. RE: South Burlington Factory Outlet Center Subdivision Application - Parking Proposal INTRODUCTION Kravco, Inc. has applied for subdivision and site plan approval for its plans to renovate the old Grandway store located in the Seaway Shopping Center at the junction of Shelburne Street and I-189 in South Burlington. Included in these plans is a proposed restriping and recurbing of the existing parking areas to increase capacity and to facilitate circulation and access. Despite these modifications, it appears that the proposed parking plan will not satisfy the strict numerical standard for parking imposed by the current South Burlington Zoning Ordinance. The increased capacity will, however, provide more than adequate parking for the proposed use, as demonstrated by recent analytical studies and experience. Accordingly, Kravco requests that the Planning Commission, pursuant to Section 13.40 of Article XIII of the Ordinance, reduce the number of required parking spaces approximately 14%. -2- Existing Parking Proposed Parking West Side 289 31.3 South Side 54 74 North Side 13 0 East Side 164 253 520 640 Required Parking Use Standard Retail Floor Area Required Spaces Supermarket 1/200 23,800 sq. ft. 118 Restaurant 1/4 seats 120 seats 30 Retail 1/100 60,000 sq. ft. 600 748 The proposed parking figures are based upon Kravco's purchase of the existing 8.35 acre shopping center parcel, plus an additional 1.44 acres of paved area on the adjacent lot to the east. The Commission should note that the State of Vermont plans to take approximately one-half acre of land from the south parking lot for highway construction purposes. Kravco has a five-year option, contingent upon such taking, to pur- chase a replacement one-half acre parcel adjacent to the east parking lot. The replacement parcel will provide a net addi- tional 24 parking spaces, resulting in 664 total spaces, should such taking occur. based on 70,248 gross leasable area less 15% storage space. -3- ANALYSIS The South Burlington Zoning Ordinance requires one parking space for every one hundred feet of retail floor area. For a typical retail store, about fifteen percent of the leasable space is devoted to storage usage. This means that the South Burlington standard translates to about 8.5 parking spaces per thousand square feet of gross leasable area for retail uses. Kravco's proposed plan calls for seven parking spaces per thousand square feet of gross leasable retail area. A recent Urban Land Institute study indicates that small shopping centers (25,000 to 400,000 sq. ft.) need about four parking spaces for every thousand square feet of gross leas- able area (See p. 14 of Exhibit A, ULI Parking Requirements study). This recommendation is based upon a comprehensive survey of shopping centers located throughout the United States. A Wall Street Journal article describing the study indicates that the 4 to 1 standard is a "27% reduction from the old parking standards developed in 1965" (See Exhibit B). The Journal attributes this trend to a shift in shopping habits, and an increase in the number of shopping centers. Id. These two factors exist in South Burlington. Conse- quently, the conclusions of the study are relevant to the instant application. Recent empirical experience at similar shopping centers also supports the result reached in the ULI study. At a factory outlet center in Northhampton, New Hampshire owned and -4- operated by Kravco, a maximum of 400 parking spaces are used by customers during peak periods. The Northhampton center is of comparable size and identical usage to the proposed South Burlington center. Kravco believes a parking capacity of seven parking spaces for every thousand square feet of gross leasable retail area is more than adequate. This 7 to 1 ratio compares quite favorably with existing shopping centers in South Burlington. (It appears, for example, that University Mall has a parking to area ratio of approximately 3.8 to 1). In light of recent studies which suggest a ratio in the range of 4 or 5 to 1, the requirement of an 8.5 to 1 ratio is unnecessarily stringent. Recent experience with an outlet center in a similar environ- ment demonstrates that the proposed center is a unique use which need not meet the numerical standard. Consequently, the Commission should reduce the parking capacity requirement from 748 spaces to the proposed 640 spaces. $3 Wy Bc S5- 87 ss 37A? 87 qo jo 70 is Iq 91 99 00 , -? ttv,� 30-7 jpi SOUTH BURLINGTON SCHOOL DISTRICT SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05401 FREDERICK H. TUTTLE Superintendent LAWRENCE E. LECOURS Assistant Superintendent p : P�ghnm9�jwt�iSslO� Mr. David H. Spitz City Planner Citv Hall South Burlington, Vermont 05401 Dear Dave, March 30, 1982 OFFICE: SOUTH BURLINGTON HIGH SCHOOL 550 Dorset Street During the past year the members of the School Board, school personnel and representatives of parent groups conducted a feasibility study of the elemen- tary schools to consider the advisability of continuing with three elementary schools in light of declining enrollment. In January of this year the Board voted to retain the existing school and grade configuration for the 1982-1983 school year and that an extensive study continue of the entire kindergarten through twelve facilities and program. This study is to review recommendations and to elicit specific comments from citizens, faculty and administration. Throughout the first phase of the study many citizens and educators came for- ward to offer constructive advice and comment and to offer their assistance in future work in this area. The Board has decided to appoint a Citizens' Commit- tee to continue the Feasibility Study. Current plans call for the Citizens' Committee to meet during the spring and summer months and for completion of its report by October 31st of this year. The task is a large and extremely impor- tant one as it could impact upon the education of students in South Burling- ton for years to come. Citizens interested in being appointed to the Committee are to call the Superintendent's office at 862-9175 by April 9th. The Board intends to review the composition of the Citizens' Committee on April 14th at its regular meeting at the Middle School. The School Board hopes there will be enough volunteers to ensure broad based community representation on the Committee. A draft of the work to be accomplished is available for review at the Superintendent's office. The purpose of this letter is to ask for your assistance in nominating individuals whom you believe would contribute to the work of the Citizens' Ad- visory Committee. I would very much appreciate receiving calls by April 9th from any of your members or constituents if there are suggestions regarding the committee membership or the work to be accomplished. Thank you for your help. Sincerely, Frederick H. Tuttle Superintendent of Schools FHT:cl TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS FOR SOUTH BURLINGTON FACTORY OUTLET CENTER SHELBURNE ROAD SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT TRANS/OP, INC. P. 0. Box 2304 South Burlington, Vermont 05401 April 1982 ii TRANS/OP INC. I SYSTEMS ENGINEERS AND CONSULTANTS P. 0. BOX 2304 - SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05401 Phone: (802) 878-5977 April 23, 1982 Cravco, Inc. 151 Coolidge Avenue Watertown, Massachusetts 02172 Attn: Mr. Frederick F. Margosian Dear Mr. Margosian: In this evaluation, an impact assessment was performed for the traffic conditions that would develop from the establishment of a factory outlet center in the building that was formerly occupied by Grand Way. This com- mercial facility is located in the shopping -center area on Shelburne Road in South Burlington, Vermont. Vehicular trips that would be generated by these commercial activities were developed for the critical afternoon peak period during an average weekday in the planning year of 1985. Traffic impacts on Shelburne Road were appraised with and without the Burlington Southern Connector. This traffic impact evaluation is an extension of the analyses that were prepared for the same building with occupancy by Garden Way as a retail -sales and general -office operation. The results of this traffic study are contained in the report entitled "Traffic Impact Evaluation for Garden Way, Shelburne Road, South Burlington, Vermont" and dated October 1981. The two sections that relate to geometric features and safety considerations are abstracted from that document and are presented in Appendix A, Previous Traffic Evaluations of this report. Please advise of any additional assistance that may be required in regard to the anticipated traffic patterns and conditions that would result from the proposed South Burlington Factory Outlet Center. Thank you. Very truly yours, Joseph C. Oppenlander, P.E. Vice -President JCO:rrb Enclosure Opp * No. 2672 r c1STE.' 710NAL EN/ 111 ITABLE OF CONTENTS Page IINTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 IVOLUME PATTERNS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 APPENDIX A, PREVIOUS TRAFFIC EVALUATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . 12 I GEOMETRIC FEATURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 1 TRAFFIC IMPACT EVALUATION FOR SOUTH BURLINGTON FACTORY OUTLET CENTER INTRODUCTION Attraction and expansion of commercial activities in an urban area enhance the economic base of a community, increase shopping alternatives for area resi- dints, and provide employment opportunities for the citizens. Traffic conditions, however, are often affected in the general vicinity of shopping centers by the vehicular trips that are generated by the various commercial establishments. Therefore, transportation planning is essential to permit continuing community development with traffic facilities that provide efficient and safe travel. The purpose of this traffic impact evaluation was to assess the travel de- mands that would result from the South Burlington Factory Outlet Center. This commercial activity is to be located in the building that was formerly occupied by Grand Way in the Seaway Shopping Center. The location of this factory out- let center on Shelburne Road in South Burlington, Vermont, is shown as site 'A' on the map in Figure 1. The present scope of this traffic evaluation was limited to the volume de- mands during the critical afternoon peak hour for an average weekday in the planning year of 1985. This date of analysis coincides with the scheduled com- pletion of the Burlington Southern Connector. The contract for this new urban facility is to be let in November 1983, and construction is to be started in the Spring of 1984 and completed in the Fall of 1985. Reductions in vehicular volumes are forecasted on Shelburne Road when the Burlington Southern Connector is placed in operation. Traffic appraisals were developed without and with the Burlington 2 4 � •� GTY OF SOUTH 8URLINGTGN Figure 1 Proposed Location of South Burlington Factory Outlet Center on Shelburne Road in South Burlington, Vermont 3 Southern Connector to assess the joint impacts of this new highway and the South Burlington Factory Outlet Center on the volume characteristics of Shelburne Road in 1985. In the area of this South Burlington shopping complex, traffic movements on Shelburne Road are served by a four -lane, undivided highway with left -turn lanes at the intersection with O'Dell Parkway and Home Avenue and with left -turn lanes and right -turning roadways at the intersection with the driveways to Seaway and Sears Shopping Centers. Right-of-way control is provided by traffic signals at these two intersections, both of which provide access to the proposed South Bur- lington Factory Outlet Center. Traffic flows on Shelburne Road are also regula- ted by a posted speed limit of 35 mph. In a previous traffic impact study for this commercial building, roadway geometry and traffic safety were evaluated for vehicular volumes generated by a combined retail and office establishment. Because these findings are still relevant to the traffic impacts of the contemplated South Burlington Factory Outlet Center, the sections dealing with geometric features and safety con- siderations are presented in Appendix A, Previous Traffic Evaluations of this report. Development features of the South Burlington Factory Outlet Center are sum- marized in Table 1 in terms of land -use activity, gross area of building usage, trip generation rates for the afternoon peak hour of traffic volumes on Shelburne Road, and relative traffic allocations to the site access locations. These plan- ning data provide the input parameters for the trip -generation phase of this traffic impact analysis. In terms of trip generation characteristics, the shop- Iping center was placed in the size category of 100,000 to 199,999 gross sq ft to reflect the entire size of existing and proposed commercial activities. Rates Iof trip generation were obtained from the publication entitled "Trip Generation" Iby the Institute of Transportation Engineers, 1979. Because the usable size of I 4 TABLE 1 PROPOSED SOUTH BURLINGTON FACTORY OUTLET CENTER Shelburne Road Item Gross area - sq ft Factory Outlet Center Seaway Shopping Center Ave. weekday two-way trip rate - vpd/1000 sq ft Ave. p.m. peak -hour one-way trip rate - vph/1000 sq ft Enter Exit Non -diverted linked trips - o Site access allocation - o Seaway Driveway O'Dell Parkway South Burlington, Vermont Land -use Activity, Shopping Center 61,800 105,400 60.4 2.4 2.6 25 74 26 R the building is being reduced from 72,000 to 61,800 sq ft, or a decrease of about 14 percent, the proposed use is estimated to generate fewer trips than the former occupant even though both situations are placed in the shopping center category. 3 VOLUME PATTERNS Vehicular volumes at the intersections of Shelburne Road, Seaway Driveway, and Sears Driveway and of Shelburne Road, O'Dell Parkway, and Home Avenue were forecasted for the planning year of 1985. Traffic data for these two intersec- tions with the Burlington Southern Connector were developed by the Vermont Agency of Transportation to describe travel conditions in 1983. To forecast travel move- ments for 1985, a traffic growth factor, as developed by the Vermont Agency of Transportation for urban highways, was applied to the 1983 volume patterns. In general, provision of this new urban facility is estimated to reduce the average daily traffic volume (ADT) and the design hour volume (DHV) by 34 and 28 percent, respectively, on Shelburne Road between the two study intersections. This impact of the Burlington Southern Connector on Shelburne Road can also be expressed as after -to -before volume ratios of 0.66 and 0.72, respectively, for ADT and DHV values. Traffic movements generated by the fully -utilized Seaway Shopping Center were determined in accordance with the development characteristics that are sum- marized in Table 1. An allowance of 25 percent for non -diverted linked trips was considered for the traffic flows on Seaway Driveway and O'Dell Parkway, which provide direct access from Shelburne Road to this commercial location. Exact de- tails of the developmental traffic volumes are depicted in Table 2 for the after- noon peak hour. The origin -and -destination patterns and the site access alloca- tions were developed from traffic volumes reported by the Vermont Agency of Trans- portation. Because the forecasted vehicular volumes that were derived from information provided by the Vermont Agency of Transportation exceed the estimated development traffic movements for the afternoon design hour in 1985, the former volume data 7 TABLE 2 DEVELOPMENT TRAFFIC Seaway Shopping Center South Burlington, Vermont IItem Trips Seaway Driveway O'Dell Parkway IAve. weekday - vpd Enter 2355 828 IExit 2355 828 Total 4710 1656 Ip.m. ave. peak hour - vph Enter 187 66 IExit 203 71 Total 390 137 Ip.m. DHV - vph Enter 214 82 IExit 231 88 Total 445 170 0 were used in the performance evaluations for the two study intersections. For comparative purposes, these intersections were evaluated for performance char- acteristics in 1985 without and with the Burlington Southern Connector by the critical movement analysis - planning. Although the analytical technique provides numerical evaluations, these values can be translated into level -of -service rat- ings for describing intersectional performance. As shown in Tables 3 and 4 for the intersections of Shelburne Road, Seaway Driveway, and Sears Driveway and of Shelburne Road, O'Dell Parkway, and Home Avenue, respectively, levels of service 'A' are achievable at these two loca- tions in 1985 without and with the Burlington Southern Connector. Service levels are qualitative descriptors of traffic conditions and range from 'A' for excellent or free flow to 'E' for intolerable or unstable flow. Level of service 'C' or better is normally established as the desired criterion in the design of urban traffic facilities. Traffic control at both intersections was specified as three-phase, actuated signals for the critical movement analyses. M TABLE 3 INTERSECTION SUMMARY Shelburne Road and Seaway and Sears Driveways Traffic Control: Three-phase, Actuated Signal Approach Total Volume (vph) Without Southern Connector 1985 p.m. Peak Hour Critical Movement (vph) Shelburne Rd. - N. App. 898 671 Shelburne Rd. - S. App. 702 103 Seaway Driveway 263 186 Sears Driveway 335 31 Total 656 Level of Service A With Southern Connector Shelburne Rd. - N. App. 711 242 Shelburne Rd. - S. App. 587 103 Seaway Driveway 263 186 Sears Driveway 335 31 Total 562 Level of Service A 10 TABLE 4 INTERSECTION SUMMARY Shelburne Road, O'Dell Parkway, and Home Avenue Traffic Control: Three-phase, Actuated Signal Approach Total Volume (vph) Without Southern Connector Shelburne Rd. - N. App. 852 Shelburne Rd. - S. App. 578 O'Dell Parkway 103 Home Avenue 124 Total Level of Service Shelburne Rd. - N. App. Shelburne Rd. - S. App. O'Dell Parkway Home Avenue Total Level of Service With Southern Connector 665 464 103 124 1985 p.m. Peak Hour Critical Movement (vph) 400 57 15 91 563 A 307 57 15 91 470 A 11 SUMMARY The traffic impact of the proposed South Burlington Factory Outlet Center in the Seaway Shopping Center on Shelburne Road in South Burlington, Vermont, has been appraised in terms of volume patterns, roadway and driveway geometry, and highway safety. For 1985 travel conditions during the afternoon peak hour, traffic performances for the intersections of Shelburne Road, Seaway Driveway, and Sears Driveway and of Shelburne Road, O'Dell Parkway, and Home Avenue are described as levels of service W. However, the future coordination of traffic signals for progressive movements along Shelburne Road may reduce somewhat the performance levels that are provided by three-phase, actuated signals at these two intersec- tions. - 54 Only minor geometric changes are required at the intersection of Shelburne Road, O'Dell Parkway, and Home Avenue to accommodate the circulation pattern that is recommended for truck combinations serving this shopping center. No geometric design and/or traffic control improvements are correlated with the traffic acci- dent situation on Shelburne Road. After the South Burlington Factory Outlet Center has commenced operation at the proposed location and traffic patterns have stabilized, vehicular and pedes- trian volume studies should be conducted to develop proper traffic signal timings at the intersections of Shelburne Road and Seaway and Sears Driveways and of Shelburne Road, O'Dell Parkway, and Home Avenue. The signal controllers should be responsive to fluctuations in traffic demands throughout the day and should accommodate pedestrian volumes between the two shopping centers that are located on opposite sides of Shelburne Road. In addition to proper signal system designs, all signing and marking of the various roadway elements should be reviewed for appropriateness and completeness. Periodic review of all traffic control devices is essential for maintaining efficiency and safety on the streets and at the intersections. 12 APPENDIX A PREVIOUS TRAFFIC EVALUATIONS 13 GEOMETRIC FEATURES Access locations to this commercial facility are already available on Shelburne Road at Seaway Driveway and O'Dell Parkway. The proposed plan for internal traffic circulation will encourage customer use of Seaway Driveway and employee and truck travel on O'Dell Parkway. Tn addition, the geometric features of the customer parking area will accommodate shoppers to and from the north through the intersection of Shelburne Road, O'Dell Parkway, and Home Avenue. Seaway Driveway is arranged for the turning characteristics of the passenger - car design vehicle. This point of ingress and egress does not adequately facilitate the needs of truck combinations. However, most truck traffic will utilize O'Dell Parkway for goods movements to and from this shopping center. To facilitate more readily the right turn from Shelburne Road to O'Dell Parkway for truck combina- tions, the curb return in the southeast quadrant of the Shelburne Road -O'Dell Parkway -Home Avenue intersection should be redesigned with a three -centered symmetric compound curve having radii of 180-60-180 ft. This curve arrangement readily accommodates the minimum turning path of the WB-50 design vehicle with a minimal increase in the paved area of the intersection proper. Also, the actual spacing of approximately 360 ft between the two intersections exceeds the recommended limiting value of 350 ft for a speed limit of 35 mph posted on an arterial street. 14 SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS I Pertinent accident characteristics are summarized in Table 5 for Shelburne IRoad in the vicinity of Seaway and Sears Shopping Centers. These data repre- sent a portion of this arterial street that is centered at Seaway and Sears r Driveways and extends for 0.1 mile in both directions. These findings were Ideveloped from the accident data files of the Vermont Agency of Transportation for the period from 1974 through 1978. The five-year total of 84 accidents amounts to an average rate of about 17 accidents per year. However, approximately 90 percent of the known causes can be attributed to driver and/or pedestrian errors. Pertinent features of roadway design and/or traffic control offer little or no causative explanation of the reported traffic accidents. Selective enforcement and/or driver educa- tional activities, rather than traffic engineering improvements, are suggested measures for enhancing safety along this section of Shelburne Road. The types of reported accidents are predominantly indicative of collisions with slight severity. This fact is further demonstrated by the lack of any fatal accidents and the preponderance of property -damage -only mishaps. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON Subdivision Application - SKETCH PLAN 1) Name, address, and phone number of: a. Owner of record Gardenway, Inc. (Attn: Jan Johnsen) P. O. Box 97, Ferry Road, Charlotte, VT 05445 425-2147 b. Applicant Kravco, Inc. (Attn: Richard Jacoby) 234 Goddard Boulevard, King of Prussia, PA 19406 215-337-1250 c. Contact person Fred Margosian Lc" �AaA IJeussN 151 Coolidge Avenue, Watertown, MA 02172 617-924-3200 PC,_;- 2 V7 2) Purpose, location, and nature of subdivision or development, including number of lots, units, or parcels and proposed use(s). Purpose and Nature: Renovation of vacant Gr_andway store into enclosed mall shopping complex. Location: Seaway Shopping Center, 520 Shelburne Street, intersection of Shelburne Street and I-1:'9 3) Applicant's legal interest in the property (fee simple, option, etc) Purchaser under agreement of sale. r-j 4) Names of owners of record of all contiguous properties Farrell Corporation, Thomas A. Farrell, Gardenway, Inc. 5) Type of existing or proposed encumbrances on property such as easements, covenants, leases, rights of way, etc. Easements and Rights of Way: Storm sewer easement and right of way to Green Mountain Power; possible pipeline easement to City of South Burlington. Covenants: Possible covenant Herman and Mavis Thomas and to Charmlain Oil Co. barring certain uses of property. Leases: Leases to Chittenden Trust Co., Grand Union, State of Vermont, Imagery Figure Salon, Seaway Laundromat, Seward's Dairy Bar. 6) Proposed extension, relocation, or modification of municipal facilities such as sanitary sewer, water supply, streets, storm drainage, etc. No relocation of municipal facilities is proposed. 7) Describe any previous actions taken by the Zoning Board of Adjustment or by the South Burlington Planning Commission which affect the proposed sub- division, and include the dates of such actions: On October 13, 1981, the South Burlington Planning Commission granted site plan approval to Gardenway, Inc. for a proposed renovation of the former Grandway store. Cn June 22, 19$1, the Zoning Board of Adjustmment granted a variance to Gar way, Inc., for proposed renovations to the former Grandway store. 8) Submit four copies of a sketch plan showing the following information: 1) Name of owners of, record of contiguous properties. 2) Boundaries and area of: (a) all contiguous land belonging to owner of record and (b) proposed subdivision. 3) Existing and proposed layout of property lines; type and location of existing and proposed restrictions on land, such as easements and cove- nants. 4) Type of, location, and approximate size of existing and proposed streets, utilities, and open space. I 5) Date, true north arrow and scale (numerical and graphic). 6) Location map, showing relation of proposed subdivision to adjacent property and surrounding area. nature) p icant or contact person v i Ce- KAli v(,0 �lC i A Cz date , ! " . BANK Egg FA► gE:w uRP. GM UAJVI y PAR( -EL # 1 LL,7AsFp ,,/AQEA AER,A L \ / \ pn.Ie I Ex�s7 f rr G PAYED AREA 1.SS ACRE i i PRoPeseD AbWna,r A, PARK) N6 . S ACCE f i i i -- E— - deficts st.uof'vre- 7 - 189 �. 0. vv. SKETCH PLAq "/-) /�2. .. � � �. y., , � � � �., w w4 ry ��e � _ � a a It � �� hy�R ,.. . SQL ._.. ""�� ��.' t,y � � � 'Sd r "' '� . ii�. Fv:�, a A . s. M � ff � 3 .� .: ' .a : q � .. i c� � r ��.,..»� ;� r . . .. rb. w �. .. �, � • ,� ar , r �_� t �l : dt:. fie. 4 ' ,j� � � � • , ,�': ^* _ ..// � ,w �. r -. t ,c � rM � yr _, � w .1. �. .. � � C '. ., _ ■ ,, } S y, � .A � ' .� ,�,, � a� + - , �;� � ., .;, � � . � � e r Y ,. .. � . . Y ., �.. y e A . „� - '�' � _ u�. � � , t ..� ?. M iy' p � si � � ... � .. r. . r - ,;. ti� f + .. r 1. f�i �[� it : i to � y � !�. .. �.._ >. h �, z -� ,. .:..":t� w��� '�j+{tie,. ''fit" y., .si� wok �, � '� �, +ham � 9= ;�. �t�i ,.ay�� � t �,� T� � i`w-, _, ,. � 4 �� - S i ♦ "�. .yf �. W� vi. .. � f, R •.• - � ., .. ,�"' $fib ,q� 1. - � 'i y �., 7`F I e-' A. L fillo T.I;e _ � C) L) - r W rl.) L.) 7- 1- ( �-4 c-, - r 4:" , v - V . In N FLAN VIEVy FOR GLU_YI►JCt_TREES ��,''I . OVER 5 INCNE$INL_SALIPEI3 ®-GUM —ALLEABLE IRON ANCHORS III TREE PIT -� I -TURNBUCKLE RUGBLR HOSE TREL. BAU_ O-OAK DEADMAN \ PLACE GAYS ADOVE FIRST LOWER I?RANCNLS E.NGA�.E WIRLJ IN RU56LR NObE AI CONTAt�.T WITH BAkK— GUYS SNALL DE DOUBLL JTWAAIh', TWISTED 12 GAGE ANNEALLD ZINC COAL LD WIRE - TURNBUCKLES SHALL BE GALVANIZED OR DIP PAINTED WITH A MINIMUM 'S INCH OPENM(4 AND i/lb" DIAMETER SCREW EYES - BRIGHT COLORED TAGGING TAPE 11 2 INCHES OF COMPACTED MULCH Z ml 71DL-b OF PIT - SHALL BF VERTICAL --U-OAK DEADMAN PLAN_ VIEW _ FOR_ STAKING _TREES UNDER 3 INCHES IN CALIPER 5i AKLt) SHALL BE 2" % 2' % 8' DRESSLD OAK DRIVLN INTO UNDISTURBED EARTH A MINIMUM OF P_ FEET - RUBBER HOSE l RILE. DAL L l Itn' 12d I kL..E•. PIT •�„ • WRAPPING. MATERIAL. SIIALL BL 4.I.11 IN PLACE W11H Slt,'+AL. YAWN TILT, AT TIIE TOP, rOTTOM, AND CENT-LR OF WRAVVIN4 MATERIAL. -- \ --- -TRUNK If)[+L SPIRALLY WRAPPED WITH �,. TWO TNICKNESS(S Of G.RINKLLD FMPEP- \a CEMLN1LO fai.1IILit W1114 ISITUMINOUS MAT F.RIAL (WOM THE BALL TO THE. LOWE'.)T 5RANCH T OF OF PALL SIIALL BE AT SAME TEMPORARY MOUND OF' EARTH GRADL AL, CnROWN IN AROUND TRILL PIT TO NURSERY, x RL TAIN WATER DEPTH OF Pit bHALL ..``� BE 12 INCHE'� DLLVLR 5ET i1Nr� MOUND THAN OLVrFI OI 15At 1.. _- • -SLOW VI I I A.,F ',I I RT ILILFR AS PER SVLOFIC 1IC)N 'w I' C • it bACKFILL SHALL PE� MADE WITH PkLPARLD PLANTING Si AND :,,_ �m IUII FIRMLY TAMVEU AROUND TSALL 1 ,• INCH LAYERS �s FSOITOM OF PIT 10 NE LLAT 1 L •EAUMEH SIIAI L C,K (A)-MALLI A6LE - (A) MALLEANA. Ik'Uf1 ANCH(AL IRO#J AIICIIOV'D ( i INCH MINIMIMol1 OP, I C Ow DLADMEN WITH MINIMUM �• WIU1N OF III 'MALL BI 36 INCIIL`,� -i DIMLN`jION5 OF 4-" DIA.X Ie,'LONG LARGER THAN D 4A.MLTLR OF I RLE BALL TREE PLANTING DETAIL No _ �, gAW CUT EXIST, PAVEMENT I" BIT, CoNC. SURMCE COURSE li'z BIT. co" BASE COURSE — —� 12"COMPACTCD L T4. GRAVEL BASE Yf' COMPACTED BACKF'ILL TYP PcN_ PAVE MAN IDM'l A�- - WT S SHRUB BALL \ PIT \ MOUND OF EARTH / PLAID TOP OF GALL SHALL BE AT `4 SAME GRADE AS GROWN IN NU125ERY-\i 2 INCHE 5 OF COMPACTED MULCH -- _ -- ;, SLOW RELEASE FERTILIZER AS PER 5F'ECIFICATI0W --- OF PIT SHALL BE VERTICAL TEMPORARY MOUND OF EARTH AROUND I.-)HRIIB PIT To j RETAIN WATER r —WRAPPING, MATERIAL TO CE CUT AWAY - - FROM TOP 1-IALF OF BALL OR A- • SPECIFIED " J fNA(.Vr ILL 514ALL HE MADE. WITH PREJARED PLANTING SOIL AND {-IRMLY TAMPLD AROUND CALL IN 6 INCH LAYERS AND THOROUGHLY WATER AT TIME OF PLANTING 1 _._'Ra_�1. 1 TI�1l, MUUNII 'T9 'Diw;l T III IJEE1 IIIIEEIII IIEEIIIIt:=:JIII" III P:==qnl Fan i ra"n PIT`+ FOR CALLED OR CONTAINER GROWN PITS FOR BALLED OR POTTED PLANTS PLANTS WITH BALL OR (.ONTAINER LI'-;,3 WITH BALL OR CONTAINER LAR(,ER THAN I BOTTOM OF PII TO THAN 12" DIAMETER. 'HALL BL E-XCAVATED 12" IN DIAMETE.W SHALL BE. EXCAVATED CE FLAT WITH DIAMET-ER AT LEAST 16" LARGER TO A DIAMETER AT LEAST 24" i THAN HAIL AND 8" DEEPER THAN BALL LARGER AND MINIMUM OF 12" DEEPER THAN SIZE OF BALL OR COWTAINER OR CONTAINER kl M(Ivl_ (()I.IIhim[ R 1 ROM ( IINTAImj,*VI/.l 1+ MAII"RIAI 5HRUB PLANTING DETAIL HO SCALE BALLED AND bURLAPPE-D OR CONTAIPILR GROWM PLAMTS LOAMED 4,SEEDED S ►-\OUL-flEiL. OF- B�T. CO1JC. SIDEWALK SEC SITE QLI�IJS "A,C-1AjV. F Z5 T. Cokjr-. C►vtLO o Qr 81T. ColJC. CUc_C3 SECT101,J hi c SckLG 121 ....... I ---- ----------------- . ...... CHKD.BY.. _..DATE._._-..... ... . ... ------ .............. .......... .................... .... ..... . JOB NO....._..--. ........... .......... -- ... - ............................... ........ - ------------- -- .............. ....... ........ ................. .................................... 1- ................... .. .... ............... UF-W I" BIT. COWC. OVEP,I.A-( xIST. 5%T. rLCIAM SEED EX LOAM SEED T EXIST, "YEL BASS Cc)UC. OVE RUA,-,, PVM'T. DETAIL Uo SCALE NEW 0VF-P\V-A-,( OWLY QF-w 5vr Cowc. Pvm'T. BIT. CLOLIC. O'iEPLA\( ?Vm'r. -r C-o ki C. FV PA'T, Ex\-5-r. 'Brr. Co NC. P'14M'T. I Vz" 51 -r. Co u C. Pq M'T. I F—xlb-T. f- I \,N Gvz\ANs- BASE r OVERLAY P\IKA'T. Joiw\Nj(::A QEW P\4KA'1-, DETAIL No SCALE 4t Yrl.cow-. PRovtQE q►'���� �E�NS04 ov��t-C)t4 130 R01Aia CLi�A{S.7•� exx-Apocarep, —� Z- 6 lz �N� 5 tC.aa Np. O>g Z'13 �N►�-1- V+P�OO� '� M c�'C 1yANIC�9 L i E 2 o � 1 L 10e-4le-VN Z'NREF�aS To MATCH L O C QL F I FZ a-p �� T, JJ �' 3 wAY i-IYDRRA/T GRAp-" vt27 L V �i_ r30X �O'(�g f:::J! _ Ui4G vz5— LJ"D15TUtZZ>EL MATE2IAL UIJL)ISTU2CED g,—O" 1—f I AJ. i` ATEzIAl ,R ' IeLocI-< (rYF -TIE iZOOS �TYp. �g��a R NJ SCALE Fador� CeWer s�s3 i ©o o S,/2- � o w a arc r -�c,c,�.•,�-- �. 5 ��.� _ r__ �t 7 ace s � �..s� fect'kA.." ea\A ? C ta rr"in r (a A c t..A'a.= C) L d - -? Ian I I b, (o D -D -- - Ls'. 3 1L4 NI&DO Iq 3 riQb 61 D ( SD/, �, a3 /lac�f3�� _1 00 t.,JeAwtr Ra�10 "l " 3 qj J,;�V47 (AUL A ti - Nct - ---------- LQ