Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSD-86-0000 - Decision - 0518 Shelburne Road (2)PLANNING COMMISSION 25 MARCH 1986 The South Burlington Planning Commission held a meeting on Tuesday, 25 March 1986, at 7:30 pm, in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset Street. Members Present Peter Jacob, Chairman; Mary -Barbara Maher, Judith Hurd, Catherine Peacock, William Burgess, John Belter, John Dooley Also Present Jane Lafleur, City Planner; Sid Poger, The Other Paper; Chris Ramos, Roger Dickenson, Dana Gratton, John Dowling, P. Mehler, Pauline O'Brien, Gordon O'Brien, H. S. Thomas, Peter Delater, Jude Chicoine, Cathy Chicoine, Paul Marquis, Bill Rowell, Dan Drumheller 1. Review Minutes of 11 March 1986 Mrs. Maher noted the misspelling of "discretion" on page 2. Mrs. Maher then moved that the Minutes of 11 March 1986 be approved as amended. Mr. Belter seconded, and the motion passed unanimously. 2. Public Hearing: Revised Final Plat of.Heathcote Associates for construction of 26,850 sq. ft. addition for retail space and a mall area and relocation of the bank facility at the Factory Outlet Mall, 518 Shelburne Rd. Mr. Jacob noted there are 2 major problems: lot coverage of approximately 95% where the Ordinance requires only 70%, and many more compact car sapces than allowed. Mrs. Lafleur said her calculations indicated lot coverage under the new plan would approach 99%. Mrs. Maher indicated because of that and the parking, she would definitely vote no. Mrs. Maher moved that the application of Heathcote Associates be denied on the grounds of excessive lot coverage. Ms. Peacock seconded. Mr. Ramos, architect for the project, said he felt that the project conforms to the latest state-of-the-art in shopping centers. They have been trying to take a property which is underutilized and also include a T.J. Max store. They have tried to develop a plan which operates within the existing conditions without making them worse. He felt they could prove lot coverage didn't exceed 94%. He said they have already adjusted the compact car spaces to meet the limitations. He said under the new plan they would have only a 3% parking deficiency where they now have 4%. Mr. Burgess noted that the Commission should first hear PLANNING COMMISSION 25 MARCH 1986 PAGE 2 traffic studies and other written data in voting on the motion. Mr. Dooley said he was also uncomfortable and felt they had an obligation to listen to whatever testimony the applicant provided and then indicate areas where there is a disagreement. Mrs. Maher and Ms. Peacock agreed to withdraw their motion. Mr. Ramos then said they were trying to bring to the city an improvement to the property and needed to know if it was a good or bad direction. He said their alternatives were to leave it as it is or to improve conditions. The owner has already spent his own money to upgrade the interior. T.J Max would make it possible to upgrade the whole exterior of the building. He said they,,,_ pain parking on the basis of 5. spaces for 1,000 sq. ft. of leasable area. Mrs. Lafleur ex- plained that the city standard is 5.5 spaces for 1,000 sq. ft. of gross floor area. She added that the dimensions on the parking spaces as shown are smaller than city standards. Mr. Ramos felt that on a larger scale, they would meet the dimensions. Mr. Burgess said it seemed they had squeezed up a foot here and there to get something that almost meets re- quirements. Regarding landscaping, $20,000 is required and Mr. Ramos felt they had a very orderly pattern of planters. Mrs. Lafleur felt they fell $6,000 short and she would also prefer larger (4" caliper) trees. She noted that ash is one of the most intollerant trees to salt. Mr. Ramos said a landscape arch- itect had recommended this tree, but they would be more than happy to meet size and species requirements. Mr. Dickinson then presented their traffic information. Shelburne Rd. is now at level of service "D" and the Swift St. intersection would deteriorate to Level "E". The project adds 150 trip ends. He noted they are trying to relieve congestion in front and move traffic to the rear. He agreed Shelburne Rd. is congested, but said they would not cause a deterioration in present level of service. He disagreed with Mr. Leiner's analysis of the impact on pedestrians at the main entrance and didn't feel there would be more than 50 pedestrians per hour. The state is planning to replace the present signals and there will be a pedestrian phase in the new signals. Mr. Dooley asked what impact the Southern Connector would have. Mr. Dickinson said traffic should de- crease 35-400. Swift Street would then be level "B". Mrs. Maher noted that at an earlier hearing, Ms. Peacock had suggested fitting the T.J. Max store into the existing foot- print. Mr. Ramos said they did consider that, but T.J. Max found it unacceptable as they require a certain number of PLANNING COMMISSION 25 MARCH 1986 PAGE 3 shops to support them. The moving of the bank was then considered. Mrs. Lafleur noted the drive -up window would be on the left side, leaving only 3 or 4 car stacking potential before encroaching on parking. Mr. Ramos noted there will be 2 lanes. He added that the 2-way entrance in front of the present bank location would become only an exit. Mrs. Hurd said she still wants to see a plan that includes the adjacent properties. Mr. Ramos said they now have an agreement to stack snow on another person's property but understand this is not per- missable. He said they would comply with whatever is called for and would remove snow from the site. Mrs. O'Brien said she didn't understand what all the talk about green space was about. She felt the property is always kept neat and clean and there are beautiful flowers in the summer. Mrs. Hurd said she didn't feel you had to expand a site to improve it. Mr. Ramos said it is not economically possible to spend the money for improvement without expansion. He said he thought they had hit on a do -able program by staying within the existing conditions. Mrs. Lafleur noted that the sale for the 5.4 acre parcel in the rear has not gone through yet. Mr. Mehler said they are still negotiating the value with the appraiser. Mr. Dooley then moved that the South Burlington Planning Com- mission deny the revised final plat of Heathcote Associates for the 26,850 sq. ft. addition to the South Burlington Factory Outlet Center for a 2600 sq. ft. mall area and a 24,250 sq. ft. retail store as depicted on a 4-page set of plans entitled "South Burlington Outlet Center", exhibits A through D, prepared �2y the Ramos Group, Kansas City, Missouri, dated March 11, 1986 for the following reasons: 1. The lot coverage does not meet the 70o maximum coverage requirement. 2. There are insufficient parking places, and the Commission does not waive either the number or size of the places. 3. The expansion would result in traffic at the intersection of Shelburne Rd. and Swift St. in excess of requirements. PLANNING COMMISSION 25 MARCH 1986 PAGE 4 4. The bank placement does not allow for sufficient cars at the drive -up windows. 5. The landscaping is insufficient to meet requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. Mrs. Maher seconded the motion which passed unanimousl Mr. Burgess stressed that you do not deal with a bad situation by making it worse. Mr. Dooley added that the Planning Commission doesn't grant waivers with the anticipation that if expansion occurs the waiver stays the same. 3. Consider site plan application of Jude Chicoine for construction of an automatic car wash including four self - wash bays at 408 Shelburne Rd (former Fish Banke Restaurant Mr. Chicoine said his lease with Mr. Farrell for his present location is not being renewed and he hopes to move to this lot. This will be an automatic carwash with 4 self-service bays. One curb cut will be closed and the remaining one will be 30 ft. There will be 3 separate lanes of traffic, one for the automatic (which can stack 26 cars) and 2 for the self- service bays which also stack 26 cars. Sewer and water is already provided by Burlington. Mrs. Maher noted the site permits a maximum of 61 trip ends, and this use would generate 104-106. ITE suggests it may be as high as 132-149. Mr. Dickinson said they analyzed the traffic and felt it was operating at level "C" for this part of Shelburne Rd. He felt the ITE estimates don't take into account the number of bays, etc. Counts at the existing carwash in early March (the highest use month) supported this, they felt. He added that their traffic peaks when Shelburne Rd. traffic is at its lowest. Mrs. Maher noted that the exiting traffic lane for left turns would be at level "E". Mr. Dickinson said this is because of traffic going by, not at the intersection. Mr. Jacob questioned if they had discussed traffic with Burlington as it is their road. Mr. Chicoine met with the traffic engineer who only requested the driveway be 30 feet. Mr. Jacob asked who makes the traffic decision in this case. Mr. Dooley said he didn't see how S. Burlington could fail to apply its standards as it is land use in S. Burlington. He added he had no problem asking Burlington's opinion. Mrs. Maher said she thought it was a bad use for the lot and would be a detriment to both Burlington and S. Burlington. Mr. O'Brien said Mr. Chicoine has been a good neighbor and is being forced to leave through no fault of his own. There has never been an accident at