Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
BATCH - Supplemental - 0540 0640 Shelburne Road
3 y s v = �d l° $ G y"Vo 7 = 57Zv� 1 4&L, A .4 f' �-r { e;p l0 3 312 (7 S-d U Z X f� a Q,� Zd,000 ca l= • 1 95-1;,N2 2 1 N t7 -,F"I11ri 01 l o >l,f03 vG -�� 3 .�? s / City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 PLANNER 658-7955 Mr. Philip Mehler Heathcote Associates 488 Madison A--enue New York, New York 10022 Re: Heathcote Associates, Dear Mr. Mehler: December 5;• 1989 Factory outlet Mall addition ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Condition 7(a) of The Notice of Decision and Statement of Condi- tions for the above referenced project requires that upon con- struction of the addition, the applicar-tt shall deliver to t+e City Planner an "as built" plan showing the interior of the building and identifying all space within the building available for lease. This "as built" plan shall also show the location of Kiosks and temporary retail stands within the common areas as stipulated by condition 7(b). This "as built" plan has not been received in this office. Please submit this plan to fulfill this requirement. ' The Planning Commission has also expressed concern regarding circulation on the site. The Commission feels that more notice- able signage is needed to direct mall customers to the rear parking area. In addition, the Commission is concerned with the large number of vehicles parking in the designated Fire Lane in front of the building. Measures should be taken to discourage this practice. Immediate attention to these issues would be greatly appreciated. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. JW/mcp cc: South Burlington Peter Collins Tim Gallup Doug Fitzpatrick Sincerely, oe Weith, City Planner Planning Commission M E M O R A N D U M To: Peg Picard, City Clerk From: Joe Weith, City Planner Re: Application of Heathcote Associates, Factory Outlet Mall Date: January 3, 1989 City Attorney, Steve Stitzel, has advised that the en- closed Notice of Decision for the aboved referenced matter should be recorded in the land records. MCNEIL, MURRAY & SORRELL, INC. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 271 SOUTH UNION STREET BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05401 TELEPHONE (802) 863-4631 FAX (802) 863-1743 JOSEPH C. McNEIL (1919-1978) JOSEPH E. McNEIL FRANCIS X. MURRAY WILLIAM H.SORRELL JOHN T. LEDDY NANCY GOSS SHEAHAN STEVEN F. STITZEL PATTI R. PAGE* WILLIAM F. ELLIS LINDA R. LEROY (*ALSO ADMITTED IN N.Y.) December 28, 1988 Joe Wieth, Planner South Burlington Offices 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 Re: In Re: Application of Heathcote Associates Dear Joe: OF COUNSEL ARTHUR W.CERNOSIA I have never received a signed copy of the Notice of Decision issued by the Planning Commission in the above - referenced matter. In addition, the original copy should be delivered to the City Clerk for recording in the land records if it has not already been recorded. Very truly yours, Steven F. Stit el SFS/kb 0 MCNEIL, MURRAY & SORRELL, INC. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 271 SOUTH UNION STREET BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05401 TELEPHONE (802) 863-4631 JOSEPH C. McNEIL (1919-1978) JOSEPH E. McNEIL FRANCIS X. MURRAY WILLIAM H. SORRELI. JOHN T. LEDDY NANCY GOSS SHEAHAN STEVEN F. STITZEL PATTI R. PAGE - (ALSO ADMITTED IN N.Y.) October 13, 1988 Joe Wieth, Planner South Burlington Town Offices 575 Dorest Street South Burlington, VT 05403 Re: In re: Applicaton of Heathcote Associates Dear Joe: OF COUNSEL ARTHUR W.CERNOSIA Please find enclosed a revised Notice of Decision and Statement of Conditions regarding the above -referenced case for your review. Very truly yours, even F. Stit el� SFS/kb Enc. R. ALLAN PAUL JOSEPH E. FRANK PETER M. COLLINS JOHN T. SARTORE B. MICHAEL FRYE ANTHONY B. LAMB ALAN D. PORT ROBERT G. CAIN S. CROCKER BENNETT, II ROBERT S. DIPALMA DAV I D A. BAR RA CHARLES F. STORROW STEPHEN J. SOULE JANE HART MARTER PAUL R. BOWLES GAIL E. HAEFNER CHARLES E. FINBERG JOHN T. LAVOIE MICHAEL J. HARRIS EILEEN M. BLACKWOOD JOHN M. GANNON PAU L, FRANK & COLLINS, INC ATTORNEYS AT LAW ONE CHURCH STREET P. O. Box 1 307 BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05402-1 307 TELEPHONE (802) 658-2311 TELECOPIER (802) 658-0042 October 3, 1988 Mr. Joseph Weith South Burlington City Planner 575 Dorset Street South Burlingon, Vermont 05403 WILLIAM J. RYAN OF COUNSEL MONTPELIER OFFICE 94 MAIN STREET P. 0. BOX 967 MONTPELI ER, VT 05602-0967 TELEPHONE 1802) 223-7550 TELECOPIER (802) 223-I 107 RE: Heathcote Associates/South Burlington Factory Outlet Dear Joe: I would appreciate it if you would send me a signed copy of the findings and decision of the South Burlington Planning Commission for my records. Although I was able to note the changes voted on last Tuesday night, I need a copy of the final version. As soon as I receive the signed copy, I will be meeting with my client to review how he wishes to proceed. Very truly yours, PAUL/, FR COLLINS, INC. M. Zollins, Esq. PMC:cab �s I PLANNING COMMISSION CIT Z OF SVV TH UVRLIlVG1VLV IN RE: Application of Heathcote Associates NOTICE OF DECISION AND STATEMENT OF CONDITIONS This matter came before the Planning Commission of the City of South Burlington on the application of Heathcote Associates to expand its Factory Outlet retail facility on Shelburne Road in the City of South Burlington. The South Burlington Planning Commission conducted public hearings on this application on August 30, 1988, September 6, 1988 and September 20, 1988. Heathcote Associates was represented by attorney Peter Collins. Attorney Robert O'Neill appeared on behalf of Thomas Farrell, an adjoining property owner. Based upon the information provided the Planning Commission at the above -stated public hearings, the Planning Commission concludes that if the proposed expansion is constructed and operated in strict accordance with the plans and representations of the Applicant and the conditions imposed by this Commission, it will satisfy the requirements of the applicable City of South Burlington regulations and for such reason is approved. In granting this approval, the Planning Commission is careful to point out that its decision has been strongly influenced by the poor traffic circulation and total lack of landscaping presently existing on the subject site. These unsafe and unsightly conditions are attributable to actions and decisions which pre -date the City's more recent regulations which require land use design that is safe, practical and attractive. In connection with its proposed expansion in this case, Applicant has proposed: 1. to remove existing asphalt and concrete from the site to create new planting areas which will be fully landscaped; 2. to reorganize the existing parking lot to improve traffic circulation, emergency vehicle access and increase available parking space; 3. to upgrade the access between the proposed site and Shelburne Road. The proposed building expansion, if viewed by itself, is an undesirable addition to this site and would warrant denial. However, if coupled with the improvements generally described above and if such improvements are fully and properly constructed and continuously maintained during the life of this project, the net result will be an improvement of this site. This represents a discretionary balancing of considerations by this Planning Commission. In exercising this discretion, the Planning Commission has assumed strict compliance with all terms and conditions of this approval. The Planning Commission has further assumed that any ambiguities will be resolved in favor of an interpretation that would enhance the appearance of this property and 2 alleviate existing unsafe conditions regarding traffic circulation on the site. With these general comments, the Planning Commission imposes the following specific conditions on the construction and operation of this project. 1. Applicant shall construct this project in strict accordance with a plan entitled "Site Layout W/30' Fire Lane, South Burlington Factory Outlet, Shelburne Road, South Burlington, Vermont", prepared by Wiemann- Lamphere, Architects, dated November 18, 1987, last revised September 20, 1988. Parking along the north and south boundaries of the project site shall be constructed in accordance with the alternate layout (parallel parking) shown of this plan. Parking along the western boundary of the site shall be constructed in accordance with the alternate layout creating standard sized parking spaces. While not shown on the above -stated plan, it has been represented and it is understood by the Planning Commission, that the proposed building improvements include the construction of a 4,000 square foot mezzanine which will be located entirely within the exterior walls of the building shown of the above -stated plans. 2. The Applicant shall construct and maintain landscaping improvements as shown on a plan entitled "Landscape Plan, South Burlington Factory Outlet, Shelburne Road, South Burlington, Vermont", prepared by Wiemann-Lamphere, Architects, dated August 29, 1988, last revised September 20, 1988. Where landscaping and planting is to occur within areas presently covered with asphalt or concrete, Applicant shall remove such material, as well as any subbase and install suitable and appropriate soil to support growth of the proposed vegetation. Applicant shall post a $26,000.00 three year landscaping bond prior to issuance of a building permit. The approved landscaping shall be continuously maintained throughout the life of this project. Because of the importance of these landscaping improvements to the approval of this project, failure of the Applicant to comply with this condition shall be full and adequate justification for the City to seek an injunction prohibiting the use of the building improvements authorized hereby. 3. Applicant shall pay $2,978.00 to the Shelburne Road intersection improvement fund prior to the issuance of a building permit. 4. Applicant shall construct concrete curbs in accordance with City standards between all paved areas and all areas to be seeded or mulched as shown on the ","ablove-referenced Site Layout Plan. 5.,i Applicant shall submit a suitable bond in an amount to be determined by the City Engineer for the 4 cost of constructing improvements at the proposed intersection of Shelburne Road and the driveway access for this project prior to issuance of a building permit. As recommended in the "Traffic Systems Management Study", prepared by J.H.K. & Associates, dated June, 1987, the improvements shall include dual left turn lanes out of the Factory Outlet and split phasing for the approaches from both shopping centers. A new controller shall also be installed which is operated in semi -actuated fashion with an overlap of the phasing for the lefts from Route 7. This will permit early release of northbound throughs which are opposed by light southbound lefts. A bond shall be posted for these improvements prior to permit in an amount determined by the City Engineer. The J.H.K. study set the amount for all these improvements at $80,000.00. 6. All parking areas and travel lanes shall be kept free of snow. This approval specifically disallows any snow storage on this site in any parking areas or travel ways. Applicant has represented that it will remove snow to property located southeast of this site. Applicant shall promptly notify the Planning Commission of any change in these plans for snow removal and submit a new plan for snow removal for approval by the Planning Commission. 5 7. If strictly applied in this case, the City Zoning Regulations would require the provision of 721 parking spaces for this project. The Planning Commission has approved this project with the provision of only Ot 1i parking spaces based upon a parking capacity study submitted by the Applicant. This study was based on this site containing no more than 121,000 square feet of gross leasable space. In spite of the information submitted by the Applicant, the Planning Commission continues to have serious concerns about the adequacy of the proposed parking for this project. To address these concerns the Planning Commission will require strict compliance with the following conditions: (a) At no time shall Applicant lease more than 121,000 square feet of space within the principal building constructed on the site. Upon completion of construction of the building improvements, Applicant shall deliver to the City Planner an "as built" plan showing the interior of the building and identifying all space within the building available for lease. If the as built plans for this project identify any space in excess of 121,000 square feet available for lease, the City may seek to enjoin the use of the building addition authorized by this approval until such space is removed. C. (b) This approval specifically disapproves the lease or licensing of any common area space on a permanent or temporary basis. It is the intent of this condition to prohibit the observed practice of allowing the location of Kiosks and temporary - retail stands within the common areas of the VV _ Factory Outlet during certain times of the year. (c) Applicant has disclosed to this Commission that up to 100 parking spaces located on its property are available for use by adjoining properties during ►r`�'" �'2�� designated times. See Condition #3 in Warranty Deed of Thomas A. Farrell to Garden Way Incorporated, dated June 30, 1981, recorded in Volume 175 at Page 42 of the City of South Burlington Land Records. Applicant has provided the Commission information that the use of these parking spaces by adjoining properties will not conflict with the needed use of these spaces by the Factory Outlet facility. Based upon this information, the Planning Commission has determined that these parking spaces are available to meet the increased parking demand created by the proposed addition. If these spaces should cease to be available to the Applicant to meet the parking requirements of this project, the Planning Commission may direct Applicant to take 7 appropriate measures to mitigate this reduction in parking. Such measures may include, but are not limited to, requiring Applicant to hire parking lot attendants to regulate circulation within the parking lot or requiring Applicant to reduce the amount of area under lease within the building. Because this project was approved primarily to obtain the benefit of additional landscaping and improved traffic circulation on site, the measures available for mitigation of this reduction in parking shall not include any reduction in landscaped area or the width of traffic circulation lanes approved in connection with the requested building expansion. (d) Upon expiration of Condition #3 in the above - referenced Warranty Deed from Farrell to Garden Way, Applicant shall not, without the prior approval of the Planning Commission, enter into any agreement or in any way authorize the use of parking spaces within its property for any use other than parking for its own property. The expiration of Condition #3 shall notb deemed or interpreted to create additional parking space available for this project since the parking spaces addressed by Condition #3 have already been included in the required parking for this project. 3 (e) Because of its continuing concern with the adequacy of parking for this site, the Planning Commission will closely monitor parking on the site for three years following the date that the building improvements authorized by this approval are opened to the public. The Planning Commission, with the assistance of the City Planner and the Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission, shall determine the frequency of parking lot utilization counts. Applicant will be responsible for payment of all costs associated with the taking of required parking lot counts. In addition, upon request by the City Planner, the Applicant shall provide the City Planner verifiable records regarding the amount of space under lease on the dates of the required counts. (f) If, during the life of this project, the Planning Commission determines that unreasonable traffic congestion or unsafe traffic conditions are occurring on this site, it may direct Applicant to impose measures to mitigate such conditions. Such measures may include those set forth in subparagraph C above and shall exclude those excluded in subparagraph C above. 8. Applicant has represented to the Planning Commission that the lease with the existing bank shown 01 on the above -referenced Site Layout Plan expires in 1990. Applicant shall not enter into a new lease that provides for the continuation of the existing drive through facility. Upon expiration of the existing lease, Applicant shall remove all pavement and concrete from the drive through lane and the five parking spaces shown to the east of the existing bank building and reclaim such spaces with suitable landscaping. Following expiration of the present lease, the existing bank building shall only be leased for purposes of providing a bank facility. If the existing building is not leased as a bank facility, it will be removed and the underlying area will be reclaimed with landscaping. 9. The traffic analysis for the impact of this project on Shelburne Road assumed the completion of Contract 1 of he Burlington_ Southern Connector Project. Pr le w -rilavcl ^F service on Cl,cbu-r-ia-- �.�`s�•► AL L„ , : 1 d S ng�,. s...m s. ti. a , ,r L. shall issuedd e--construction �-�-�- � �t `/�„� -- C�-1}e�r-i- -- b3�--_ this of the �, rae s _ - --rc �m V Dex,,_L a pr.o fe;until dompletion of ontJract 7of the Re� Burlington Southern Connector Project.i 10. All site improvements, including landscaping,001 ° 1� curbing, access lanes and parking areas, must be fully Cltl// completed before the building improvement authorized by this approval may be opened to the public. 11. Applicant shall submit a final plat in mylar form for final review and approval and signing by the Chairman or Clerk of the Planning Commission and must have said plat recorded within 90 days of the date of this approval or this approval will be null and void. 12. This notice of decision and statement of conditions shall be recorded in the Land Records in the City of South Burlington and shall be binding upon the Applicant and the Applicant's heirs, successors and assigns. Dated at South Burlington, Vermont this _,i day of September, 1988. heathcote.not sfs #2 CHAIRMAN OF PLANNING COMMISSION 11 PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON IN RE: Application of Heathcote Associates NOTICE OF DECISION AND STATEMENT OF CONDITIONS This matter came before the Planning Commission of the City of South Burlington on the application of Heathcote Associates to expand its Factory Outlet retail facility on Shelburne Road in the City of South Burlington. The South Burlington Planning Commission conducted public hearings on this application on August 30, 1988, September 6, 1988 and September 20, 1988. Heathcote Associates was represented by attorney Peter Collins. Attorney Robert O'Neill appeared on behalf of Thomas Farrell, an adjoining property owner. Based upon the information provided the Planning Commission at the above -stated public hearings, the Planning Commission concludes that if the proposed expansion is constructed and operated in strict accordance with the plans and representations of the Applicant and the conditions imposed by this Commission, it will satisfy the requirements of the applicable City of South Burlington regulations and for such reason is approved. In granting this approval, the Planning Commission is careful to point out that its decision has been strongly influenced by the poor traffic circulation and total lack of landscaping presently existing on the subject site. These unsafe and unsightly conditions are attributable to actions and decisions which pre -date the City's more recent regulations which require land use design that is safe, practical and attractive. In connection with its proposed expansion in this case, Applicant has proposed: 1. to remove existing asphalt and concrete from the site to create new planting areas which will be fully landscaped; 2. to reorganize the existing parking lot to improve traffic circulation, emergency vehicle access and increase available parking space; 3. to upgrade the access between the proposed site and Shelburne Road. The proposed building expansion, if viewed by itself, is an undesirable addition to this site and would warrant denial. However, if coupled with the improvements generally described above and if such improvements are fully and properly constructed and continuously maintained during the life of this project, the net result will be an improvement of this site. This represents a discretionary balancing of considerations by this Planning Commission. In exercising this discretion, the Planning Commission has assumed strict compliance with all terms and conditions of this approval. The Planning Commission has further assumed that any ambiguities will be resolved in favor of an interpretation that would enhance the appearance of this property and 2 alleviate existing unsafe conditions regarding traffic circulation on the site. With these general comments, the Planning Commission imposes the following specific conditions on the construction and operation of this project. 1. Applicant shall construct this project in strict accordance with a plan entitled "Site Layout W/30' Fire Lane, South Burlington Factory Outlet, Shelburne Road, South Burlington, Vermont", prepared by Wiemann- Lamphere, Architects, dated November 18, 19871 last revised September 20, 1988. Parking along the north and south boundaries of the project site shall be constructed in accordance with the alternate layout (parallel parking) shown of this plan. Parking along the western boundary of the site shall be constructed in accordance with the alternate layout creating standard sized parking spaces. While not shown on the above -stated plan, it has been represented and it is understood by the Planning Commission, that the proposed building improvements include the construction of a 4,000 square foot mezzanine which will be located entirely within the exterior walls of the building shown of the above -stated plans. 2. The Applicant shall construct and maintain landscaping improvements as shown on a plan entitled "Landscape Plan, South Burlington Factory Outlet, 3 Shelburne Road, South Burlington, Vermont", prepared by Wiemann-Lamphere, Architects, dated August 29, 1988, last revised September 20, 1988. Where landscaping and planting is to occur within areas presently covered with asphalt or concrete, Applicant shall remove such material, as well as any subbase and install suitable and appropriate soil to support growth of the proposed vegetation. Applicant shall post a $26,000.00 three year landscaping bond prior to issuance of a building permit. The approved landscaping shall be continuously maintained throughout the life of this project. Because of the importance of these landscaping improvements to the approval of this project, failure of the Applicant to comply with this condition shall be full and adequate justification for the City to seek an injunction prohibiting the use of the building improvements authorized hereby. 3. Applicant shall pay $2,978.00 to the Shelburne Road intersection improvement fund prior to the issuance of a building permit. 4. Applicant shall construct concrete curbs in accordance with City standards between all paved areas and all areas to be seeded or mulched as shown on the above -referenced Site Layout Plan. 5. Applicant shall submit a suitable bond in an amount to be determined by the City Engineer for the 4 cost of constructing improvements at the proposed intersection of Shelburne Road and the driveway access for this project prior to issuance of a building permit. As recommended in the "Traffic Systems Management Study", prepared by J.H.K. & Associates, dated June, 1987, the improvements shall include dual left turn lanes out of the Factory Outlet and split phasing for the approaches from both shopping centers. A new controller shall also be installed which is operated in semi -actuated fashion with an overlap of the phasing for the lefts from Route 7. This will permit early release of northbound throughs which are opposed by light southbound lefts. A bond shall be posted for these improvements prior to permit in an amount determined by the City Engineer. The J.H.K. study set the amount for all these improvements at $80,000.00. 6. All parking areas and travel lanes shall be kept free of snow. This approval specifically disallows any snow storage on this site in any parking areas or travel ways. Applicant has represented that it will remove snow to property located southeast of this site. Applicant shall promptly notify the Planning Commission of any change in these plans for snow removal and submit a new plan for snow removal for approval by the Planning Commission. 5 7. If strictly applied in this case, the City Zoning I29 Regulations would require the provision of 7.2J3- parking spaces for this project. The Planning Commission has approved this project with the provision of only „61C'46/9 parking spaces based upon a parking capacity study submitted by the Applicant. This study was based on this site containing no more than 121,000 square feet of gross leasable space. In spite of the information submitted by the Applicant, the Planning Commission continues to have serious concerns about the adequacy of the proposed parking for this project. To address these concerns the Planning Commission will require strict compliance with the following conditions: (a) At no time shall Applicant lease more than 121,000 square feet of space within the principal building constructed on the site. Upon completion of construction of the building improvements, Applicant shall deliver to the City Planner an "as built" plan showing the interior of the building and identifying all space within the building available for lease. If the as built plans for this project identify any space in excess of 121,000 square feet available for lease, the City may seek to enjoin the use of the building addition authorized by this approval until such space is removed. 0 (b) This approval specifically disapproves the lease or licensing of any common area space on a permanent or temporary basis. It is the intent of this condition to prohibit the observed practice of allowing the location of Kiosks and temporary retail stands within the common areas of the Factory Outlet during certain times of the year. n (c) Applicant has disclosed to this Commission that up U!' to 100 parking spaces located on its property are available for use by adjoining properties during designated times. See Condition #3 in Warranty Deed of Thomas A. Farrell to Garden Way Incorporated, dated June 30, 1981, recorded in Volume 175 at Page 42 of the City of South Burlington Land Records. Applicant has provided the Commission information that the use of these parking spaces by adjoining properties will not conflict with the needed use of these spaces by the Factory Outlet facility. Based upon this information, the Planning Commission has determined that these parking spaces are available to meet the increased parking demand created by the proposed addition. If these spaces should cease to be available to the Applicant to meet the parking requirements of this project, the Planning Commission may direct Applicant to take 7 appropriate measures to mitigate this reduction in parking. Such measures may include, but are not limited to, requiring Applicant to hire parking lot attendants to regulate circulation within the parking lot or requiring Applicant to reduce the amount of area under lease within the building. Because this project was approved primarily to obtain the benefit of additional landscaping and improved traffic circulation on site, the measures available for mitigation of this reduction in parking shall not include any reduction in landscaped area or the width of traffic circulation lanes approved in connection with the requested building expansion. (d) Upon expiration of Condition #3 in the above - referenced Warranty Deed from Farrell to Garden Way, Applicant shall not, without the prior approval of the Planning Commission, enter into any agreement or in any way authorize the use of parking spaces within its property for any use other than parking for its own property. The expiration of Condition #3 shall not deemed or interpreted to create additional parking space available for this project since the parking spaces addressed by Condition #3 have already been included in the required parking for this project. (e) Because of its continuing concern with the adequacy of parking for this site, the Planning Commission will closely monitor parking on the site for three years following the date that the building improvements authorized by this approval are opened to the public. The Planning Commission, with the assistance of the City Planner and the Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission, shall determine the frequency of parking lot utilization counts. Applicant will be responsible for payment of all costs associated with the taking of required parking lot counts. In addition, upon request by the City Planner, the Applicant shall provide the City Planner verifiable records regarding the amount of space under lease on the dates of the required counts. (f) If, during the life of this project, the Planning Commission determines that unreasonable traffic congestion or unsafe traffic conditions are occurring on this site, it may direct Applicant to impose measures to mitigate such conditions. such measures may include those set forth in subparagraph C above and shall exclude those excluded in subparagraph C above. 8. Applicant has represented to the Planning Commission that the lease with the existing bank shown X y on the above -referenced Site Layout Plan expires in y a 1990. Applicant shall not enter into a new lease that provides for the continuation of the existing drive through facility. Upon expiration of the existing A h& lease, Applicant shall remove all pavement and concrete from the drive through lane and #�ivs' paces shown to -east -of t-he existing, ba and reclaim such spaces with suitable landscaping. Following expiration of the present lease, the existing eo bank building shall only be leased for purposes of providing a bank facility. If the existing building is not leased as a bank facility, it will be removed and 0 the underlying area will be reclaimed with landscaping. 9. The traffic analysis for the impact of this project on Shelburne Road assumed the completion of Contract 1 of the Burlington Southern Connector Project. The improvements within the scope of such project are necessary for the maintenance of acceptable levels of service on Shelburne Road. For this reason, _no building permit shall b --sued uction -.of the_.—bu.ihdi-ng -------giuthn~izec -by this approval;t until completion of Contract 1 of the Burlington Southern Connector Project. 10. All site improvements, including landscaping, / curbing, access lanes and parking areas, must be fully completed before the building improvement authorized by �m 10 this approval may be opened to the public. 11. Applicant shall submit a final plat in mylar form for final review and approval and signing by the Chairman or Clerk of the Planning Commission and must have said plat recorded within 90 days of the date of this approval or this approval will be null and void. 12. This notice of decision and statement of conditions shall be recorded in the Land Records in the City of South Burlington and shall be binding upon the Applicant and the Applicant's heirs, successors and assigns. Dated at South Burlington, Vermont this day of September, 1988. heathcote.not sfs #k2 CHAIRMAN OF PLANNING COMMISSION 11 R. ALLAN PAUL PAUL, FRANK & COLLINS, INC JOSEPH E. FRANK ATTORNEYS AT LAW PETER M. COLLINS JOHN TORE ONE CHURCH STREET B. MICHAEL ICHAEL FRYE ANTHONY B. LAMB P. O. BOX 1 307 ALAN D. PORT G. BURLINGTON VERMONT 05402-13O7 S. CRO KER BE S. CROCKER BENNETT, II , ROBERT S. DIPALMA TELEPHONE (802) 658-231 1 DAVID A. BARRA TELECOPIER (802) 658-0042 CHARLES F. STORROW STEPHEN J. SOULE JANE HART MARTER MICHAEL I. GREEN JOHN J. COLLINS PAUL R. BOWLES GAIL E. HAEFNER September 23, 1988 CHARLES E. FINBERG MATTHEW C. SUSMAN JOHN T. LAVOIE MARK A. SINCLAIR MICHAEL J. HARRIS EI LEEN M. BLACKWOOD Mr. Joseph Weith City Planner South Burlington Municipal Office Dorset Street South Burlington, Vermont 05403 WILLIAM J. RYAN OF COUNSEL MONTPELIER OFFICE 94 MAIN STREET P. 0. BOX 967 MONTPELIER, VT 05602-0967 TELEPHONE (802) 223-7550 RE: Heathcote Associates/South Burlington Factory Outlet Dear Joe: I just wanted to confirm in writing my client's position in connection with conditions imposed upon the project. After the City of South Burlington allowed University Mall to not only proceed with construction, but to open for business before the improvements to Dorset Street had even been started, it seems unfair and discriminatory to impose that condition upon my client. It appears especially onerous considering the fact that a substantial portion of the improvements to Shelburne Road have already been completed and the impact of my client's addition on traffic is miniscule compared to that created by University Mall. I would hope that the planning commission would reconsider that particular condition before next Tuesday. Cordially yours, PAULZACOLLINS, INC. Pete' Esq. PMC:cab cc Steve Stitzel, Esq. McNeil, Murray & Sorrell Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission 66 PEARL STREET P.O. BOX 108 ESSEX JUNCTION, VERMONT 05452 802 658-3004 November 1.8, 1987 Jane Lafleur, City Planner City of South Burlington 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, Vermont 05403 Dear Jane, I have reviewed the traffic analysis prepared for the proposed expansion of the South Burlington Factory Outlet, and have the following comments; 1. Level of service under existing (that is, 1986) PM. conditions at Shelburne Road/Sears/Factory Outlet is "E" with 46 seconds of delay; and at Shelburne Road/Home Avenue/O'dell Parkway, PM, level of service is "D" with 32 seconds of delay. 2. The consultant's traffic projections for 1990 are consistent with those in the TSM study done for CCRPC by JHK & Associates. 3. The signal equipment at the Sears/Factory Outlet intersection is to be upgraded by the VT Agency of Transportation. However, physical improvements are necessary at this location to achieve an accpetable level of service. The consultant has identified three actions that will improve conditions: a) Develop and implement a new signal phasing plan; b) Increase capacity by adding a second left turn lane for traffic exiting the Factory Outlet; and c) Remove the existing islands. I agree that these actions are necessary, and will improve traffic operations sufficiently to handle increased traffic from the proposed expan- sion. Specifically, the above actions should improve PM. level of service at Sears/Factory Outlet to "C" and at Home Avenue/O'dell Parkway to "B". More- over, these actions would implement recommendations presented in the TSM study. I suggest that these improvements be constructed by the applicant, at their expense, and that the improvements be coordinated with the expansion (if approved) so that the improvements are in place at the time the additional space is open for business. 20 Years of Service to the Municipalities of ... Bolton Burlington Charlotte Colchester Essex Junction Essex Town Hinesburg Huntington Jericho Milton Richmond St. George Shelburne So. Burlington Underhill Westford Williston Winooski Jane Lafleur, City Planner November 18, 1987 Page 2 If you have any questions, please call. Sincerely, CRAIG T, LEINER TRANSPORTATION ENGINEER CTL/cm PLANNING COMMISSION 25 FEBRUARY 1986 PAGE 3 4. The buildinq permit shall be otained within 6 months. Mr. Jacob seconded, and the motion passed unanimously. 3. Consider sketch plan application of Heathcote Assoc. for construction of a 27,600 sq. ft. addition for retail sales and relocation of bank facility at the Factory Outlet Mall, Shelburne Rd. Mr. Mehler said retail space would be 25,000 sq. ft. Part of the plan is to relocate the Chittenden Bank unit to make the site less congested. Mrs. Lafleur said she is not pleased with the new location of the bank as she felt it would disrupt traffic circulation patterns. Mr. Mehler said that at present rear parking is underutilized and the rear of the mall is dead space from a retail point of view. The proposed T.J. Maxx store would be a needed anchor to attract shoppers to the rear of the site. They have also exercised their option and will get 1/2 acre more parking if the Southern Connector is built. They will also do more landscaping. Mr. Burgess said he is concerned with traffic and parking in adjacent properties. Mrs. Hurd agreed and added this is already a dangerous lot with narrow aisles, and she would not like to see the bank up front. Mr. Burgess felt that by its visibility it might draw more traffic, but he wasn't too concerned especially as there is a curb between the bank and Odell Parkway. Mr. Jacob felt T.J. Maxx would draw cars to the rear of the lot and would help the problem. Mr. Dooley felt he would have to know where the drive-in window was to be located before making a judgment. Members then considered the lot coverage issue. Coverage is now 93% and would probably go up to 94%. Mrs. Hurd felt they should do something to bring down the coverage. Ms. Peacock agreed. Regarding parking, Mr. Mehler noted they now require 5.5 and have provision for 6. By utilizing the compact car sapces where the bank now is, and realigning some spaces, they would be short about 16 spaces or 2%. With the plan utilizing the additional 1/2 acre, they would be short only 6 spaces, or less than 1%. All rear parking spaces belong to the Factory Outlet Mall. Mr. Mehler added they would be willing to con- sider curbing the area in front of the stores for safety and will redo existing islands. A plan will be submitted. They are also aware of the traffic study to be conducted and have hired Roger Dickinson to do it. Mrs. Lafleur said Craig Leiner has already been informed of this. Mrs. Lafleur will calculate total lot coverage, width of aisles & spaces, and PLANNING COMMISSION 25 FEBRUARY 1986 PAGE 4 will also provide percentage of compact car spaces at University Mall, Mrs. Maher advised the applicant that on their plans they should show everything in relation to adjacent properties. Mrs. Lafleur reminded the Commission that with a P.C.D. they have the right to look beyond the boundaries of the property under consideration. 4. Consider revised sketch plan application of Mery Brown for a P.U.D. of 100-acres into 121 single family lots and a 25- acre industrial lot located on the Vermont Structural Steel property on Hinesburg Rd. Mr. Jacob stepped down during this discussion due to a conflict of interest. Lance Llewellyn present 2 revised configurations for the proposed development. Both would leave the Industrial area alone. Access would be off Hinesburg Rd. with 2 accesses to Burler Farms and one to the Economou property. Plan 1 would have a total of 11.56 open space acres (6.16 in the northwest corner, 2.03 abutting the Dubois property, and 3.37 as a Hinesburg Rd. buffer). The state would get as agricultural land the 15 acres of Industrial Zone and 10 acres of the residential lot. Mrs. Lafleur said she was concerned about getting swampy land for open space and suggested that a piece of the 10-acre ag land be dedicated to the city for passive recreation use only. This is the second proposed plan under which the city gets 8.98 acres. It was noted that with a transfer of development rights, the ag lands could be de- veloped in the future, but the portion dedicated to the city could not. Mrs. Lafleur said the Commission should know up front what restrictions would be put on the dedicated land. Mrs. Maher said she would like to know how the wet areas would be drained so they would be usable. Mrs. Lafleur said Bruce O'Neill should be consulted as to what use would be best for that land. She also questioned whether lots that have the drainageway going through them are buildable. She is concerned about the setback from the drainageway. Mr. Szymansky should be the final judge of this. The concensus of the Commission was a preference for the second alternative. 5. Sign resolution to validate the subdivision approvals and final plats for the 2-lot subdivision of the Tilley Farm, 700 Hinesburg Rd. Mrs. Lafleur advised that the resolution was needed because the mylar was signed after the date of filing. MCNEIL, MURRAY & SORRELL, INC. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 271 SOUTH UNION STREET BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05401 TELEPHONE (802) 863-4531 JOSEPH C. McNEIL (1919-1978) JOSEPH E. McNEIL FRANCIS X. MURRAY WILLIAM H.SORRELL JOHN T. LEDDY NANCY GOSSSHEA14AN PATTI R. PAGE - (*ALSO ADMITTED IN N.Y.) August 5, 1988 Peter Collins, Esq. Paul, Frank & Collins 1 Church Street P.O. Box 1307 Burlington, Vermont 05402 Re: Heathcote Associates Dear Peter: OF COUNSEL ARTHUR W. CERNOSIA I am writing to identify the documents and witnesses the City will rely upon if this matter proceeds to trial on September 2nd, 1988. The principle documents are as follows: 1. Parking Generation, An Interim Report, prepared by Institute of Transportation Engineers (1985). 2. Parking Generation, 2nd Edition, prepared by Institute of Transportation Engineers (1987). 3. Chittenden County Survey of Municipal Parking Standards, 1st Edition, prepared by Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission (September, 1987). 4. Zoning Parking and Traffic, a publication prepared by the ENO Foundation For Transportation (1972). 5. Parking Requirements For Shopping Center: Summary Recommendations and Research Study Report, prepared by Urban Land Institute (1982). I believe Joe Oppenlander should be familiar with all these publications. The City's principle witnesses will be Joe Weith, City Planner for South Burlington, and Dr. Michael Munson, Planning Consultant to the City. In addition, it may be necessary to call Peter Collins, Esq. August 5, 1988 Page 2 Jane LeFleur, former City Planner for the City of South Burlington, because of her background with this case. I will be on vacation during the week of August 8, returning August 15. I will gladly allow you or Joe Oppenlander to review the publications cited above at my office at that time, assuming Joe doesn't already have these publications. I will also cooperate with you in scheduling any deposition you deem necessary. Very truly yours, 4 Steven F. Stit SFS/slb cc: Joe Weith, Collins.ltr/SFS#2 PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON IN RE: Application of Heathcote Associates NOTICE OF DECISION This matter came before the Planning Commission of the City of South Burlington on the application of Heathcote Associates to expand its Factory Outlet retail facility on Shelburne Road in the City of South Burlington. The South Burlington Planning Commission conducted public hearings on this application on August 30, 1988, September 6, 1988 and September 20, 1988. Heathcote Associates was represented by attorney Peter Collins. Attorney Robert O'Neill appeared on behalf of Thomas Farrell, an adjoining property owne'rt- Based upon the information provided the Planning Commission at the above -stated public hearings, the Planning Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: FINDINGS General Findings 1. Heathcote Associates (hereinafter referred to as "Applicant") presently owns a lot containing 428,200 square feet on the easterly side of Shelburne Road in the City of South Burlington. This parcel is the site of a Factory Outlet shopping facility operated by Applicant. 2. At the present time, Heathcote Associates maintains a building containing 117,000 square feet of gross floor area on the above -referenced lot. This building 0 contains 104/� square feet of gross leasable floor area. 3. Heathcote Associates has requested approval to expand its present building in accordance with a plan entitled "South Burlington Factory Outlet Shelburne Road, South Burlington, Vermont," prepared by Wiemann-Lamphere Architects, dated November 18, 1987 and last revised July 5, 1988. 4. The building addition requested by Heathcote Associates will increase the first floor area of the building to a total of 128,460 square feet and add a second -4- '9(go � floor mezzanine of square feet. These changes will increase the gross floor area of the building to 131,460 square feet and the gross leasable area of the building to 121,000 square feet. Findings Regarding Parking 5. The parking lot surrounding the Factory Outlet building described above presently contains 531 marked parking spaces. 6. Heathcote retained Mr. Joseph Oppenlander to conduct a parking study at the Factory Outlet facility in February of 1988. The study, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit A, showed peak parking demand for this facility as follows: 2 a. Friday, February 19, 1988 at 16:00 hours - 259 cars. b. Saturday, February 20, 1988 at 14:00 hours - 326 cars. 7. On the days this parking study was conducted, approximately 10% of available leasable space at the Factory Outlet facility was not leased so that the total occupied gross leasable area was 93,600 square feet. 8. Based upon the occupied gross leasable area, the peak parking ratio for the facility based upon number of cars per 1,000 square feet of gross leasable area was as follows: a. Friday, February 19, 1988 at 16:00 hours - 2.76. b. Saturday, February 20, 1988 at 14:00 hours - 3.48. 9. Based upon a parking study conducted at a shopping mall in Rutland, Vermont, Mr. Oppenlander determined that peak parking rates in February should be adjusted by a factor of approximately of 1.27 to reflect peak parking rates during the December shopping period. Based upon this adjustment, Mr. Oppenlander calculated required parking demand for the Heathcote Factory Outlet facility as follows: a. During a Friday in December at 16:00 hours - 318 spaces. b. During a Saturday in December at 14:00 hours - 415 spaces. 3 10. Based upon Mr. Oppenlander's calculated peak parking demand, the peak parking ratios for the Heathcote facility based on 93,600 square feet of occupied gross leasable area are as follows: a. On a Friday in December at 16:00 hours - 3.39. b. On a Saturday in December at 14:00 hours - 4.43. 11. Based upon a parking ratio of 4.43 spaces per 1,000 square feet of gross leasable area, the shopping facility requested by Heathcote (121,000 square feet of gross leasable area) will require 536 parking spaces to accommodate calculated peak parking demand. 12. There are 50 parking spaces located on the Heathcote property or on adjoining property which are reserved for the use of the Club New England and the WCAX Television facility during weekday business hours prior to 6:00 p.m. There are 100 parking spaces located on the Heathcote property or on adjoining property which are reserved for the use of the Club New England and the WCAX Television facility during the evening hours, on weekends and on Holidays. 13. Thomas Farrell contends that all of the above - referenced parking spaces are located on the Heathcote property. Heathcote acknowledges that all such spaces may be located on its property but also contends that some spaces may be located on adjoining property. 14. The Club New England is a restaurant, bar/lounge 4 which operates during the evening hours. For this reason, the parking requirements for this facility do not routinely coincide with the peak parking requirements for the Heathcote facility. 15. During the November/December Holiday period, the Club New England is the site of frequent afternoon Holiday parties. For this reason, the parking demand created by the Club New England does conflict with peak parking demands that will be created by the expanded Heathcote facility. 16. As part of its proposal to expand its retail facility, Heathcote proposes to increase the number of parking spaces in its parking lot from the present number of 531 to a total of 642, 93 of which spaces will be compact car spaces as such are defined in the South Burlington Zoning Regulations. Findincfs Regarding Coverage 17. Applicant states that with the present building and paved area on its existing lot, a total of 98% of the lot is "covered" within the meaning of the South Burlington Zoning Regulations. 18. Applicant contends that it can construct the addition to its building and provide the additional parking but still reduce total lot coverage to 90.9%. 19. The proposed building addition will cover an area of 11,460 square feet. 5 20. The addition of 111 parking spaces (assuming 93 of these spaces are compact car spaces and 18 of these spaces are regular car spaces) will cover an area totalling 15,959 square feet. 21. Additional required travelway to accommodate the 111 additional parking spaces will cover additional area although the amount of such additional area could vary greatly depending on the particular parking lot layout. Such coverage would be at a minimum 1,000 square feet and could possible be as much as 10,890 square feet. 22. The total additional coverage attributable to the proposed new building, parking and travelway could range from 98,419 square feet (based on 1,000 square feet of additional travel way) to 38,309 square feet (based on 10,000 square feet of additional travel way). 23. The additional lot coverage mentioned above ranges from % to % of the total lot area. CONCLUSIONS 24. Section 19.252 and Table I of the City of South Burlington Zoning Regulations impose a requirement of 5.5 parking spaces for each 1,000 square feet of gross floor area located in a shopping center. Under Section 19.256(b) the Planning Commission may reduce the required amount of parking by as much as 500 "if it determines that overlapping use of parking spaces or other unique characteristics causes 0 the requirement to be unnecessarily stringent." 25. The Heathcote property is located in the commercial one district which contains a requirement that maximum lot coverage for buildings, parking and outside storage shall not exceed 70% of total lot area. In this district building coverage shall not exceed 30% of total lot coverage. 26. The proposed expansion of the existing building satisfies the 30% total building coverage requirement. 27. The Zoning Regulations require a minimum of 643 total parking spaces for the existing building and a total of 723 for the proposed expansion. 28. Based upon 531 existing parking spaces, the existing facility lacks 17.4% of its required parking. If the building expansion is approved and parking is not increased beyond 531 existing spaces, the expanded building will lack 26.6% of its required parking. 29. If the proposed expansion is approved an applicant creates the additional parking shown in the proposed plan (642 spaces), the shopping facility will lack 11.2% of its required parking. Dated at South Burlington, Vermont this day of , 1988. heathcote.not sfs #2 7 From: M E M O R A N D U M crested Parties �. Jane B. Lafleur, City Planner,�� Re: Notice of Heathcote Associates Appeal Date: December 31, 1987 Enclosed is a copy of a Notice of Appeal from the denial motion of the South Burlington Planning Commission regarding the Heathcote Associates addition (Factory Outlet Mall) at 540-640 Shelburne Road. As an interested party who attended this hearing, we are required to send ,you notice of this appeal. cc: William Schroeder James Lamphere Dennis Webster John Ponsetto Herman Thomas Roger Dickinson STATE OF VERMONT CHITTENDEN COUNTY, SS. IN RE: HEATHCOTE ASSOCIATES ) Chittenden Superior Court Docket No. NOTICE OF APPEAL FROM DECISION OF CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON PLANNING COMMISSION Now comes Heathcote Associates, an "interested person" as defined by 24 V.S.A. §4464, and in accordance with 24 V.S.A. §§4471, 4472 and 4475, appeals the decision of the City of South Burlington Planning Commission on December 8, 1987 in which said Planning Commission denied the final plan of Heathcote Associates for construction of an addition to the South Burlington Factory Outlet at 540-640 Shelburne Road. Appellant is entitled to a de novo trial in a superior court pursuant to 24 V.S.A. §4472. This notice of appeal is being served upon both the Clerk and the Chairman of the City of South Burlington Planning Commission as appropriate officers under V.R.C.P. 74. Either the Clerk or the Chairman of the South Burlington Planning Commission is hereby instructed to serve notice upon all interested parties and to forthwith transmit a copy of this notice of appeal directly to the Clerk of the Chittenden Superior Court in accordance with the rules. Appellant stipulates that no transcript is required for this appeal. The record on appeal shall include any plans or other documents or letters filed with the City of South Burlington Planning Commission by the Appellant. Attached to this notice of appeal is a check payable to the Chittenden Superior Court in the amount of $35.00 as the filing fee. The Clerk or Chairman of the City of South Burlington Planning Commission is directed to send this check to the Clerk of the Chittenden Superior Court together with this notice of appeal. Dated at Burlington, Vermont, this 30th day of December, 1987. 60:PMC3 HEATHCOTE ASSOCIATES By: ;eteAr FRANK COLLINS, INC. By. M. Collins, Esq. -2- R. ALLAN PAUL PAUL, FRANK & COLLINS, INC EPH E. FRANK ATTORN EYS AT LAW PETER M. COLLINS PET E ONE CHURCH STREET B. MI CH EL FRY B. MICHAEL FRYE ANTHONY B. LAMB P. O. BOX 1307 ALAN D. PORT G. BURLINGTON VERMONT 05402-I 307 S. CRO ROCKER BE S. CROCKER BENNETT, II , ROBERT S. DIPALMA TELEPHONE (802) 6S8-2311 DAVID A. BARRA TELECOPIER (802) 6SB-0042 C HARLES F. STORROW W ILLIAM E. ROPER ST EPHEN .�. SOULE JANE HART MARTER MICHAEL I. GREEN JOHN J. COLLINS December 30, 1987 PAUL R. BOWLES GAIL E. HAEFNER CHARLES E. FINBERG MATTHEW C. SUSMAN JOHN T. LAVOIE MARK A. SINCLAIR Mr. Peter L. Jacob, Chairman South Burlington Planning Commission South Burlington City Hall 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 RE: Notice of Appeal by Heathcote Associates Dear Mr. Jacob: WILLIAM J. RYAN OF COUNSEL MONTPELIER OFFICE 94 MAIN STREET P. O. BOX 967 MONTPELIER, VT 05602-0967 TELEPHONE (802) 223-7S50 In accordance with 24 V.S.A. Sections 4471, et seq., 4472 and 4475, and V.R.C.P. 74, I hereby serve upon you an original and ten copies of our notice of appeal to the Chittenden Superior Court. I have also enclosed our check in the amount of $35.00 payable to the Chittenden Superior Court. Under the Vermont Rules of Civil Procedure, you are instructed to forthwith transmit a copy of this notice of appeal together with the check for $35.00 to the Clerk of the Chittenden Superior Court. You are further instructed to send copies of the notice of appeal to every interested person appearing and having been heard at the hearing. In addition, you should instruct the Clerk of the Planning Commission to transmit the record on appeal to the Clerk of the Chittenden Superior Court forthwith. I am sending a copy of this letter and notice of appeal to the Clerk of the Planning Commission and to Attorney Steven Stitzel who, I understand, represents the City of South Burlington. Sincerely yours, PAUL, A & C LINS, INC. PMC/mb et C s Enclosures cc: Clerk, South Burlington Planning Commission Steven F. Stitzel, Esq. 61:PMC3 PARCEL A A certain piece or parcel of land in the City of South Burlington, County o: Chittenden and State of Vermont, with the buildings and improvements thereon and appurtenances thereto located on the easterly side of Shelburne Street and more particularly bounded and described as follows, vi:: Beginning at an iron pin in the easterly line of Shelburne Street, which pin is located 683.6 feet, more or less, southerly of the intersection of the easterly line of Shelburne Street and the southerly line of Hadley Street, and which pin marks the northwesterly corner of the herein -described premises; thence proceeding S 720 28' 10" E a distance of S00.00 feet to an iron pin marking the northeasterly corner of the herein -described premises; thence turning to the right and proceeding S 170 31' 50" 11 a distance of 703.37 feet to an iron pin marking the southeasterly corner of the herein -described premises; thence turning to the right and proceeding in a southwesterly, westerly and northwesterly direction along an existing fence line, a distance in all of 546.60 feet, more or less, to a steel fence post marking - the southwesterly corner of the herein -described premises; thence turning to the right and proceeding N 170 31' 50" E, along the easterly line of Shelburne Street, a distance of 637.82 feet to the point and place or beginning. Included in this conveyance are all slope, fill and any other rights held by the Grantor by virtue of Warranty Deed of Thomas A. Farrell dated December 29, 1959, and recorded in the South Burlington Land Records in Volume SO at Page 463. Said prenuses contain 8.35 acres and are shown and depicted as "Parcel 11" on a certain map or plan entitled "Plat of Survey for Seaway Shopping Center Corporation and Thomas A. Farrell" prepared by John A. Marsh, dated June 4, 1931, and recorded or to be recorded in the South Burlington Land Records, to which reference is made. PARCEL B A certain piece or parcel of land in the City of South Burlington, County of Chittenden and State of Vermont, with the buildings and improvements thereon and appurtenances thereto located on the easterly side of Shelburne Street and more particularly bounded and described as follows, viz: Beginning at an iron pin marking a point in the southern boundary of a 60-foot.-wide right-of-way and private road now or formerly known as Market Square or Odell Parkway, said point being located 500 feet easterly of the eastern line of Shelburne Street, thence S 170 .31' SO" W a distance of 367.50 feet to a point marked by an iron pin, thence S 720 28' 10" E a distance of 182.00 feet to a point Marked by an iron pin, thence N 170 31' SO" E a distance of 310.06 feet to a point marked by an iron pin, thence generally westerly along the southern line of said 60-coot-wide right-of-way and private road, as follows, proceeding in a carve to the right having a radius of 234.43 feet an arc distance of 91.94 feet to a point marked by an iron pin, thence in a curve to the left having a radius of 136.62 feet and arc distance of 100.85 feet to the iron pin marking the point of beginning. ' Sald piece or parcel of land contains 1.44 acres, more or less, and is shown and depicted as "Parcel 2A" on a map or plan entitled "Seaway Shopping Center - Topographic Survey" prepared by Fred C. Koerner, C.E., dated July 1981 and revised April 1982 and recorded or to be recorded in South Burlington Lard Records, to which reference is hereby made. PARCEh C E A perpetual easement and other rights granted by Indenture between Farrell Corporation and Thomas A. Farrell, Grantors, and Garden Way Incorporated, Grantee, dated June 30, 1981 and recorded in Volume 168, Page 522 of the South Burlington Land Records, as more specifically defined and modified by Agreement and Addendum to Indenture, dated August 2, 1982 and recorded in Volume 186, Page 112 of said Land Records. FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED Engineering and Planning Services One Wentworth Drive • Williston • Vermont • 05495 • (802) 878-3000 27 November 1989 Mr. Joe Weith, Planner City of South Burlington 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, Vermont 05403 RE: Heathcote Associates/Factory Outlet FILE: 88173 Dear Mr. Weith: On behalf of our Client, Heathcote Associates, we are herewith enclosing recordable mylars of the (revised) Final Plat for recording. The Planning Commission, on 29 August 1989, approved modifications to the previously -approved plan(s) and stipulated that a "new" Final Plat be recorded showing the revised parking layout (Alternate #1), along with the termination of the new water line at the Farrell property line, and the revised landscaping to correlate with the new layout. The revised Final Plat showing the "modified" landscaping plan, by Wiemann-Lamphere Architects, is also enclosed for recording. We greatly appreciate all your assistance and advice while reviewing these plans; it made a difficult job much easier. Please bill Mr. Mehler, at 488 Madison Avenue, 17th Floor, New York, N.Y. 10022, directly for the recording fees. Should you have any questions, please don't hesistate to call us. Sincerely, FITZP TRICK-LL< ELLYN INCORPORATED Douglas R. Fitz atrick, P.E. cc Philip Mehler Wiemann-Lamphere Architects Design • Inspection 0 Studies • Permitting • Surveying 1) Name of Applicant CITY OF SOU111 BUltIAW'IUN Subdivision Application - FINAL PLAT (REVISED) Heathcote Associates 2) Name of Sulxli.vision Factory Outlet 3) Indicate any changes to name, address, or phone nu,iJ)er of owner of record, applicant, contact person, engineer, surveyor,- attorney or plat designer since preliminary plat application:' N.A. 4) Indicate any changes to the subdivision, such as nLunber of lots or units, property lines, applicant's legal interest in the prorxxrty, or develup -,ntccl tiiiet-able, since preliminary plat application: Proposal. is to revise parking lot- - layout in front of Grand Union; to move landscaping along I-189 fence to another location; to study traffic signal patterns before implementing any re -phasing; and to terminate waterline at Farrell property line. 5) SulAidt four copies of a final set of plans Lorlsistirig of a final plat blurs engineering drawings and containing all inforirtiation required Under section 20::.1 of the subdivision reyulcrtions for a minor sulxl.ivision and uncles ski(,t.i011 204.1(a) for a ucajor sulxlivisiun. G) Submit two draft copies of all legal required under' section 202.1 (11) and (12) of the subdivision ieyulcatioris fur a inii-ior subdivision Lind under section 204.1(b) for a nkcjor SUI)division. (Signature) contact [x: r sun 8 August 1989 Da to FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED Engineering and Planning Services One Wentworth Drive • Williston • Vermont • 05495 • (802) 878-3000 7 June 1989 Mr. Joseph Weith, Planner City of South Burlington City Hall Dorset Street South Burlington, Vermont 05403 RE: Factory Outlet Center FILE: 88173 Dear Mr. Weith: As a follow-up to the plans sent you last month, and your review comments regarding the "green strip", we have revised the Site plan for the above -referenced Project, and herewith submit a new Site plan for your records and approval. As noted on the Site Plan the planter, or green strip, along Shelburne Street has been increased to 5 feet in width, from the previous 3.58 feet south of the entrance and 4.25 feet north of the entrance. The differential, in order to maintain the necessary parking lot width, was deducted from the planter along the front of the building. Also shown as a revision is the addition of the utility easement along the new 8-inch waterlines and hydrants, in preparation for ownership by the City, after approval. Enclosed are copies of letters regarding the traffic signal at the Project's entrance. Our letter to the Agency of Transportation proposes that the originally -suggested phasing change was incorrect, and phasing should remain as it is today. The State, in their letter, has agreed with our position. We then sent the City of Burlington a letter explaining our analysis, with a copy to Craig Leiner of the Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission. We haven't heard any comment from either party, to date. On behalf of our Client we are asking, as a result of our determination that no signal changes are required, that the bond for the signal changes be released. We trust the enclosed plans, with the modifications you requested, will now meet with your approval. Design • Inspection • Studies* Permitting • Surveying 7 June 1989 Mr. Joseph Weith FILE: 88173 Our Client would appreciate a brief letter to this effect, as well as some indication of the traffic signal bond release. Again, we thank you for all the time you've taken to review and discuss this Project. Should you have any questions, please don't hesitate to call. Sincerely, FITZPATRICK.-LLEW LYN INCORPORATED Douglas R. FitzPatrick, P.E. cc: Philip Mehler Wiemann-Lamphere Engleberth Construction Chief Goddette CWD South Burlington Water DRF/hf FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED Engineering and Planning Services FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCL GRATED Engineering and Planning Services One Wentworth Drive WILLISTON, VERMONT 05495 (802) 878-3000 TO L1EUMJeF'TRUzMCTU2RL DATE ATTENTION RE: WE ARE SENDING YOU ached ElUnder separate cover via the following items: ❑ Shop drawings ❑ Prints Plans ❑ Samples ❑ Specifications ❑ Copy of letter ❑ Change order ❑ COPIES DATE NO. DESCRIPTION UOV THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below: ❑ For approval ❑ For your use ❑ As requested For review and comment ❑ FOR BIDS DUE REMARKS —tee ❑ Approved as submitted ❑ Approved as noted ❑ Returned for corrections ❑ Resubmit copies for approval ❑ Submit copies for distribution ❑ Return corrected prints 19 ❑ PRINTS RETURNED AFTER LOAN TO US SIGNED -IN PRODUCT 240-3 laic. Cmbm, Mm 01471_ If enclosures are not as noted, kindly notify us CITY OF SOUTH WRL.ING"MN Subdivision Application - FINAL PLAT 1) Name of Applicant Heathcote Assoc. 488 ;iadison Ave. NY NY 10022 2) Name of Subdivision So. Burlington Factory Outlet 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: Sketch Plan Application listed Philip Mehler Realty, Inc. as applicant Applicant is in fact fieathcote Assoc. as stated above 4) Indicate any changes to the subdivision, such as number of lots or units, property lines, applicant's legal interest in the property, or developmental f timetable, since preliminary plat application: i Q 1,000 sf reduction of mezzanine, 2,900 sf addition to first floor S) 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 too 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. (Signature) applicant or contact person Date CITY OF SOM BMJNMICN Subdivision Application - SKE CH PLAN 1) Name, address, and phone number of: a. owner of record Philip Mehler Realty, Inc. 488 Madison Ave. New York, NY 10022 Tel: (212)486-3330 b. Applicant Philip Mehler Realty, Inc. c. Contact person Dennis ','.ebster - lViemann-Lamphere Architects, Inc. Wiemann-Lamphere Architects, Inc. 289 College St., Burlington, VT 05401 2) Purpose, location, and nature of subdivision or development, including number of lots, units, or parcels and proposed use(s)• Addition to existing shopping center for 1 tenant. 3) Applicant's legal interest in the property (fee simple, option, etc) Owner 4) Names of owners of record of all contiguous properties Richard Davis State of Vermont Thomas Farrell 5) 'Type of existing or proposed encumbrances on property such as easements, covenants, leases, rights of way, etc. None 6) Proposed extension, relocation, or modification of municipal facilities such as sanitary sewer, water supply, streets, storm drainage, etc. To serve new tenant and their parking. 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: 8) Sutmit 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. 5) Date, true north arrow and scale (numerical and graphic). 6) Location map, showing relation of proposed subdivision to adjacent property and surrounding area. I (Sig ture) applicar t or contact person / ./ _� _b� - date. HEATHCOTE ASSOCIATES SOUTH BURLINGTON FACTORY OUTLET CHANGES MADE TO ADDRESS CONCERNS OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 1. SIZE OF PROJECT. Originally asked for an addition of 27,000 square feet (2/2 /86) Reduced to 26,850 square feet on 3/25/86; Reduced to 18,462 square feet on 5/27/86; Increased to 24,000 square feet on 9/22/87; Reduced to 20,400 square feet on 11/24/87; Reduced to 11,460 square feet after appeal on 12/30/87. The applicant has been able to reduce the scale of the addition by converting portions of existing leased space. This request brings the building coverage down to 30 percent of the lot. 2. LOT COVERAGE. At the present time, the lot is 98 percent covered. With the parking lot refiguration and new landscape plan, the lot coverage will be reduced to 91 percent. 3. GENERAL APPEARANCE. The proposed project will greatly improve the appearance of the site both in front and back. The landscaping budget is over $26,000.00; $13,000.00 more than required. 4. PARKING. The parking ratio (spaces per 1,000 feet of GLA) will uctuate depending upon other considerations such as: A. Width of fire lane. B. Amount of green space/landscaping. C. Number of compact car spaces. D. Perpendicular vs. parallel spaces. E. Circulation patterns. The South Burlington standard of 5.5 is clearly excessive (see memo from City Planner dated 9/2/88). Many experts use 4.0 as a guideline. Typically, larger shopping centers use a higher ratio and smaller centers use a lower ratio. Even taking into consideration the "contested" spaces reserved by Farrell, there should be adequate parking in all but the peak of the Christmas season, at which time no shopping center's parking is adequate. With proper signage, compact spaces do not have to be eliminated. In addition, the majority of new cars will fit in South Burlington's compact spaces (8 1/2 X 16). 5. TRAFFIC CONCERNS. The traffic concerns expressed in 1986 and 1987 have been addressed by the completion of Phase I of the Southern Connector improvements. 6. CIRCULATION. The interior parking scheme has been modified to allow free flow of traffic to the rear of the property. This was accomplished by changing some perpendicular spaces to parallel, and eliminating some spaces. At the request of the Commission, the drive-in banking service will be eliminated when the current lease expires. 7. SNOW REMOVAL. To be pushed off -site until rear land developed, and then to be trucked off -site. 8. FIRE PROTECTION. Provided for wider isles (24 feet to 30 feet); change entrance to allow better swinging room; added loop fire system. -2- FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED Engineering and Planning Services One Wentworth Drive • Williston • Vermont • 05495 • (802) 878-3000 19 July 1989 James Goddette, Chief South Burlington Fire Department Dorset Street South Burlington, Vermont 05402 RE: Factory Outlet FILE: 88173 Dear Chief Goddette: copy This letter, as you suggested, is a follow-up to our recent telephone conversation regarding the proposed water supply for the above -referenced Project. As you know, the approved site plans show a new "loop" of pipe from the existing CWD line to the "private" line on the Farrell property. You were very helpful and instrumental in setting up the connection to the Farrell waterline. Thank you. As evidenced by the enclosed letters to Mr. Farrell from Mr. Mehler, our Client, a resonable attempt was made to formalize the connection agreement. Mr. Farrell, however, has been non -responsive in granting written permission to connect to his waterline. Since the construction season is slipping away, I called Mr. Farrell. When I spoke with him by telephone on 12 July 1989, he informed me that he expected some sort of payment from Mr. Mehler before a hook-up could be consumated and, once connected, he had no intention of turning "his" waterline over to the City. You and I have discussed this situation, and since payment to Mr. Farrell was not part of the original "looping" proposal, you agreed terminating the new waterline at Mr. Farrell's property was appropriate. And, since the supply of water from CWD to the new hydrants is large enough, not connecting to the Farrell line won't jeopardize the function of the hydrants. We've also spoken with CWD (Bob Gardner) regarding this situation and, although he's disappointed the connection to Farrell won't take place at this time, he agreed terminating the new line at the Farrell property line is logical. We trust you will have an opportunity to speak with Mr. Weith about this situation, and convey your feelings to him that, even though the "looping" can't be accomplished now, the system will function to your satisfaction. Design 0 Inspection 0 Studies • Permitting 0 Surveying 19 July 1999 James Goddette, Chief FILE: 88173 Page Two Again, thanks for all the time and effort you've put into this Project. Sincerely, FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED Douglas R. FitzPatrick, P.E. cc: Philip Mehlet; Heathcote Bob Gardner, CWD Joe Weith, South Burlington Planner Tim Gallup, Wiemann-Lamphere Peter Kelley, Engleberth DRF/hf FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED Engineering and Planning Services 1. HeathcoteAssociateS June 0, 1909 V -- Mr. Thomas Farrell Farrell Distributing Corp. Holmes Road t. , South Burlington, VT 05403 1UNI T"t Re: South Burlinqton Outlet Center Dear Mr. Farrell: As you may recall, the South Burlington Fire Chief, Mr. James Goddette, contacted you regarding an improvement to the water system for the shopping center adjacent to the Old Board Restaurant (Club New England). As I understand Mr. Goddette's thinking, and as endorsed by the City, the new water main we are constructing, to provide additional fire protection in the back of the shopping center, would be extended to tie into the water line you constructed to serve the Old Buard Restaurant. The Engineer for the shopping center improvements has created plans showing this connection, which has been approved for construction by the City: a copy is enclosed for your review. The City's goal with the "looped" water line is to provide better fire protection for structures in the area, and to increase the strength of their water distribution system, in turn creating a more reliable water system for all users. In order for the construction personnel to effect this water line connection,it will be necessary for them to work on your property. As the plans indicate, most, if not all the construction will take place outside the paved areas and will avoid the planters. We agree to restore the land and all disturbed material to the condition. before . construction takes place, and every erfort possible will be taken to insure the restaurant will not be without its water service during business hours or for an extended period of time. In addition, if requested, a representative of the construction company will meet with you to discuss the work before it actually begins. We believe this improvement will benefit both of us and would appreciate your indicating your approval by signing and returning the duplicate of this letter. Sincerely, HEATHCOTE ASSOCIATES By: .- Philip Mehler General Partner Accepted and approved: FARRELL DISTRIBUTING CORP. By: cc: Doug Fitzpatrick 488 Madison Avenue New York, New York 10022 212 486-3330 5 x j a ,:. i S;wY�4�i�°fr3''R"iT,e`�. ::. "fi''�B.�m'its'"µ-'Y',e"F.�'°`.�SYYi,.�,F'++�q:�A�.,�T�If`5^�.,ri�`-�'�':`?n 7r"5xaer�m't"i�°'a�t l� •^ra i�. ,,..wV. • . Via Fax No. 8024164-9878 Mr, Thomas Farrell Farrell Distributing Corp. Holmes Road South Burlington, VT 05403 Re: South Burlinqton Outlet Center Dear Mr. Farrell: July 6, 1 g8 1 Jul," We recently wrote requesting approval to tie into your water line near the northerly end of the shopping center for the new water main we are constructing (see enclosed letter dated June 0, 1980). Since we are at the point of construction where we are ready to complete the connection, we would appreciate your approval by signing and returning the duplicate of the above referenced letter. Many thanks in advance. PM/hs Encl. cc: Doug Fitzpatrick Yours sincerely, HEATHCOTE ASSOCIATES By: Philip Mehler General Partner M, 488 Madison Avenue New York, New York 10022 212 486-3330 CHARLES T. SHEA STEPHEN R. CRAMPTON STEWART H. McCONAUGHY ROBERT B. HEMLEY WILLIAM G. POST, JR. CRAIG WEATHERLY JOHN R. PONSETTO NORMAN WILLIAMS JAMES E. KNAPP DENNIS R. PEARSON PETER S. ERLY ROBERT F. O'NEILL VAN Z. KRIKORIAN SUSAN WILLIAMS SWEETSER GRAVEL AND SHEA ATTORNEYS AT LAW 109 SOUTH WINOOSKI AVENUE POST OFFICE BOX 1049 BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05402 December 2, 1987 South Burlington Planning Commission c/o Ms. Jane Lafleur City of South Burlington South Burlington, VT 05401 Re: South Burlington Planning commission: Application of Heathcote Associates for construction of a 20,400 square foot addition to existing South Burlington Factory Outlet Mall Dear Members of the Planning Commission: TELEPHONE 658-0220 AREA CODE 802 CLARKE A. GRAVEL COUNSEL Please enter the appearance of the undersigned in the above -referenced matter, on behalf of Thomas A. Farrell. Mr. Farrell owns property adjacent to the site of appli- cant's shopping mall and the proposed expansion which is the subject of this application. By virtue of reservations contained in a warranty deed from Mr. Farrell to applicant's predecessor in title (a copy of which is attached), Mr. Farrell, his heirs, successors and assigns have the right to use a portion of the applicant's property for parking by employees, patrons, and invitees of two businesses located on Mr. Farrell's property, including 50 spaces for daytime parking (before 6:00 p.m.) and 100 spaces for evening parking. It appears from applicant's site plan that it proposes to use the property to which Mr. Farrell has prior claim, as parking space to serve the mall and the proposed expansion. The applicant has no legal right to commit any portion of its property to which Mr. Farrell has prior claim for parking, to GRAVEL AND SHEA South Burlington Planning Commission December 2, 1987 Ms. Jane Lafleur Page 2 this proposed development, in order to satisfy off-street parking requirements of the South Burlington zoning ordinance, or to develop the property in such a way which interferes with Mr. Farrell's access to the parking space. Very truly yours, GRAVEL and SHEA By: John R. Ponsetto Attorney for Thomas A. Farrell JRP:wrb Enclosure cc: Mr. Thomas A. Farrell Heathcote Associates i Mr. Frederick P. Tiballi lam` Al 3� r 3 ii The right of Grantor, his heirs and assigns, until June 30, 200�,'to use a portion of the northwesterly corner of the premises as reasonably required for supplemental parking of automobiles of employees, patrons and invitees of the restaurant and nightclub located immediately northerly of the herein -conveyed premises (now or formerly known as the Old Board and the Yankee Trader Room) as now constituted, and the existing studio and office building located immediately northwesterly thereof (presently occupied by International Television Corporation) as now constituted. The amount of such parking is limited to a maximum of 50 spaces during business daytime hours (prior to six o'clock p.m.) and a maximum of 100 spaces during evenings and on weekends and holidays, and is subject to the obligation of Grantor, his successors and assigns to pay a pro rata share of the costs of maintaining, repairing, illuminating, landscaping and removing snow and ice (such share to be. based upon the actual use -of such supplemental parking by or on behalf of said Grantor). TO: FROM: RE: 1 � 1.2uuth Nurltngtun give RepartrnEnt 575 19nrset -treet fnuth Nurlington, Vermant 95401 N OFFICE OF JAMES W. GODDETTE, SR. CHIEF (802) 658-7960 September 16,1987 SO. BURLINGTON PLANNING COMMISSION CHIEF JAMES W. GODDETTE SR. SEPTEMBER 22,1987 AGAEDA ITEMS 1. SALAMIN HANDY HINESBURG ROAD COMPLEX My only concern at this time is with y Z A the store, liquor store and restaurant the parking lot is full and many times would be impossable to.get fire equipment in if needed. 2. SO. BURLINGTON FACTORY OUTLET SHELBURNE ROAD Plans reviewed by the fire department and the following is a problem for the fire department A. Main entrance from Shelburne Road is not wide enough for emergency equipment. B. Access around the building is poor and again not wide enough for setting up equipment. C. At least two (2) hydrants is required in the back of building. At this time I do not feel we could give proper fire protection to the property if needed. Memorandum December 5, December 1, Page 5 - Planning 1989 agenda items 1989 The Commission is going to have wetness" so it may be applied determine the appropriate density should relate to suitability of may be some sort of engineering appropriate to apply. to define the term "excessive to this project in order to range. Clearly, the definition supporting a structure. There or soils standards that may be 8) FACTORY OUTLET, REVISED PARKING.- SHELBURNE ROAD Heathcote Associates is requesting approval for a minor change to the front parking area to improve circulation. There is current- ly a bottlenecking problem at the end of the entrance chute caused by tight geometries. I have been to the site sever,a. times in the past two weeks to observe the `.t.uat.ion. I agree there is a problem. I feel it could be resolved by increasing the radii similar to what is shown on Sketch "A". This would, however, result in the loss of two parking spaces. Other than that, I feel the circulation is wo:i:•king fine. The circulation could be somewhat further improved with additional direction signs (i.e., exit. signs). 9) CITIZEN PARTICIPATION FORUMS Enclosed is the tabulated information developed from the 3 citi- zen participation forums held in October. Attached is a memo in which I summarize what I interpret to be the major issues and concerns raised by the participants. 9 Memorandum August 29, August 25, Page 8 - Planning 1989 agenda items 1989 8) HEATHCOTE ASSOCIATES. FACTORY OUTLET Doug Fitzpatrick relayed the Planning Commission's decision on parking alternative #1 to the Grand Union people. Basically, they have decided that alternative #1 is unacceptable. They prefer alternative #3 but are willing to propose a modified alternative #3 which they feel better addresses the safety and circulation concerns. Doug will be present at Tuesday's meeting with two plans, one showing alternative #1 and one showing a modified alternative #3. Also, the Grand Union people may tion regarding a trail basis for the end of six months, if the parking and circulation situation pay to convert the parking lot to be willing to accept a stipula- the modified alternative #3. At Planning Commission feels the is unacceptable, Heathcote will the alternative #1 design. 0 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, August 22, 1989, at 7:30 P.M. to consider the following: Revised Final Plat application of Heathcote Associates to: 1) change the parking layout in front of the Grand Union and along the south side of the building , and 2) request an amendment to stipulation #5 of the approval motion dated 10/14/88 regarding improvements to the Shelburne Road/Factory Outlet intersection, Factory Outlet Mall, Shelburne Road. Copies of the Revised Final Plat application are available for public inspection at the South Burlington City Hall. Peter Jacob Chairman, South Burlington Planning Commission August 5, 1989 r. MEMORANDUM To: South Burlington Planning Commission From: Joe Weith, City Planner Re: August 22, 1989 agenda items Date: August 18, 1989 3) FACTORY OUTLET, SHELBURNE ROAD,, Heathcote Associates proposes to revise the parking layout and requests an amendment to stipulation #5 of the approval motion regarding improvements to the Shelburne Road/Factory Outlet entrance intersection. Parking: The applicant proposes to revise the parking lot in front of the Grand Union and the parking along the south side of the building. The applicant feels more than one access point to the frontparking area is necessary. I agree. 3 alternatives are proposed (enclosed). I recommend either Alternative 1 or Alternative 2. I believe these would provide adequate access to the parking spaces and have less of a potential for conflict with the free flow circulation lane around the building perimeter. The parking along the south side of the building is being revised due to a determination by the VAOT that it does not want the existing pavement along the I-189 retaining wall removed (letter enclosed). The applicant has proposed moving some of this lost green space to planted islands in the rear parking lot. These islands will improve the appearance of the rear parking lot, but more importantly, will improve the circulation and parking patterns. In place of the lost green space along the I-189 retaining wall, the plan shows perpendicular parking spaces. In the previous review, the Planning Commission specifically re- quired parallel parking spaces along the north and south sides of the building. Provided below is a summary of the various parking alternatives: Total spaces Total spaces Total spaces approved w/perpendicular w/parallel Alternative (10/14/88) parking parking 1 619 610 597 2 619 616 603 3 619 634 621 1 Intersection Improvements The 10/14/89 condition of approval (enclosed required that the following intersection improvements which were recommended by JHK & Associates be completed by the applicant.. 1. Dual left turn lanes out of the Factory Outlet and split phasing for the approaches from both shopping centers; 2. a new controller shall be installed; and 3. operation of the controller in semi -actuated fashion with an overlay of the phasing for the lefts from Route 7. Installation of the new controller (improvement #2) has been completed by the State. Roger Dickinson reevaluated the traffic analysis and found that improvement #1-is not necessary. The VAOT and Burlington concur with this conclusion. Craig Leiner, however, is not thoroughly convinced that improvement #1 is not needed. He recommended that the applicant take counts 6 months after T.J. Maxx is open and rerun the analysis to see if improve- ment. #1 is needed. If the analysis shows a need for the improve- ment, the applicant will be required to complete it. If the improvement is not warranted, the bond will be released. The reevaluation conducted by Roger Dickinson showed that im- provement #3 would benefit the traffic situation. I recommend that the applicant still be required to implement this improve- ment. I recommend that the City retain $12,000 of the original $80,00 bond to cover improvement #1, if needed, and improvement 43. 4) G.T. BAGEL FACTORY, WHITE STREET George Trono proposes to revise his site plan for operation of a bagel/coffee shop business at 35 White Street which was approved by the Planning Commission on 9/22/87. Mr. Trono proposes to remove the proposed posts separating his property from the "U- Save" Beverage Store property which was added as a requirement by the Planning Commission. Mr. Trono claims that these posts would hinder efficient onsite circulation (see enclosed letter). I agree that the location of the posts would hinder the maneuverability of trucks on his property and the Beverage Store's property. I do not completely understand why these posts were required. I will check with Jane Lafluer and Craig Leiner before Tuesday's meeting to see of they can shed some light. 5 ; :1Gi NTA =d -Ji =_-, :IMBt1TL AV-�-_'INJt; 2 PLANNING COMMISSION 1 AUGUST 1989 The South Burlington Planning Commission held a meeting on Tuesday, 1 August 1989, at 7:30 pm, in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset Street. Members Present Peter Jacob, Chairman; John Belter, Mary -Barbara Maher, Ann Pugh, William Craig, William Burgess Also Present Joe Weith, City Planner; Sid Poger, The Other Paper; Joyce Olsen, Town Planner, Williston; Chris Cavin, Steve Crowley 1. Other Business a. Heathcote will be coming back in to request 2 revisions: 1) amendment of the stipulation that dealt with intersection improvements. The State agrees the JHK study was incorrect. 2) revision of front parking to statisfy concerns of Grand Union. Only 2 parking spaces will be lost. There is also a landscape problem that involves the State and visibility from I-189. Mr. Weith noted that Craig Leiner is not convinced about the intersection improvements but suggested checking traffic after TJ Maxx is open to see how things are operating. Members agreed to have Heathcote back in on 8/22/89. b) Mr. Craig noted that he had talked with people in Essex who said their biggest problem was "nibble to death" develop- ment. They have done 2 things to handle this: a) with a parcel over a certain size, there has to be a master plan presented for the full parcel; b) when a parcel is subdivided they have to wait 5 years before the parcel can be subdivided again. c) Ms. Pugh noted the Gracey's boat has reappeared. They also have a concession selling corn in the parking lot. Mr. Weith will check on this. 2. Discussion with Williston Town Planner, Joyce Olsen, on Williston citizen participartion program Ms. Olsen said their usual process was to have the public respond to a particular plan. This time, however, the town was invited to define goals, objectives, etc.. A series of workshops/forums was held. Ms. Olsen distributed a format sheet showing the topics, etc. The process included a guest speaker followed by a brainstorming session from which goal statements were enumerated. A telephone survey was done after the forums and Ms. Olsen said they were reassured by M E M O R A N D U M To: South Burlington Planning Commission From: Joe Weith, City Planner Re: August 22, 1989 agenda items Date: August 18, 1989 3) FACTORY OUTLET, SHELBURNE ROAD Heathcote Associates proposes to revise the parking layout and requests an amendment to stipulation #5 of the approval motion regarding improvements to the Shelburne Road/Factory Outlet entrance intersection. Parking: The applicant proposes to revise the parking lot in front of the Grand Union and the parking along the south side of the building. The applicant feels more than one access point to the front parking area is necessary. I agree. 3 alternatives are proposed (enclosed). I recommend either Alternative 1 or Alternative 2. I believe these would provide adequate access to the parking spaces and have less of a potential for conflict with the free flow circulation lane around the building perimeter. The parking along the south side of the building is being revised due to a determination by the VAOT that it does not want the existing pavement along the I-189 retaining wall removed (letter enclosed). The applicant has proposed moving some of this lost green space to planted islands in the rear parking lot. These islands will improve the appearance of the rear parking lot, but more importantly, will improve the circulation and parking patterns. In place of the lost green space along the I-189 retaining wall, the plan shows perpendicular parking spaces. In the previous review, the Planning Commission specifically re- quired parallel parking spaces along the north and south sides of the building. Provided below is a summary of the various parking alternatives: Total spaces Total spaces Total spaces approved w/perpendicular w/parallel Alternative (10/14/88) parking parking 1 619 610 597 2 619 616 603 3 619 634 621 1 Intersection Improvements The 10/14/89 condition of approval (enclosed)required that the frl � UTT1._,? :1tCT'c;r-�:+? _I; l.Il� --. _ .:�I:t .. c•/11 . 'r'. ,le. _ _•�_•_ ir;Jlir'I1CIt:-i 1-ti�_i li'..h & Associates be completed by the applicant.. 1. Dual left turn lanes out of the Factory Outlet and split phasing for the approaches from both shopping centers; 2. a new controller shall be installed; and 3. operation of the controller in semi -actuated fashion with an overlay of the phasing for the lefts from Route 7. Installation of the new controller (improvement. #2) has been completed by the State. Roger Dickinson reevaluated the traffic analysis and found that improvement 41 is not necessary. The VAOT and Burlington concur with this conclusion. Craig Leiner, however, is not thoroughly convinced that. improvement 41 is not needed. He recommended that the applicant take counts 6 months after T.J. Maxx is open and rerun the analysis to see if improve- ment 41 is needed. If the analysis shows a need for the improve- ment, the applicant will be required to complete it. If the improvement is not warranted, the bond will be released. The reevaluation conducted by Roger Dickinson showed that im- provement #3 would benefit the traffic situation. I recommend that the applicant still be required to implement this improve- ment. I recommend that the City retain $12,000 of the original $80,000 bond to cover improvement #1, if needed, and improvement #3. 4) G.T. BAGEL FACTORY, WHITE STREET George Trono proposes to revise his site plan for operation of a bagel/coffee shop business at 35 White Street which was approved by the Planning Commission on 9/22/87. Mr. Trono proposes to remove the proposed posts separating his property from the "U- Save" Beverage Store property which was added as a requirement by the Planning Commission. Mr. Trono claims that these posts would hinder efficient onsite circulation (see enclosed letter). I agree that the location of the posts would hinder the maneuverability of trucks on his property and the Beverage Store's property. I do not completely understand why these posts were required. I will check with Jane Lafluer and Craig Leiner before Tuesday's meeting to see of they can shed some light. 5) MOUNTAIN CABLE, LOT 2, KIMBALL AVENUE 2 Arp M E M O R A N D U M To: South Burlington Planning Commission From: Joe Weith, City Planner Re: September 6, 1.988 agenda items Date: September 2, 1988 2) SYNON, REQUEST TO AMEND APPROVAL On May 31, 1988 the Planning Commission approved a 1.55 acre subdivision from the 26+ acre Cupola Golf Course and the site plan application for a day care/office building on this 1.55 acre lot. Both approvals are subject to the stipulation that legal documents for the Offer of Dedication and deed for Quarry Hill Road shall be submitted to the City Attorney for approval prior to permit. As described in the 8/17/88 letter from Michael Burak, the Deslauriers find it in their best interest not to dedicate the road to the City at this time. Therefore, the stipulation described above will not be met. As described in Mr. Doremus' 8/29/88 letter to the Planning Commission, the success of the day care/office building project depends on the Planning Commission's willingness to waive the stipulation described above. The City's policy of no more private roads was generated by the problems arising from the City being forced to take over private roads which were substandard and had not been maintained. The Deslauriers' have agreed to build a street to City standard. However, they have not agreed to dedicate it to the City at this time. One proposal which has been made is to require that a maintenance bond be posted that will cover the cost of maintenance until future dedication of the road. I will talk further with Steve Stitzel on this subject. 3) HEATHCOTE ASSOCIATES, FACTORY OUTLET MALL Based on the literature I have reviewed, and a review of parking standards for surrounding municipalities, our parking standards for this size shopping center appear to be high. The Urban Land Institute recommends a design standard of 4 spaces per 1,000 square feet of gross leasable area (GLA) for this size shopping center. Based on this standard, the applicants proposed 5.3 spaces/1000 GLA should be sufficient to handle the demand generated by this facility. Even with the shared parking issue, there should be enough spaces to accommodate the Shopping Center and Club New England/TV Station parking demand. 1 Memorandum - Planning September 6, 1988 agenda items September 2, 1988 Page 2 Last week, the applicant proposed changing the parking layout to show parallel parking along the north and south sides. This would reduce the proposed number of spaces by 30 and result in a parking space ratio of 5.1 spaces/1000 GLA. Based on the literature of parking standards, this ratio should still be sufficient to handle parking demand. A concern I expressed in my last memo is that the layout of compact car spaces along the west property line does not discourage large cars, pick-ups, etc. from parking in them. I feel that standard sized cars could easily come down the aisles and pull directly into those compact car spaces located directly at the end of the aisles. Something we may want to consider is removing the compact car spaces located directly at the end of the aisles. This would leave only those compact car spaces which are located in a configuration which makes it more difficult for larger cars to pull into these spaces, thereby discouraging large cars from parking in them. This would also increase the amount of green space in the front of the building. However, by replacing these compact car spaces with green area, 30 spaces would be lost resulting in a ratio of 4.8 spaces/1000 GLA. Considering the shared parking issue, this may be closely approaching the line between meeting parking demand and not meeting parking demand. 4) GARY RIGGS, LOT #17, ETHAN ALLEN DRIVE Gary Riggs proposes to construct a 9,000 square foot building for storage/distribution uses. Four 2,250 square foot units are proposed for the building. The Zoning Board approved Mr. Riggs' request for a multiple use on August 22, 1988. The plan also shows a fifth 2,250 square foot unit to be added to the southern end of the building sometime in the future. Mr. Riggs would like approval for all 5 units, so that he does not have to come back to the Planning Commission if and when he decides to add the fifth unit. Access: Access is shown from both Ethan Allen Drive on the north and Commerce Avenue on the south. The plan shows the access from Commerce Avenue to be provided by a future driveway. Mr. Riggs informed me that he plans to put this drive in immediately. The plan should be revised to show this. Circulation: Circulation is shown along the length of the west side of the building. A 24 foot aisle width is proposed between 2 M E M O R A N D U M To: South Burlington Planning Commission From: William J. Szymanski, City Manager Re: August 30, 1988 agenda items Date: August 19, 1988 3) FRANCO SUBDIVISION, AIRPORT PARKWAY 1. Drainage pipe shall be plastic not metal or aluminum. 2. Road including island shall be lined with a concrete curb. 3. Street shall be -named. 4. The cul-de-sac is sub -standard but is acceptable. This is the best plan of the many we have had for the parcel. 5. Drainage pipe to outlet in drainage way not tee into existing 36" pipe. 6. Work on Airport Parkway shall be completed during this (1988) construction season. 4) ROBERT BROWN SUBDIVISION, ALLEN ROAD 1. Creating lots served by 20' right-of-way should be discouraged. City has had a lot of experience with these types of subdivisions. Adjacent owners complain about excessive speed on them, dust if they are not paved and approach the City to plow them because they are so long. 6) HEATHCOTE ASSOCIATES, SHELBURNE ROAD 1'. About 70-80 parking spaces will be lost for snow storage during the time they are most needed. Hauling snow away will require a dumping site. South Burlington land fill cannot be used for that purpose. 2. The plan legend is very misleading and should be corrected. The grassed areas should be lined with concrete curb to protect them. A few trees and shrubs should be added. 1 Memorandum - Planning Agenda 30, 1988 agenda items August 19, 1988 Page 3 5) HEATHCOTE ASSOCIATES, 540-640 SHELBURNE ROAD HeaLhcoLe Associates propose to construct a 15,460 square foot addition to the exisLing Factory outlet. This 15,460 square feet includes an 11,460 square Not building footprint and a 4,000 square foot mezzanine. The plan which was denied on 12/8/87 proposed a 20,400 square foot addition (16,400 square rook building rooLprinL plus 4000 square foot mezzanine). Circulation: The circulation pattern is the same as shown on the previous plan. Access for the rear of the property is provided by a 30 foot wide drive along the south end of the building and a drive along the north side of the building which varies between 24 and 30 feet. I aw concerned, as is Bill Szymanski, that the proposed parking spaces along the drives providing access for the rear of the property will interfere with circulation to and from the rear of the property during peak parking periods. Also, the compact car spaces proposed along the west property line are laid out in a way that will riot discourage large cars from parking in them. If large cars park in these spaces, they will stick out into the aisle, thereby reducing the efficiency of circulation. The layout of compact car parking spaces can be designed In ways that better discourage large cars from parking in them. This should be considered. Parking: The plan proposes 642 parking spaces which works out to be 5.3 spaces per 1000 square feet gross leasable area (GLA). This is the ratio which was granted for the University Mall expansion approval. The South Burlington Zoning Ordinance requires 5.5 spaces per 1000 square feet of gross floor area. The proposed plan requires a 12% waiver in the number of parking spaces required by Or-dinance. The plan includes 93 compact car spaces or 15% of the total provided. The Commission may waive up L o 2 5 % . There appears to still be confusion over the shared parking issue. There is no clear way to know exactly how many spaces are on the HeaLhcuLe property since the spaces were only generally described in the deed. Steve SLiLzel has suggested that if Lhis projecL is approved, it should be stipulated LhaL all spaces are for the Factory Outlet Mall and that when the adjoining parcels are developed, they will have to meeL parking requiremenl.,s regardless of any sharing agreements. 3 ! I §�outb +iSurlington ,dire Department 575 llnrfaet #treet #uuth Burlington, Vermont 05401 - r TO: SO. BURLINGTON PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: CHIEF GODDETTE RE: TUESDAY AUGUST 30,1988 AGENDA ITEMS DATE: AUGUST 17,1988 1. 2. FRANCO SUB -DIVISION AIRPORT PKWAY OFFICE OF JAMES W. GODDETTE, SR. CHIEF (802) 658-7960 PLANS WERE REVIEWED BY THIS DEPARTMENT AND AT THIS TIME I DO NOT SEE A PROBLEM WITH THE PROJECT. HEATHCOTE ASSOC. FACTORY MALL SHELBURNE ROAD PLANS WERE REVIEWED AND THE FOLLOWING IS NEEDED FOR FIRE PROTECTION: A. THE WATER SYSTEM MUST BE EXTENDED WITH A LOOP SYSTEM AROUND THE BACK OF THE BUILDING. B. THREE (3) HYDRANTS INSTALLED AT A LOCATION APPROVED BY THIS DEPARTMENT. C. THE MAIN ENTRANCE IN WHICH IS SHOWONG 18' SHOULD BE REDESIGNED SO WE CAN TURN GOING IN TO MAKE A RIGHT HAND TURN IN FRONT OF THE BUILDING. Memorandum - Planning August 2, 1988 agenda items July 29, 1988 Page 3 3. Hire a consultant to develop an affordable housing plan and program for the City. 4. Hire a consultant to develop a View Protections Plan for the City. This plan would identify areas throughout the City where views should be preserved. Such a plan would make efforts to preserve views easier and more defensible in court. 5. Hire an intern to take on some of my day-to-day responsibilities in order for me to spend more time on these other pressing planning issues. 4) OTHER BUSINESS One item I would like to discuss briefly next Tuesday is a letter (enclosed) recently received from Louis Borie, District #4 Coordinator. Mr. Borie indicated in the letter that letters from Town Planners are no longer sufficient evidence to meet the applicant's burden of proof under Criterion 10 of the Act 250 permit process, conformance with the local and regional plans. I and several planners from surrounding towns are very upset with this decision because it takes the interpretation of a Town's Comprehensive Plan out of the Town's hands and into the hands of developers and District #4. I feel that we should raise some hell and send some letters to both Mr. Borie and the Governor expressing our opposition to this decision. REVISED PLAN = HEATHCOTE The Planning Commission is to review the revised plan for the addition to the South Burlington Factory Outlet. Apparently, Heathcote has proposed that if the Planning Commission approves the revised plan, they will drop the suite. If not, the suite will be continued. Steve Stitzel will be present at the meeting to explain everything. The revised plan shows a reduction in the size of the proposed addition -from 16,400 square feet to 11,460 square feet. Proposed lot coverage would be reduced from 91.8% to 90.9%. Existing lot coverage is 98%. 9 M E M O R A N D U M To: South Burlington Planning Commission From: William J. Szymanski, City Manager Re: December 8, 1987 agenda items Date: December 4, 1987 2) SOUTH BURLINGTON FACTORY OUTLET, SHELBURNE ROAD 1. Same comment as for previous plans. No provisions for snow storage. Using landscaped strips with plantings for snow storage will kill or damage these plantings. 3) SHEPARD SUBDIVISION, PATCHEN ROAD 1. Sewer and water service to parcel "B" should be shown on plan. If these services are not within the 20' drive easement another easement should be given to parcel B to include them. 4) CALKINS TWO LOT SUBDIVISION, SPEAR STREET During my negotiations for the Calkins Dorset Street property planned for the Dorset Street park, it was brought to my attention that Mrs. Calkins house on Spear Street served by a well is having serious problems with the supply. A water main was installed on Spear Street about 5 years ago and Mrs. Calkins requests connection to this water main. To do this a lot frontage charge of $8.00 per foot is assessed. This for Mrs. Calkins would amount to more then $24,000. By subdividing and including the house in a one acre lot (150' x 290.4'), the frontage charge would be for that one lot in the amount of $1200. 1 M E M O R A N D U M To: South Burlington Planning Commission From: Jane B. Lafleur, City Planner �p Re: December 8, 1987 agenda items Date: December 4, 1987 2) HEATHCOTE ASSOCIATES. 540-640 SHELBURNE WAD Heathcote Associates proposes to construct is 20,400 square foot addition to the existing Factory Outlet. The plan has changed since the Sketch Plan we reviewed Septembor 22_, 1987 and now shows a 2,900 increase to the first floor Wid a 1000 square foot reduction to the mezzanine for 20,400 square feet total. The new foot print is 16,400 square feet and the 4000 square foot 0� mezzanine brings the total to 20,400 square+ feet. The addition a� is "pulled" slightly into the existing center with an 1800 square, \� foot overlap. (The plan denied in 1986 showed a 19,040 addition. It should be made clear that this proposed addition is larger than the addi- tion we denied in 1986.) � The applicant has submitted two plans. one shows 24 foot wide aisles and fire lanes. The other shows a 30 foot fire lane. Both have 650 parking spaces. The 30 foot wide fire lane results in less landscaping, higher coverage, (89.17 vs. 91.8%) and less snow storage area. X According to the attorney for the applicant,, there should be significant cosmetic improvements to the pr(Werty and especially to the rear of the building which is visili e from I-189. The applicant is expected to bring elevations Lo the meeting that show this upgrade. Az� Circulation: The circulation pattern will be significant) improved with the proposed redesign of the narking lots. The following issues were Parking: The Commission an improvement over the parking plan is for 650 s are 558 existing spaces o d\ V pl an ise rove to th asked the applicant existing parking ratio. The proposed paces or 5.3 spaceQ Per 1000 gla. There r 5.36 spaces per I000 gla. left open at sket,.h plan review: The above calculation includes the spaces i,hat are on the newly acquired Parcel 2B and does not include tilp spaces recently lost to the Southern Connector. Parcel 2B is not being used for parking now but could be. Therefore, if we count only the existing spaces, the ratio has been improved from 4.8 per 1000 gla. (Under the ordinance 756 spaces are required; this plan represents a 14% waiver.) Je Memorandum - Planning December 4, 1987 Page 2 The plan includes 103 compact car spaces or 16% of the total provided. The Commission may waive up to 25%. Ms. Pugh requested a bus parking area. There is now one space labeled for a bus in the northeast corner of the site. Mr. Belter expressed concern about vehicles leaving the lot to access the rear of the building. The plans now show an aisle between the Chittenden Bank and the main building that allows vehicles free passage along the north of the building without leaving the property. Enclosed is deed information regarding a guaranteed r.o.w. from Mr. Farrell. The applicant was also asked to clear up the shared parking with Club New England. According to Attorney Bill Schroeder, there are 50 spaces in the daytime before 6 p.m. and up to 100 spaces in the evening, weekends and holidays that may be used by the Club New England and the TV station. These spaces are located on both the Outlet Mall property and Rick Davis' property. According to Bill Schroeder, there is no clear way to know exactly how many spaces are on each parcel since the spaces were only generally described as "in the northwest corner". It appears as though the proposed addition may cover some of the shared parking since the original Davis parcel was somewhat larger and the original outlet Mall parcel was somewhat smaller. (See enclosed map in Tiballi letter.) In any event, it is clear that both the Factory Outlet Mall and the present Davis property behind the Mall are subject to some dedicated parking for other businesses. Enclosed is a letter from Mr. Tiballi regarding this. This explains that Rick Davis is considering purchase of the Club New England property and his concerns regarding the shared parking. Also enclosed is a letter from John Ponsetto who represents Mr. Farrell regarding the parking rights on this property. See Bill Szymanski's comments regarding snow storage. Coverage: The Sketch Plan showed 85% lot coverage and this was acceptable to a majority of the Planning Commission. This new plan shows 89.37% with the 24 foot fire lane and 91.8% with the 30 foot fire lane. E Memorandum - Planning December 4, 1987 Page 3 Traffic: Enclosed is a traffic study from Roger Dickinson. He concludes that: a) 116 additional trip ends will be generated during the P.M. peak hour; b) The Shelburne Road/Home Ave./O'Dell Parkway intersection will operate at LOS B after Phase I of the Southern Connector is completed; c) The Shelburne Road/Sears/Factory Outlet intersection will be LOS E/F: By providing 2 left turning lanes out of the shopping center, the LOS can be improved to C during the P.M. peak. That improvement is part of this proposal and was a major recommendation in the JHK study to improve this intersection. Mr. Dickinson does not provide information on the Route 7/Swift Street intersections as he did for the 1986 study. Craig Leiner's comments are enclosed. The 116 additional trip ends require a $2978 dedication to the Route 7 intersection improvement fund. Fire Access: The Planning Commission told the applicant to resolve Chief Goddette's concerns for access. Enclosed is a memo from him regarding this. One plan offers a 30 foot wide fire lane around the building but it is at the expense of landscaping, green space and the minimal snow storage areas. Landscaping: The proposed addition requires $12,900 in new land- scaping. The proposed plan is valued at approximately $26,000 and .should be a significant improvement to the site. The plan shows a row of norway maple along Route 7 and a honey locust, 2 crab and a norway maple along each side of the entrance drive. A bond must be posted for $26,000 prior to permit. Other: Enclosed is a letter from the City of Burlington regarding lack of sewer capacity. No South Burling ton permit will be issued until the applicant can"'ver� i y-.that capacity is available. - 3 M E M O R A N D U M To: South Burlington Planning Commission From: James Goddette, Fire Chief Re: December 8, 1987 agenda items Date: December 4, 1987 1) HEATHCOTE ASSOCIATION, 540 - 640 SHELBURNE ROAD Plan B, showing the 30 foot wide fire lane is the only acceptable plan. However, the hydrants on Plan A must be shown on plan B. 1 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, November 24, 1987 at 7:30 p.m. to consider the following: 1) Revised Final Plat application of Heathcote Associates for construction of a 20,400 square foot addition to existing South Burlington Factory Outlet Mall. Property is bounded on the north by T. Farrell, H. Thomas and Champlain Oil Company, Inc., on the east by Touchdown Properties (F. Tiballi), on the south by I-189 and on the west by Rte 7 and is located at 540-560 Shelburne Road. 2) Request of John Larkin to amend motion of approval for the 200 unit motel on Rte 7 to delete the requirement that Phase II approval is contingent upon the announcement of a construction schedule for Route 7 upgrade. Project is bounded on the north by Harbor Sunset Motel, the City of South Burlington and K. Reichelt, on the east by Harbor Heights Association and John Larkin, on the south by Harbor View Road and on the west by Rte 7 and is located at 1710 Shelburne Road. 3) Amendment to the Zoning Map to change zoning from R4 to R7 of approximately 4.7 acres of the Blodgett property located east of the C1 zone to the eastern most property line. Property is bounded on the north by G. and C. Handy, S. Hazelton, C. Snyder, C. Smith, R and E. Mansfield, on the east by A. and M. Farring- ton, A. and P. Longe, S. and R. Wiggins, on the south by B.U.P. Realty, Inc. (IDX), and on the west by Rte 7 and is located at 1342 Shelburne Road. Copies of the applications are available for public inspection at the South Burlington City Hal].. Peter L. Jacob, Chairman South Burlington November 7, 1987 Planning Commission M E M O R A N D U M To: South Burlington Planning Commission From: William J. Szymanski, City Manager Re: November 24, 1987 agenda items Date: November 20, 1987 4) HEATHCOTE ASSOCIATES, SHELBURNE ROAD 1. Lot coverage leaves no room for snow storage. 40 to 70 spaces will be lost for that purpose during the holiday season when they are most required. 1 M E M O R A N D U M To: South Burlington Planning Commission From: Fire Chief Jim Goddette Re: November 24, 1987 agenda items Date: November 20, 1987 4) SOUTH BURLINGTON FACTORY OUTLET MALL ADDITION Plans have been reviewed by the Fire Department and the only problems I find are as follows: a) Main road wayfa'round building marked 30' but by scale (1" - 40') it comes out to 25'. b) North and south parking areas are only 16.5' deep. The Fire Department needs a 30 foot travel lane. Long cars in these short spaces will block the 30 foot aisle. 1 M E M O R A N D U M To: South Burlington Planning Commission From: Jane B. Lafleur, City Planner Re: November 24, 1987 agenda items Date: November 20, 1987 2) BLODGETT, 1342 SHELBURNE ROAD Enclosed is a map that describes the proposed zone change. This public hearing was rewarned to change the zoning from R4 to R7 on approximately 4.7 acres that are located east of the C-1 line to the eastern border. Also enclosed is a petition from the neigh- bors who oppose this zone change and are expected to attend the meeting. 3) LTH ASSOCIATES, HOWARD JOHNSONS MOTEL LTH and Associates has asked for an amendment to the approval motion that required a "schedule for the upgrade of Route 7 to be announced prior to construction of Phase II of the motel." Phase II is the last 80 rooms. The State has removed construction funds from the 5 year MPO plan. Design is underway now and r.o.w. acquisition is scheduled for 1989. Construction will occur sometime beyond 1991. Enclosed is a letter from John Larkin expressing his concern and his request to amend the final motion. Also enclosed is the original approval motion. David Spitz will be available to comment on the traffic ramifications. I have told the applicant of ,your request for a complete signal warrant study. 4) HEATHCOTE ASSOCIATES, 540-640 SHELBURNE ROAD Heathcote Associates proposes to construct a 20,400 square foot addition to the existing Factory Outlet. The plan has changed since the Sketch Plan we reviewed September 22, 1987 and now shows a 2,900 increase to the first floor and a 1000 square foot reduction to the mezzanine for 20,400 square feet total. The new foot print is 16,400 square feet. The plan denied in 1986 showed a 19,040 addition which did not include a basement we later found out about. It should be made clear that this proposed addition is larger than the addition we denied in 1986. 1 Memorandum - Planning November 20, 1987 Page 2 The following issues were left open at Sketch Plan: Parking: The Commission asked the applicant to prove the plan is an improvement over the existing parking ratio. The proposed parking plan is for 649 spaces or 5.3 spaces per 1000 gla. This calculation does not include the office mezzanine in gross leasable space. When calculated as leasable space as it should be, the ratio is 5.2 spaces/1000 gla. There are 558 existing spaces (includes newly acquired Parcel 2B but not spaces lost to the Southern Connector) or 5.4 spaces per 1000 gla. Therefore, this plan does not show an improvement to the parking ratio. (Under the ordinance 756 spaces are required; this plan repre- sents a 14% waiver.) There is no separate provision for busses as requested by Ms. Pugh. Mr. Belter also expressed concern since vehicles must leave the lot to access the rear of the building. Enclosed is deed information regarding a guaranteed r.o.w. from Mr. Farrell. The applicant was also asked to clear up the shared parking with Club New England. There is no information on this. See Bill Szymanski's comments regarding snow storage. Coverage: The Sketch Plan showed 85% lot coverage and this was acceptable to a majority of the Planning Commission. This new plan shows 90%. The existing lot coverage is approximately 98%. Traffic: Enclosed is a traffic study from Roger Dickinson. He concludes that: a) 116 additional trip ends will be generated during the p.m. peak hour; b) The Shelburne Road/Home Ave/O'Dell Parkway intersection will operate at LOS B after Phase I of the Southern Connec- tor is completed; c) The Shelburne Road/Sears/Factory Outlet intersection will be LOS E/F. By providing 2 left turning lanes out of the shopping centers, the LOS can be improved to C during the p.m. peak. That improvement is part of this proposal. Mr. Dickinson does not provide information on the Rte7/Swift Street intersection as he did for the 1986 study. Craig Leiner's comments are enclosed. Fire Access: The Planning Commission told the applicant to resolve Chief Goddette's concerns for access. Enclosed is a memo from him regarding this. 2 Memorandum - Planning November 20, 1987 Page 3 Landscaping: The proposed addition requires $12,900 in new land- scaping. The plan shows a row of norway maple along Route 7 and a honey locust, 2 crab and a norway maple along each side of the entrance drive. The plan is valued at approximately $26,000 and a bond must be posted for this amount prior to permit. Other: Enclosed is a letter from the City of Burlington regarding lack of sewer capacity. No South Burlington permit will be issued until the applicant can verify that capacity is available. 3 City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 PLANNER 658-7955 November 20, 1987 Dennis Webster Wiemann-Lamphere Architects 289 College Street Burlington, Vermont 05401 Re: Heathcote Associates, 540-640 Shelburne Road Dear Mr. Webster: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Enclosed are the agenda and my memo to the Planning Commission. Also enclosed are Bill Szymanski's and Chief Goddette's comments. Please be sure someone is present on Tuesday, November 24, 1987 to represent your request. Sincerely, j ,, 6 Jane B. Lafleur, City Planner JBL/mcp Encls cc: Roger Dickinson Philip Mehler PLANNER 658-7955 City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 October 2, 1987 Philip Mehler 488 Madison Avenue New York, New York 10022 Re: Heathcote Associates, Factory Outlet Mall Dear Mr. Mehler: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Enclosed are the minutes of the September 22, 1987 Planning Commission meeting. Please call me if you have any questions. Sincerely, B. Lafleurf Jane , City Planner JBL/mcp 1 Encl cc: Dennis Webster ' M E M O R A N D U M To: South Burlington Planning Commission From: Joe Weith, City Planner Re: September 20, 1988 agenda items Date: September 16, 1988 2) SYNON, REQUEST TO AMEND FINAL,PLAT AND SITE PLAN APPROVALS Synon came before the Planning Commission at the 9/6/88 meeting to request an amendment to both the Final Plat and Site Plan approvals for their project on Quarry Hill Road. Mr. Doremus withdrew the request prior to the Commission`Sdecision because he wanted to return when all the Planning Commission members were present. Therefore, Synon will again request that the stipulation which requires dedication of the roadway be waived. As a matter of interest, enclosed is a copy of the minutes from the 3/22/77 meeting when Horizon Heights subdivision was approved. Stipulation No. 5 specifically requires that the roadway be improved to City standard upon further subdivision or development of the parcel, however, it does not specifically require the road to be dedicated to the City. Even though dedication was not specifically stipulated, it might have been talked about and understood during the course of the meetings. 3) HEATHCOTE ASSOCIATES, FACTORY OUTLET MALL, SHELBURNE ROAD I will provide at next Tuesday's meeting (9/20/88) answers and information to the various questions and requests which were raised at the 9/14/88 Planning Commission meeting. 4) BANK OF VERMONT ADDITION, SHELBURNE ROAD The Bank of Vermont proposes to construct a 500 square foot addition in the attic; of the existing building. The addition would be a mezzanine in the existing building, thereby, the existing building footprint would remain the same. The property is Zoned Commercial 1. The building is currently non -conforming because it does not meet side and rear yard setbacks or front, yard coverage. The property is bounded by Commercial uses on the south and residential uses on the east. Shelburne Road runs along the west property line and Brewer Parkway along the north property line. 1 ^l.n. MEMORANDUM -Planning 9 3 September 18, 1987 1 Page 3 -�� 5) FACTORY OUTLET MALL, PHILIP MEHLER REAL ESTATE, 540-560 SHELBURNE ROAD Philip Mehler Real Estate proposes to construct a 24,000 square foot addition to the rear of the Factory Outlet Mall. It includes a ground floor (18,000 square feet) and a 6,000 square foot mezzanine. This is a sketch plan. A revised final plat will be the next step. I i6p r t• Access: Access is shown from the existing Shelburne Road entrance across from Sears Center, and from the northern Shelburne Road access via 3 curb cuts on O'Dell Parkway. The plans show curbing or barriers off of the property. Since Mr. Farrell is not agreeing to these improvements, they should be removed from the plan. Circulation: The plans show an improved traffic flow through the front of the lot. The parking lot in front of the Grand Union will be revised so that cars will enter at the southern end after traveling in front of the building. Parking: The parking standard is 5.5 spaces per 1000 square feet of gross floor area. This development requires 765 spaces based on this standard at 139,000 square feet. (133,000 square feet footprint and 6,000 square foot mezzanine) The plans show 645 spaces representing 16% waiver. The applicant requests consideration under a gross leasable standard which was applied to the University Mall. Under the standard, the 128,000 square feet would require 704 spaces at 5.5 spaces/1000 square gla. The applicant claims the University Mall was granted 5.03/1000 gla and they are requesting the same standard with 644 spaces required. In actuality, the University Mall was required to have a 5.3 apace/1000 square foot gla which would require 678 spaces here. Landscaping: The proposed addition requires $12,900 in new land- scaping. The plan shows a row of norway maple and euonymus along Route 7 and crab and norway maple along the sides of the entrance drive. The site will be heavily landscaping with large trees and bushes valued at approximately $26,000. The plan mimics the improved landscaping across the road at the Sears Center. Lot Coverage: The plans state that the existing lot coverage is 100% The new lot coverage will be 88% with 31% building coverage. In order to avoid a variance request for building coverage, the applicant will reduce the building to 30% coverage by Final Plat. This will improve the parking situat on as well. 1335a° 2�1�S2 Cg `Or1S �� `°' lb a . 10A,00 o �a 3 loacon.Qu.�t =15�a� --- MEMORANDUM -Planning September 18, 1987 Page 4 Traffic: A traffic study must be completed and submitted to me and Craig Leiner two weeks prior to the final plat hearing. It must show the level of service at the Sears/Outlet Mall/Route 7 intersection and the Home Avenue/Outlet Mall/Route 7 intersection at a minimum. The Commission may want to include Swift Street/ - Route 7 and the proposed I-89/Route 7 intersections. Other: See Chief doddette's and Bill Szymanski's comments. M E M O R A N D U M To: South Burlington Planning Commission From: William J. Szymanski, City Manager Re: September 22, 1987 agenda items Date: September 18, 1987 4) DESLAURIER - DORSET STREET 1. The issue of the inaccessible lots off Oakwood Drive should be resolved. 2. Lot coverage seems to be excessive leaving little or no room for snow storage. 5) SOUTH BURLINGTON FACTORY OUTLET, SHELBURNE ROAD 1. Plan has excessive lot coverage leaving no room for snow storage. 2. The narrow planting strips should be protected by concrete curbs (not precast). 3. Plan should show existing sidewalk. This sidewalk shall not be disturbed. 4. Plan should show method of handling storm water runoff. l Memorandum - Planning August 30, 1988 agenda items August 19, 1988 Page 4 Cuverage: The proposed plan shuws a building coverage of 30% aria a loL coverage of 90.9%. ExisLing building aria loL cuverage is 27 . 3% aria 98%, respec Li vely . Traffic: No new Lraffic study was coraducLed for- Lhis revision. The developers proposed aL Lhe lasL review (12/8/87) Lo spliL Lhe Liming on Lhe signal upposi Le Lhe Sears exiL so LhaL Sears' luL aria Lhis loL would exiL on differenL cycles. IL was also prupused Lo pruvide 2 lefL Luvra exiL lames from Lhe FacLory OutleL Mall. These improvements would r-esulL in level of service C aL Lhis inLersecLiurr. IL was also proposed Lo revise Lhe islands which would .help with Lruck Lraffic. I assume all of Lhese impruvemenLs are still being proposed. Landscaping: No landscaping is shown on Lhe plan. I assume LhaL Lhe landscape plan pr•eseriLed on 12/8/87 is still being proposed as parL of Lhis revision. The landscape plan preseraLed on 12/8/81 is valued aL approximaLely $26,000, well wiLhin Lhe $12,900 new landscaping r-equir-emeriL. Mary -Barbara expressed concern LhaL Lhe plaraLings proposed alurig Lhe fruraL of Lhe building are covered by uverhangs. She quesUiorrs whether anything will be able Lu gruw Lhere. The 12/8/87 plan proposes BechLel Crabapple Lo be plan Led in Lhese plan Ling areas. The curr•errL plan shuws a 5.5 fooL wide green space sLr.ip along Lhe suuLh prroperLy line. Pr•eseriLly, Lhis area is paved all Lhe way up Lo the fence and a guard rail has been puL in. I would like assurarice frum Lhe developers LhaL Lhis will all be ripped up aria renwved in under- Lu provide Lhis green sLrip. 4 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, August 30, 1988, at 7:30 P.M. to consider the following: 1) Revised Final Plat application of Heathcote Associates for construction of an 11,460 square foot addition to existing South Burlington Factory Outlet Mall. Property is bounded on the north by T. Farrell, H. Thomas and Champlain Oil Company, Inc., on the east by Touchdown properties (F. Tiballi), on the south by I-189 and on the west by Route 7 and is located at 540-560 Shelburne Road. 2) Preliminary Plat application of A.C.M. Associates for a four - lot residential subdivision on a 1.72 acre parcel. The property is bounded on the north by H. Giguire, L. Dongara, W. Wade and G. Danyow, G. Moreau, L. Flynn, on the east by M. Pacicot, on the south by R. Dumont, and on the west by Airport Parkway, and is located on Airport Parkway. 3) Resubdivision application of Robert Brown and Angelo Pizzagalli to resubdivide two adjoining 1.2 acre lots on Allen Road. The two existing lots, each with a frontage of 1.55 feet on Allen Road, would be resubdivided to create two new lots, one with a frontage of 310 feet on Allen Road, and the other located behind the lot fronting Allen Road. A 20 foot right-of-way will be provided along the western boundary of the newly created front lot for access to the rear lot. The property is bounded on the north by Allen Road, on the east by R. Brown, A. Pizzagalli, on the south by F. Irish, and on the west by R. Brosseau, and F. Irish. Copies of the applications are available for public inspection at the South Burlington City Hall. Peter L. Jacob Chairman, South Burlington Planning Commission August 13, 1988 8//29/89 JW MOTION OF APPROVAL I move the South Burlington Planning Commission approve the Revised Final Plat application of Heathcote Associates for: 1) change the parking and landscaping layout, and 2) request an amendment to stipulation #5 of the condition of approval dated 10/14/88 regarding improvements to the Shelburne Road/Factory Outlet intersection based on the following stipulations: 1) The stipulations setforth in the "Notice of Decision and Statement of Conditions" dated 10/14/88 which are not superseded by this approval motion shall apply. 2) The Planning Commission approves the revised parking and landscaping layout as shown on the 3 page set of plans titled "Factory Outlet Center, South Burlington, Vermont, Site & Utili- ties Plan", prepared by Fitzpatrick -Llewellyn Inc., and dated March, 1989", last revised 6/6/89. The Planning Commission ors front parking alternative # 2 as shown on page of the plans. 3) Condition #5 of the 10/14/88 "Notice of Decision and Statement of Conditions" shall be replaced by the following condition: "Applicant shall retain a $12,000 bond with the City for the cost. of constructing or implementing the following improvements at the intersection of Shelburne Road and the driveway access for this project: a) As recommended in the "Traffic Systems Management Study" prepared by J.H.K. & Associates, dated June, 1987, the new controller shall be timed so that it is operated in semi -actuated fashion with an overlap of the phasing for the lefts from Route 7; and b) The J.H.K. Study mentioned above recommended that the intersection improvements include dual left turn lanes out of the Factory Outlet with split phasing for the approaches from both shopping centers. Six months after the new addition is open to the public, the applicant shall take new counts and conduct an analysis to determine whether the dual left turn lanes and split phasing would improve the overall operation of the intersection. This study report shall be submitted to the Planning Commission for its review. If the Commis- sion determines such improvements are necessary, the applicant shall implement such improvements. If the Commission determines such improvements are not neces- sary, the bond shall be released. jj) The applicant shall record a Revised Final Plat addressing stipulation5#2 above within 90 days or this approval is null and void. 1 °/ 11 % f3f5 COA)C) r vn) � �tPPRa ✓�, Applicant shall submit a suitable bond in an 5/mount to be determined by the City Engineer for the cost of constructing improvements at the proposed intersection of Shelburne Road and the driveway access for this project prior to issuance of a building permit. As recommended in the "Traffic Systems Management Study", prepared by J.H.K. & Associates, dated June, 1987, the improvements shall include dual left turn lanes out of the Factory Outlet and split phasing for the approaches from both shopping centers. A new controller shall also be installed which is operated in semi -actuated fashion with an overlap of the phasing for the lefts from Route 7. This will permit early release of northbound throughs which are opposed by light southbound lefts. A bond shall be posted for these improvements prior to permit in an amount determined by the City Engineer. The J.H.K. study set the amount for all these improvements at $80,000.00.-i' 6. All parking areas and travel lanes shall be kept free of snow. This approval specifically disallows any snow storage on this site in any parking areas or travel ways. Applicant has represented that it will remove snow to property located southeast of this site. Applicant shall promptly notify the Planning Commission of any change in these plans for snow removal and submit a new plan for snow removal for approval by the Planning Commission. 5 9/20/88 JW DE-tJIA L_. MOTION OF APPROVA I move the South Burlington Planning Commission deny the revised Final Plat of Heathcote Associates for construction of a 15,460 square foot addition (11,460 square foot building footprint plus 4,000 square foot mezzanine) to the South Burlington Factory Outlet at 540-640 Shelburne Road as depicted on a 3 page set of plans entitled "South Burlington Factory Outlet, South Burlington, Vermont" prepared by Wiemann-Lamphere Architects, dated 11/18/87 last revised 8/29/88 for the following reasons: 1. The proposed plan does not meet the parking standard of 5.5 spaces per 1000 square feet of gross floor area. (Table I, South Burlington Zoning Regulations). Under this standard, 729 spaces are required. The plan shows 619 spaces. 2. The abutting property owned by Thomas Farrell has legal right to 50 parking spaces in the day before 6 P.M. and 100 spaces in the evening, weekends and holidays on this property and the Davis parcel to the east. This legal right further diminishes the available parking spaces for the Outlet Center. The Planning Commission feels that the overlap in the hours of operation, especially on weekends and during the holidays does not warrant a waiver of the parking spaces for shared use as allowed under Section 19.256. 3. The proposed parking lots are excessive amounts of pavement with little buffer area for passing traffic, public street and adjoining property. The Planning Commission denies this for aesthetic reasons as allowed under SEction 19.1519. 4. The proposed plan does not have adequate snow storage area. Storing snow on site will eliminate parking spaces. 5. The lot coverage of 91% is excessive. Allowed coverage is 70%. 4-1 9/20/88 JW MOTION OF APPROVAL I move the South Burlington Planning Commission approve the revised Final Plat of Heathcote Associates for construction of a 15,460 square foot addition (11,460 square foot building footprint plus 4,000 square foot mezzanine) to the South Burlington Factory Outlet at 540-640 Shelburne Road as depicted on a 3 page set of plans entitled "South Burlington Factory Outlet, South Burlington, Vermont," prepared by Wiemann-Lamphere, Architects dated 11/18/87 last revised 8/29/88 with the following stipulations: 1. The applicant shall post a $26,000 landscaping bond prior to permit. i'eaa a Q r w a ni b e to Lis -ewe a���n oleranL 2. A $2978 contribution to the Shelburne Road intersection improvement fund shall be paid prior to permit. 3. The plan shall be revised prior to recording to show the 4,000 square foot mezzanine to be included in the addition. 4. The plan shall be revised to show concrete curbs between paved areas and -all —green green space. o{ r." k 0 elf_ 5. Prior to permit, a bond shall the posted for the intersection improvements proposed for the Shelburne Road driveway in an amount determined by the City Engineer. As recommended in the "Traffic Systems Management Study", prepared by JHK and Associates, dated June, 1987, the improvements shall also include dual left turn lanes out of the Factory Outlet and split phasing for the approaches from both shopping centers. A new controller shall also be installed which is operated in semi -actuated fashion with an overlap of the phasing for the lefts from Route 7. This will permit early release of northbound throughs which are opposed by light southbound lefts. A bond shall be posted for these improvements prior to permit in an amount determined by the City Engineer. The JHK study set the amount for all these improvements at $80,000. 6. All snow shall be plowed onto the adjoining property to the southeast. If and when the property to the southeast becomes unavailable for storing snow, the applicant shall dispose of snow according to a snow removal plan to be approved by the Planning Commission. 1 1--A"ThePlanning Commission recognizes that 50 spaces may be used by other properties in the daytime before 6:00 P.M. and up to 100 spaces in the evenings/weekends and holidays for the businesses located on the adjoining property to the north. -4. In that the traffic analysis assumed the completion of Contract I of the Burlington Southern Connector for acceptable level of service at affected intersections, no building permit (� will be issued until Contract I of the Connector is completed. Contract I involves a complete reconstruction of the Shelburne Road/I-189 interchange. The plan shall be revised to show/ Pro parking space along the north and south sides of the Factory Outlet building-. This will result in a total of proposed parking spaces. G7� <. The applicant shall cooperate in a 3-year parking study to be conducted on the property. The methodology shall be developed by the City Planner with assistance from the Regional Planning Commission. The applicant's primary responsibility will be the collection of data which may include counts of parked cars and records on gross leasable area. This approval will also include a yearly review of the parking data by the City Planner and Planning Commission. If the Planning Commission determines that there is not a sufficient number of parking spaces to adequately accommodate parking demand generated by the Factory Outlet Mall, the applicant shall impose measures to mitigate the parking space short fall. The measures to be instituted during peak parking demand periods will be determined by the Planning Commission and may include, but are not limited to, the hiring of parking lot attendants to regulate the ingress of vehicles onto the property or the restriction of gross leasable area in the building. ,YLr. It is the applicants responsibility to record the final plat within 90 days or this approval is null and void. It must be signed by the Chairman or Clerk of the Planning Commission and approved by the Planner prior to recording. ,' VVl '►L t k ®/" ! ✓� / �s'Yw ��wv S el l Q- v.%Z/v LAY -eyP_24_- . . lik 0 9/20/88 JW MOTION OF APPROVAL I move the South Burlington Planning Commission approve the revised Final Plat of Heathcote Associates for construction of a 15,460 square foot addition (11,460 square foot building footprint plus 4,000 square foot mezzanine) to the South Burlington Factory Outlet at 540-640 Shelburne Road as depicted on a 3 page set of plans entitled "South Burlington Factory Outlet, South Burlington, Vermont," prepared by Wiemann-Lamphere, Architects dated 11/18/87 last revised 8/29/88 with the following stipulations: 1. The applicant shall post a $26,000 landscaping bond prior to permit._.__ _ ar mare _-ev_e_ rgY.e-en salt_ ant spec' Revised c"p al n --11 ' -� roved ��ityPrier prior to reco 2. A $2978 contribution to the Shelburne Road intersection improvement fund shall be paid prior to permit. 3. The plan shall be revised prior to recording to show the 4,000 square foot mezzanine to be included in the addition.�ViJ�c)�s [��:.�.� �v-C-fl- �Zcc ✓�cL�e �.�� —�zc> .. 4. The plan s-h- revised to show concrete curbs between paved areas and all green space.-- —1 5. Prior to permit, a bond shall be posted for the intersection improvements proposed for the Shelburne Road driveway in an amount determined by the City Engineer. As recommended in the "Traffic Systems Management Study", prepared by JHK and Associates, dated June, 1987, the improvements shall also include dual left turn lanes out of the Factory Outlet and split phasing for the approaches from both shopping centers. A new controller shall also be installed which is operated in semi -actuated fashion with an overlap of the phasing for the lefts from Route 7. This will permit early release of northbound throughs which are opposed by light southbound lefts. A bond shall be posted for these improvements prior to permit in an amount determined by the City Engineer. The JHK study set the amount for all these improvements at $80,000. 6. All snow shall be plowed onto the adjoining property to the southeast. If and when the property to the southeast becomes unavailable for storing snow, the applicant shall dispose of snow according to a snow removal plan to be approved by the Alanning Commission. 7. The Planning Commission approves 623 599 parking spaces. In 1 r �U"lam" a 8.• The Planning Commission recognizes that 50 spaces may be used by other properties in the daytime before 6:00 P.M. and up to 100 spaces in the evenings/weekends and holidays for the businesses located on the adjoining property to the north. 9. In that the traffic analysis assumed the completion of Contract I of the Burlington Southern Connector for acceptable level of service at affected intersections, no building permit, will be issued until Contract I of the Connector is completed. Contract I involves a complete reconstruction of the Shelburne Road/I-189 interchange. 10. The plan shall be revised to show no parking spaces along the north and south sides of the Factory Outlet building. This will result in a total of -5'' proposed parking spaces. 11. The applicant shall cooperate in a 3-year parking study to be conducted on the property. The methodology shall be developed by the City Planner with assistance from the Regional Planning Commission. The applicant's primary responsibility will be the collection of data which may include counts of parked cars and records on gross leasable area. This approval will also include a ,yearly review of the parking data by the City Planner and Planning Commission. If the Planning Commission determines that there is not a sufficient number of parking spaces to adequately accommodate parking demand generated by the Factory Outlet Mall, the applicant shall impose measures to mitigate the parking space short fall. The measures to be instituted during peak parking demand periods will be determined by the Planning Commission and may include, but are not limited to, the hiring of parking lot attendants to regulate the ingress of vehicles onto the property or the restriction of gross leasable area in the building. 1', It is the applicants responsibility to record the final plat thin 90 days or this approval. is null and void. It must be signed by the Chairman or Clerk of the Planning Commission and approved by the Planner prior to recording. 2 e a PLANNING COMMISSION 14 SEPTEMBER 1988 PAGE 5 Mr. Stitzel said judges cannot discuss any matter pending before them without notification to all persons involved. You are supposed to make a decision based on what happens at a public hearing. Other Business a) Jake's Bar & Grill: Mr. Weith noted they want to put windows on the patio and enclose it for winter. This was treated as a full addition for traffic and other standards. Members felt they wanted the applicant to come before the full Commission. b) Peter Bergh has requested to put in a row of red pine instead of cedar. He said they will maintain the height. Members said they want the 6 foot cedars. c) Commission pictures for the annual report will be taken next week. d) There will be a meeting on 5 October with the City Council for the presentation of the Natural Resources Committee. Mr. Craig said he would like to see their maps ahead of time. Executive Session Mr. Craig moved the Commission meet in Executive Session to continue discussion of the Heathcote litigation and to resume regular session only to adjourn. Ms. Peacock seconded. Motion passed unanimously. gIi414s[ Pc M,r9 V ��u�-� bra-u�� �•-mac.. �i� �� �.-- �- o�.� a�-C�. ,J f' 9/6/88 JW MOT10N OF APPROVAL I move that the South Burlington Planning Commission approve the revised Final Plat of Heathcote Associates for construction of a 15,460 square foot addition (11,460 square foot building footprint plus 4,000 square foot mezzanine) to the South Burlington Factory Outlet at 540-640 Shelburne Road as depicted on a plan entitled "South Burlington Factory Outlet, South Burlington, Vermont," prepared by Wiemann-Lamphere, Architects dated 11/18/87 last revised 8/29/88 with the following stipulations: 1. The applicant shall post a $26,000 landscaping bond prior to permit. Landscape plan will be revised to show more evergreen and more salt tolerant species. Revised plan shall be approved by City Planner prior to recording. 2. A $2978 contribution to the Shelburne Road intersection improvement fund shall be paid prior to permit. 3. The plan shall be revised prior to recording to show the 4,000 square foot mezzanine to be included in the addition. 4. The plan shall be revised to show concrete curbs between paved areas and all green space. J 5. Prior to permit, a bond shall be posted for the intersection improvements proposed for the Shelburne Road driveway in an (� amount determined by the City Engineer. ,p As recommended by the JHK study the improvements shall also include split phasing for the approaches from both shopping W centers. A new controller shall also be installed which is operated in semi -actuated fashion with an overlap of the phasing r1 for the lefts from Route 7. This will permit early release of )' northbound throughs which are opposed by light southbound lefts. "f A bond shall be posted for these improvements prior to permit in r` J> an amount determined by the City Engineer. The JHK study set the amount for all these improvements at $80,000. 6. All snow shall be plowed onto the adjoining property to the east. Upon development of the property- to the east, all snow shall be removed from the site. 7 7. The Planning Commission approves �Z parking spaces. In doing so, 16% of the required spaces are waived. 8. The Planning Commission recognized that 50 spaces may be used by other properties in the daytime before 6:00 P.M. and up to 100 spaces in the evenings/weekends and holidays for these other users. /�4' S 2 9. In that the traffic analysis assumed the completion of/ the Burlington Southern Connector for acceptable level of service at affected intersections, no building permit will be issued until //the Connector is completed. 10. The Planning Commission approves 75 compact car spaces or 12% of the total provided. 11. It is the applicants responsibility to record the final plat within 90 days or this approval is null and void. It must be signed by the Chairman or Clerk of the Planning Commission and approved by the Planner prior to recording. f�� Wlca � ✓� S � � ��'C I 2 9/6/88 JW MOTION OF DENIAL I move the South Burlington Planning Commission deny the revised Final flatof fleat.heote Associates for construction of a 15,460 sgiinre foot .addition (11,460 square foot building footprint plus 4,000 square foot mezzanine) to the South Burlington Factory Outlet at. 540-640 Shelburne Road as depicted on a plan entitled "South Burlington Factory Outlet, South Burlington, Vermont" prepared by Wiemann-Lamphere Architects, dated 11/18/87 last I't'vised 8/29/88 for the following reasons: 1. The proposed plan does not meet the parking standard of 5.5 spaces per 1000 square feet of gross floor area. (Table I, South Burlington Zoning Regulations). Under this standard, 729 spaces are required. The plans show 612 spaces. 2. The abutting property owned by Thomas Farrell has legal right to 50 parking spaces in the day before 6 P.M. and 100 spaces in the evening, weekends and holidays on this property and the Davis parcel to the east. This legal right further diminishes the available parking spaces for the Outlet Center. The Planning Commission feels that the overlap in the hours of operation, especia Lly on weekends, does not warrant a waiver of the parking spaces for shared use as allowed under Section 19.256. 3. The proposed parking lots are excessive amounts of pavement with little buffer area for passing traffic, public street and adjoining property. The Planning Commission denies this for aesthetic reasons as allowed under Section 19.103d and "e". 4. The proposed plan does not have adequate snow storage area. Storing snow on site will eliminate parking spaces. 5. The .lot coverage of 91% is excessive. Allowed coverage is 70%. 3 9/6/88 JW MOTION OF DENIAL 1 move the South Burlington Planning Commission deny the revised Final Plat of Heathcote Associates for construction of a 15,460 square foot addition (11,460 square foot building footprint plus 4,000 square foot mezzanine) to the South Burlington. Factory Outlet, at 540-640 Shelburne Road as depicted on a plan entitled "South Burlington Factory Outlet, South Burlington, Vermont prepared by Wiemann-Lamphere Architects, dated 11/18/87 last revised 8/29/88 for the following reasons: 1. The proposed plan does not meet the parking standard of 5.5 spaces per 1000 square feet of gross floor area. (Table I, South Burlington Zoning Regulations). Under this standard, 729 spaces are required. The plans show 612 spaces. 2. The abutting property owned by Thomas Farrell has legal right to 50 parking spaces in the day before 6 P.M. and 100 spaces in the evening, weekends and holidays on this property and the Davis parcel to the east. This legal right further diminishes the available parking spaces for the Outlet Center. The Planning Commission feels that the overlap in the hours of operation, especially on weekends, does not warrant a waiver of the parking spaces for shared use as allowed under Section 19.256. 3. The proposed parking lots are excessive amounts of pavement with little buffer area for passing traffic, public street and adjoining property. The Planning Commission denies this for aesthetic reasons as allowed under Section 19.103d and "e". 4. The proposed plan does not have adequate snow storage area. Storing snow on site will eliminate parking spaces. 5. The lot coverage of 91% is excessive. Allowed coverage is 70%. K �-o 1o4,000 19 as, 20g 339 -Z 39 3 SS 41 ca No Text ;;evr-P Fcr �l r 4 z� fLq jt�s F,> � Pon -,-� - b o/ 9 rA L'4 a � �i�o (,c-ZL✓✓G1 07� 40� KIU f ,,, A �*- U,4 h yo, l MOTION OF DENIAL 12/7/87 JBL That the South Burlington Planning Commission deny the revised final plat of Heathcote Associates for construction of a 20,400 square foot addition to the South Burlington Factory Outlet at 540-640 Shelburne Road as depicted on a three page set of plans entitled "South Burlington Factory Outlet, South Burlington, Vermont" prepared by Wiemann-Lamphere Architects, page one dated 9/3/87, last revised 11/18/87, page 2 dated 11/18/87 for the following reasons: 1) The proposed plan does not meet the parking standard of 5.5 spaces per 1000 square feet of gross floor area. (Table I, South Burlington Zoning Regulations). Under this standard, 756 spaces are required. The plans show 650 spaces. 2) The abutting property owned by Thomas Farrell has legal right to 50 parking spaces in the day before 6:00 P.M. and 100 spaces in the evening, weekends and holidays on this property and the Davis parcel to the east. This legal right further diminishes the available parking spaces for the Outlet Center. The Planning Commission feels that the overlap in the hours of operation, especially on weekends, does not warrant a waiver of the parking spaces for shared use as allowed under Section 19.256. 3) The existing parking situation is deficient. The Planning Commission believes the recently acquired land (parcel 2B) and l� the land for the proposed expansion should be used for parking to remedy the existing parking deficiency. Ak5� 1 4) The proposed parking lots are excessive amounts of pavement with little buffer area from passing traffic, public streets and b� adjoining property. The Planning Commission denies this for V aesthetic reasons as allowed under Section 19.103 d and e. 5) The proposed plan does not have adequate snow storage area. Storing snow on site will eliminate parking spaces. 7 FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED Engineering and Planning Services One Wentworth Drive • Williston • Vermont • 05495 • (802) 878-3000 4 December 1989 Mr. Joseph Weith, Planner City of South Burlington Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 Re: Heathcote/ Factory Outlet; revision to parking lot File: 88173 Dear Mr. Weith: On behalf of our Client, Heathcote Associates, we are herewith asking to make a minor change to the parking lot of the above -referenced Project. The approved layout has an entrance "chute" into the parking lot in front of Grand Union. This 22-foot wide road was designed to deliver the vehicles to the parking lot in front of Grand Union with virtually no impedance; i.e. no parked vehicles can back into the path of entering or exiting cars, and no turns can be made until the end of the "chute". So far, the chute has worked quite well in this respect. However, at the merger with the parking lot a bottleneck has been detected. Some vehicles appear to have a difficult time staying in their proper lane as they turn left or right, and it appears there is a comparable problem as cars leaving the parking area try to re-enter the "chute". We believe that to relieve this geometric "frustration", which many drivers seem incapable of handling, that a widened or flared curb should be provided, allowing both entering an exiting vehicles to make a more "leisurely" or less restricted turning maneuver. To provide the radius curbs we think are needed to accommodate the high volumes of traffic, we must, however, eliminate a single parking stall on either side of the "chute" at its connection to the parking lot. We endorse this design change, since it appears a large portion of the drivers using the "chute" are encountering frustration, in turn slowing the movement of traffic, which all concerned agreed was a primary motivation for changing the parking layout. We are also working on a new signage program to help drivers orient to the new driveways and parking areas. We plan to have a preliminary layout for you by tomorrow, with a little good fortune. Design • Inspection • Studies • Permitting • Surveying Mr. Joseph Weith, Planner FILE: 88173 4 December 1989 Page Two Thank you for taking the time to discuss the proposed curb/parking changes contained herein, and as shown on the enclosed plans (4 copies). Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact us at your convenience. Sincerely, FITZPATRICK,-LLEWELL INCORPORATED Douglas R. FitzPatrick, P.E. cc: Philip Mehler Tim Gallup DRF/ka FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED Engineering and Planning Services ssw a -"'r�-&T NAA-1LOT- — Fol V 1 �- �"lUor l�n1E ✓•� � E VIST rStJM1D ---- TOeIMA�ti --� STor -� J - bAIt TT _ uJE (vEi1cY r� FA C q� No Oh- N w Zoa.H 41 I i I � � 1 I r I rAL.ITto -w I I I StEA.w`K SwutT ) (TY" r I I I 1 �Iy I >r v 15 � 1 I I i 4 I I I i I I 1 i II ! � �-�-- - I----� � ____===`ter:====___�-___..•„_-�--------- i-- -11 w`o�iayT:.�.o..��eDs •� r1J"l � I u.MT `. I „- j r I I � „TILIT 1 ,1JoTt ptpv�0i J Q I OI!•J•VL '� G4JP�' E r ST,..r{ �--- r — �I L To to;" 70pPiVl�T I t 4/C• �t' � Hn.I��,p � 71Ot`VNLK — I OA TO 2En4.•J (Y(?1_____J �L•pr ��ST�•Jcl tioTE.. PP_pd I DE �W1 L4 ti B ZLJ J n L, T ti �xE.�Go G~I, ac_Tg��•J7 E.4SEl1t.JT 1-1+89 RAMP a�ocac �n o�'Za Tom. C�oZ7 ,4F C K. gr7,11 , D . I � I I I Jo7E; Foe EKTEcio2 G64T DETAILS SEE atc.+ITEcTD2a� (E) P""-^ Karen L. Rowell 817 Pine Street Apt 308 Burlington, Vermont 05401 November 17, 1989 Mr. Joe Weith South Burlington Planning Commission 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, Vermont Dear Mr. Weith: I would like to express my deep disappointment in the rearrangement of the parking lot at Grand Union on Shelburne Road in South Burlington. The existing parking lot provided safe and easy access to all rows from the main stretch in front of the super market. Now with only two exits parking has become an extremely frustrating experience. It also has become more dangerous as other irritated drivers weave in and out of the rows searching for parking. (when previously all they had to do was look from the main stretch in front of the building down the rows). It is my understanding that Grand Union was against the project from the beginning. The Planning Commission's project has become an irritant to Grand Union as well as to their customers. Perhaps taking into consideration what the consumer wanted as well as the owner (in this case the owner being against the change) this costly monstrosity could have been avoided. If the City of South Burlington's Planning Commission thinks that "beautifying" this parking lot (strictly a matter of opinion and rare opinion at that) is more important than safe and easy access to parking spots, then perhaps a new Planner who could spend his or her time more wisely is needed. If the Planning Commission wants to do something with Grand Union why not plant some trees around the parking lot to help reverse global warming rather than complicating a perfectly good parking lot. Sincerely, Karre`n' L. Rowell Former Grand Union Shopper Su►.,MA2� pF tPA21L1"J4 xr/yES� -k OPICrINAL Aj=,,p2.ovc� -R-Ar1 - (�, I 1 767AL. ,4 LTE2NA7f v E �1 �3 3 MOD/F/ffD 7E>-rq t_ Sp c GAS 5'9 7 603 � /S l J� B`Z9�By SUMN►+42� �� 1�AiZ.k►nJCc A�-TE�,IJATiVES -k OKiC IAIAL TFIAN - (�, 19 -Th7AL SP4CJFs ,4 LTaa/,J T/ V E- 7&-r4 L 5/P.4 GAS i'1 59 '7 z 603 M E M O R A N D U M To: South Burlington Planning Commission From: Joe Weith, City Planner Re: August 22, 1989 agenda items Date: August 18, 1989 3) FACTORY OUTLET, SHELBURNE ROAD Heathcote Associates proposes to revise the parking layout and requests an amendment to stipulation #5 of the approval motion regarding improvements to the Shelburne Road/Factory Outlet entrance intersection. Parking: The applicant proposes to revise the parking lot in front of the Grand Union and the parking along the south side of the building. The applicant feels more than one access point to the front parking area is necessary. I agree. 3 alternatives are proposed (enclosed). I recommend either Alternative 1 or Alternative 2. I believe these would provide adequate access to the parking spaces and have less of a potential for conflict with the free flow circulation lane around the building perimeter. The parking along the south side of the building is being revised due to a determination by the VAOT that it does not want the existing pavement along the I-189 retaining wall removed (letter enclosed). The applicant has proposed moving some of this lost green space to planted islands in the rear parking lot. These islands will improve the appearance of the rear parking lot, but more importantly, will improve the circulation and parking patterns. In place of the lost green space along the I-189 retaining wall, the plan shows perpendicular parking spaces. In the previous review, the Planning Commission specifically re- quired parallel parking spaces along the north and south sides of the building. Provided below is a summary of the various parking alternatives: Total spaces Total spaces Total spaces approved w/perpendicular w/parallel Alternative (10/14/88) parking parking 1 619 610 597 2 619 616 603 3 619 634 621 1 Intersection Improvements The 10/14/89 condition of approval (enclosed)required that the ftl1oU/1-I'� I1rCl':St n ILt.-. r/r•. r ;�i�t:;j }� 2 _ lil it' 7 i J11:K & Associates be completed by the applicant.. 1. Dual left turn lanes out of the Factory Outlet and split phasing for the approaches from both shopping centers; 2. a new controller shall be installed; and 3. operation of the controller in semi -actuated fashion with an overlay of the phasing for the lefts from Route 7. Installation of the new controller (improvement #2) has been completed by the State. Roger Dickinson reevaluated the traffic analysis and found that improvement #1 is not necessary. The VAOT and Burlington concur with this conclusion. Craig Leiner, however, is not thoroughly convinced that. improvement #1 is not needed. He recommended that the applicant take counts 6 months after T.J. Maxx is open and rerun the analysis to see if improve- ment. #1 is needed. If the analysis shows a need for the improve- ment, the applicant will be required to complete it. If the improvement is not warranted, the bond will be released. The reevaluation conducted by Roger Dickinson showed that im- provement #3 would benefit the -traffic situation. I recommend that the applicant still be required to implement this improve- ment. I recommend that the City retain $12,000 of the original $80,000 bond to cover improvement #1, if needed, and improvement 43. 4) G.T. BAGEL FACTORY, WHITE STREET George Trono proposes to revise his site plan for operation of a bagel/coffee shop business at 35 White Street which was approved by the Planning Commission on 9/22/87. Mr. Trono proposes to remove the proposed posts separating his property from the "U- Save" Beverage Store property which was added as a requirement by the Planning Commission. Mr. Trono claims that these posts would hinder efficient onsite circulation (see enclosed letter). I agree that the location of the posts would hinder the maneuverability of trucks on his property and the Beverage Store's property. I do not completely understand why these posts were required. I will check with Jane Lafluer and Craig Leiner before Tuesday's meeting to see of they can shed some light. 5) MOUNTAIN CABLE, LOT 2. KIMBALL AVENUE 2 TELEPHONE MEMO Name: �+JE _�GEf ------ Date: Contact�t�u.s[L_ _ Subject -- - ___ a.�.� _--�.�a-cam � �..�,�..; �� c�.,G►�� � �. �� toe ►+--42 U--� --- -� a-.-� Signature I' o go i / I ISO STOP i I I r3A� �vwITE PA, nIjEn I r L4 AF- (SEE SHT 2) + II I I 1 -------�1 ------ o f c 1 I I I eG-/N0vk LI 1 I Lq Ol �, E w 1 L NE Clow Ir' -5I . I � I , 1, F3EFOCE t 1 �h I "I Ca�ISTZ�Je-T10� 1 I FACTOR I INLET To PIN ti ; J I ZO$.%cj - C c L. i liG 00 N I I I ---•. I ' I I I I I I PA-4TE D I G20S5 - WALK (SH EETT T-a ) (TYP F I I I _ w 01 ' , L,C,WT24 N I II 18' I I �dHIT'E PA njTEI> I I I I II LINE I I I I LIJ I I I I 11 I I I � I 'V I �I GEu7c..;,ic �1 eoL4ae II ICI � I I I � � �\ 8 •��---T--- -- r- Ir- Sa ` LI�,uT`, 1 I I I i I To /,AA �, 6, Li I GAS 71-------------------- _ I I V --- I I I I 11 I I I I�i4µT �g E,eiSTI I I I I I I 1241 I I D20P 114LEZ To eE/AA-4 I �,J l I f�'AiAP Ul I L — — 'n��o _ STOP 5"C _ I 0 E�T�� I I ` TO ZF/AAIP..1 (T`��1 q,.lsF�o2/AE2 IJo'rE' PeplIOE ti1Ew Z4"-le 8" ?A'LJ IL1T te1Mco►-I�.IEC-T T� EASE����T P LA�-4 le PIPEI, �" - 189 RAMP I FLA�1 E � T+�+��STN �Loc� E n c� � z4 fir` , Cool y�,�T 4,yv,D, ------------------------------ I II I I i t-40TGR' For- EATEIZIOC AL ( 4 PTi.rDISTAILS SEE I-C Ij Mr. iLl' ! F-11 ji! 4-7 a] ""'N i � + r • �17 ♦ �4 I: f ' � • • T -a' r � M 1� • �.�.i, �.., � �j� /f�/ . ' !� • L'[-:..' `:.: , yy, ,. .• 1, a _.�' . le 14, Now 141. 11 1 • • • � ` I • t r F i • .�... � �� � '� * e'er � �"� ,' , � ii �,. `Ir:, flaw A �•..•..1•.w. ..+++.r• 7j! jai •r Ob • rR is -�• 1 . ♦ 041 R. ALLAN PAUL PA U L, FRANK & COLLINS, I N C. JOSEPH E. FRANK PETER M. COLLINS ATTORNEYS AT LAW JOHN T. SARTORE ONE CHURCH STREET B. MICHAEL FRYE ANTHONY B. LAMB P. O. BOi� 1 3O7 y-1 MAIN ,rf?EE,, P. ALAN D. PORT " (I H� n �467 G. S. CRO KER BE S. CROCKER BENNETT, II BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05402-1 307 "TELEPEE""1" �;-,603 o��«s ROBERT S.ALMA TELE G--)NE 1802, : c'3 155� TELEPHONE (802) 658-2311 DAVID A. BARRRRA TELECOPIER (802) 658-0042 CHARLES F. STORROW STEPHEN J. SOULE JANE HART MARTER MICHAEL 1. GREEN JOHN J. COLLINS PAUL R. BOWLES GAIL E. HAFFNER September 23, 1988 CHARLES E. FINBERG MATTHEW C. SUSMAN JOHN T. LAVOIE MARK A. SINCLAIR MICHAEL J. HARRIS EILEEN M. BLACKWOOD Mr. Joseph Weith City Planner South Burlington Dorset Street South Burlington, Municipal Office Vermont 05403 RE: Heathcote Associates/South Burlington Factory Outlet Dear Joe: I just wanted to confirm in writing my client's position in connection with conditions imposed upon the project. After the City of South Burlington allowed University Mall to not only proceed with construction, but to open for business before the improvements to Dorset Street had even been started, it seems unfair and discriminatory to impose that condition upon my client. It appears especially onerous considering the fact that a substantial portion of the improvements to Shelburne Road have already been completed and the impact of my clients addition on traffic is miniscule compared to that created by University Mall. I would hope that the planning commission would reconsider that particular condition before next Tuesday. Cordially yours, PAUL,' RA COLLINS, INC. LPeter, M Colli-n-S-, Esq. PMC:cab cc Steve Stitzel, Esq. McNeil, Murray & Sorrell M �I12K�n1Cy SPAGE/CrLA RATIO GaLGVLA7ioA1S LPA` 1%,r �AJGLVA1�1�r RF 1��GULPMZ SPI�LES pLnNCr Noi2-n-1 � C••o�� stt�P.Z c�C` `C31.�C�CT. izI� coo 6;L,A.. 6,4-�- -SQAGLS S. P/ /ood G, L. A T 1=Z0 t�OS� 1� F�. t�. k l. J6 L A' -To V T 1 Ni r- L-u r) i,i G IT Arz A i-LjF- L -s PAGE S A Le N G- j�l o PL-T-k d So u'Tt+ St DeS o�-- SL D & . 121) pDo Gr. L . A . 6,2 3 Sl�-AGES S. Z SpAGesJ /000 G. L.A , G> pr�oPoSEQ I�i1�2K iN� LA`tmur �xGt_uDi.uG A►.��r SPAc,� S 41-0N G- N�� t Sow r11 SIDe-S OF �Zlj000 C `,A, 5q,? Sna c. Fs 1�7,O-�PAGGS//oop G. !_, A . '�,E?JFV,-J M-- PAKt4Q(�c l ` IIJA-jOe- PintTS U L sp, k ►- y. o s�a-u. pe - / ✓o v sb. '�' /oov At Z L, - , tT 4d UPI / 0���� v ✓ G Zvi l .nr=� . DTJr /i,[�1,14-�-..� %�,� ✓tit++�a...� l�C� d'''t W�L.s¢' 4.-�t� i^q✓�L-.P a `,`c 'f _ I.'.� L �/o F 7 11 l Elm 1"� C t.LZ_,. f L✓� K Pf 10 D/ J u D ", s! ✓� c e , ! a �v i ` r^.t+. ! vcre Y"G_S, • � �c y�c , �/1 C_o.-+,..X-« � GOG� o D o J b� !�-...7��. p✓fit �G 1 1 A � ` 1 -T -r'� - C, SL e, S�-t1 �-c G'� k�c,�c.-cL..-c� 121 v� 7!'�cx.�. G%�-t.�• J CScti�G^_ I J aw Ave . 9&44, '7 s p `L-e-ea I%Af .- oe c-0 Z clrL� r c:V'�--c�-e.x c1,:f`t-tic,`y� � ►�,.c , _ fC %,�,v� c 1' `-'�.f�, ''7 jdo l" � a J � Z G C A - L. M E M O R A N D U M To: South Burlington Planning Commission From: Jane B. Lafleur, City Planner l Re: December 8, 1987 agenda items Date: December 4, 1987 2) HEATHCOTE ASSOCIATES, 540-640 SHELBURNE ROAD Heathcote Associates proposes to construct a 20,400 square foot addition to the existing Factory Outlet. The plan has changed since the Sketch Plan we reviewed September 22, 1987 and now shows a 2,900 increase to the first floor and a 1000 square foot reduction to the mezzanine for 20,400 square feet total. The new foot print is 16,400 square feet and the 4000 square foot mezzanine brings the total to 20,400 square feet. The addition is "pulled" slightly into the existing center with an 1800 square foot overlap. (The plan denied in 1986 showed a 19,040 addition. It should be made clear that this proposed addition is larger than the addi- tion we denied in 1986.) The applicant has submitted two plans. One shows 24 foot wide aisles and fire lanes. The other shows a 30 foot fire lane. Both have 650 parking spaces. The 30 foot wide fire lane results in less landscaping, higher coverage, (89.37 vs. 91.8%) and less snow storage area. According to the attorney for the applicant, there should be significant cosmetic improvements to the property and especially yy� to the rear of the building which is visible from I-189. The applicant is expected to bring elevations to the meeting that ��show this upgrade. Circulation: The circulation pattern will be significantly improved with the proposed redesign of the parking lots. The following issues were left open at sketch plan review: Parking: The Commission asked the applicant to prove the plan is an improvement over the exisi.:ing parking ratio. The proposed parking plan is for 650 spaces or 5_,3--spaces per 1000 gla. There are 558 existing spaces or 5.36 spaces per 1000 gla. The above calculation includes the spaces that are on the newly acquired Parcel 2B and does not include the spaces recently lost to the Southern Connector. Parcel 2B is not being used for parking now but could be. Therefore, if we count only the existing spaces, the ratio has been improved from 4.8 per 1000 I gla. (Under the ordinance 756 spaces are required; this plan represents a 14% waiver.) 1 Memorandum - Planning December 4, 1987 Page 2 The plan includes 103 compact car spaces or 16% of the total provided. The Commission may waive up to 26%. Ms. Pugh requested a bus parking area. There is now one space labeled for a bus in the northeast corner of the site. Mr. Belter expressed concern about vehicles leaving the lot to access the rear of the building. The plans now show an aisle between the Chittenden Bank and the main building that allows vehicles free passage along the north of the building without leaving the property. Enclosed is deed information regarding a guaranteed r.o.w. from Mr. Farrell. The applicant was also asked to clear up the shared parking with Club, New England. According to Attorney Bill Schroeder, there are,'50 spaces in the daytime before 6 p.m. and'up to 1070-', spaces in the- evening, weekends and holidays that may be used by the Club New England and the TV station. These spaces are located on both the Outlet Mall property and Rick Davis' property. According to Bill Schroeder, there is no clear way to know exactly how many spaces are on each parcel since the spaces were only generally described as "in the northwest corner". It appears as though the proposed addition may cover some of the shared parking since the original Davis parcel was somewhat larger and the original outlet Mall parcel was somewhat smaller. (See enclosed map in Tiballi letter.) In any event, it is clear that both the Factory Outlet Mall and the present Davis property behind the Mall are subject to some dedicated parking for other businesses. Enclosed is a letter from Mr. Tiballi regarding this. This explains that Rick Davis is considering purchase of the Club New England property and his concerns regarding the shared parking. Also enclosed is a letter from John Ponsetto who represents Mr. Farrell regarding the parking rights on this property. See Bill Szymanski's comments regarding snow storage. Coverage: The Sketch Plan showed 85% lot coverage and this was acceptable to a majority of the Planning Commission. This new plan shows 89.37% with the 24 foot fire lane and 91.8% with the 30 foot fire lane. 2 Memorandum - Planning December 4, 1987 Page 3 Traffic: Enclosed is a traffic study from Roger Dickinson. He concludes that: a) 116 additional trip ends will be generated during the P.M. peak hour; b) The Shelburne Road/Home Ave./O'Dell Parkway intersection f Y will operate at LOS B after Phase I of the Southern Connector is completed; y�C j) ne Road/Sears/Factory Outlet intersection c) The S eEnter, will be LO E By providing 2 left turning lanes out of the shoppin the LOS can be improved to C during the P.M_._ peak. That improvement is part of this proposal and "was a major recommendation in the JHK study to improve this intersection. 1 _ —, _., Mr. Dickinson does not provide information on the Route 7/Swift Street intersections as he did for the 1986 study. Craig Leiner's comments are enclosed. The 116 additional trip ends require a $2978 dedication to the Route 7 intersection improvement fund. Fire Access: The Planning Commission told the applicant to resolve Chief Goddette's concerns for access. Enclosed is a memo from him regarding this. One plan offers a 30 foot wide fire lane around the building but it is at the expense of landscaping, green space and the minimal snow storage areas. Landscaping: The proposed addition requires $12,900 in new land- scaping. The proposed plan is valued at approximately $26,000 and should be a significant improvement to the site. The plan shows a row of norway maple along Route 7 and a honey locust, 2 crab and a norway maple along each side of the entrance drive. A bond must be posted for $26,000 prior to permit. Other: Enclosed is a letter from the City of Burlington regarding lack of sewer capacity. No South Burlington permit will be issued until the applicant can verify that capacity is available. 3 Memorandum - Planning December 4, 1987 Page 4 3) SHEPARD, 131 PATCHEN ROAD Terry and Mary Shepard propose to subdivide a 1.83 acre property into two lots. Each has an existing house. The second house was approved by the Zoning Board in 1985 as a multiple use. Parcel A will be 1.47 acres and parcel B will be .36 acres. The property is located north of Jaycee Park and south of Bill Shearers proposed development. Access: Access is shown from an existing gravel drive within a 20 foot wide right-of-way. It is located off of Patchen Road. Other: See Chief Goddette's and Bill Szymanski's comments. 4) CALKINS, 1840 SPEAR STREET Paul Calkins proposes to subdivide Mrs. Calkins 200 + acre farm into 2 lots. The one acre parcel will have the existing house and the other will be comprised of the remaining land. There are no major problems or issues in this subdivision. See Bill Szymanski's comments. 5) Other business Larry Caron requests a six month extension to the site plan approval granted June 23, 1987. There should be no problem granting this extension. 4 WARRANTY ^EED C,( KNOW Ely 14EN BY THESE PRESENTS TILAi I. THGMAS.A. FARRELL, of South durlit:gton in the County of Chittanden and State of Vermont, Grantor, in the consideration of Ten and more Dollars paid to my full satisfaction by GARDEN WAY INCO.JPORATED, a Connecticut corporation with a place of business in Charlotte. County of Chittenden and State of Vermont, Grantee, by these presents do freely GIVE, GRANT, SELL, COhNEY AND CONFIRM unto - the said Grantee, GARDEN WAY INCOn,"-OP.ATEO and its successors and assigns forever, a certain piece or parcel of land in the City of South Burlington, County or Chittenden and State of Vermont, with all improvements and appurtenances thereto located on the westerly side of Farrell Street, the southerly side n: a private roed ro.+ or for;nerly known as Market Square or Odell Parkway, and to the rear of the easterly side of Shelburne Street, and more particularly bounded and described as follows, viz; Beginning at an iron pin marking the northeasterly corner of tha herein. -described premises, which pin marks the intersection of the southerly line of a private road now or formerly known an ' f'.er :zt Square or Odell Parkway and the westerly line of Farrell Street; thence proceeding S 19`49'20" W. along the westerly lire of Ferrell Street, a distance of 472.73 feet to a point; thence proceeding S 19"15'20" W along said westerly line a distance of 59.37 feet to a point marking the southeasterly corner of the herein -described premises; thence turning to the right and proceeding S 86`58110" W a distance of 153.85 feet to a concrete monument; thence turning slightly to the right and proceeding N 85°14'10" W a distance of 564.43 feet to a point .narking the southwesterly corner -f the herein -described premises; thence turning to the right end proceeding N 17°31'50" E a distance of 703.37 feet to an iron pin in the southerly line of said private road, which iron pin marks the northwesterly corner of the herein. -described premises; thence turning to the right and proceeding in a generally easterly direction along said sout'torly line ' of said arivate read, as follows, proceeding in a curve to the right having a radius of 186.62 feet a distance of 105.85 feet to a point; thence in a curve to the left ;paving a radius of 234.43 feet a distance of 126.69 feet to a point; thence D- S 72'2VIVE a distance of 63.87 feet to a point; thence in a curve to the left having a radius of 230.15 feet a distance of 124.38 feet to a point; thence in a curve to the right having a radius of 172.99 feet a distance of 93.49 feet to a point; thence S 12'23'10" E a distance of 309.43 feet to the iron pin marking the point and place of beginning. Said premises contain 10.10 acres, more or less, and are shown and depicted as "Parcel 2" oii-a certain map or plan entitled "Plat of Survey .or Seaway Shopping Center Corporation and Thomas A. Farrell" prepared by Joh:t A. Marsh, dated June 4, 1981 and recorded or to be recorded in the South Burlington Land Records, to which reference is made. Said premises are conveyed subject to and together with the benefit cf: 1. Taxes due the City of South Burlington, not delinquent, which the Grantee by acceptance of this deed expressly assumes and agrees to pay. 2. Any and all provisions of any municipal ordinance, public law or special act. 3. The right of Grantor, his heirs and assigns, until June 30, 2002, to use a portion of the northwesterly corner of the premises as reasonably required for _supper ie_ nt_a1-gig of automobiles of employees, patrons and invitees of the restaurant and nightclub located i=rrediately northerly of the herein -conveyed premises (now or formerly known as the Old Board and the Yankee Trader Room) as aow constituted, anal the exiDting studio and office build.'_ng located imsD_diately northwesterly thereof (presently occupied by International Te?evieion Corporation) as now constituted. The amount of such ' panting is limn .ted to a uaximum of 50 spaces during business daytime } F�:urs (prior to six o'clock p.m.) and a maximum of 100 spaces during evenings and on week -ands and holidays, and is subject to the obliostion of Grantor, his successors and assigns to pay a pro reta share of the costa of maintaining, repairing, illuminating, landscaping and rer+oving enow and ice (such stare to be based upon the actual use of such supplemental parking by or on behalf of said Grantor) . 4. Tne right o: the Grantor. his heirs and assigns, to install, maintain, repair and replace a pipe or pipes to drain surface water from the lands located easterly of The Old Board, so called, and northerly of said private road, and to connect same to the manhole end drainig,e pipes presently locates in the northwesterly quadrant cf the herein -described premises, including, the right to enter upor. the herein -described premises with machinery and equipment for such purposes; such right to be exercised at Grantor's sole cost and expenue and in good and workmanlike fashion, and the location of the pipes to be as choti<rn and depicted as "Drainage R.O.W." on the v -2- f above —described map or plan or in such other location as may be mutually agreed upon by Crant�- and Grantee. -A 5. Possible rights and restricciuns contained in Warranty Deed of Miomss A. Farrell to Herman S. `Lomas and Mavis C. ihumas, ` dated January 28, 1960, of record in Volume 50, Page 481 of the Land Records of the City of South Burlington. 6. The property may be subject to a perpetual easement and right of way to the Town of South Burlington as conveyed by deed of Thomas A. Farrell, dated March 25, 1971, of record in Volume 96, Page 360 of the Land Records of the City of South Burlington, for th= purpose of the operation, construction, maintenance, repairing,.__ _ rebuilding and replscing pings and pipelines. 7. The property may be subject to an agreement between South Burlington Fire District #1 and Thomas A. Farrell, dated August 25, 1941, of record in Volume 24, Page 45 of the :.and records of the City of South Eurling'�c.., 8. Easements End rights of way conveyed to Crcen Mountain ^over by heeds of Thomas A. Farrell, dates; July 5, 1975 and June 28, 1954, of record in Volume 109, Page 364 and Volume 34, Page 80, raspec:.ively,, of the Land Records of the City of South Burlington. 9. Fi.;}its now or formerly of Seaway Shopping Center Corporation as get forth in Warranty Deed of Thomas A. Farrell, dated December 29, 1959, of record is Volume 50, Page 463 ;.o place fill .and allow the top slope to extend into the land of Thomas 'A. Farrell. 10. The prcperty is subject to slope and highway rights, the right to construct ar.d maintain culverts, and the right to discharge water through raid culverts as get forth in "Order of State Hi9huay Board fixing couipensation to be r,�Id and report of herring relative to the taking; of laid and rights o: others in the Town of South Eurli.nrton", dated :'larch 16, 1961, of record in Volume 43, Page 423 of the Land Records of the Ci_y of South Burlington. 11. Any and all rights and restrictions existing under or by virtue of Leases assionsd this day by Seaway Shopping Center Corpora— tion to the within Grantee or held by Seaway Shopping Center Corpora— tion and suc!:eeccd to by the s+i;h:in Crzatee. 12. Possible restrictions against direct or indirect use of any land or prerzices an an autoziotive car wash and as set for,�h in Lease Agreement between 2arrell Corporation and Champlain Oil 4ompany, Inc., dated September 8, 1971, of record in Volume 101., Page 208 of the Lan,1 P.; cords of the City of South Burlington, TO HAVE AAD TO MOLT said granted premises. with all the privileges 6 and appurtenances thereof, to the said Crantee, GARDEN WAY INCORPORATED, —3� A a, its successors and assi"ns, to their own use and behoof forever; and I, the said Grantor, THOMAS A. FARRELL. for myself and my heirs, executors and administrators, do covenant with the said Grantee, GARDEN WAY INCORPORATED, its successors and assigns, that until the ensealing of these presents I am the sole owner of the premises, and have good right and title to convey the save in manner aforesaid, that they are FREE FROM EVERY ENCUMBRANCE, except as aforesaid. And I hereby engage to VARRANT AND DEFENr) the same against all lawful claims whatever, except as aforesaid. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I hereunto set my hand and seal this 30th day of .;une, A.D. 1931. IN PRESFECE OF: THOMAS A. FARRELL ST..TE OF VERMONT COUNTY OF CRITTENDEN, SS. S At Burlington this 30th day of June, A.D. 1981, personally appeared THOMAS A. FARRELL, and he acknowledged this instrument, by him sealed and subscribed, to be his free nd deed. Before me tli 11V `� �� ont Property Transfer )ea 12 V.SA Chap. 231 JQWLEDGMENT- La Pald—Board of MeapA Cal. Rec'd. 1 Da+alopment Ptant AcL Can. Rac'd. —4— Notary Public Received for Record July 1, 1981 at 9:55 a.m. %tte.S I ► Y P. . A ! L !V STREET - - - - - - - - - -► � � - 1, w 7 CURVE DATA PARCEL I PA RCr 2. sojo Ac. 71 r PLAT C.' SURVEY a 35 AC. I ix SEAWAY SHOPPING ..CENTER CCciPOF-%TlO:l THCMAS A. FAQ RELL ;,JCITY OFCO. BURLING-, ONV-r. SCA t /00, 4rA Chk r, C SCA."%U ^"ft I-S -*.4-sir A. St;,,irr --♦4.4 ice.. f DArl. —CNA. —.ow a. r irr. -v.= om c— sao City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 PLANNER 658-7955 Mr. Philip Mehl.er Heathcote Associates 488 Madison Avenue New York, New York 10022 Re: Heathcote Associates, Dear Mr. Mehler: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 December 59- 1989 Factory Outlet Mall addition Condition 7(a) of The Notice of Decision and Statement of Condi- tions for the above referenced project r eQui esll dt at uponiver to toe con- struction of the addition, the app r1 City Planner an "as built." plan showing the interior of the building and identifying all space within the building available for lease. This "as built" plan shall also show the location of Kiosks and temporary retail stands within the common areas as stipulated by condition 7(b). TIiis "as built" plan has not. been received in this office. Please submit this plan to fulfill this requirement. The Planning Commission has also expressed concern regarding circulation on the site. The Commission feels that more notice- able signage is needed to direct mall customers to the rear parking area. In addition, the Commission is concerned with the large number of vehiclesparkinin the Measures should bestakeneaoFire Lae discouragen front of the building. this practice. Immediate at�nntioe�°onsPspleaseissues dowould hesitategreatly to contact me. appreciated.If you have Y q J JW/mcp cc: South Burlington Peter Collins Tim Gallup Doug Fitzpatrick Sincerely, oe Weith, City Planner Planning Commission City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 PLANNER 658-7955 August 18, 1989 Mr. Doug Fitzpatrick Fitzpatrick -Llewellyn Associates One Wentworth Drive Williston, Vermont 05495 Re: Heathcote Associates, Shelburne Road Dear Doug: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Enclosed is the agenda for next Tuesday's Planning Commission meeting and my comments to the Planning Commission. Please be sure someone is present on Tuesday, August 22, 1989 at 7:30 P.M. to represent your request. Sincerely, C� Joe Weith, City Planner Ends JW/mcp City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 PLANNER 658-7955 August 25, 1989 Mr. Doug Fitzpatrick Fitzpatrick -Llewellyn Associates One Wentworth Drive Williston, Vermont 05495 Re: Revised Final Plat, Factory Outlet Mall Dear Doug: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Enclosed is the agenda for next Tuesday's Planning Commission meeting and my comments to the Planning Commission. Please be sure someone is present on Tuesday, August 29, 1989 at 7:45 P.M. to represent your request. �Xr%_re 1 y, Joe Weith, City Planner Encls JW/mcp City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 PLANNER 658-7955 September 27, 1989 Mr. Doug Fit_.pat.rick Fitzpatrick -Llewellyn Associates One Wentworth Drive Williston, Vermont 05495 Re: Heathcote Associates, Factory Outlet Mall Dear Doug: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 This letter serves to confirm that the City has approved the proposed 12 foot wide curb cut for loading dock access as shown on the plan entitled "Factory Outlet Center, Site & Utilities Plan," dated March 1989, last. revised 9/20/89. The Planning Commission, at its 9/26/89 meeting, determined that the proposed change is not significant and therefore could be handled adminis- tratively. The City agrees that the curb cut would improve truck loading circulation. However, it is important that every effort be made to discourage vehicles from using this access (i.e., "Do Not. Enter" signs, maximum 12 foot width, etc.) If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Toe Weith, Ci t T"l pi!ey. W/mcr, City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 PLANNER 658-7955 October 13, 1989 Mr. Doug Fitzpatrick Fitzpatrick-Llewllyn Associates One Wentworth Drive Williston, Vermont 05495 Re: Heathcote Associates, Factory Outlet Mall Dear Doug: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Enclosed are the 8/22/89 Planning Commission meeting minutes. Please call if you have any questions. i cere'l , oe Weith, iCity Planner 1 Encl JW/mcp 0 City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 PLANNER 658-7955 October 16, 1989 Doug Fitzpatrick Fitzpatrick -Llewellyn Associates One Wentworth Drive Williston, Vermont 05495 Re: Heathcote Associates, Factory Outlet Mall Dear Doug: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Enclosed are the 8/29/89 Planning Commission meeting minutes. You must record the revised Final Plat within 90 days of the date of approval. Please call if you have any questions. 1 Encl JW/mcp Sincerely, Joe Weith, City Planner PLANNING COMMISSION 26 September 1989 page 6 Mrs. Maher moved to inform the City Council of the two changes, one to Section 24.501 adding subsection (c), and the other to 24.502 adding a sentence. Mr. Craig seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 9. Other Business a) Heathcote: Mr. Weith noted near the loading dock they are having trouble backinq trucks in. They want to put in a 12 ft. curb cut to allow trucks in and will put up "do not enter" signs. The Commission aqreed this was an administrative change that does not require Commission approval. b) Oak Creek Village: (Mr. Craig stepped down due to a conflict of interest) A revised landscapinq plan has been requested. The landscaping was to include 56 shrubs on the berm which they now feel won't provide sufficient screening . The want to substitute larqer plants. Members aqreed to let the Planner handle this request. c) 3060 Associates, Williston Rd.: A new landscapinq plan adds more honey locust and puts in less pine. Shrubs have been changed. The value remains the same. Members aqreed to let the Planner handle this. d) IDX: Mery Brown wants to clear out scrub from an existing veg- etation area. All trees 2" or more will be kept. This is re- quested for visibility. A seeded lawn will be put in and main- tained. IDX has asked for a formal approval from the Commission. Members aqreed to have the applicant come in for formal review. As there was no further business to come before the Commission, the meetinq adjourned at 10:40 pm. Clerk M E M O R A N D U M To: Peg Picard, City Clerk From: Joe Weith, City Planner Re: Application of Heathcote Associates, Factory Outlet Mall Date: January 3, 1989 City Attorney, Steve Stitzel, has advised that the en- closed Notice of Decision for the aboved referenced matter should be recorded in the land records. City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 PLANNER 658-7955 December 1, 1989 Mr. Douglas Fitzpatrick Fitzpatrick -Llewellyn Associates One Wentworth Drive Williston, Vermont 05495 Re: Factory Outlet Mall, parking revision Dear Doug: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Enclosed is the agenda for next Tuesday's Planning; Commission meeting and my comments to the Planning Commission. Please be sure someone is present on Tuesday, December 5, 1989 at 7:40 P.M. to represent your request. Sincerely, 01 Joe Weith, ` City Planner Encls JW/mcp City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 PLANNER 658-7955 January 3, 1989 Attorney Stephen Stitzel 271 South Union Street Burlington, Vermont 05401 Re: Heathcote Associates, Factory Outlet Mall Dear Steve: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Enclosed is a copy of the signed Notice of Decision issued by the Planning Commission in the aboved referenced matter. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Joe Weith, City Planner JW/mcp Encls City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 PLANNER 658-7955 0 c I O 6e 1. 2, r; , i. 1-4 8 8 "Ir•, Bob ONeill lir-avel and Shea 109 South Winooski. avenue P.O. Box 1049 Hur•l.i.ng t:on, Vern►orit 05401 ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658.7958 He: Heathcot,e Associates, Sollth Bur•l.i.ngton I,acLory out .If-,t. Mall Dear '-Irr. O' Neill : Eric'.losect are cordes of the si-olned September- 27, 1988 Plmnin, Commission minutes, the oriainal. "Notice of Decision and Statement: of Conditions", and the revised "Not :.ice of Decision and Statement of t:onditiorzs" whictl includes e. amen(Ainont.s contained in the 9/27/88 minutes. It' you have any questions, please do not. hesi t 1.i t e t.o call men. Sincerely, Joe t i Lh , City PInnner Jw/mcp Em,Is PLANNER 658-7955 City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 October tti , i TESTS `Ir . Herman Thomas ,ale 1-c;orman F urn:i Lure Conrparo, 518 Site.]. burne Road South Hurl i.rigt.orr, Vermont 05403 ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Ile: heat,hcote Associates, South lsut•i. iligtori ray. t,orti uut l.et `Ial 1 Dear 'Ir. 'Thomas: Enclosed are copies of the si.gried September 27, 1988 Planning Commission minutes, the original "Notice of I)ecjsion and St,atemNnt o.t' Conditions", and the revi.sed "Notice o1' Uec• is iori and 5tatemerit, of Conditions" which i.n(Audes the amendmew.s eontairied in the 9/Z7/88 minutes. If* you have any questions, please do not hesitate to c,.al l me. 5Iy, , JO, wE, i th , Uit.y- N.lnnner I {4 % III (.' 1) l:n1. 1 s City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 PLANNER 658-7955 October 14, 1988 Mr. Peter Collins Paul, Frank & Collins 1 Church Street Burlington, Vermont 05401 ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Re: Heathcote Associates, South Burlington Factory Outlet Mall Dear Mr. Collins: Enclosed are copies of the signed September 27, 1988 Planning Commission minutes, the original "Notice of Decision and Statement of Conditions", and the revised "Notice of Decision and Statement of Conditions" which includes the amendments contained in the 9/27/88 minutes. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call me. Sincerely, c t),47 Joe Weith, City Planner JW/mcp Encls City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 PLANNER 658.7955 October 5, 1988 Mr. Peter Collins Paul, Frank & Collins 1 Church Street P.O. Box 1307 Burlington, Vermont 05401 Re: Heathcote Associates, Factory Outlet iIMall Dear Mr. Collins: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Enclosed are the September 6 and September 20, 1988 Planning Commission meeting minutes. Please call if you have any questions. Sincerely, Joe Weith, City Planner JW/mcp 1 Encl. cc: Mr. Dennis Webster City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 PLANNER 658.7955 September 23, 1988 Mr. Peter Collins Paul, Frank & Collins 1 Church Street Burlington, Vermont 05401 Re: Heathcote Associates Dear Mr. Collins: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Enclosed is the agenda for next Tuesday's Planning Commission meeting. Also enclosed is the draft Motion of Approval. Please be sure someone is present on Tuesday, September 27, 1988 at 7:30 P.M. to represent ,your request. Sincerely, C�Joe Weith, City Planner JW/mcp Encls City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 PLANNER 658-7955 September 21, 1988 Peter Collins, Esq. Paul, Frank & Collins 1 Church Street P.O. Box 1307 Burlington, Vermont 05401 Re: Heathcote Associates, Factory Outlet Mall Dear Mr. Collins: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Enclosed are the August 30, 1988 Planning Commission meeting minutes. Please call if you have any questions. Sincerely, 91t Joe Weith, City Planner JW/mcp 1 Encl cc: Dennis Webster I City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 PLANNER 658-7955 September 16, 1988 Mr. Peter Collins Paul, Frank & Collins 1 Church Street Burlington, Vermont 05401 Re: Heathcote Associates Dear Mr. Collins: Enclosed are the agenda itemlfor next Tuesday's Planning Commission meeting. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 PLease be sure someone is present on Tuesday, September 20, 1988 at 7:30 P.M. to represent ,your request. Sincerely, YJoe Weith, City Planner JW/mcp Encls PLANNER 658-7955 City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 September 2, 1988 ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Peter Collins, Esq. Paul, Frank & Collins 1 Church Street P.O. Box 1307 Burlington, Vermont 05402 Re: Factory Outlet Mall Addition Dear Mr, Collins: Enclosed are the agenda item and my comments to the Planning Commission. Please be sure someone is present o.n.Tuesday, September, 6, 1988 at 7:30 P.M. to represent your request. Sincerely, Joe Weith, City,Planner JW/mcp Ericls cc: Dennis Webster City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 PLANNER 658-7955 AugusL 19, 1988 PeLer- Collins, Esq. Paul, Frank & Collins 1 Church SLreeL P.O. Box 1307 BurlingLon, VermorrL 05402 Re: FacLory OuLleL Mall AddiLion Dear Mr. Collins: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Enclosed are Lhe agerida i Lem and my commerrLs Lo Lhe Planning Commission. Also enclosed are Bill Szymariski's and Chief Godde L Le' s commerr Ls . Please be sure someone is Pr•esenL orr Tuesday, AugusL 30, 1988 aL 7 : 30 P.M. Lo r•ePreseri L your• reques L . Sincerelyl,, Joe weiLh, Ci Ly Plariner Jw/uicP Encls cc: Dennis websLer City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 PLANNER 658-7955 July 21, 1988 Attorney Peter Collins 1 Church Street Burlington, -Vermont 05401 Re: Heathcote litigation Dear Mr. Collins: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Enclosed are the July 5, 1988 Planning Commission meeting minutes. Please call if you have any questions. Sincerely, Joe Weith, City Planner JW/mcp 1 Encl City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 PLANNER 658-7955 December 21, 1987 Dennis Webster Wiemann-Lamphere Architects 289 College Street Burlington, Vermont 05401 ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Re: Heathcote Associates, 540-640 Shelburne Road Dear Mr. Webster: Enclosed are the December 8, 1987 Planning Commission at which your revised plan was denied. Please call me if you have any questions. Sincerely, Q . ql&L- Jane B. Lafleur, City Planner JBL/mcp 1 Encl cc: Philip Mehler William Schroeder Roger Dickinson City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 PLANNER 658-7955 December 4, 1987 Dennis Webster Wiemann-Lamphere Architects 289 College Street Burlington, Vermont 05401 Re: Heathcote Associates, 540-640 Shelburne Road Dear Mr. Webster: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Enclosed are the agenda and my memo to the Planning Commission. Also enclosed are Bill Szymanski's and Chief Goddette's comments. Please be sure someone is present on Tuesday, December 8, 1987 to represent your request. Sincerely, ja+C_ Pj Jane B. Lafleur, City Planner JBL/mcp Encls cc: William Schroeder Roger Dickinson Philip Mehler City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 PLANNER 658-7955 September 18, 1987 Dennis Webster Wiemann Lamphere Architects 289 College Street Burlington, Vermont 05401 Re: Mehler Realty, Factory Outlet Mall Dear Mr. Webster: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Enclosed are the agenda and my memo to the Planning Commission. Also enclosed are Bill Szymanski's and Chief Goddette's comments. Please be sure someone is present on Tuesday, September 22, 1987 to represent your request. Sincerely, lI Jane B. Lafleur, City Planner JBL/mcp Encls cc: Philip Mehler Realty, Inc. i l �r-kyo eax ,w n eve -t �av \ .s f ucS 630e from -:FaQ eAucj d - -r k SQL - Goy �Z�1 60" d-cv �\j �-3 �"-,� -i 0,,,to F,4-A� { a.ecc� bt t ft. -* -to a .,aVa-&, l� bL� cw. Lwta,, 1 sh Lae �U C e CL to ` � VD CcAS o ( �4 C�rnc v E& i 42Ct � r `rt C. tsyyy5 &l Aookc9 ct-t \C�i No Text 4&Al 44' 6A� 13 ►o6 r 4(D Me22. �\ L\ b 4, ookl few ? I04 /61,,57 y �L kLno Ra 13-) 1u�� , S ; 7 5-(,, IDDO I---- fsh'Sh ohig 'aZ�) 0 ,J 'b `�� 0�;zv r -,�, OVI 7 al .eg 1 "c., to u SL° Ton �5 -,o" Q I I -y d% vo C - �ws cap"O h Sr - QOo'8 / X r 1 OS� - �l f6 s a ?.q. f PA FRANK & COLLINS, I RYAN R, ALLAN PAUL U L, NC. WILLUAM 1. JOSEPH E. FRANK ATTORNEYS AT LAW OF COUNSEL PETER M. COLLINS JOHN T. SARTORE ONE CHURCH STREET MONTPELIER OFFICE B. MICHAEL FRrE AN B. LAMB P. O' R 1307 94 MAIN STREET ALAN D. PORT `OX P. O. BOx 967 ROBERT G. CAIN BU RLI NGTON, VERMONT 05402-I307 MONTPELIER. VT 05602� 0967 S. CROCKER BENNETT. II TELEPHONE 1802, 223 7550 ROBERT S. DIPALMA TELEPHONE (802) 6SB-231 I DAVID A. BARRA TELECOPIER (802) 6S8-0042 CHARLES F. STORROW STEPHEN J. SOULE JANE HART MARTER - MICHAEL 1. GREEN JOHN J. COLLINS PAUL R. BOWLES GAIL E. HAEFNER September 23, 1988 CHARLES E. FINBERG MATTHEW C. SUSMAN JOHN T. LAVOIE _.-- ....M'A'YZR'.ii""�3`-'..__. _ - ---..•-•r--•--..-I-..q.•._... .:, .,. „r::. "�'.�--�.-•--^+ram-T^+-^m _----,.r-•. MICHAEL J. HARRIS EILEEN M. BLACKWOOD Mr. Joseph Weith City Planner South Burlington Dorset Street South Burlington, Municipal Office Vermont 05403 RE: Heathcote Associates/South Burlington Factory Outlet Dear Joe: I just wanted to confirm in writing my client's position in connection with conditions imposed upon the project. After the City of South Burlington allowed University Mall to not only proceed with construction, but to open for business before the improvements to Dorset Street had even been started, it seems unfair and discriminatory to impose that condition upon my client. It appears especially onerous considering the fact that a substantial portion of the improvements to Shelburne Road have already been completed and the impact of my clients addition on traffic is miniscule compared to that created by University Mall. I would hope that the planning commission would reconsider that particular condition before next Tuesday. Cordially yours, PAUL,RA COLLINS, INC. P e t e r,M C o l l_i.-n-S-Esq . PMC:cab cc Steve Stitzel, Esq. McNeil, Murray & Sorrell New Survey i-a 9.83 A �• 1982 Seaway Shopping Center Chittenden Bank Factory Outlet T a Macke ; ;t ,.Ai Grand Union �141 State-t�quor Store Color Tile Laundromat Arby Is 540-560 Shelburne Road 540 Shelburne Road 560 Shelburne Road 570 Shelburne Road 580 Shelburne Road 590 Shelburne Road 600 Shelburne Road 620 Shelburne Road 640 Shelburne Road 5-2-89 Addition for Retail Complex T 5-3-89 Renovate Kids Port for office & 5-15-89 Renovate Shapes for Sox Market 7-10-89 Remodel interior of Dress Barn 10-16-89 Free standing kisok for Perkins J Mack storage area Lending 1 South Burlington Outlet Center SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT T.J. MAXX z OJ) OLD KIDS MILL PORT w FRUGAL ERES m FRANKS C w O GIGGLES NUTCRACKER O SWEET � BASS m UU SHLEY'S SHOE z GIFTS r w Q Cc m KITCHEN, OR LINENS'N BEANS MATERNITY GRAND UNION w F' O Z ETC. MISS a THINGS WEARHOUSE m �O Q m w z 0 SOX RADIO 2 O THE D g SHOP SHACK U Q x U ROUTE J 7 ` PARKING �� F] UNDER CONSTRUCTION I x pox- ow4i 19b, i 1 )i� �I r-,,7C 1!'; �,`r If t I!---, Q« .Y, -6nt =TOt : i. 1 - 7 It- x• ~:c'�!F�`f4 ," .rep•. •.. coat J.._f.II.�f��j`� ��� r r PLANNING COMMISSION 22 SEPTEMBER 1987 PAGE 5 concerns for the neighbors. Mr. Burgess felt it was a nice concept and looked like what was wanted for Dorset St. frontage. Mr. Belter felt it was fine if problems with the Fire Chief can be worked out. Mrs. Maher did not like the project and felt the back zoning should be R-7. She felt it would delay the city's ability to get anything started on the other side of the street. She would like to see a mix of residential and office uses. 5. Sketch plan application of Heathcote Associates for construction of a 24,000 sq. ft. addition round floor and mezzanine) to the Factory Outlet Mall at 540-640 Shelburne Rd Mrs. Maher requested that when the plan comes in it show the relationship to adjacent properties. Mr. Lamphere said one of their aims was to give attention to the back of the building so it looks good from I-189. They feel what they are proposing is an improvement. Mr. Webster said there is presently 100% percent building/pavement coverage. They are proposing 88%. At present there are 104,000 ft. gross leasable space and they are proposing to increase this to 120,500 ft. Regarding parking, they noted that University Mall was allowed a ratio of 5.3 and they are requesting the same consideration. They propose 638 spaces with 15% for compact cars. They propose to have a ring of landscaping around the whole site with as many arbarvitae as possible which they will trim to hedge height. Mr. Belter raised the question of someone going into a compact car space with a large car and and creating a problem backing out. Mrs. Lafleur said she prefers all compact spaces together and noted they are only half a foot narrowed and 2-1/2 feet shorter than regular spaces. She noted that if the same standard is applied here as was applied at University Mall, parking seems adequate. Mr. Lamphere said Club New England does not encroach on this parking area. They are also not counting the parking spaces allotted to this development in the Agel-Corman lot. Mrs. Hurd said she had no problem with Club New England using this lot at night and felt it was a good idea to have such shared parking. Mr. Webster said the bank will remain as it is today. They have a legal right of way to use Odell Parkway. Mrs. Maher said she felt the use was too intensive and too tight. Mr. Belter said he felt it was better than last time and like the parking much better. He had no big problem with PLANNING COMMISSION 22 SEPTEMBER 1987 ]PAGE 6 waiving parking a bit. Mr. Burgess said he thought it was OK as long as it was an improvement over what is there now. Ms. Peacock said she would consider the 5.3 if there is enough improvement. Ms. Pugh agreed but asked the applicant to think about buses. Mr. Belter was still concerned about going off the applicant's lot to get to the rear of the building. He felt it would be OK with a guaranteed right of way from Mr. Farrell. Mrs. Lafleur asked if members were willing to accept 85% lot coverage. It is now'99% Mrs. Peacock said she wasn't sure. Mr. Burgess felt it was closer to 70% than-99% is, so he would vote for 850. Mr. Belter agreed. Mrs. Maher felt the use was too intense for this location. Mr. Jacob wouldn't mind 85%, and Mrs. Hurd agreed it would be more acceptable than 99%. Mrs. Maher said she was bothered by the notion that a de- veloper won't upgrade a lot without "getting something." Other Business The next meeting will be 6 October. Craig Leiner has serious objections to offsetting the entrance to Southsett. Mrs. Lafleur said she explained the problem, but Craig still has reservations. As there was no further business to come before the Commission, the meeting adjourned at 10:10 pm. Clerk `I to J PLANNING COMMISSION 5 JULY 1988 PAGE 5 4. Consider going into Executive Session to discuss pending litigation with Heathcote Mr. Jacob noted that Heathcote has come up with a proposition. Mr. Collins, representing Heathcote, said a number of plans have been proposed. There is now an appeal procedure in Superior Court. He noted he had met with the City Attorney and that the remaining issues were parking, traffic, building coverage, lot coverage. The new plan they propose is a compromise. Mrs. Maher questioned the appropriateness of the hearing this plan as the Commission had no instructions from the City Council to talk with the applicants. She stressed the issue is now in the Courts. Mr. Jacob said the Commission would not make a decision in the matter and did not feel there was a problem hearing what the applicant proposes. Mr. Collins said the new plan is a compromise. Building coverage is 30% and lot coverage is 90.1%. Lot coverage is presently 98%. Mrs. Maher asked if they were still counting contested parking spaces. Mr. Webster said they were. Mr. Collins said they hired Joe Openlander who feels that is a "non -issue" as there is plenty of parking without those spaces. Mr. Webster said the building now has 117,000 sq. ft., 23% coverage. The proposed addition would bring coverage to 30%. It is smaller than originally propsoed. There would be a mezanine. He said they are asking for the same ratio as University Mall, 5.3 spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. of gross leasable area, or 642 spaces which is what they propose. The ordinance requires 5.5 per 1000 gross sq. footage. With the new space the gross leasable area would be 121,000 sq. ft. with coverage of 128,460 sq. ft. Total sq. footage would be 128,460 plus the mezanine. They propose a green area around the perimeter of the lot, ranging in width from 5 ft. to 22 ft. Mrs. Maher noted that access to the rear of the lot is terrible and said people won't park back there. Mr. Burgess asked about snow removal. Mr. Webster said snow would be trucked away. Mr. Burgess said he questioned whether that would be done. Ms. Pugh then moved the Commission meet in Executive Session. Ms. Peacock seconded. Motion passed unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 11:10 P.M. Clerk PLANNING COMMISSION 1 AUGUST 1988 'PAGE 2 answered that question last week. Mr. Hoehl said no one would see any panoramic views from between houses and he felt properties were being devalued and robbed of shade. Mr. Burgess said that is not true and that trees will be allowed in the 100 foot envelope. Mr. Hoehl said he didn't think his home would look good from the road. He also wants to screen his house from the overlook. Ms. Campione said the view from the overlook is virtually gone. You can't stand in front of the Jameson house and say there is a view. She felt the owners were using destructive logic and were just carrying on further destruction of the scenic vista. Mr. Cooper said it is important that they be able to properly landscape their homes. He felt the focus should be on the part and on a plan to do something there. Mr. Hoehl said the people don't need the whole view. A poll of members showed only Mr. Belter favoring option 1. Other members favored a more finely tuned version of option 2. The question of changing the baseline elevation was raised. Mr. Stitzel said the baseline would be just immediately forward of the park so that the viewing area would be conforming. Mr. Craig suggested that if the existing elevation of a piece of land is such that the land would be within 2 feet or above the baseline level, owners should be allowed 2 feet of veg- etation. Members also felt that Mr. Hoehl-should be allowed to screen his house from the overlook. Mr. Stitzel will clean up the wording and get the revised Option 2 back to the Commission as soon as possible. 2. Review the revised Heathcote plan for an 11.460 sq. ft. addition to the South Burlington Factory Outlet on Shelburne Road Mr. Jacob noted the Council has asked the Commission to look at the plan as if it were coming to them for the first time. Mr. Stitzel outlined the history of the plans. The Commission's denial has been appealed to Superior Court and is scheduled for trial on the back-up calendar of 2 September. The applicant has proposed a revised plan which is a reduced proposal from that which was denied. This plan was informally presented to the Commission to see if it might be a basis for settling the litigation. The Council decided it should be submitted as a new application with the under- standing that if it is approved, the case in Superior Court PLANNING COMMISSION 2 AUGUST 1988 PAGE 3 would be dropped. Mr. Stitzel noted there was some con- fusion on procedures used in reviewing this last time. It was reviewed under the subdivision regulations; consquently, it must be a warned final plat hearing. He recommended that the matter proceed to that public hearing. He suggested that tonight the Commission see if it is possible to schedule that public hearing before the scheduled trial date. Mr. Collins, attorney for Heathcote, said he has been very frustrated in going back and forth with the City on this and noted that some City Council members had no idea what was going on. Mr. Stitzel replied that the City had initiated a parking study of its own during this time. He also added that the Council is not necessarily kept abreast on a day to day basis, and that when litigation is on track, the Council is then brought completely into the picture. The parking study was initiated to provide a data base for parking areas in similar types of facilities in the City. It involved aerial photography, which is very expensive, and the study was suspended when funds were no longer available. Members agreed to hear the final plat in a public hearing on 30 August. Mrs. Maher said she would like to see drawings of this plan in relation to neighboring buildings and rights of way, specifically, Agel-Corman, Odell Parkway, Club New England. This should be provided by the applicant. She also asked that the landscaping person be present. Mr. Weith will provide Minutes of previous hearings. Mr. Stitzel said there is one aspect of the litigation he would like to discuss with the Commission in Executive Session. Mrs. Maher then moved the Commission meet in Executive Session to discuss pending litigation with Heathcote. Mr. Craig seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Regular Session Resumed 3. Discussion of possible amendments to the South Burlington Subdivision and Zoning Regulations Mr. Weith advised he has been notified the City's flood plain standards do not comply with standards of the National Flood Insurance program. Mr. Jacob told Mr. Weith to warn it for a future meeting for the Commission to consider. At the same time a discrepancy between the Subdivision and Zoning Reg- ulations will also be warned. PLANNING COMMISSION 30 AUGUST 1988 PAGE 4 have spent a lot of money on this project. Mr. Weith said that one suggest;oh is to require that 15% of the bond be maintained until the road is upgraded. Mr. Belter said that might result in having money to build a street but not having the land. He said there is a problem there and he feels it should be done correctly. Mrs. Maher said a lot of people from East Terrace were at that hearing and she did not feel a decision or discussion should be held until they are notified. She felt the Commission should have both Synon and Deslauriers back in for a hearing. Mr. Burgess agreed and said he was uneasy about a stipulation "until the rest of the land is developed." Mr. Stitzel said the first question to consider is why the Commission wanted a street and if they now want to change it. There is also the question of the current road remaining private with increased use. He said whatever the Commission decides there should be an appropriate maintenance agreement though he didn't know who should sign it. He noted the City had experience in the past with allowing a road to remain private and then having to go to Court later to try to make a public road. Mrs. Maher moved that action on this request be postponed until this is a regularly scheduled item on the agenda and the developer and property owner are present to explain the details of the project. 5. Revised Final Plat application of Heathcote Associates to construct a 11,460 sq. ft. addition to the South Burlington Factory Outlet Mall on Shelburne Rd. Mr. Collins gave an overview of their presentation. He noted that Joe Openlander had been retained to explore 2 issues: the problem with a private covenant in a deed from Farrell to the predecessor of the present owner, and the actual requirements for the shopping center itself. Mr. Collins said the plan they are presenting is the one approved several weeks ago by the Commission. Mr. Burgess and other Commission members stressed they did not at any time approve a plan. Mr. Collins said they have had discussions with the Planner, Fire Chief and City Manager. One issue they discussed was making a better access to the rear. They have thus changed some perpendicular spaces to parallel parking. On the question of snow removal, a letter has been given to the City Planner indicating permission from the neighbor to the east to put snow on that property until it is developed. After that time, they will truck it away. A Lot coverage isWw 90.9% with building coverage at 30%. Grr s,(I PLANNING COMMISSION 30 AUGUST 1988 PAGE 5 Parking: Mrs. Maher asked if any of the contested 100 spaces are included in the plan. Mr. Collins read from the original deed and contended that the question is moot. He also claimed that they have enough parking without those spaces. Mr. O'Neill, representing Mr. Farrell, said their interest is in protecting their parking spaces. The deed, he said, gives Farrel the right for parking for The -Old Board and TV station in the northwest corner of the Heathcote property. He said if those spaces are not necessary for Heathcote, there is no objection. They will not, however, be denied use of them for future development. If there is an easement on that land for parking, Heathcote cannot build on that land without providing Farrell with 100 spaces. Mr. Collins said the track record of where people park is not in those spaces. Mr. O'Neill said he didn't care where people park. The right to park is in that northwest corner. Mr. Stitzel noted that what has arisen is a private property dispute which has to be resolved between the 2 parties. The Commission has no right to address this issue. All it can do is apply the standards to the application as presented. He noted the plan shows 642 parking spaces and asked what the applicant's position is on the number of parking spaces ex- clusively controlled by the applicant. Mr. Webster said until someone can tell him where the northwest corner is, he couldn't answer that question. Mr. Stitzel asked what spaces Mr. Farrell claims to have an interest in. Mr. O'Neill re- plied that as far as they were concerned Heathcote has at least 542 spaces and Farrell has a right to 100 spaces in the paved parking area. Mr. Collins said they did not feel it makes a difference and that they still have adequate parking with the worst case scenario. Mr. Openlander said at the time of their study there were 531+ marked parking spaces. In their study, done on 19 and 20 February 1988, at the peak hour on Friday, a total of 259 spaces were utilized. At the peak hour on Saturday, 326 spaces were utilized. Mr. Belter asked how the count was taken. Mr. Openlander said one UVM student went through the lot by car every hour on the hour and counted. Mrs. Maher said that did not sound professional to her. Mr. Collins cited the Ordinance which allows and encourages shared parking. Mr. Craig said they are not talking about shared parking but concurrent parking as Heathcote and Farrell uses are simultaneous. Mr. O'Neill stressed that the deed does not call for shared parking. Farrell is entitled to 50 spaces in the daytime and 100 on nights, holidays and weekends. This is exclusive use for Farrell. PLANNING COMMISSION 30 AUGUST 1988 PAGE 6 Mrs. Maher asked for a breakdown of where people parked. Mr. Openlander said that at 2 pm Saturday, 183 of 192 stalls in front were used; 34 of 34 on the south side; 17 of 13 in the back right (people parked not in spaces) 42 of 209 in the rear; 46 of 83 in left front, 4 in the undefined Club New England spaces and none in the TV lot. Mr. Burgess noted that at the time of the study the mall was only about 1/2 occupied with 5 empty stores. Mr. Openlander said they also estimated Christmas rush parking needs based on a comparison with the Rutland Mall on Rt. 4. Their figures showed a need for 318 at the Friday peak and 415 at the Saturday peak with present use and 370 for Friday use and 483 for Saturday peak for the expanded use. Adding 3 standard deviations to this results in 428 for the Friday peak and 549 for the Saturday peak. Mr. Openlander said they addressed 3 standards. Based on the ITE shopping standard they would require 242 spaces for the average weekday use, 393 for weekday peak; 278 for average Saturday use and 448 for Saturday peak. Based on the Parking Generation Second Generation standard, 296 would be required on the weekday and 294 on Saturday. Members questioned the reduced need on Saturday, and Mr. Openlander said that is what the figures say. Based on the Urban Land Institute requirements for parking spaces for shopping centers, 484 spaces would be required. Mr. Collins noted that even without the contested spaces, they more than meet these needs. Mr. Craig asked if there are standards of design for parking lots. Mr. Openlander said he did not know of any. Mr. Webster then explained the remainder of the plan. He said they have doubled the radius on ingress for fire vehicles and the Chief is satisfied. The Chief asked that hydrants be served from the CWD line then looped to the Farrell St. line. This will have to be designed by a Civil Engineer. Mr. Jacob stressed that the Commission will tell the applicant how many fire hydrants to install. If the applicant then gets any changes from Montpelier, he wants to be informed of this. Mr. Webster said they now have 30 foot fire lanes except near the bank where there is an existing 24 ft. lane. The question of parking on the south and north sides of the building was raised as this would be dangerous with cars backing out into a lane of moving traffic. Members felt parallel parking in those areas would be preferable. Mr. Webster noted this results in a loss of about 1/2 of those spaces. Landscaping: Mr. Webster said they are trying to create a screen of arba vitae around the perimeter with intermittant PLANNING COMMISSION 30 AUGUST 1988 PAGE 7 street trees of various kinds. Mrs. Maher asked if the applicant intends to tear up what was just paved 2 weeks ago. Mr. Webster said they do. Mrs. Maher said she would like to see some evergreens included. Mrs. Maher then moved that since the hour was late, the applicantion be continued until the next scheduled meeting, Tuesday, 6 September. Mr. Burgess seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Other Business Mr. Weith read a letter from Vermont Federal Bank at Hinesburg Rd. and Williston Rd. Their approval to operate in the temporary trailer expires on 30 September and they are requesting an extension till 30 November. Mr. Craig moved to extend the permit of Vermont Federal Bank to operate in their temporary trailer at Hinesburg Rd. and Williston Rd. until 30 November 1988. Mrs. Maher seconded. Motion passed unanimously. As there was no further business to come before the Commission, the meeting adjourned at 11:10 pm. Clerk PLANNING COMMISSION 6 SEPTEMBER 1988 PAGE 3 same positon as the abuttors in not knowing what is planned for this property in the future. Mr. Gragnolati, administrator at the Medical Center, explained the impact of this situation on the Center. He said they have been planning for the day care center for their employees and have held meetings and have a very long pre -application list. They feel this is a very good location for them and they are concerned they are getting mired in an historical issue. He said they are willing to insure maintenance of the road to City standards. Mr. Burgess said that if the road isn't maintained by the owner, the Medical Center will be among those in the City Manager's office demanding the City maintain it. He said the Commission is trying to get the road under the maintenance protection of the City the best way possible. Mr. Gragnolati said he hoped there could be a compromise. A poll of Commission members showed: Mr. Craig was sympa- thetic with Synon and understood the need for the day care facility but was more concerned with future problems resulting from keeping the road private. Mrs. Maher felt it j would be unwise to reconsider and that the Commission had to send a message to the owner that things must be done as the Commission plans them. She added she felt there was a "design" in all of this. Mr. Burgess said he agreed with Mr. Craig and Mrs. Maher but was sympathetic with Synon and that if in some way the City Attorney and City Manager could be satisfied things could be worked out, he would reluctantly vote in favor. Mr. Belter agreed with Mr. Burgess that the Commission should try to save the project and take up its quarrels with the Deslauriers later. He added he wants to see a specific time period for the road to be dedicated, not an indefinite period. Ms,Peacock said she was very sympa- thetic with Synon but did not see how the City would get dedication of the road and thus was opposed to reconsider. Ms. Pugh, having arrived late, abstained from comment. Before a formal vote could be taken, Mr. Doremus withdrew the request in order to bring it before a full Commission. 3. Continuance of Revised Final Plat application of Heathcote Associates to construct and 11.460 sq• ft. addition to the South Burlington Factory Outlet Mall on Shelburne Road Mr. Collins said they agree to change the perpendicular spaces on the north and south of the building to parallel. j They have aproblem with changing the compact car spaces but / noted the spaces are larger than usual compact spaces and moderate and medium cars will fit. The spaces could be made PLANNING COMMISSION 6 SEPTEMBER 1988 PAGE 4 larger by reducing green space by 560 sq. ft. A poll of members showed they wanted the spaces made into standard spaces. Regarding circulation, Mr. Craig noted that by testimony of Dr. Oppenlander, the front lot was full during studies which means people have to get to the back of the facility. He felt the Odell Parkway/Shelburne Rd. intersection should be improved to get people to the back easier. Mr. Burgess noted that the City of Burlington owns Shelburne Rd,Mr. Belter said the problem is with Odell Parkway. Mr. O'Neill said Odell goes through Agel-Corman's parking lot. In 1970, the City of South Burlington forced it to be moved to its present location to line up with Home Ave. and for safety reasons. Mr. Thomas of Agel-Corman is concerned with people going through the lot all day. Mr. Craig said he would still like to see it made easier for people to get to the back. Mr. Collins said he was led to believe the traffic issue on Shelburne Rd. had been addressed satisfactorily at some time. He added that he felt once there was an anchor store in back, more people would go their initially. Mrs. Maher said one thing that would get her vote would be to know you couldn't get to T.J. Maxx except by parking in the rear. She felt as it is planned, people will still park in front and walk through the Mall. Mr. O'Neill said he believed the easement for Odell Parkway was only for trucks. Mr. Craig noted the bank's lease expires in 1990 and that in old Minutes it was said the lease would not be renewed. He felt this would improve circulation. Mr. Burgess quoted the 5/27/86 Minutes where Mr. Ramos said the bank will remain until 1990 and then they will not have a drive -up facility after that. Ms. Pugh said parking requirements for supermarkets are greater than for a shopping cneter, 1 space for every 200 sq. ft. of retail floor area which equals 5 per 1,000. Mr. Craig raised the question of whether traffic standards had been based on completion of the Southern Connector, Phase I. He said it will be 2 construction seasons before traffic on this section of Shelburne Rd. is mitigated by the Southern Connector. Mr. Craig also raised the question of vacant stores in the Mall when the survey was taken and asked if parking figures had been adjusted. Mr. Oppenlander said adjustment resulted in 287 as opposed to 259 cars on Friday and 362 instead of �� 326 on Saturday. PLANNING COMMISSION 6 SEPTEMBER 1988 PAGE 5 It was noted that 4 spaces on the Western border would be lost by making them regular instead of compact car spaces. 21 spaces would be lost by making them parallel instead of perpendicular. This results in 517 total spaces (or 617 counting the 100 contested spaces). Mrs. Maher stressed the difference between this lot and other lots of shopping centers. This is an old, ill -designed building, she said, one that pre -dates the new standards. Mrs. Maher then moved to continue the application until the next regularly scheduled meeting, 20 September 1988. Mr. Belter seconded. Motion passed 5-1 with Ms. Pugh opposing. 4. Site Plan applicationof Gary Riggs to construct a 9,000 sq• ft. building for storage/distribution use on Lot #17, Ethan Allen Drive Mr. Belter stepped down during this discussion. Mr. Riggs proposed a multi -use building with 4 or 5 units for small contractors. There will be 2 curb cuts. Mrs. Maher noted that landscaping is inadequate. Mr. Riggs said they have upped the total proposed to $6,006. They had calculated wrong before, Mrs. Maher said she would like to see a change in selection to include some real evergreens. Mr. Weith said parking is OK and there are sufficient hydrants. Mr. Riggs said they comply with drainage requirements and depressed curbs are now shown on the plan. Ms. Peacock moved the Planning Commission approve the site plan application of Gary Riggs for construction of a 5 unit, 11,250 sq• ft. building for storage/distribution uses as de- picted on a plan entitled "Storage/Distribution Facility, Ethan Allen Drive, lot No. 17" prepared 12y Graphic/Construc- tion Management Services, Inc, dated 9/l/87, revised 7/29/88 and 9/6/88 with the following stipulations: 1. The landscaping bond shall be in the amount of $6,600 and shall be for a 3-year period. The revised landscaping plan shall be submitted to and approved by the City Planner. 2. The plan shall be revised prior to permit to show the following: a. The proposed Dwarf Juniper located outside of the pro- posed future parking space area b. A note indicating that site drainage shall be toward Commerce Avenue to the south PLANNING COMMISSION 14 SEPTEMBER 1988 The South Burlington Planning Commission held a special meeting on Wednesday, 14 September 1988, at 7:00 pm, in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset Street. Members Present Peter Jacob, Chairman; William Burgess, Mary -Barbara Maher, William Craig, Catherine Peacock, Ann Pugh Also Present Joe Weith, City Planner; Sid Poger, The Other Paper; Stephen Stitzel, Ctiy Attorney; Richard Ward, Zoning Administrator; James Thibault, Steve Crowley, Joe Randazzo, James Condos, Fred Blais, Zoning Board 1. Executive Session Mr. Burgess moved the Commission meet in Executive Session to discuss pending litigation with Heathcote. Mr. Craig seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 2. Regular Session Joint meeting between Planning Commission and Zoning Board and City Attorney to discuss various legal issues and procedures: Mr. Stitzel noted that -he is not usually involved in an issue until it gets to Court. He is finding out that applicants are attempting to embarrass or discredit city officials by showing sloppiness, conflicts of interest, discrepancies, etc. This does have an impact on the Court. Mr. Stitzel said he is also uncomfortable for public officials who have to appear under these circumstances. It raises the issue of who is the more credible party. Mr. Stitzel said there are practical points that can assist in making and recording decisions and also assist other city officials when/if a case goes to Court. He noted that in the review process, a decision is made when everything is right at hand. It usually comes to Court 5 years later when people have changed and records are incomplete. He felt the Minutes kept by the City have been very good but they must be signed. He said it is necessary for the Planning Commission to have a written document that contains the stipulations... in addition to the Minutes. The Zoning Board has three types of appeals: conditional use reviews, appeals from decision where the applicant feels the Zoning Administrator has made a wrong decision, and appeals where the applicant feels the decision is right but they want a variance from that decision. PLANNING COMMISSION 6 SEPTEMBER 1988 PAGE 3 same positon as the abuttors in not knowing what is planned for this property in the future. Mr. Gragnolati, administrator at the Medical Center, explained the impact of this situation on the Center. He said they have been planning for the day care center for their employees and have held meetings and have a very long pre -application list. They feel this is a very good location for them and they are concerned they are getting mired in an historical issue. He said they are willing to insure maintenance of the road to City standards. Mr. Burgess said that if the road isn't maintained by the owner, the Medical Center will be among those in the City Manager's office demanding the City maintain it. He said the Commission is trying to get the road under the maintenance protection of the City the best way possible. Mr. Gragnolati said he hoped there could be a compromise. A poll of Commission members showed: Mr. Craig was sympa- thetic with Synon and understood the need for the day care facility but was more concerned with future problems resulting from keeping the road private. Mrs. Maher felt it would be unwise to reconsider and that the Commission had to send a message to the owner that things must be done as the Commission plans them. She added she felt there was a "design" in all of this. Mr. Burgess said he agreed with Mr. Craig and Mrs. Maher but was sympathetic with Synon and that if in some way the City Attorney and City Manager could be satisfied things could be worked out, he would reluctantly vote in favor. Mr. Belter agreed with Mr. Burgess that the Commission should try to save the project and take up its quarrels with the Deslauriers later. He added he wants to see a specific time period for the road to be dedicated, not an indefinite period. Ms�Peacock said she was very sympa- thetic with Synon but did not see how the City would get dedication of the road and thus was opposed to reconsider. Ms. Pugh, having arrived late, abstained from comment. Before a formal vote could be taken, Mr. Doremus withdrew the request in order to bring it before a full Commission. 3. Continuance of Revised Final Plat application of Heathcote Associates to construct and 11.460 sq. ft. addition to the South Burlington Factory Outlet Mall on Shelburne Road Mr. Collins said they agree to change the perpendicular spaces on the north and south of the building to parallel. They have aproblem with changing the compact car spaces but noted the spaces are larger than usual compact spaces and moderate and medium cars will fit. The spaces could be made PLANNING COMMISSION 6 SEPTEMBER 1988 PAGE 4 larger by reducing green space by 560 sq. ft. A poll of members showed they wanted the spaces made into standard spaces. Regarding circulation, Mr. Craig noted that by testimony of Dr. Oppenlander, the front lot was full during studies which means people have to get to the back of the facility. He felt the Odell Parkway/Shelburne Rd. intersection should be improved to get people to the back easier. Mr. Burgess noted that the City of Burlington owns Shelburne R& Mr. Belter said the problem is with Odell Parkway. Mr. O'Neill said Odell goes through Agel-Corman's parking lot. In 1970, the City of South Burlington forced it to be moved to its present location to line up with Home Ave. and for safety reasons. Mr. Thomas of Agel-Corman is concerned with people going through the lot all day. Mr. Craig said he would still like to see it made easier for people to get to the back. Mr. Collins said he was led to believe the traffic issue on Shelburne Rd. had been addressed satisfactorily at some time. He added that he felt once there was an anchor store in back, more people would go their initially. Mrs. Maher said one thing that would get her vote would be to know you couldn't get to T.J. Maxx except by parking in the rear. She felt as it is planned, people will still park in front and walk through the Mall. Mr. O'Neill said he believed the easement for Odell Parkway was only for trucks. Mr. Craig noted the bank's lease expires in 1990 and that in old Minutes it was said the lease would not be renewed. He felt this would impl-pve circulation. Mr. Burgess quoted the 5/27/86 Minutes where Mr. Ramos said the bank will remain until 1990 and then they will not have a drive -up facility after that. Ms. Pugh said parking requirements for supermarkets are greater than for a shopping cneter, 1 space for every 200 sq. ft. of retail floor area which equals 5 per 1,000. Mr. Craig raised the question of whether traffic standards had been based on completion of the Southern Connector, Phase I. He said it will be 2 construction seasons before traffic on this section of Shelburne Rd. is mitigated by the Southern Connector. Mr. Craig also raised the question of vacant stores in the Mall when the survey was taken and asked if parking figures had been adjusted. Mr. Oppenlander said adjustment resulted in 287 as opposed to 259 cars on Friday and 362 instead of 326 on Saturday. PLANNING COMMISSION 6 SEPTEMBER 1988 PAGE 5 It was noted that 4 spaces on the Western border would be lost by making them regular instead of compact car spaces. 21 spaces would be lost by making them parallel instead of perpendicular. This results in 517 total spaces (or 617 counting the 100 contested spaces). Mrs. Maher stressed the difference between this lot and other lots of shopping centers. This is an old, ill -designed building, she said, one that pre -dates the new standards. Mrs. Maher then moved to continue the application until the next regularly scheduled meeting, 20 September 1988. Mr. Belter seconded. Motion passed 5-1 with Ms. Pugh opposing. 4. Site Plan applicationof Gary Riggs to construct a 9,000 sq. ft. building for storage/distribution use on Lot #17, Ethan Allen Drive Mr. Belter stepped down during this discussion. Mr. Riggs proposed a multi -use building with 4 or 5 units for small contractors. There will be 2 curb cuts. Mrs. Maher noted that landscaping is inadequate. Mr. Riggs said they have upped the total proposed to $6,006. They had calculated wrong before, Mrs. Maher said she would like to see a change in selection to include some real evergreens. Mr. Weith said parking is OK and there are sufficient hydrants. Mr. Riggs said they comply with drainage requirements and depressed curbs are now shown on the plan. Ms. Peacock moved the Planning Commission approve the site plan application of Gary Riggs for construction of a 5 unit, 11,250 sq. ft. building for storage/distribution uses as de- picted on a plan entitled "Storage/Distribution Facility, Ethan Allen Drive, lot No. 17" prepared 12y Graphic/Construc- tion Management Services, Inc, dated 9/1/87, revised 7/29/88 and 9/6/88 with the following stipulations: 1. The landscaping bond shall be in the amount of $6,600 and shall be for a 3-year period. The revised landscaping plan shall be submitted to and approved by the City Planner. 2. The plan shall be revised prior to permit to show the following: a. The proposed Dwarf Juniper located outside of the pro- posed future parking space area b. A note indicating that site drainage shall be toward Commerce Avenue to the south PLANNING COMMISSION 20 SEPTEMBER 1988 PAGE 3 Mr. Burgess said he would vote against the application tonight and said it is the Planning Commission that is being squeezed. He said this was started as 4n item of other business and the Commission has now gotten into a public hearing. He felt none of the facts have changed and the Commission has wasted its time. Ms. Peacock said she has sympathy for Synon but that this is a problem between Synon and the land owners. It was clear the road had to be ded- icated and both Synon and Deslauriers knew this. A poll of Commission members showed a majority opposing. Mr. Burgess moved that the request of Synon Group to amend both the Final Plat approval for subdivision of a 1.55 acre parcel from the 26+ acre Cupola Golf Course property on Quarry Hill Road and the site plan approval for construction of a 9,800 square foot daycare/office building on Quarry Hill Road be denied. Mrs. Maher seconded. Motion passed 6-1 with Mr. Jacob opposing. Mr. Belter left the meeting after this item. 3. Continuation of Revised Final Plat application of Heathcote Associates for construction of an 11,460 sq. ft. addition to the South Burlington Factory Outlet Mall located on Shelburne Road Mr. Collins said they agree this is not a perfect plan, but they have to work with what they have. He felt they had made a good faith attempt to address the issues, and that they will end up with something better than what is there now. Mr. Collins said they could have 642 parking spaces, but that would not be as aesthetically pleasing. He added that it was clear to him that in all but the worst week of the year (be- fore Xmas) there is no problem because there is enough parking. Every parking center in the city is crowded before Xmas, he said. He acknowledged there will be some times in the worst week when they couldn't take care of the spaces for Club New England, but that would be assuming they use all their spaces. Mr. Craig asked if it was fair to assume the parking arrangement with Club New England won't be renewed. Mr. Collins guaranteed that it wouldn't. He also noted that although the deed allows the Mall to bill Club New England for such things as lighting for those spaces, there has never been such a billing. Mr. O'Neill contended that is because there were no expenses, not because there was no usage of the spaces. Mr. Collins said if you look at the spaces, you can see they are not being used. S$ Ms. Pugh noted that there is a requirement for 11100OAft. of loading dock space and only 2400Aft. is provided. Mr. Weith 5$, PLANNING COMMISSION 20 SEPTEMBER 1988 PAGE 4 said clearly they don't meet that requirement and there could be a conflict when deliveries come during the day. Mr. Dowling, Manager of the Mall, said there are stipulations in the leases that say deliveries can come only at certain times. Mrs. Maher suggested there be no parking on the north side of the building for safety reasons and also on part of the south side. She felt it was safer than having cars go in and out of parking spaces. The concensus of the Commission was to allow parallel parking in those locations. Mr. Burgess noted that at present there is 98% coverage and with the new plan there will be 910. Since building and parking will be added, he asked how this reduction is possible. Mr. Webster said they will be tearing up asphalt and not replacing it. Some of it, he added, was just put down, but it will be torn up. Mrs. Maher asked for an explanation of the landscaping plan. Mr. Webster said there will be a green space around the perimeter, mostly a continuous arba vitae hedge. There is another planting area around the building to soften the building. Ms. Pugh asked Mr. Webster to delineate what is painted asphalt and what is actually landscaping. He indi- cated the space where the island had been and also cross- walks. Mr. Burgess felt the island should be returned to the plan for traffic control as an island does more to control traffic than a painted strip of asphalt. Mr. Oppenlander suggested a 4" high mountable curb, and the Commission agreed to this. Mr. Webster also noted that they took out the pro- posed yews up front and reduced the number of crabapple trees to 28, replacing them with spruce and pine. They have also introduced some spruce around the perimeter. Mr. Burgess stressed that the cedar will have to be trimmed and main- tained so it doesn't grow into the parking lot. Mr. Weith reminded members that last week they discussed a possible 3-year traffic/parking study on the lot. The ap- plicant would be responsible for data collection and a yearly review would be required by the Commission and City Planner. Mr. Collins said he felt it would be a useful planning tool. Mr. Weith added that if it were determined there are not enough parking spaces, the applicant would then be required to take measures such as hiring someone to control ingress/ egress. Mr. Collins agreed to this. Mr. Craig added that it should be mentioned that the Commission considers this an experiment in making the best use of an existing structure. There is no intent on the part of the Commission to make the same concessions to other shopping centers or to consider this application as a new standard. Mr. Burgess said he would like the City Attorney to be involved in drafting that PLANNING COMMISSION 20 SEPTEMBER 1988 PAGE 5 language. Mr. Craig said he would like to review the motion then poll the Commission as to whether they would approve it, then have a quality motion ready for a vote at the next meeting. Members felt they would like the bank drive -up window removed when the bank's lease expired. Ms. Pugh said she would like a stipulation that there be no kiosks allowed in what is being considered non -leasable space. Members then reviewed the stipulations in the proposed motion and a poll of members indicated that all but Mrs. Maher would approve it. Question then arose as to when construction would be allowed to begin. A stipulation indicated that it could begin only after completion of phase I of the Burlington Southern Connector, and Mr. Collins said he did not feel the owner would want to accept that but would agree not to occupy the new building space until that construction was complete. Ms. Pugh indicated she would not vote for the motion if construction could begin before the completion of the Connector Phase I. Ms. Pugh then moved to continue the item until the next meeting. Mr. Burgess seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 4. Site plan applicationof Bank of Vermont to construct a 500 sq. ft. addition to the branch bank located at 960 Shelburne Rr)ad Larry Decker of Bank of Vermont said this will be a mezanine addition to provide an office for the manager and a conference room. The building footprint won't change. The space is currently there but is used for storage and mechan- ical equipment which will be relocated. The building will not be any higher. They plan to keep the bank operating during the construction work. Mr. Craig raised the question of causing traffic problems during construction. Mr. Webster said they will try to do a lot of the work on evenings and weekends. Mr. Craig thought this might not be fair to the residential neighbors. Ms. Pugh asked if the Bank has talked to its abutting neighbors. Mr. Decker said they had not. Mr. Craig noted the City Manager's comment that the original plan for the bank showed a concrete curb and a catch basin that were never provided. Mr. Decker said they would be willing to work that out with the City Manager. Mr. Burgess said approval will be held up until that work is complete. PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 22, 1989 The South Burlington Planning Commission held a meeting on Tues- day, August 22, 1989 at 7:30 P.M. in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset. Street. Members Present Peter Jacob, Chairman; John Belter, Mary -Barbara Maher, William Craig, Catherine Peacock, William Burgess, Ann Pugh Others Present Joe Weith, City Planner; Sid Poger, The Other Paper; Tim Gallup, Deborah Bell, Ed Wolfstein, Brad Rabinowitz, Bill Wilson, Mary Ellen Minisola, John Burroughs, Steve Barer, Doug Fitzpatrick 1. Other Business a) Mr. Weith rioted that an executive session will be scheduled for the next meeting to discuss the I.B.I.S. litigation. Commis- sion members decided to schedule it for 7:00 P.M. and start the regular meeting at. 7:45 P.M. b ) Mr. kieith expla.inc a the status of the T-Model analysis program. The City has received all of the necessary input data from the CCRPC except for land use projections. Mr. Jacob suggested the Commission send a message to the City Manag- er and City Council supporting sending the Planner to a T-Model 2 training course. c) Ann Pugh announced that she will not be at the 9/5/89 meet- ing. 2. Minutes of August 1 and August 81 1989 A Commission member moved the minutes of 1 August be approved as written. It was seconded and the motion passed unanimously. A Commission member moved the minutes of 8 August be approved as written. It was seconded and the motion passed unanimously. ?. PUFT,IC HEARING: Revi.reri Final Plat apr-licit cr f Heatrlc(:te. Associates for: 1 ) change the parking _layout cn _curie iumen-L to stipulat.i..on lt5 of the approval mot.ioIi dated 10/14/88 regarding improvements to the Shelburne Road/Factory f111+1 f•4 tr.l.��,`+ - T - -+ -)utlei M Mr WPi t 1 YintPrl that HPntAate 1 s rf,,? -., t + Fitzpatrick, had requested to be moved to the last item on the agenda. Commission members agreed to continue for T�,�}�"i i Tra?�•ir_� at. the end of the agenda. 1 PLANNING COMMISSION -5- AUGUST 22, 1989 Members felt the circulation on the site was inadequate. Also, they felt some parking spaces were located too far from the units. The Commission members did not feel the number of units were the main problem but rather the inadequate circulation and parking layout on the site. The applicant and Commission discussed the possibility of mandat- ing a maximum unit size and selling price for the units. Some members questioned the authority and appropriateness of the Commission to set a selling price. Mr. Craig suggested that a sidewalk be provided connecting the units to Patchen Road. 7. Sketch Plan application of Cooley -Wood Corporation for con- struction of a 10 room addition to the Ho -Hum Motel, 1660 Willis- ton Road. Jim Wood presented. 10 units would be added as a second floor on the rear building. Parking spaces are met. He explained the parking plan was revised to meet the concerns expressed by Mr. Weith and Chief Goddette. Members felt the circulation looked very tight. The owner said the storage shed is used for chairs, mattresses and bathroom accessories. Access to the shed is through a door on the side, therefore, the proposed parking spaces would not block access to the shed. Members suggested that handicapped spaces be located near the handicapped units. Members agreed to visit the site on their own time. They also suggested landscaping be added and shown on the plan. It was advised that the applicant address the concerns and come back for a revised sketch. CONTINUE PUBLIC HEARING FOR HEATHCOTE ASSOCIATES Doug Fitzpatrick presented. The proposed parking change was presented first. Three front parking alternatives were present- ed. Alternate #1 is the best as far as limiting blocking in the 30 foot circulation lane. Alternate #3 is the best as far as loosing the least number of spaces. Mr. Fitzpatrick recommended alternate #3 as far as best meeting the interests of all in- volved. He said Grand Union preferred alternate 43. The Commis- sion members did not like alternate #2. Mr. Weith explained that he preferred alternates #1 and #2 because he felt these would result in less potential for conflict with the free flowing lane �, n,7?7d t1 P ne7 1?T?ete� F +t.:c u , a LT_ ��., c majority of parking is behind the building, it was important to keep a free flowing lane cpen as much as possible in _-rder to allow efficient circulation and encourage vehicles to go to the rear lot. After much dibL:ussioii, the menibcrs decided on ai-er- nate #1. k PLANNING COMMISSION -6- AUGUST 22, 1989 The applicant then explained the parking revisions along the south side of the building and the rear parking lot. He ex- plained that the Agency of Transportation did not want the pave- ment removed as proposed in the original plan because water seepage might damage the wall. The Commission suggested angled parking along the south side and one more island in the southeast corner of the rear parking lot. The members advised the appli- cant to come back with a revised plan showing angled parking and alternate #1 and a revised landscaping plan. The applicant then described the proposed intersection improve- ment revisions. He said an analysis showed that dual left turns out of the mall and split phasing of the signal were not neces- sary. He said that the State concurred with the analysis. He said that Craig Leiner of the Regional Commission was not thoroughly convinced that these suggested improvements were not. necessary. Craig suggested that new counts and new analysis be conducted 6 months after the opening of T.J. Maxx. Mr. Weith explained that the new analysis also showed that the overlapping throughs and lefts for Route 7 traffic would benefit the traffic situation. He recommended that the applicant still be required to implement this improvement as originally stipulat- ed. Commission members agreed. The final change described by the applicant is that Mr. Farrell, the adjoining property owner to the north, would not allow the applicant to loop the water system on Farrell's property as originally required. Therefore, the applicant is proposing to cap and valve the water line at the north property line. Members did not have a problem with this. It was decided to continue the public hearing at next week's meeting. As there was no further business to come before the Commission, the meeting adjourned at 10:40 P.M. Clerk 9 a r SEP 11 1992 City of So. Burlington f �Y B7 y � � J � eI :i� T7•\'J I-89 RAMP C GRAPHIC SCALE ( IN Few ) I Ina\ . .B It STATISTICS • COMMERCIAL T ZONE • LOT COVERAGE: MAXIMUM ALLOWED EXISTNG BUILDINGS: 3OX 307E BUILDINGS, PARKING k STORAGE: 70X 89x PROPERTY LINE - - - - - - - - - - STORM LIME FACE Or CURB EASTWC BUIDWC CATCH BASIN EXIS7INC SEVER LIME AND YANHOIE 0 0-4 PAVEMENT BORBIO PARgNG LOT ® sEcnaN NtAleCR u LUWT 0r PARKINGLOT SECTION LANDSCAPE AND WALK AREAS J—iptlon O SKETCH/CONCEPT [:3 PRELIMINARY 0 FINAL [:1 RECORD DRAWING pe uu• FACTORY OUTLET CENTER SHELBURNE ROAD, SOUTH BURLINGTON VT. MASTER PLAN LAMOUREUX & STONE t{ Mar•• DO- 27 High Str••t E..., Jct., VT 05452 St AWm., VT 05470 (802) 878-N50 (802) S21-52u Consulting Engineers Inc. \\\III IIIII ..�.TSo J, L4� NIB —y .ca. OTHERS 1'=40' d.d9n dat. OTHERS 9-I-92 tern Pro} no. LAL 9276 eh.ck.d jht. no. PJO okE{ RIBRBQtf MBW kols� u im �a ✓ 00 No Text s3 /cp FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED Engineering and Planning Services One Wentworth Drive • Williston • Vermont • 05495 • (802) 878-3000 1 August 1989 Mr. Joseph Weith, Planner City of South Burlington 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, Vermont 05403 RE: Heathcote/Factory Outlet FILE: 88173 Dear Mr. Weith: On behalf of our Client, Mr. Heathcote Associates, we are seeking some information and responses regarding the site work for the above -referenced Project. First, we would like to secure your approval to leave the new water supply pipe terminated at the Farrell property line, as explained in our lengthy letter to Chief Goddette. As you'll recall, Mr. Farrell, at the last ;minute, wouldn't allow connection to his waterline until he'd been V compensated. The reactions of both Chief Goddette and Bob Gardner were to terminate the pipe at the property line, and let Farrell make the connection later. We believe both the Fire Chief and Mr. Gardner have conveyed this to you, plus the fact that the new system constructed by Heathcote is adequate for their purposes. We would like a letter from you to this effect for our files, in case a question arises in the future regarding the connection to the Farrell waterline. iThe second item to clarify is the traffic signal. As we've discussed at length, the State of Vermont and the City of Burlington are in agreement with us that the new signal controller, as it is now set, is adequate. Mr. Leiner, who has reviewed our comments and analysis, thinks that the originally -recommended left -turn phasing change should not be ignored at this time. Since this appears to be a professional difference of opinion, we believe you suggested, as did Mr. Leiner, that this signalized intersection be left as it is, but monitored by Heathcote. Then after a period of time, say six months, the monitoring information be studied and a reassessment of re -phasing the signals be made. If the signals need to be adjusted, and the State, along with Burlington, agree on the adjustment, then Heathcote would pay to have the re -phasing done. We believe, based on a very rough estimate, that the cost to monitor the intersection would be about $5,000, and the cost to adjust the phasing would be about $5,000, for a total of $10,000. Since all the other improvements recommended by the JHK, report have been completed, except the total removal of the right -turn islands on Route 7, Design 0 Inspection 0 Studies • Permitting • Surveying r Mr. Joseph Weith 1 August 1989 File: 88173 Page Two which the State has just re -built, we believe our Client's request to release most of the s80,000 bond related to this intersection is justified. Should the City of South Burlington decide to require the monitoring leading to a signal re -phasing, then it would seem reasonable to release only $70,000 of the bond at this time. It should be pointed out, as an aside, that the JHK report actually includes all the improvements on the Sears side of the intersection in the $80,000 estimated construction cost. This would, deductively, then make the JHK improvements envisioned for the Factory Outlet less than the $80,000 bonded. v� The third item is the proposed parking in the southwest corner (in front of the Grand Union), and the approved access to it. Grand Union and Heathcote, after studying the access and parking layout approved by the City, feel it is quite unworkable. We agree. The long access drive along the building leading to the single entrance to the parking will, definitely, eliminate queues forming from vehicles leaving Shelburne Street. We feel the queues, which can be a problem when shoppers slow down in the entrance lane to analyze the parking situation, can just as effectively be controlled by moving parking entrances away from the road a reasonable distance, and by reducing obstacles to entering the parking area, such as eliminating parking stalls near the entrance. We've created three "sketch" versions of parking for this particular lot, and solicit your and the Commission's reactions. All the enclosed sketches have one common aspect: the more efficient the parking and search pattern, the fewer cars can be parked. We strongly feel all of the enclosed proposals are preferable to the version shown on the approved plans. And our Client, along with the tenants of the Project, can accept any of the enclosed proposals. We would be happy to meet with you and/or the Commission to discuss this proposed change in the plans and explain why we think the proposals are preferable. In any case, it appears the green space in the front will be the same or greater with these proposals. ✓' The fourth item is the proposed greenspace along the I-189 fencing. We have yet to receive formal notification, but our meetings with the State have produced a definite verbal position that they will not allow the pavement in this area to be replaced with plantings. We've been told a letter to this effect will be sent "soon", and will pass it on to you when received. FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED Engineering and Planning Services Mr. Joseph Weith FILE: 88173 1 August 1989 Page Three We raise this issue now so that construction will not be held up and, in turn, the opening of the store. Our proposal would be to continue parking cars along the fence, and create an equal amount of greenspace elsewhere in the Project, and then petition the State to see if they would accept lacing green plastic privacy strips into the existing fence to produce a screening effect. Again, we bring this up at his early time so that we can work together and avert a "time crunch" later on. You indicated that some of the foregoing items may need formal review and approval by the Commission. If this is so, please proceed with the necessary mechanics, and let us know so we can be in attendance. Again, thanks for all the time and effort you've spent discussing these items. Sincerely, FITZPAT ICK-LLEWELLY INCORPORATED Douglas R. FitzPatrick, P.E. cc: Mr. Mehler, Heathcote Tim Gallup, Wieman-Lamphere Peter Kelley, Engleberth Construction DRF1mam FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED Engineering and Planning Services FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED Engineering and Planning Services One Wentworth Drive • Williston • Vermont 0 05495 • (802) 878-3000 17 August 1989 Mr. Joseph Weith, Planner City of South Burlington Dorset Street South Burlington, Vermont 05403 RE: Factory Outlet/Heathcote FILE: 88173 Dear Mr. Weith: On behalf of our Client, Mr. Mehler, we are herewith submitting supplemental information for the hearing scheduled for 22 August 1989. The hearing, as discussed and announced as a "Revised Final Plat", is to assess the proposals to revise the parking lot in front of Grand Union, move the landscaping along I-189 to other areas, postpone the traffic signal re -phasing until after further study, and to terminate the new waterline at the Farrell property line. In our letter to you of 1 August 1989 we explained in detail how Mr. Farrell's demands made looping the water system to his pipe impossible, and that both Chief Goddette and Bob Gardner agreed termination of the new waterline at the Farrell property was acceptable. We also explained in our letter how there was some disagreement between us and the regional planning commission regarding the need to adjust the traffic signal's phasing. We feel the bonded amount to cover this potential signal work, and the study of it, won't exceed $10,000. You asked that we generate a cost breakdown of the $80,000 amount estimated by JHK needed to up -grade this intersection and signal. Roger Dickinson of our firm has done so after his discussion with you, and we include his office memo herewith for your review. We still believe the $80,000 bond should be reduced to $70,000 at this time, which would allow for $10,000 of additional work. As requested, we have generated a drawing showing in greater detail the three (3) proposed alternatives to the approved parking layout in front of the Grand Union. As explained during the work session, Alternative #1 is the most efficient in traffic circulation, but the least efficient in number of parked vehicles. Alternative #2 is more efficient in parking than #1, but less efficient in circulation. Alternative #3 is the most efficient in parking, but the least efficient in circulation. It seems you can't have something for nothing. For comparative purposes, there are 179 parking spaces now (by our field check), and the originally -approved plan provides 176 spaces. All three proposals more nearly satisfy our goals of providing proper Design • Inspection • Studies • Permitting • Surveying Mr. Joseph Weith 17 August 1989 FILE: 88173 Page Two pedestrian access to the shops, while creating a better pattern for vehicles to enter both the access road and the parking lot. All three proposals, each to a greater or lesser degree, reduce the potential of queues backing up to Shelburne Street from the present situation. Enclosed also is a letter (3 August 1989) from the Vermont Agency of Transportation rather definitively saying they will not allow the proposed "green strip" along I-189. As discussed at the work session, we have re -arranged the parking layout to distribute this eliminated "green space". The enclosed preliminary site plan displays our proposa'�,-`or this distribution; 16 parking spaces would be gained along I-1B9, while L4._)tpaces would be eliminated in the rear parking lot, for a net gain of 2 spaces. Approximately 2,800 square feet of green space would be eliminated along I-189, while about 1,500 square feet of green space will be created in the back parking lot, for a net loss in this transaction of about 1,300 square feet of green space. However, since all the new parking alternatives create green space, there will not be a net project loss. Alternative #1, for example, will add about 1,800 square feet of green space, creating a net project increase of 500 square feet of green space. The amount of net parking spaces and green space will, obviously, vary with the parking proposal selected for the front parking lot, We feel the addition of curbed and grassed islands in the "back" parking lot will increase both the aesthetics and the circulating efficiency of the lot, as shown on the enclosed preliminary site plan. We fully appreciate how confusing the foregoing is to follow, so please feel free to call us if you have any questions. Again, thank you for the time you've taken to discuss all these matters. Sincerely, FITZPAT CK-CLEW INCORPORATED Douglas R. itzPatrick, P.E. cc: Mr. Mehler Wiemann-Lamphere Engleberth Construction DRF/mam FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED Engineering and Planning Services TO: Douglas FitZPatr� , FROM: Roger Dickinson V� ✓V%WO tl-v DATE: August 4, 1999 RE: Factory Outlet Inte ection/Signal Costs FILE: 09173 As requested, I have developed a breakdown of the cost to improve this intersection (Table 18 of the TSM study). Of the $00,000 total, the breakdown equals: A. Intersection Geometric Improvements (including $50,000 Sears & Factory Outlet access modifications) B. New Signal Controller and Strain Poles $20,000 C. Revise Signal Timings & Signal Phasing $10,000 With the exception of widening Shelburne Road itself, which is not the responsibility of Factory Outlet, Items A and B have been accomplished by the Vermont Agency of Transportation as part of the recent Shelburne Road reconstruction. Modifications to the Sears access have been in place for several years now, and similar modifications to the Factory Outlet access will be completed coincident with other site work. The VAOT has indicated that the new controller can handle the proposed split/overlapping phasing with only minor modifications. Additionally, the revised phasing would require possibly up to four additional loop detector amplifiers. Those units are only several hundred dollars apiece. No signal head modifications would be required. FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED Engineering and Planning Services �pNT AGF�C� O � Z 'Pq�SPOR�P�` STATE OF VERMONT AGENCY OF TRANSPORTATION 133 State Street, Administration Building Montpelier, Vermont 05602 August 3, 1989 Mr. Douglas Fitzpatrick, P.E. Fitzpatrick - Llewellyn, Inc. One Wentworth Drive Williston, Vermont 05495 RE: Burlington, MEGC M5000(1), c/1 Factory Outlet; South Burlington Dear Doug: r We are in receipt of and have considered your request of July 11, 1989 to install curbing and a grassed area north of the timber retaining wall adjacent to Ramp "C" off I-189. As you know we, the Agency of Transportation, have certain permanent rights in this area which are: 1. Slope rights. 2. Drainage rights. 3. Right to construct and maintain a retaining wall. Enclosed is a copy of the warranty deed in which are conveyed, to the VAOT, the aforementioned rights. Also enclosed are right-of-way plan sheets depicting right-of-way limits and various rights. Your request has been considered by our Construction and Structures Engineers. Their consensus is that the construction of a "grass strip" in this area would adversely affect the structural integrity of the timber retaining wall. Allowing water to permeate this area is not desirable because of the resulting hydrostatic pressure and because additional water will cause the wood to deteriorate more rapidly. In light of the above, it is necessary for us to deny your request to construct the proposed "green strip". If you have further questions or comments, please feel free to call. Sincerely, VW& 4 1, 0U William 0. Fisk Utilities Engineer WOF:DFH:kf Attachment cc: Central File, via RFS Utility File John Perkins, Design File n z IVIO n m cn ARB Y'S SHEL BURNE S TREE T GRAND UNION lalltt s n m SHEL BURNE S TREE T As 0000 It ARB Y'S GRAND UNION SHELBURNE S TREE T 4+II tt n SHELBURNE STREET Illitt c ED FARB 7YS GRAND UNION INCORPORATED Engineering and Planning Services One Wentworth Drive 0 Williston 0 Vermont ~ 05485 0 (902)878-3000 11 December 1989 Mr. Joseph Weith, Planner City of South Burlington 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 RE: Heathcote Associates; Factory Outlet FILE: 88173 Dear Mr. Weith: On behalf of our Client, Heathcote Associates, we are herewith making application for an amendment to the Final Plat for the above - referenced Project. Specifically, as discussed with you and the Planning Commission on an informal basis, our Client would like to have Alternate #3, as presented to you during the Final Plat hearing earlier this year, approved in place of Alternate #l, which was approved and subsequently built. The Owner and some of the tenants of the Center strongly feel the current parking lot layout in front of Grand Union simply doesn't work' At issue is the lack of curb openings in front of the Grand Union. At present, only the inlet "chute" and the exit road near Arby's provide openings in the curb along the front of the building. As shown on the enclosed plan (4 copies enclosed), under the proposed layout there would be three (3) more openings in the curbing. This would, in effect, allow traffic searching for a parking space in this area to utilize the roadway in front of the building in their search pattern. The part of the lot near the main entrance would remain unchanged from what exists today' As we mentioned during the previous Final Plat hearing, we can support and justify Alternate #39 now being proposed again, as a compromise of the goals being sought by all parties' The proposed plan allows for about 300 feet of unimpeded stacking length off Shelburne Street, while still allowing some "free circulation" of parking/searching in front of Grand Union. Design 0 Inspection * Studies 0 Permitting 0 Surveying r c 1 j Mr. Joseph Weith, Planner FILE: 88173 11 December 1989 Page Two We've noticed that already the "new" road in front of Grand Union, with virtually no interference to travel, has caused drivers to travel at an excessively high rate of speed. We believe this situation could endanger pedestrians. The enclosed proposal would counteract this tendency to speed, by forcing drivers to be wary of more traffic entering the roadway at different places. In addition, the proposed plan will increase the number of parking spaces available; the present plan (Alternate #1) has 164 spaces, which is being reduced to 162 to improve circulation, while this plan will have 174 spaces, for an increase of 12 spaces. The "original" Alternate #3 proposed 188 spaces. While we were doing the detail layout (enclosed), we decided that safety could be improved by widening the two major aisles to 30 feet, and reducing the parking along the I-189 fence, thereby allowing the lanes to align better. We trust, as discussed, this proposal can be heard at the 9 January hearing. Should you have any questions between now and then, please don't hesitate to call us. Enclosed also is the fee check for $30.00, as well as a completed application form. Again, thank you for all your time taken to discuss this Project. Sincerely, FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED Douglas R. FitzPatrick, P.E. cc: Philip Mehler 881731tr DRF/kal FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED Engineering and Planning Services %F C - --� --------------------------- 1 zos.�z r ' 1 I E novE r4_oq wt / i 1 � I / I I II c�. I I � I •I I 1 l,j - NXv I , EN ST s o Jr w , ¢Rr.P ^ II I I ' I - - N"Lw,Nc 1 Sr Rb�TUkE , ___. _ ____ - E --- ---� } N EPS E N.0 ry Nrn F',.WTrcG 4l vrG rcls. I t O �O2 A "GeuT rQ r„ ¢x,e N4 LAJL9 ALG 11Y ••'TrollJe4t �.�----� - 2,b ' 0 3 I � To ¢i.nR .r z.�Tn oa�r4''' see •V L -- -I -F i A L t lOT t r¢� iNST4L1 fl.a9' r DetS / ¢orn \�* sir ) " \ Ivob'f+E '---� I TB a. .� Ic•r)tJ \ Peo �ti a<as�7. z,. 'm v�n.rcE� �x ' g.atiti I Fit � n _ - • F E � I PNr.,RE p . �L 1 r ee¢ _ _AU 4P , , I y r 1 , l7ROR05Ep � - RNrNT¢Oeg- A- ' Lr,Ne/� FFE •t,4:1 THi si )rwET E&� __,-..., M 4 ry ., f � i"- � 9: _� ¢,Swr! _ I L- I CITY _` OF g BURLINGrfM' �, X SITE .. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTONI LOCUS NOTES, 'TOP , c L C%ISTING SITE INFORMATION TAKEN I ItOM I LANS I r -- PREPARED BY RI D KOERNER, I E., THE WATER -__. .. ' - -- `2oee'''p� _ DEPARTMENTS OF BCIRLINGTON AND SOUTH ----------------- �\ '' ------ --� - --_-_ ° ♦" 2'--��i�xw BIIRLINGTON, AND WIEMANN-LAMPIILI28. ONLY ._I LIMIT rD SITE' CH ECKING OF SOME At "I. -GRADE y, LOCATIONS, INCLIIDING NEW 1-49 JMTAiNINC WALL DONC HY THIS OPtl(-E. -- _ , _._ -_ ( TOR S C JEc R. EXISTING - I _ R`(T IN( UTILITY LOC ANIONS AND 51 CS F C I IiOM �- Ne I REST INFORMATION NATION AVPIILAt\L I' IT IS THI: CONTRA 7 r �leoeicw,., -r-- _y _ -- H.. LaNSTe 'TON CTORY \ — REsloNwlalry r0 vl.lin') nLL Bnuu,D unl-Inls -- -- 1 II r r z.,n LF , „¢y n �.. " FA OUTLET nel•oat: coNsntucrlc N. r —I v I l - -_ - — ILA `hIP... ! I yt e.,�.. z�I'I��"Z 1 i i i 1- ' ♦ + L-' CENTER h I _ - �' y .w-�,. �.. s s _ J �• f. IN IS Tlif CONTRA( WITH 12 ESPONSIBILITI 10 CHECK III 1 AND 711E OVEDENGIFEltI;LA S INSI IRE THE MOST I2L('CNT ANTI r\I'DROVCD PLANS Ail P. 11EINC IpLD POIi " CONSTRUCTION. 4 T .., I i I II ' 1 ! ♦ �i ' III -i-.(_ - / 7 -' 4. SITE RLAN LAYOUT HAS BEEN TAKr.N FROM A PLAN I II j l i \ i U I i -- \ PREPARED BY WIEMANN-LAMPHERE, AND APPROVED NI, _.____r__ /I r _ - F ST BY THE CITY OF SO11TH BURUNCTON. S. ALL NEW WATER LINES S INCHES Olt LAI2GL'It, AND ALI. r yy r ^Nqr T lHYDNANTS ^¢p`LLr, WILL (IN THE AS' 11111NTv 1111 NAND/OltRD TO I IT. I TT WIDE, 1 � T HYDRANT. T , eet2°i mrs. I� N tU -✓• ,.- /i/r i` T PERIMETER RI 1asE° LEGEND ��� PROPERTY LINE _ -j' RIGHT -OF-WAY /EASEMENT LINE PROPOSED EDGE OF PAVEMENT f 61 i EXISTING EDGE OF PAVEMENT PROPOSED CURBING f 5 ' I [}- EXISTING CONTOUR '�' 1 N �: y `.i m '� U' x er'T o - ..4.1 _ _...----z 2 ... __.--• PROPOSED CONTOUR _ ate. _.� PROPOSED SIDEWALK I, � 9 _ i- EXISTING WATER LINE W/HYDRANT VALVE PROPOSED WATER LINE W/ HYDRANT, VALVE q ' i I I i I I`• 'i I, V I r I 2'2----5---�-0------ EXISTING SANITARY SEWER W/MANHOLE Li '�"-` r' / ///;-� 1 ��• I �s- _ >N e`:n �z„ -�\ \ ------ -'-ii]' --r--,-- i--- ------ PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER W /MANHOLE "• EXISTING SEWER / CATCH BASI N PROPOSED STORM SEWER W/ CATCH BASIN EXISTING UTILITYPOLE EXISTING GAS LINE J - 1 _ PROPOSED SPOT ELEVATION !..•••••••••I� EROSION CONTROL PARFIE�FTYPF B SEQUENCE J-- I v1Ew G.K6 r �I E. I T'o cc,n 01 '� •. I. o. % ' Toe ar NEw —' 1J -- r _ i -_24•.r_—___�, � _�_ �:, v. c „- P � N� r �:°eN�o,t -'-- I / \_- SCALE I"= 40' 8040 ,20 /60 200 240 �I I mq L FACTORY OUTLET CENTER VERMONr Ilblll LLLII o('1_ t�R' , �_�l J.,. _D ��`_ ® i:�lj rE �_ Tlu-Is"'a`1e •nEe � �--• ___ --_ 1 NIoTE•PCW rJe J ------ R+ST'-✓ J HTS 1��' j o ¢-- -- SITE 8 UTILITIES PLAN Nc, PIPE y_r,.l,--«-.-'-.�-.-�.'-- _ -- - EX z E3nrd[��T. I - l69 RAMP "C °' n .z REVISED' "ALTERNATE* 03 -- -- _ - PROIIEI IIDMXI A� cm�p T-s-�-oE � 88173 , I ----------- � PE S C 49 "N4 YOUT N FCoNT of 4¢PN.] JN'o�l IL •II B9 De D A `r.10 E: AFoGG¢ U ET•i"cEErJE IG 7 41 ,O� U L v.. T .__-Gf- PCw41 AL1bo,e-89 9 * l�.r�'LtEI `VyAly// L11 ILI 1II1 N{IIXX„I OAADWPAIAXLpD 7 X 61 7 e0 S) -R-6INCORPORATED J4,15SEE A PAP -_ ENOIN[EN1N0 AND PLANNING yEAVIE[S - - -'-- -"--' GRAVEL AND SHEA ATTORNEYS AT LAW CHARLES T. SHEA STEPHEN R.CRAMPTON 109 SOUTH WINOOSKI AVENUE STEWART H. MCCONAUGHY ROBERT B. HEMLEY POST OFFICE BOX 1049 WILLIACRAIGM G. HERLYR. C RAIG WEATHER LY BURLINGTON, VERMONT OS402 JOHN R. PONSETTO NORMAN WILLIAMS JAMES E. KNAPP DENNIS R. PEARSON PETER S. RLY ROBERT F.. O'NEILL 'N December 2 , 1987 VAN Z. KRIKORIAN SUSAN WILLIAMS SWEETSER South Burlington Planning Commission c/o Ms. Jane Lafleur City of South Burlington South Burlington, VT 05401 Re: South Burlington Planning Commission: Application of Heathcote Associates for construction of a 20,400 square foot addition to existing South Burlington Factory Outlet Mall Dear Members of the Planning Commission: TELEPHONE 6S8-0220 AREA CODE 802 CLARKE A. GRAVEL COUNSEL Please enter the appearance of the undersigned in the above -referenced matter, on behalf of Thomas A. Farrell. Mr. Farrell owns property adjacent to the site of appli- cant's shopping mall and the proposed expansion which is the subject of this application. By virtue of reservations contained in a warranty deed from Mr. Farrell to applicant's predecessor in title (a copy of which is attached), Mr. Farrell, his heirs, successors and assigns have the right to use a portion of the applicant's property for parking by employees, patrons, and invitees of two businesses located on Mr. Farrell's property, including 50 spaces for daytime parking (before 6:00 p.m.) and 100 spaces for evening parking. It appears from applicant's site plan that it proposes to use the property to which Mr. Farrell has prior claim, as parking space to serve the mall and the proposed expansion. The applicant has no legal right to commit any portion of its property to which Mr. Farrell has prior claim for parking, to GRAVEL AND SHEA South Burlington Planning Commission December 2, 1987 Ms. Jane Lafleur Page 2 this proposed development, in order to satisfy off-street parking requirements of the South Burlington zoning ordinance, or to develop the property in such a way which interferes with Mr. Farrell's access to the parking space. Very truly yours, GRAVEL and SHEA By: 1 �� flXl�jlSl� John R. Ponsetto Attorney for Thomas A. Farrell JRP:wrb Enclosure cc: Mr. Thomas A. Farrell Heathcote Associates Mr. Frederick P. Tiballi WARRANTY SEED S kZ%. e� KNOW tlIL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS T11A; I, THOHAS,A. FARRELL, of South Burlington in the County of Chittanden and State of Vermont, Grantor, in the consideration of Ten and more Dollars paid to my full satisfaction by GARDEN WAY INCO:UO RATED, a Connecticut corporation with a place of buriness in Charlotte, County of Chlttenden and State of Vermont, Grantee, by these presents do freely GIVE, GRA11T, SELL, CONVEY AKD CONFIRM unto the said grantee, G:A%DE:i WAY INCORPOP.AT.ED and its successors and assigns forever. a certain piece or parcel of land in the City of South Burlington, County of Chittenden and State of Vermont, with all improvements and appurtenances thereto located on the westerly side of Farrell Street, tha southerly side n: a private roed r.ow or formerly known as Xarket Square or Odell Parkway, and to the rear of the easterly side of Shelburne Street, and more particularly bounded and described as follows, viz; Beginning at an iron pin marking the northeasterly corner of the herein -described premises, which pin marks the intersection of the southerly line of a private road now or formerly known as ' N.ar':zt Square or Odell Parkway and the westerly line of Farrell Street; thence proceeding S 19'49'20" W, along the westerly line of Farrell Street, a distance of 472.73 feet to a point; thence proceeding S 19'15'20" W along said westerly line a distance of 59.87 feet to a point marking the southeasterly corner of the herein -described premises; thence turning to the right and proceeding S 86'58'10" W a distance of 158.85 feet to a concrete monument; thence turning Slightly to the right and proceeding N 85'14'10"'W a distance of 564.43 feet to a point marking the southwesterly corner -f the herein -described preMises; thence turning to the right and proceeding N 17*31150" E a distance of 703.37 feet to an iron pin in the southerly line of said private road, which iron pin marks the northwesterly corner of the herein -described premises; thence turning to the right and proceeding in a generally easterly direction along said southerly line'of said private road, as follows, proceeding in a curve to the right having a radius of 186.62 feet a distance r� of 100.85 feet to a point; thence in a curve to the left having a t radius of 234.43 feet a distance of 126.69 feet to a point; thence P L S 72023110"E a distance of 63.87 feet to a point; thence in a curve to the left having a radius of 220.15 feet a distance of 124.33 feet to a point; thence in a curve to the righr. having a radius of 172.99 feet a distance of 93.49 feet to a point; thence S 72'23110" E a distance of 309.43 feet to the iron pin marking the point end place of beginning. Said premises contain 10.10 acres, more or less, and are shawu and depicted as "Parcel 2" oii--a certain map or plan entitled "Plat of Survey for Seaway Shopping Center Corporation and Tb omns A. Farrell" prepared by Joh:► A. Marsh, dated June 4, 1981 and recorded or to be recorded in the South Burlington Land Records, to which reference is made. Said premises are conveyed subject to and together with the benefit of: 1. Taxes due the City of South Burlington, not delinquent, which the Grantee by acceptance of this deed expressly assumes and agrees to pay. 2. Any and all provisions of any municipal ordinance, public law or special act. 3. The right of Grantor, his heirs and assigns, until June 30, 2002, to use a portion of the northwesterly corner of the premises as reasonably required for supplemental parking of automobiles of employees, patrons and invitees of the restaurant and nightclub located immediately northerly of the herein —conveyed premises (now or formerly kno.,n as the Old Board and the Yankee Trader Room) as now constituted, srd the existing studio and office build'_ng located imzt diately northwesterly t1hereof (presently occupied by International Televieion Corporation) as now constituted. The amount of such ' parUng is limited to a caaximum of 50 spaces during business daytime h.:urs (prior to six o'clock p.m.) and a maximum of 100 spaces during evenings and on weekends and holidays,, and is subject to the obliostion of Grantor, hia successors and assigns to pay a pro rota 6hare of the costa of maintaining, repairin3, illuminating, land6capin6 and removing enov and ice (such ,share to be based upon the actual use of such supplemental parking by or on behalf of said Grantor). 4. The right of the Grantor, his heirs and assigns, to install, maintain, repair and replace a pipe or pipes to drain surface water from the lands located easterly of The Old Board, so called, and northerly of said private road, and to connect same to the manhole end drainage pipes presently locate6 in the northwesterly quadrant of the herein—descr-lbed premises, including the right to enter upon the herein —described premise& With machinery and equipment for such purposes; such right to be exercised at Grantor's sole cost and expense and in good and workmanlike fashion, and the location of r the pipes to be as shown and depicted as "Drainage R.O.W." on the —2— above -described map or plan or in such other location as may be mutually agreed upon by Grantrr and Grantee. 5. Possible rights and restrictions contained in Warranty Deed of 11 omsa A. Farrell to Herman S. Ib omas and Mavis C. Thomas, dated January 28, 1960, of record in Volume 50, Paga 481 of the Land Records of the City of South Burlington. 6. The property may be subject to a perpetual easement and right of way to the Town of South Burlington as conveyed by deed of Thomas A. Farrell, dated March 25, 1971, of record in Volume 96, Page 360 of the Land Records of the City of South Burlington, for the purpose of the operation, construction, maintenance, repairing,,.. - rebuilding and replacing pipss and pipelines. 7. The property may be subject to an agreement between South Burlington Fire District G1 and Thomas A. Farrell, dated August 25, 1947, of record .in Volume 24, Page 45 of the Land Records of the C!.ty of South Burlingtc... 8. Easements cnd rights of way conveyed to Crcen Mountain Power by deeds of Thomas A. Farrell, dated July 5, 1975 and June 28, 1954, of record in Volume 109, Page 364 and Volume 34, Page 80, respectively,, of the Land Records of the City of South Burlington. 9. Rights now or formerly of Seaway Slopping Center Corporaticn as set forth in Warranty Deed of Thomas A.. Farrell, dated December 29, 1959, of record in Volume 50, Page 463 to place fill and allow the top slope to extend into the land of Thomas'A. Farrell. 10. The prcperty is subject to slope and highway rights, the right to construct And maintain culverts, and the right to discharge water through, paid culverts as Set forth in "Order of State Highway Board fixir:g compensation to be p.,id and report of hearing relative to the taking; of land and rights of others in the Town of South Burlington", dated March 16, 1961, of record in Volume 48, Page 429 of the Land P.ecQrds of the City of South Burlington. 11. Any and all rights af:d restrictions existing under or by virtue of Lcaaes nssioned this day by Seaway Shopping Center Corpora- tion to the within Grantee or hel,1 by Seawey Shopping Center Corpora- tion and sucnaeccd to by the within Grantee. 12. Possible restrictions against direct or indirect use of any land or premises as an automotive car each and us set forth in Lease Agreement between Farrell Corporation and Champlain Oil Company, Inc., dated September 8, 1971, of record in Volume 101, Page 208 of the Land Records of the City of South Burlington. 0 HAVE AND O H �a 1 T HA T OLD said granted premises, with all the privileges snd appurtenances thereof, to the sPid Grantee, GARDEN WAY INCORPORATED, —3� A i 6a • &A its successors and assigne, to their own use and behoof forever; and I, the said Grantor, THOMAS A. FARRELL, for myself and my heirs, executors and administrators, do covenant with the said Grantee, GARDEN WAY INCORPORATED, its successors and assigns, that until the ensealing of these presents I am the sole owner of the premises, and have good right and title to convey the save in manner Lforesaid, that they are FREE FROM EVERY ENCUMBRANCE, except as aforesaid. And I hereby engage to V.1RRANT A1iD DEFEND the sane abait)st all lawful claims whatever, except as aforesaid. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I hereunto set my hand and seal this 30th day of June, A.D. 1931. IN PRESFECE OF: 000 r THOMAS A. FARRELL ST:,TE OF VERMONT COUNTY OF CHITTENDEN, SS. S At Burlington this 30th day of June. A.D. 1981. personally appeared THOMAS A. FARRELL, and he acknowledged this instrument, by him sealed and subscribed, to be his free and deed. N' Before me � ont Propany Tran0er 1a+ �2 V.S.A. Chap. 231 JOWLEDGMENT- La Paid —Bard of hutth Cert. fteC'd: L Ds+&loymaru Plant, ACL Can. Rac'd. -4- Notary Public Received for Record July 1, 1981 at 9:55 a.m. Attest .I l Y .P,. r O ("J Fb %v Iw 0 HAOL STREET i uj • 'f )11 � sa.r � III • . _ 1 ice- , • L �� !L s.~ • 'O1 •• I CYIM DATA s•t. .., n••�.a• •R":a �• qn • •_• J. .c...:J rt • Y•:•]e .T /L / wa ••,ry ..rr f. 14 •¢ ••,Yaso'.t .•rt'to•[t lOJO R.C. •� ••[x.. i' I^ 35 AC. f wo. T,r I•sf• I .— .. LtO.�.• I••� ..I.•n r/•ra "-%,W r A..rwti+A lPLAT C.- SURY£7 t SEAWAY SHOPPING CENTER CGF PC%F-ST10N tYD TtIOMAS A. FARR _L.L :[ CITY OF_O. OURLING ON\VT. � �• . _ . are t/[Fl• C is Mardi •- �..• •• ..e.\ .1 1 OFFICE Burlmak Associates c/o Kravco, Inc. 234 Goddard Boulevard P. 0. Box 135 ring of Prussia, PA 19406 COPY July 30, 1982 — _ FILE CODE A • I CIIENT �c Attentioni Dale Chalpin, Esq. Re: "Scavay Shopping Center" Shelburne Street South Burlington, Ve:-ncnt Gentle;::en: this fir,. represents :`,r. i`ror; as A. Farrell and Farrell Corporation, or, '.:}hose behal_` we Sivc •;nu `orT..a'_ notice as fo11o:as . 1. In cc:nneCtioa with a. prop,:sec? modification of Facilities leased to the Chi:.tenden Trust Company, as outi`:.ed in E June 23, 1982 letter from William W. Sch.-oc•cier , Seq. , to the undo: siC_ned, please be ad' _,cad that' }::. ='� rrc�11 and "ar-F'll Corporationc'a p �, S s lv cc.nte st end den ti:• r P-== y c r.gh„ of �urlrak As: oc'iates (,Dr £-L'Vone ease C! a r,ling ."rom or throush Gel de ^ ►gay inco:Porated) to ;.lake any of the altr:r.7iGnu or perform any of the construction pr os c,sed to be un6erta►:en i -' or upor, any of the proi:ertlocated northerly Of the r�orthc.•r-a:.wst bou- (!Lr I'-—; v o� she P;l, eel of _�.�d curve Ted Dy Se :ucy Sh-jp ,inn C^n�1ter Coil -.on tC� (� Inc for oi P,tcd b; i iJT* ty ✓Ci'C j".1n at E. o 30 1 81 a: d ire the South Bur] iriE, oC1 F-rrell _end Fr�rreli Corp'Nr<--tiion '2r.Pre.ssly contest ` 871c deny ally alleged right r,: Dur va: k Associates (or an•,cnc else 1aco�P017a_c'c) to " e, any p,-., ;ion o4. ` the right of way denc : i'_��•d in to ,_lie car :;anal June 30. :9b1 :;;det��.ure e,:c•c.ut �,: ?'r. Ffir-.-ell and Farrell C��rp:�rAti.�►1 or ,ly ;%ki pose otr,er than ingress and egress fror~ and tc :?,elburne Street and Ferrell Strut. Sp�ci_'c�;'_ly, withc!ut the p-ior written OFFICE COPY Burlmak Associates Julv 30, :932 Page 2 FILE CODE A - i CLIENT consent of :Sr. Farrell and Farrell Corporation, neither Burll:.ak nor- anyone else claiming from or through Garden Way tins any right to park vehicles or place any suns, kiosks, rr structures of any kind in that area. We also draw your attention to the fact that the site plan layout submitted to t;r. Farrell and Farrell Corporation indi- cates a total of 648 parking spaces, of which 24 appear to be locAted in. the right of way area mentioned rtbove. Further, there is no indication that 50 of the :paces (100 during the evenings, and on weekends and holidz:vs) are subject to a prior claim in favor of employees, patrons and invitees of the two buildings owned by Mr. Farrell i-nediately to the nor.th.of the parcel you are acquiring. We hereby specifically give you notice that in sat{ s`_ying any parl ilis i,�, r.Cnts which the City of South Burlington may impose on 11r. Frarrell or Farrell Corporation, or their respective heirs, succcEsors or assigns in connection with use of those properties to the north, they will clz+im the ben. = it of that 50 (1-00) space allotment, and s l f o the bcrzef l t of the ric-ht co use the right or way area in r.-nn�:r noL �nc�r.: is t�r:t w�:;t h the e}:nr c6s rights of otil_rs. V(— v truly ?. , "i-D, & V'' I :H , LTD. i • - a sL ! .� t tLU ;i'���� �� meal p--•�ali< I z D i t cc C i s LL q i � � ij I r .SL C' 4.: �r � 1�: ► r O �� u i C f C L t y� K F+ O i �• C l i W C C E. < G O Z :Ei.•..."Tes-- AETUR♦i1FC:, PF�:L:ttc^- .. ...D:.^.I�fi;:�.�411 r''y ,f-d r Gj OQ ri MA STRECT IAJ U.) 7 Z PARCE 2. JO AC. &35 AC. ■ 0. CURVZ DATA M T gr-e NL T M PLAT OF SURVEY SEAWAY SHOPPING —,CENTER CORPORATION AND THCMAS:A. FARRELL N, ;,'CITY OF SO. ISURLIWTOKVT. OA CXITl C XANVAJ war A. w it rqAAair s&wvrr i Yoe, xf. oA rs: -L f-L e.9L c mo. STITZEL & PAGE, P.C. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 171 BATTERY STREET BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05401 (802) 660-2555 (VOICE/TDD) FAX (802( 660-2552 STEVEN F. STITZEL PATTI It. PAGE• DIANNE L. KENNEY (WAI.80 ADMIT'rm, IN N.Y.(. May 24, 1993 Honorable Matthew J. Katz Chittenden Superior Court PO Box 187 Burlington, VT 05402-0187 Re: City of South Burlington v. Chittenden Bank, et al. Docket No. S257-93 Cnc Dear Judge Katz: OF COUNSEL ARTHUR W.CERNOSIA I have enclosed an executed Stipulation for Entry of Order and a proposed Order for issuance in the above -referenced matter. Very truly yours, _ 1 Steven F. St tzel SFS/mdm Enclosure cc: Peter Collins, Esq. William Schroeder, Esq. Joseph Weith L:\SON1090.cor STATE OF VERMONT COUNTY OF CHITTENDEN, SS. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON CHITTENDEN SUPERIOR COURT v. Docket No. S257-93 CnC CHITTENDEN BANK, in its capacity as tenant, and HEATHCOTE ASSOCIATES, in its capacity as property owner of 508 Shelburne Road STIPULATION FOR ENTRY OF ORDER NOW COME the City of South Burlington, the Chittenden Bank and Heathcote Associates, by and through their attorneys of record, and stipulate that the Court may enter a final order against the Chittenden Bank and Heathcote Associates in the above -captioned matter as follows: 1. The Chittenden Bank and Heathcote Associates are enjoined from operating a drive-thru banking service at the existing branch bank building in the Factory Outlet Center at 508 Shelburne Road; the injunction shall continue until final resolution of the appeal of Heathcote Associates in Docket No. S1755-92 Cnc, and if the appeal is denied, the injunction will be permanent. 2. The Chittenden Bank shall pay to the City of South Burlington fines of $25 per day for the period commencing December 15, 1992 and continuing through February 26, 1993 for a total of 74 days. 3. The Chittenden Bank shall not interfere with reasonable activities undertaken by Heathcote Associates to srrrzrL & PAcr, P.C. complete the site work specif ied in paragraph 4 below. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 171 BATTERY S'I'R 671;T I I U R 1, 1 N(Yf0 N. V K R N10NT K"5 )1 r 4. Heathcote Associates shall4complete the temporary site work shown on the plan attached to this Stipulation as Exhibit A on or before July 1, 1993. Within ninety (90) days of the date of a decision of this Court in Docket No. S1755-92 CnC, denying Heathcote Associates approval to operate a drive-thru banking service at the property commonly known as 508 Shelburne Road, Heathcote Associates shall complete the site work specified in paragraph 8 of the approval motion of the South Burlington Planning Commission dated April 28, 1992. G Dated at Burlington, Vermont, this ( day of May, 1993. STITZEL & PAGE, P.C. Attorneys for the City of South Burlington By: � I I'/ 1W/A Steven F. Stitzel Dated at Burlington, Vermont, this )11/"day of May, 1993. DOWNS, RACHLIN & MARTIN Attorneys for the Chittenden Bank ) - IL By: W William W. Schroeder Dated at Burlington, Vermont, this . day of May, 1993. H:\SON135.stp STITZEL & PAGE, P.C. ATTORNP:YS AT LAW 17I BATTERY STREA"T BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05101 PAUL, FRANK & COLLINS, INC. Attorneys r Heat ote Associates A1By: er16niss v A' OIA.. Y MKNI R.C. PLANTER ,tlh P0.L[D TO a- t[LOw TO► 1• PLAT t s� SMALL T WITH tMALL Rt[ FLA 1 ►LANTW IN �O tH P RUBB 1 I 1 P asaa s --a sass as-saEKISTINO �I SIOE W ALK ---TL C I .� I111 11 I � E%:STING ATM OTELL PARKWAY EXISTING LAWN. -EXISTING WALK-UP LAW M B aNK �1 r SCARITY ►AVEW&NT. - is s siii nisi PLACE /" OF TOPSOIL It ESTABLISH ►REBSIRIE TREATED NEW LAWN TIMBER C&M, DOW[L[D TO PAVEMENT WITH Nr . 3n- RISMS EXISTING DRIVE O --a---s---------.---1a----------- --- --- - fr�a. 11 .1 II II 1 1. FACTORY OUTLET CENTER TEMPORARY LANDSCAPE PLAN 4ASID3 SCALE 1". 20' iTITZEL & PAGE, P.C. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 171 BATTERY STRE'E'T WRIANGTON, VKRMONT05401 STATE OF VERMONT COUNTY OF CHITTENDEN, SS. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON CHITTENDEN SUPERIOR COURT rW Docket No. S257-93 CnC CHITTENDEN BANK, in its capacity as tenant, and HEATHCOTE ASSOCIATES, in its capacity as property owner of 508 Shelburne Road FINAL ORDER This matter came before the Chittenden Superior Court, the Honorable Matthew J. Katz presiding, based upon a Stipulation for Entry of Order filed with the Court on May , 1993. Based upon said Stipulation for Entry of Order, this Court ORDERS, ADJUDGES and DECREES as follows: 1. The Chittenden Bank and Heathcote Associates are enjoined from operating a drive-thru banking service at the existing branch bank building in the Factory Outlet Center at 508 Shelburne Road; the injunction shall continue until final resolution of the appeal of Heathcote Associates in Docket No. S1755-92 Cnc, and if the appeal is denied, the injunction will be permanent. 2. The Chittenden Bank shall pay to the City of South Burlington fines of $25 per day for the period commencing December 15, 1992 and continuing through February 26, 1993 for a total of 74 days. 3. The Chittenden Bank shall not interfere with reasonable activities undertaken by Heathcote Associates to complete the site work specified in paragraph 4 below. 4. Heathcote Associates shall use its best efforts to complete the temporary site work shown on the plan attached to this Stipulation as Exhibit A on or before July 1, 1993. Within ninety (90) days of the date of a decision of this Court in Docket No. 51755-92 CnC, denying Heathcote Associates approval to operate a drive-thru banking service at the property commonly known as 508 Shelburne Road, Heathcote Associates shall complete the site work specified in paragraph 8 of the approval motion of the South Burlington Planning Commission dated April 28, 1992. Dated at Burlington, Vermont, this day of May, 1993. H:\SON145.ord SI'ITZEL & PAGE, P.C. ATTORNLYS AT LAW 171 IIATI'ERY s,riwrr H URI,INGTON. VI•:RNIONT OGA01 Honorable Matthew J. Katz Chittenden Superior Court Judge I,� v •' DIA. ■ r m*H R.C. /LANTCR IN TO a' CCIOW TOP W 1I' i WITH14SOIL, ►CAT l AARK it ILATLO WITH SMALL TRCC �oR 4MtAl 1 1 1 II - 1 1 II -----------.------ -A EXISTING it it OE W ALK � II �I C XISTING ATM - I r � L III / li r, I 1 II i I. O'DELL PARKWAY ---------------` [lilSTW4 EXISTING LAWN. WALK-u► LAW- BaNK ` SCARRT ►AVIEWNT. Ff a: sLA► PRfASITREATED YIACt 4" Of iOPSgI l Cf TACl6H TIM&JA CUM. DOWCLCD NEW LAWN TO ►AVCM"T WITH 0- . 316- R%G&NS EXISTING DRIVE r ---------- -------------------------r---- .------------ -------- -T---. FACTORY OUTLET CENTER TEMPORARY LANDSCAPE PLAN AAIIII SCALE P'. 70- STITLEL & PAGE, P.C. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 171 BATTERY STREET BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05401 (802) 660-2555 (VOICE /TDD) FAX (802) 660-2552 STEVEN F. STITZEL PATTI R. PAGE" OIANNE L. KINNEY (*AI.\I) AI)MI'11PI) IN N.Y.) May 20, 1993 William W. Schroeder, Esq. Downs, Rachlin & Martin PO Box 190 Burlington, VT 05402 Peter Collins Paul, Frank & Collins, Inc. PO Box 1307 OF COUNSEL ARTHUR W.CERNOSIA Burlington, VT 05402-1307 Re: South Burlington v. Chittenden Bank and Heathcote Associates Dear Bill and Peter: I have enclosed a proposed Stipulation for Order in the above referenced matter. This incorporates certain changes requested by Bill in an earlier stipulation I prepared between the city and the Chittenden Bank. If this is acceptable, we can present it to the court at the status conference on May 24, 1993. Very truly yours, Steven F. Sti ze"Y SFS/jac Enclosure cc: Joseph Weith L:\SON670.LET #1459 STATE OF VERMONT COUNTY OF CHITTENDEN, SS. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON CHITTENDEN SUPERIOR COURT V. Docket No. S257-93 CnC CHITTENDEN BANK, in its capacity as tenant, and HEATHCOTE ASSOCIATES, in its capacity as property owner of 508 Shelburne Road STIPULATION FOR ENTRY OF ORDER NOW COME the City of South Burlington, the Chittenden Bank and Heathcote Associates, by and through their attorneys of record, and stipulate that the Court may enter a final order against the Chittenden Bank and Heathcote Associates in the above -captioned matter as follows: 1. The Chittenden Bank and Heathcote Associates are enjoined from operating a drive-thru banking service at the existing branch bank building in the Factory Outlet Center at 508 Shelburne Road; the injunction shall continue until final resolution of the appeal of Heathcote Associates in Docket No. S1755-92 Cnc, and if the appeal is denied, the injunction will be permanent. 2. The Chittenden Bank shall pay to the City of South Burlington fines of $25 per day for the period commencing December 15, 1992 and continuing through February 26, 1993 for a total of 74 days. 3. The Chittenden Bank shall not interfere with reasonable activities undertaken by Heathcote Associates to STITZE1.L& PAGE. P.C. complete the site work specified in paragraph 4 below. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 171 BA'rTI?RY siltui,;'r I I IIR I,INGTON, VEIRNIONT 05401 4. Heathcote Associates shall complete the temporary site work shown on the plan attached to this Stipulation as Exhibit A on or before July 1, 1993. Within ninety (90) days of the date of a decision of this Court in Docket No. S1755-92 CnC, denying Heathcote Associates approval to operate a drive-thru banking service at the property commonly known as 508 Shelburne Road, Heathcote Associates shall complete the site work specified in paragraph 8 of the approval motion of the South Burlington Planning Commission dated April 28, 1992. 4 Dated at Burlington, Vermont, this day of May, 1993. STITZEL & PAGE, P.C. Attorneys for the City of South Burlington By: Steven F. Stitzel Dated at Burlington, Vermont, this day of May, 1993. DOWNS, RACHLIN & MARTIN Attorneys for the Chittenden Bank By: William W. Schroeder Dated at Burlington, Vermont, this day of May, 1993. H:\SON135.stp 71 I TLEL & PAGE, P.C. ATTORNEYS AT LAW M BA,rrr•my STREEIT URI. NGTON. VERMONT 05401 PAUL, FRANK & COLLINS, INC. Attorneys for Heathcote Associates By: Peter M. Collins 17442V Wr PAU L, FRANK & COLLINS, INC. ATTORNEYS AT LAw ONE CHURCH STREET P. 0. Box 1307 BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05402-I307 R. ALLAN PAUL TELEPHONE (802) 6S8-231 1 JOSEPH E. FRANK PETER M. COLLINS TELECOPIER (802) 658-0042 JOHN T. SARTORE (NY' B. MICHAEL FRYE ANTHONY B. LAMB ALAN D. PORT ROBERT G. CAIN (NY) S. CROCKER BENNETT, 11 ROBERT S. DIPALMA DAVID A. BARRA STEPHEN J. SOULE (NH( GAIL E. HAEFNER C HARLEs E. FINBERG MICHAEL J. HARRIS (WI) ELIZABETH J. GRANT (MA) April 28, 1993 OF COUNSEL Steven F. Stitzel, Esq. Stitzel & Page, P.C. 171 Battery Street, 2nd Floor Burlington, Vermont 05401 Re: Heathcote Associates/South Burlington Dear Steve: STEPHANIE J. MAPES JOSEPH R. WESTON (NJ, PA) KENNETH R. APPLEBY (OC, MO( STEPHEN G. NORTEN CHRISTOPHER MCVEIGH INE, NY) JOHN H. DRAPER, IV JAN E. BERNASCONI (MA) HAROLD A. GOLDMAN DAVID BORSYKOWSKY (NY) This is to follow up on our earlier conversation in connection with the pending enforcement action. My client asked Leonard Lamoureux to come up with a temporary landscaping plan which would deal with the existing site conditions around the Chittenden Bank building. As you know, my client feels that he should not have to change the site until the appeal is heard on the merits. However, in a spirit of compromise, he has authorized the temporary landscape plan, which will cost in excess of $3,000.00. I have enclosed a copy of the plan prepared by Leonard Lamoureux and, as you can see, it substantially complies with the requirements of Paragraph 8 of the original Planning Commission approval. If this plan is acceptable to the City, please let me know as soon as possible so that work can be commenced. I await your advice. Cordial PMC/Csg Enclosure cc: Mr. Philip Mehler Mr. Leonard Lamoureux cgoodr/pmc/stitzel.ltr NC. RFC E1 VED APR LG33 4' DM. A r HIGH A.C. PLANTER EILLED TO 4' SELOW TOP OI WITH SL, PEAT A SARK PLANTED VATH SMALL TREE 1 1 1 U 1 1 'I .... .... 11 ExnTINo 1 SIDEWALK-11 p E%;STING ATM — 11 1 li `Tr c II 1 1. II 1 1 OTELL PARKWAY EXISTING LAWRL WALLA-uP E317TIN0 :r-=.w_zt=•.:z _:a `y "L- LAWM I BANK I SCARILY PAVEMENT. as ►TIMSG ''= TED rasa NEW LAWN PLACE 4" OF TOPSOIL t ESTASUEH MAFAFE CURS-TREA/IR. DOW[L[D TO PAVEMENT WITH W . S/S- RESARS EXISTING DRIVE --------------- -r----------------- ------- ---- FACTORY OUTLET CENTER TEMPORARY LANDSCAPE PLAN a/IS/SS SCALE I-. 20' PLANNER 658-7955 City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 FAX 658-4748 C October 3, 1991 ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Mr. Philip Mehler Heathcote Associates 488 Madison Avenue New Yor-, New York 10022 Re: Factory Outlet. Mall Parking Study Agreement Dear Mr. Mehler: This letter se�-.ves as written notice that a payment. of $5,980.00 is due to the City by October 15, 1991 as specified in the above referenced agreement. Please contact me if you have any ques- tions. s cere y oe Weith, ity Planner JW/mcp HeathcoteAssociates December 8, 1989 Joe Weith City Planner City of South Burlington 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 Re: Heathcote Associates/ Outlet Mall Addition Dear Mr. Weith: This will acknowledge receipt of your letter of 12-5-89. As of this date, we are advising our architect of Condition 7 (a) of the Notice of Decision and Statement of Conditions that requires an "as built" plan. We will make every reasonable effort to satisfy said provision quickly. In the meantime, the enclosed Lease Plan will indicate that there are not any temporary retail stands and that all conditions of 7 (a) have been strictly adhered to by the Owner. With respect to traffic patterns at the Outlet Center, the site improvements, in particular the widening at the northerly portion of the parking lot, have significantly improved circulation. Moreover, we have observed that there is no negative impact on either traffic or circulation from the drive rthru facility on the north side of the Chittenden Bank. Your point about darec g mall customers to the rear parking facility is valid, and signs for Such purpose are already in the process of being ordered. Measures will also be promptly taken to discourage customers from parking in fire lanes. You should note, however, that weather conditions prevented us from completing the striping, and it will be re -done in the spring. Nevertheless, improved signage will not solve the parking lot problems in front of Grand Union. All paving has been completed, and there are no existing conditions that limit circulation at the southerly end. Nor, as may be assumed, is the parking ratio inadequate for the number of stores at the Outlet Center. In fact, based on nationwide industry standards that elsewhere never include public areas for computing parking ratios, the Outlet Center has 10 % more parking. 488 Madison Avenue New York, New York 10022 212 486-3330 -2- Please also note that plan 113, previously rejected by the South Burlington Planning Commission, provided approximately 12% more parking spaces in the front where it is most needed for Grand Union customers. Since there may be a continuing problem at the south end of the front parking, we look forward to your help and favorable consideration in resolving this matter. Respectfully yours, HEATHCOTE ASSOCIATES By: (�L 4W"'-I Philip Mehler General Partner PM:af cc: Peter Collins Tim Gallup Doug Fitzpatrick MEMORANDUM TO: South Burlington Planning Commission FROM: Joe Weith, City Planner DATE: October 16, 1990 RE: Factory Outlet Mall - Chittenden Bank One of the stipulations for the T.J. Maxx addition required that upon expiration of the lease with the Chittenden Bank in 1990, the drive -through window must be eliminated. In addition, if the existing building is not leased for purposes of a bank facility, the building must be removed. The applicant would like to come back to the Commission and request that this stipulation not be required. They feel that traffic and on -site circulation are working adequately with the existing drive -through bank, and therefore, would like to continue that use. In addition, they claim that parking is not a problem. The bank serves primarily drive -through customers and drop-off deposits for the local business tenants. The applicant will be requesing the following: 1) That the drive -through bank be allowed to continue; and 2) In the event that the bank use is discontinued that the building not be required to be razed. Instead, the applicant would have to get approval from the Commission to put a new use in the building. I advised that the applicant hire a consultant to adequately address these issues and they are willing to do so. Since this application does not require a change in the site plan, I would like to skip sketch plan and bring them directly to Revised Final Plat. Is this satisfactory with the Planning Commission? -- --------------------------------------- L- •- --.v._ --- - -- -- - ---- - - - --- -- I \v ..Tr .•J xE i'�.'ob \t�l t e �?-,;,0-!h' � T4-C lb K I S-- T S S,f'r_lEC I r �-----.�./fT_-�__�- i TOL J4 cvC l! 1 yry• - ' i� � EIS J1�B6 - r ------------------------- ra•_ 7 , -•1-_,:-•iu :�� sT•J��.�:�'t �,�� � 1 1 r. o�T c.....•.: ..Y,I _ -� 1 <F..r..aE, y - \ a�a `� 1 I 1 I I ' i- I'`�� 13AV•G4 ^ ' �_� A �_ -\ i ' `- -- J a."i i \ ; I ea•••.� vl .[�W w. 1 G S 'x-� 6__�• �� a= ... / Bpi; `s•r ...- - _ _ _ - -_ - . . ---- ----- ---- -------- - *��T.-�•e s •ems i '� ic•_•7cre� � }- _. � e.• - r`. \� � ... _ --.-T r r .. ,LL. n�.r PROPOSED 1 1 _- I I I I FFE L 4.l 'l l 9eT c4 •., ' it T•• i '�.< [ �' f� ! I�"►�:/ I I I • I i I I i I I a 'ia�_c.�- °Tu..�i �Wcc• II t- Jr.. \ IpA.i f CITY fif//ILNVGTGV r, -_x fl 1« (;I SITE 1 orSOUTH LOCUS I , �- I2 ` �,�,,,,, �/� •. I - -\ •t.•..� i I 1'!(ICTINI SITL iNi l)H \1ATIl1N T\KLN IH 111LANc . �ToO +yK __--_-_ _ ,_�• 1-R „• •-i , •.c e• 1•itCl ARCn R\ 1 RTO IL NCR 1 C THE W \T - [GOB \.ea%~.a �'•' Ill:l \RT\ICNTC \lr MAW, INI.TON ANII CM1T11 r — - -'i '�-•� �=- " 1 _ �y� 1 •� -•' �� ��_ 1111HLINCTON AND WIL-\IANN LAMNIERC. ONLY I - ----- ^ �'• c , 1 -. �4 7 LIN'A1U SITC i IICCKIN\: OE SF-1.0 113TAI NICAI)C �I • -_-- --- _ �]--� u,-- • ��• _-.... - I • J �} a / � - _-t L S� , � /� /S�-_-- � LO(.AlN1NC. /NCL1111ING NEW I-�� Hl:TA1NINl: WALL ,-- - -- -- ----- - *.' .. i• � :� _.- -- __-� lr��� -�� r+ IxiNLu\ mna°rlce- .�_t ,� _ �__ -• • �. •••S+ ; `*i - - - _ - 7 LrISTINI: UTILITY LOCATION% ANTI Ct_CC Altl I RO\1 ,a -. I •-- .I ..' TaC �-'- i - -- I RCCT INTOR►IATION A MLN4.L. 11 IS TOM CaIM TN M'TINt'S �l 1 I r ' ;��a••• EX/ST/ rr; J ' ~` I TIUTII NG •Y s '� 1 - RTCIt1NNIVLITY TO VrRll'\ All HI'N ICU I �� < , ; aTC.•tioJ - 111-.I.1R1 CONSTRICTION �I r.t:,3{ 1•• !sP �- _ I FACTORY OUTLET -' 1 I J - - �- •� 111I" r f. I IS TOM: CONTRACTOR". Rrit'l1NCN% LITI' TOCHECK l� I r I ._ • CENTER -' r ••+ - I - -- ['ITII TO Ir, I.NI:1\E. I -It TO INS ill. '.k1ST Ill I i NT 1 / I ' i � _ - .-• } 1 ( , I �. � K�)W y{(_ � - � ..•., � _ _ ' :\NU \I'I•It PV,al MANS ARI: 111i1N1. I-?Lp 1 Olt .t * tl_ ` I T••�-_ I ' T \ CONCTR ICTION. `. s. SITI: PLAN LAYMIT HAN OUN TAKE % rH0\I A PLAN j 11 1i �i - l\ : • • 4° I �• �� _ \ 11 rilK CITnIM IC(N^i11J 01 H^LINCTINANII AIY•RSIVLU ` J I • _ _ t At NT.W %AXON I'I1U ! IN IIESN('I! aNt LA, -I tl:n AND ALL toa4._ 1 III Ilit ANTS AXON AI.1'UH TI'NANI'I:C 1TTA.-I11.O TO I INf.t- I r ' 1 ; A I �• I , I �I _ •, 27, li/ a'1lL III: IN A 1'I NTLIC IITII ITS LA\I-.\II1/l TG 1111MEI-T ['tIM. •• 1'CVTI:K 11 CIN TOM AS -MALT 111.1: ANIIIM! tll'IIItAN T. i!'-�Mw.lpT! ..`)} _ :'r- _ IL' L.. c✓t. "-- . I � 1 ' i � • � SS aat Y I� _- _ _-- � __ ___ _ __ C[ ST�J.ar• Oil � III --- � � I� '-'•' � ts..:[r )(tr►) , � � ; �I :; t° ` 1 _ _ LEGEND _ - j J� .a. a -4 "�� - - - -- ------ PERIMETER PROPERTY LINE RIGHT-OFi1NY/EASEMENT LINE V Ij rl ' 2 O I [ { PROPOSED EDGE OF PAVEMENT 1 , TL i I t I t / __.._-- _---._-.-_- EXfSTING EDGE OF PAVEMENT 1 \Zt 0 ' ' � r _ t PROPOSED CIK7BING I N&i t INI 1 il, 1 1 �bTi • PCw•'x ✓<�� L• +p� Ur JT'LT, , ! Go.IJa CT TJ Caa!••VaJ,' �o< 7F+•lnTo ZAP Tbl. 1 Imo) 1 •-IO is F tuE •EG�K ..•G R� ia'ai see. �-• I•QG •TOG ..R•fl-l4l EXISTING CONTOUR V ` • �<1• 1 �. -aa T aTa PROPOSED CONTOUR ,c•1 _ PROPOSED SIDEWALK --,a,!,.;,,,} .a.Ia.[x e••a'• I �� _ —� _,,, _ _ _�_ _ - �. _ __ _ _ EXISTING WATER LINE W/ HYDRA" . VALVE .\ Na••+�w- � \ter• w PROPOSED WATER LINE W/HYDRANT, VALVE J ' -Q - - - - - - EXISTING SANITARY SEVER WIMANHOLE ' / [--••♦� PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER W/MANHOLE ......... / �\ _ _ _ _ ___.Q_ _. _,_ _ _ _ - EXISTING STORM SEWER W/ CATCH BASIN i^ t1 ea PROPOSED STORM SEWER W / CATCH BASIN 1 _ T, • �- ► EXISTING UTILITY POLE EXISTING GAS LINE PROPOSED SPOT ELE VA. ION 111 - � ' M / SAY•}{•••• � `ter. (a�..«.«........... EROSION CONThUL PA/UUE-!.',TYPE" A SEOI'EI/CE m ViY/ . io as .. w �: ,. , I / / ! �- �' s �,► to CA I 3ie ei.•.w tbJ 1 i T/l �_ , SCALE I = 40• .o ao ro aoa r•o FACTORY OUTLET CENTER d -- -- K..I.�. ---1 / SOYM .IMLNYiTON -- _ _. °�[% — SITE a UTILITIES � PLAN - _ ----- ----- �"- - _ �/_ tis REVISED: "ALTERNATE 3 S-leg RAMP 'C" io Apr L��• i i- has-- _. .n.�Lf%I-. _ c •Y. t -ova•.• _ - a• M a�,� y,[,nyG r ••+lert -+ 1 Ate•- w_.auVa, acn atuO tc..[., E[.M[ `••.E.s •• n• � LS GS1 JTt •TY [4SQ-• T _L aa,la[ f'1'f'lll• .�r w•..•.o•- ____. _.____ ^7'1'ItlA F0 uzL rmu n u ` u" LE W E a air a MARCH f9B9 f • FLf INCORPORATED N,�,,, ,Nn: - � � D • DOII H tNONILMNIO ANO PLAN -Me A[NYIC[• WILLISTON VERMONT / - --------- FACTORY-CTORY OUTLET Fax CENTER h LLJ Alk) \j tu 4 0 !Mk i-al 4"" --------------- -------------------------------- RAMP 'C' T L.Ocus PROPOSED Ell— c- CU I, -7- —ARI SEWlR WIMAJIOHOLE EX— — S— W1 — BN P�SED 5 1— W/ LArcm BASM EXISnNG UTILITY POLE Ex GAS L NE .............. .......... -0,0SEL, ,or <r CIII,13 CONT rAl, r.1 =ALE " - 40 FACTORY OUTLET CENTER SITE 8 UTILITIES PLAN REVISED: "ALTERNATE' *3 I ILI lo. '01., up'h f.biGe+"41M"'y'.. interpreted to create additional parking space available for this project since the parking spaces addressed by Condition #3 have already been included in the required parking for this project. (e) Because of its continuing concern with the adequacy of parking for this site, the Planning Commission will closely monitor parking on the site for three years following the date that the building improvements authorized by this approval are opened to the public. The Planning Commission, with the assistance of the City f Planner and the Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission, shall determine the frequency of parking lot utilization counts. Applicant will be responsible for payment of all costs associated with the taking of required parking lot counts. In addition, upon request by the City Planner, the Applicant shall provide the City Planner verifiable records regarding the amount of space under lease on the dates of the required counts. (f) If, during the life of this project, the Planning Commission determines that unreasonable traffic congestion or unsafe traffic conditions are occurring on this site, it may direct _— Applicant to impose measures to mitigate such conditions. Such measures may include those set W clln�141A=. - o4--e. �s MY 44�A Cale-- A;04- � 4p l Utz tj ►1l t s fv--\ 4'O -"rra'9cl -.d 4 Alt { vac ? o ©- �%h ct r p� Memorandum - Planning August 1, 1990 agenda items August 17, 1990 Page 2 4) AIRPORT GULF, WILLISTON ROAD This application was continued in order to get the City Attor- ney's advice on how best to procedurally approve the trailer rental business but deny the proposed addition and retail use. Steve Stitzel advised that the Commission propose a motion which approves in part and denies in part. The motion will in effect approve the rental trailer business and deny the addition and retail use. Steve and I will have a motion available at Tues- day's meeting. 5) FACTORY OUTLET MALL PARKING STUDY Enclosed is a draft methodology for the Factory Outlet Mall parking study. Craig Leiner reviewed the methodology and said it was fine. His only comment is that for years 2 and 3, counts be taken every 2 months or 3 months, or during the heavier demand months as shown from the first year's data. He thinks it might be overkill to continue monthly counting for 3 years. 6) REVISED WILLISTON ROAD AND HINESBURG ROAD TRAFFIC IMPACT FEES Enclosed are the revised Williston Road and Hinesburg Road impact fees. These fee schedules have been revised to reflect a 10 year growth period rather than a full build out scenario. The re- quired improvments have also been revised. These fees should be considered to be plan to start reviewing our impact fees sistance of Steve Stitzel so that they with State enabling legislation. interim impact fees. I this fall with the as - are legally consistent 2 FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED Engineering and Planning Services One Wentworth Drive • Williston • Vermont • 05495 • (802) 878-3000 13 December 1989 Mr. Joseph Weith, Planner City of South Burlington 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 RE: Factory Outlet Center; Signage FILE: 88173 Dear Mr. Weith: As discussed with you and the Planning Commission last week, we have developed a signing program for the revised Factory Outlet parking layout. Enclosed are three (3) copies of the proposed signage for your comment and files. We also spoke with Mr. Ward regarding the use of two company names on the directional parking signs, explaining the Planning Commission feels quite strongly that vehicles destined for T.J. Maxx should park in the rear of the complex, leaving the front parking area for the other high -volume generator, Grand Union. We are convinced that many drivers won't proceed to the rear parking lot unless assisted by directional signs, in this case people seeking T.J. Maxx. Mr. Ward said he would accept such signage on a "trial" basis, and emphasized the signs couldn't constitute advertising. We understand this, and are sending Mr. Ward a copy of this plan for his review. The Owner has already begun preparations for installing the signs, and hopes to have them in place shortly so the Christmas shoppers will have an easier time negotiating the new parking lots. Should you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact us. Sincerely, FIT PATRICK-L WELYN INCORPORATED Douglas R. FitzPatrick, P.E. cc: Philip Mehler w/ encl John Dowling w/ encl Richard Ward w/ encl Tim Gallup w/ encl Design 0 Inspection • Studies • Permitting • Surveying PLANNER 658-7955 City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 July 3, 1990 Mr. Craig Leiner Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission P.O. Box 108 Essex Junction, Vermont 05453 Re: Factory Outlet Mall Parking Study Dear Craig: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 As part of the approval for the South Burlington Factory Outlet Mall addition (T.J. Maxx) the Planning Commission stipulated that a 3 year parking study would have to be conducted (stipulation enclosed). The purpose of the parking study is to determine whether there is enough spaces to meet demand. Enclosed is a proposed parking study methodology. Please review the study and provide me with any comments, suggestions or concerns. I appreciate your help. S' erely, Joe Weith, City Planner 1 Encl JW/mcp FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED Engineering and Planning Services One Wentworth Drive • Williston • Vermont • 05495 • (802) 878-3000 2 November 1907 Mr. Philip Mehler Philip Mehler Realty Inc. 488 Madison Avenue, 17th Floor New York, NY 10022 RE: Traffic Impact Evaluation Proposed Expansion - South Burlington Factory Outlet South Burlington, Vermont FILE: 86027 Dear Mr. Mehler: As requested, we have analyzed potential traffic impacts of a proposed 20,5000 sq. ft. expansion of the South Burlington Factory Outlet. The scope of this Project is shown on a plan entitled "Site Plan - South Burlington Factory Outlet", Wiemann-Lamphere Architects, last revised October 001 1987. The gross leaseable floor area of this expansion was calculated from the above -referenced plan to be 19,500 sq. ft. Previous analyses (March -May 1996) of similar expansion proposals of this shopping center resulted in the projection of unfavorable traffic conditions at the two primary intersections serving this Project: Shelburne Road/Home Avenue/O'Dell Parkway and Shelburne Road/Sears/Factory Outlet. Since that time additional information and analyses cconcerning traffic operations on the Shelburne Road corridor have been developed by the Vermont Agency of Transportation and the Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission. The culmination of those efforts was a report entitled "Traffic Systems Management Study, JHK Associates, July 1907" (TSM Study). That report and its accompanying drawings outline specific recommendations necessary to restore desirable traffic operations on the Shelburne Road corridor. Because of continued delays in the scheduled completion of the Southern Connector, it is imperative that short„-„rm so,lutign, to the current traffic problems on this portion of Shelburne Road be implemented as soon as possible. Design • Inspection • Studies • Permitting • Surveying Mr. Phillip Mehler FILE: 86027 2 November 1907 Page Two PROJECT IMPACTS Examination of projected 1990 traffic volumes from Figure 8 of the TSM Study indicate a substantial increase in the trip generation of both the Factory Outlet and the Shelburne Road Plaza (Sears). Such an increase contradicts Table 16 of that report, which does riot include any new development associated with either shopping center. The magnitude of the trip generation difference, from 1986 to 1990, in traffic volumes accessing the Factory Outlet equals 229 vte/hour. In comparison, an estimate of this Project's trip generation, based on ITE trip generation data, is given in Table 1. TART F 1 ESTIMATED VEHICULAR TRIP GENERATION Average Weekday Vehicle Trip Ends 1,301 vte/day A.M. Peak Hour Enter 18 Exit 16 Total 34 vte/hour P.M. Peak Hour Enter 57 Exit 59 Total 116 vte/hour Examination of the projected 1990 traffic volumes, as presented in the TSM Study, and projected 1988 dc-_sign hour volumes with this Project, as calculated in previous impact studies for this Project, indicates a close correlation of turning volumes entering and exiting both the Factory Outlet and Sears. In addition, the projected 1990 volumes provide overall Shelburne Road traffic volumes between 8-12% higher than the 19ee volumes, depending on the exact location. Consequently, the projected 1990 traffic volumes developed by the. TSM Study have been used as the basis for evaluating potential traffic impacts at the two primary intersections serving this Project. One adjustment, in the northbound left -turn movement at the Sears/Factory Outlet intersection was made. It iG projected that the new entrance into Sears, directly opposite the new I-189 ramp, will divert approximately 4O%._Qf the existing left --turn traffic entering Sears from the south. FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED Engineering and Planning Services Mr. Philip Mehler FILE: 86027 2 November 1987 Page Three Future operating conditions of the Shelburne Road/Sears/Factory Outlet and Shelburne Road/Home Avenue/O'Dell. Parkway intersections were determined by performing intersection capacity analyses. For clarity sake, the results at each intersection will be discussed separately. Shelburne Road/Home Avenue/O'Dell Parkwa The signal system at this intersection is being replaced as part of Phase I - Southern Connector construction, presently underway. At the completion of this phase, scheduled for 1988, a new phasing and timing plan will become operational. Under projected 1990 traffic volumes, as previously discussed, this intersection will operate at L.O.S. B during the P.M. peak hour. The results of this analysis, which are attached as Appendix A, confirm the findings of the TSM Study. Shelburne Road/Sears/Factory Outlet Existing signal equipment at this intersection is also being replaced concurrent with Phase I - Southern Connector construction. The VAOT has proposed a signal phasing and timing plan which is essentially the same as existing. Our analyses indicate that under projected 1990 volumes, with existing geometrics and VAOT signal design phasing, this intersection will operate at L.O.S. E/F. Again, this confirms the findings of the TSM Study. To correct this situation, the TSM Study recommends certain geomteric improvements, notably widening, removal of the existing islands, and a new signal phasing plan. -The latter item, which will provide an centers, is pr=imari ly responble�f�rp/thesencor each of they shopping exclusive double left -turn_ increased capacity at this intersection. We have analyzed those recommendations and concur with them. Detailed results, which are enclosed as Appendix B, indicate that traffic operations at this intersection can be improved to L.O.S. C. during P.M. peak periods. CONCLUSION The results of the above analyses indicate that traffic conditions on this portion of Shelburne Road can be improved sufficiently to accomodate the additional trip generation of a 20,500 sq. ft. expansion of the Factory Outlet. We note that the a firm schedule for the implementation of the improvements recommended by TMe TSM Study has not yet been developed. We see no reason, however, why the FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED Engineering and Planning Services Mr. Philip Meh 1 er FILE: 86027 2 November 1987 Page Four needed improvements at the Sears/Factory Outlet intersection cannot be dovetailed into the Phase I - Southern Connector construction which is presently underway. We wish to thank you for this opportunity to be of service. Should you have any questions, or if we can be of additional assistance, please feel free to contact us. Sincerely, FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED Rog1rr . Dickinson, P.E. CC. Dennis Webster/ Jane LaF1eur�_ Craig Leiner FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED Engineering and Planning Services APPENDIX A *SHELBURNE ROAD/HOME AVENUE/0'DELL PARKWAY 1990 INTERSECTION CAPACITY ANALYSES WITH PROJECT FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED Engineering and Planning Services ' HCM(1985) SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION CAPACITY ANALYSIS INTERSECTION:SHELBURNE RD. & HOME AVE./O'DELL PKWY. AREA TYPE: NON-CBD lNTERSECTION LEAN! [ ION :BURLINGTUN VT. DATE AND TIME PERIOD ANALYZED:1990 P.M. DHV W/ 19.5K PROJECT ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:VAOT PHASING & TIMING ANALyST:R. DICKlNSON TODAY'S DATE:10-29-87 _________________________________________-____________________________________ *** INPUT INFORMA[ION *** .... .... ......... __________________________________________________________________________ unpr1-1nn/mn �n//rI inn//mn FAqTnDUNn WESTBOUND LEFT TU�NING VOLUME 20� l�V zo �o THROUGH VOLUHE z295 1120 90 35 RIGHT TURNING VOLUME 30 1k:) 450 125 PEDESTRIANS 20 20 20 ARRIVAL TYPE 3 3 3 3 PEAK HOUR FACTOR 0.95 i::..95 0.90 0.90 PERCENT HEAVY VEHICLES 0.04 0.04 0.02 0.01 NUMBER OF BUSES 2 2 0 0 GRADE 0.00 0.00 0.00 �.00 THROUGH LANE UTILIZATION FACTOR 1.05 1.05 1.00 1.00 BASE SATURATION FLOW 1800 1800 1800 1800 NUMBER OF LANES 3 3 2 2 PARKING'? H N N N PARKING MANUEVERS PER HOUR 0 0 0 0 SIGNAL TYPE: SEMI -ACTUATED CYCLE LENGTH: 80 NORTHBOUND: LANE GROUP 1 LANE GROUP 2 LANE GROUP 3 LANE GROUP CONFIGURATIDN 3 13 0 NUMBER OF LANES LANE WIDTH 10 10 0 GREEN TIME 51.0 51.0 0.O GREEN, PROTECTED PHASE 14. 0.0 0.0 O+C, PERMISSIVE PHASE 51.0 0.0 0,0 SOUTHBOUND: LANE GROUP 1 LANE GROUP 2 LANE GROUP 3 LANE GROUP CONFIGURATION 3 13 0 NUMBER OF LANES 1 2 0 LANE WIDTH i0 10 0 GREEN 7IME . 41.0 41.0 0.0 6REEN, FPOTEC7ED PHASE�5.O 8+C, PERMISSIVE PHASE 41.0 EASTBOUND: LANE GROUP 1 LANE GROUP 2 LANE GROUP 3 LANE GROUP CONFIGURATION 5 10 0 NUMBER OF LANES 1 1 0 LANE WIDTH 12 12 � GREEN TIME 16.0 33.0 0.0 WESTBOUND: L0NE GROUP 1 LANE GROUP 2 LANE GROUP 3 LANE GROUP CONFIGURATI01'.1 5 10 0 NUMBER OF LANES 1 1 0 LANE WIDTH 12 12 0 GREEN TIME 16.0 16.0 0.0 v~ ^^ ' K K . � . ' . . - HCM(1985> SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION CAPACITY ANALYSIS ***way 0 K f* f**1 ***%I I ****.K INTERSECTION:SHEL8URNE RD. & HOME AVE./O'DELL FKWY. AREA TYPE: lot! -CPT) INTERSECTIUN LOCATIUN:BURLINGTON VT,, DATE AND TIME PERIOD ANALYZED:1990 P.H. DHV W/ 19.5K PROJECT ADDITIONAL INFORMATlON:VAOT PHASING & TIMING AhALYST:R. DICKINSON TODAY'S DATE:10-29-87 .... ..... ..... __..... ... .......... ... ..... ..... ..... ... ________________________________________________________ THE INTERSECTION AVERAGE STOPPED DELAY IS: 13.1 THE INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE IS: _..... ..... ..... ... ..... _..... ..... ..... ..... ... ______ ..... .... __..... ..... ..... ... ___.... ..... ..... _ _..... .... ..... _..... ..... .... ..... .... ..... ..... _.... ..... ..... ... ..... ..... _... .... ..... ________ ..... ..... _..... ..... STOPPED DELAY (SEC/VEH) ADJUSTED LANE GROUP APPROACH APPROACH LAi�E GROUP VOLUME V/C DELAY LOS DELAY LOS ..... _ ... ..... _______ PROT. 1 ..... .... ________ 113.97 ..... ..... ____... .... ... ..... ________ 0.42 .... ..... ____________________ 6.27 B PERM. 1 96.55 1.00 NOR THBOU|W 2 1464.47 0.?0 7.98 B 7.77 ' 3 0.00 0.00 0.0� ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ... .... ..... _____..... ..... ..... ..... ... .... ____________..... ..... ______________________________________ PROT. 1 97.54 1.00 26.90 D PERM. J. 39.30 0.44 OUND 2 1248.95 0.74 12.98 B 14.35 3 0.�0 0.00 0.00 ______________________________________________________________________________ 1 111.11 0.31 20.88 C EASTBOUND 2 500.00 O.8l 21.27 C 21.20 . 3 0.00 0.00 0.00 .... ..... _... _... ..... _______________________________________________________________________ 1 77.78 0.56 25.43 D WES[BOUND 2 138.89 0.46 22.25 C 23.40 3 0.00 0.00 0.00 APPENDIX B SHELBURNE ROAD/SEARS/FACTORY OUTLET 1990 INTERSECTION CAPACITY ANALYSES WITH PROJECT FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED Engineering and Planning Services r HCM(1985) SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION CAPACITY ANALYSIS INTERSECTION:SHELBURNE RD. & SEARS/FACTORY OUTLET AREA TYPE: NON-CBD INTERSECTION LOCATION:SOUTH BURLINGTON VT. DATE AND TIME PERIOD ANALYZED:1990 P.M. DHV W/ 19.5K PROJECT ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:JHK PHASING ANALYST:R.DICKINSON TODAY'S DATE:10-29--87 ### INPUT INFORMATION ### ----------------------------------------------- nino-ruoni Min cnl 1'ruLnnl min rnc-rnni loin 1 lf-rlrnr,)l In ITN LEFT TURNING VOLUME THROUGH VOLUME RIGHT TURNING VOLUME PEDESTRIANS ARRIVAL TYPE PEAK HOUR FACTOR PERCENT HEAVY VEHICLES NUMBER OF BUSES GRADE THROUGH LANE UTILIZATION FACTOR BASE SATURATION FLOW NUMBER OF LANES PARKING? PARKING MANUEVERS PER HOUR SIGNAL TYPE: CYCLE LENGTH: 144 10 245 230 1450 1200 45 25 280 175 310 50 20 20 20 20 4 4 3 3 0.95 0.95 0.90 0.90 0.04 0.04 0.01 0.01 2 2 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.05 1.05 1.05 1.05 1800 1800 1800 1800 4 4 3 3 N N N N 0 0 0 0 EMI -ACTUATED 80 NORTHBOUND: LANE GROUP 1 LANE GROUP CONFIGURATION 1 NUMBER OF LANES 1 LANE WIDTH 11 GREEN TIME 14.0 SOUTHBOUND: LANE GROUP 1 LANE GROUP CONFIGURATION 1 NUMBER OF LANES i LANE WIDTH 11 GREEN TIME 9.0 LANE GROUP 2 17 2 it 39.0 LANE GROUP 2 17 2 11 34.0 LANE GROUP 3 10 1 12 39.0 LANE GROUP 3 10 1 12 34.0 EASTBOUND: LANE GROUP 1 LANE GROUP 2 LANE GROUP 3 LANE GROUP CONFIGURATION 4 10 O NUMBER OF LANES 2 1 0 LANE WIDTH 10 12 0 GREEN TIME 11.0 23.0 0.0 WESTBOUND: LANE GROUP 1 LANE GROUP 2 LANE GROUP 3 LANE GROUP CONFIGURATION 4 10 0 NUMBER OF LANES 2 1 0 LANE WIDTH 10 10 0 GREEN TIME 9.0 21.0 0.0 HCM(1985) SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION CAPACITY ANALYSIS �*�t-x-*��t���-x�x-��-��-x--►������-�-���-►�--x�����--x-�-��-��--�-�-�-�����t-�-��-�at�-�-xx-�c-�-#�-���t-�c-��-�-�t�-��-x-�--�#� INTERSECTION:SHELBURNE RD. & SEARS/FACTORY OUTLET AREA TYPE: NON-CBD INTERSECTION LOCATION:SOUTH BURLINGTON VT. DATE AND TIME PERIOD ANALYZED:1990 P.M. DHV W/ 19.5K PROJECT ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:JHK PHASING ANALYST:R.DICKINSON TODAY'S DATE:10-29-87 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ THE INTERSECTION AVERAGE STOPPED DELAY IS: 23.2 THE INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE IS: C' ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ STOPPED DELAY (SEC/VEH) ADJUSTED LANE GROUP APPROACH APPROACH LANE GROUP VOLUME V/C DELAY LOS DELAY LOS 1 151.58 0.54 24.45 C NORTHBOUND 2 1602.63 0.97 24.24 C 21.74 C 3 309.47 0.43 7.48 B ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1 10.53 0.06 24.10 C SOUTHBOUND 2 1326.32 0.92 21.44 C 19.81 C 3 193.42 0.31 8.40 B ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1 338.33 0.76 30.59 D EASTBOUND 2 361.67 0.84 29.53 D 30.05 jD 3 0.00 0.00 0.00 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1 297.50 0.82 36.19 D WESTBOUND 2 50.33 0.16 17.27 C 33.09 D 3 0.00 0.00 0.00 City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 PLANNER 658-7955 June 25, 1990 Mr. Phillip Mehler Heathcote Associates 488 Madison Avenue New York, New York 10022 ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Re: Intersection Improvements - Shelburne Road/Factory Outlet Dear Mr. Mehler: As part of the Factory Outlet Mall addition (T.J. Maxx) approval, several improvements were required to the above referenced inter- section. The remaining improvements are described in the at- tached August 29, 1989 minutes (Stipulation #3). In summary, the applicant was required to modify the signal phasing and conduct an analysis six months after the addition was open to determine whether dual left turn lanes are necessary. A traffic analysis was recently conducted as part of the proposed variety retail use (Ben Franklin) in the former Agel-Corman building directly north and adjoining the Factory Outlet proper- ty. The analysis indicated that the subject signal is currently operating at an acceptable level of service. Based on this analysis, it has been recommended by Don Morley of the Burlington Public Works Department and Craig Leiner of the Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission that the current signal phasing and lane configuration at the intersection should not be modified. Mr. Philip Mehler Re: Intersection June 25, 1990 Page 2 Improvements - Shelburne Road/Factory Outlet Based on these recommendations, the South Burlington Planning Commission voted to no longer require stipulation #3 of the 8/29/89 approval. This vote was taken at the 6/19/90 Planning Commission meeting. Therefore, the existing bond held for inter- section improvements may be released. Please contact the South Burlington Zoning Administrator, Richard Ward, to arrange release of the bond. S' cerel Gt oe Weith, City Planner cc: Richard Ward Doug Fitzpatrick M E M 0 R A N D U M To: South Burlington Planning Commission From: Joe Weith, City Planner Re: Factory Outlet Mall, Traffic Impacts Date: June 15, 1990 As part of the Factory Outlet Mall addition (T.J. Maxx) approval, several improvements were required to the Shelburne Road/Factory Outlet Mall intersection. The remaining improvements are de- scribed in the August 29, 1989 Planning Commission minutes (attached). In summary, the applicant was required to modify the signal phasing and conduct an analysis six months after the addition was open to determine whether dual left turns lanes are necessary. Since the signal is owned by the State and soon will be owned by the City of Burlington, approval by both entities is required. The State has expressed concern with the impact retiming the light would have on the eleven signal coordination along Shel- burne. They have determined that no changes should be made until the light is taken over by Burlington. I met with Craig Leiner and Don Morley of the Burlington Public Works Department to discuss this issue. Mr. Morley is hesitant to change the phasing of the light. He does not feel lead lag phasing is appropriate for this light. Additionally, it is his opinion that the light phasing is working fine now and should not be changed. Craig Leiner agrees with Mr. Morley. Based on Craig's review of the traffic analysis submitted by F.E.P. Associates (Ben Frank- lin), it is his opinion that the traffic signal phasing is work- ing well and should not be changed. He also feels that the study indicates that dual left turn lanes are not needed. Based upon the recommendations above, I feel the signal phasing should stay as is. Therefore, I would like to release the $12,000 bond being held by the City for the improvements de- scribed previously. I would like to bring this issue up Tuesday night under other business to get permission to release the bond. M E M O R A N D U M To: South Burlington Planning Commission From: Joe Weith, City Planner Re: Factory Outlet Mall, Traffic Impacts Date: June 15, 1990 As part of the Factory Outlet Mall addition (T.J. Maxx) approval, several improvements were required to the Shelburne Road/Factory Outlet Mall intersection. The remaining improvements are de- scribed in the August 29, 1989 Planning Commission minutes (attached). In summary, the applicant was required to modify the signal phasing and conduct an analysis six months after the addition was open to determine whether dual left turns lanes are necessary. Since the signal is owned by the State and soon will be owned by the City of Burlington, approval by both entities is required. The State has expressed concern with the impact retiming the light would have on the eleven signal coordination along Shel- burne. They have determined that no changes should be made until the light is taken over by Burlington. I met with Craig Leiner and Don Morley of the Burlington Public Works Department to discuss this issue. Mr. Morley is hesitant to change the phasing of the light. He does not feel lead lag phasing is appropriate for this light. Additionally, it is his opinion that the light phasing is working fine now and should not be changed. Craig Leiner agrees with Mr. Morley. Based on Craig's review of the traffic analysis submitted by F.E.P. Associates (Ben Frank- lin), it is his opinion that the traffic signal phasing is work- ing well and should not be changed. He also feels that the study indicates that dual left turn lanes are not needed. Based upon the recommendations above, I feel the signal phasing should stay as is. Therefore, I would like to release the $12,000 bond being held by the City for the improvements de- scribed previously. I would like to bring this issue up Tuesday night under other business to get permission to release the bond. FITZPATRICK LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED Engineering and Planning Services One Wentworth Drive • Williston • Vermont • 05495 • (802) 878-3000 13 April 1989 Mr. Don Allen Vermont Agency of Transportation L�EA Utilities Division 133 State Street Montpelier, Vermont 05602 RE: Factory outlet/Sears/Route 7 Intersection FILE: 88173 Dear Mr. Allen: Our firm is currently acting as a Consultant for the Factory Outlet Shopping Center expansion project in South Burlington, Vermont. The shopping center is located across Route 7 from the Sears Shopping Center, immediately north of the I189/Route 7 interchange. At this time, our attention is focused on the signalized intersection lying between the two shopping centers on Route 7. Because this signal is operated by the State, we wish to seek your concurrence with our analysis of geometrics and timings. Enclosed are three analyses of the above -mentioned intersection. In brief, the analyses can be described as follows: Analysis A reflects Vermont Agency of Transportation phasing as presently in effect. - Analysis B represents the phasing scheme presented by JHK and Associates in a report entitled "Traffic Systems Management Study Final Report", dated July, 1987. Analysis C is the same as Analysis A, except for the east/west bound right -turning lanes having been omitted from signalized control. Figure 1 has been included to help identify each analysis. It is our opinion that Analysis C is the best representation of traffic operations at this intersection. The right -turning lanes have been omitted from the east/west approaches because of their separation from the rest of the intersection by an island which results in those lanes not being signal controlled. Design • Inspection • Studies • Permitting • Surveying Mr. Don Allen FILE: 88173 13 April 1989 Page Two We request your review of the foregoing, and, if possible, your concurrence with our opinion of Analysis C. Please feel free to contact us should you have any questions or require additional information. Sincerely, FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED Kevin R. Flanders KRF/mam FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED Engineering and Planning Services rAcTa�Q y S�A�S N-4-------- ,q B C PyASE �- PEASE PNAS� 5 1985 HCM: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS SUMMARY REPORT ************************************************************************** INTERSECTION..SEARS/FACTORY OUTLETAHELBURNE ROAD AREA TYPE ..... OTHER ANALYST ....... KRF DATE..........3-29-89 TIME .......... PM PEAK HOUR COMMENT ....... WITH 19.5K __________________________________________________________________________ PROJECT & VAOT PHASING VOLUMES : GEOMETRY EB WB NB SB : EB WB NB SB LT 245 230 144 10 : L 10.0 L 10.0 L 11.0 L 11.0 TH 45 25 1450 1200 : T 10.0 T 10.0 T 11.0 T 11.0 RT 310 50 280 175 : R 10.0 R 10.0 T 11.0 T 11.0 RR 0 0 0 0 : 12.0 12.0 R 11.0 R 11.0 : 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 __________________________________________________________________________ : 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 ADJUSTMENT FACTORS GRADE HV ADJ PKG BUSES PHF PEDS PED: BUT. ARR. TYPE (%) (%) Y/N Nm Nb Y/N min T EB 0.00 1.00 N 0 0 0.90 20 N 29.8 3 WB 0.00 1.00 N 0 0 0.90 20 N 29.8 3 NB 0.00 4.00 N 0 2 0.95 20 N 22.8 4 SB 0.00 4.00 __________________________________________________________________________ N 0 2 0.95 20 N 22.8 4 SIGNAL SETTINGS CYCLE LENGTH = 80.0 PH-1 PH-2 PH-3 PH-4 PH-1 PH-2 PH-3 PH-4 EB LT X NB LT X TH X TH X RT X RT X PD X PD X WB LT X SB LT X TH X TH X RT X RT X PD X PD X GREEN 20.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 GREEN 8.0 39.0 0.0 0.0 YELLOW 4.0 0.0 __________________________________________________________________________ 0.0 0.0 YELLOW 4.0 5.0 0.0 0.0 LEVEL OF SERVICE LANE GRP. V/C G/C DELAY LOS APP. DELAY APP. LOS EB L 0.757 0.262 26.7 D 21.4 C T 0.114 0.262 17.1 C R 0.654 0.375 17.8 C WB L 1.894 0.262 * * * * T 0.064 0.262 16.8 C R 0.105 0.375 12.4 B NB L 0.829 0.112 44.0 E 17.0 C T 0.914 0.512 17.3 C R 0.266 0.775 1.4 A SB L 0.058 0.112 24.1 C 9.7 B T 0.756 0.512 10.8 B R 0.166 __________________________________________________________________________ 0.775 1.3 A INTERSECTION: Delay = * (sec/veh) V/C = 1.193 LOS = * 1985 HCM: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS SUMMARY REPORT ************************************************************************** INERSECTION..SEARS/FACTORY OUTLET/SHELBURNE ROAD AREA TYPE ..... OTHER ANALYST ....... KRF DATE .......... 3-29-89 TIME .......... PM PEAK HOUR COMMENT ....... __________________________________________________________________________ WITH 19.5K PROJECT AND JHK PHASING VOLUMES : GEOMETRY EB WB NB SB : EB WB NB SB LT 245 230 144 10 : L 10.0 L 10.0 L 11.0 L 11.0 TH 45 25 1450 1200 : LT 10.0 LT 10.0 T 11.0 T 11.0 RT 310 50 280 175 : R 10.0 R 10.0 T 11.0 T 11.0 RR 0 0 0 0 12.0 12.0 R 11.0 R 11.0 : 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 __________________________________________________________________________ : 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 ADJUSTMENT FACTORS GRADE HV ADJ PKG BUSES PHF PEDS PED. BUT. ARR. TYPE (%) (%) Y/N Nm Nb Y/N min T EB 0.00 1.00 N 0 0 0.90 20 N 29.8 3 WB 0.00 1.00 N 0 0 0.90 20 N 29.8 3 NB 0.00 4.00 N 0 2 0.95 20 N 22.8 4 SB 0.00 4.00 __________________________________________________________________________ N 0 2 0.95 20 N 22.8 4 SIGNAL SETTINGS CYCLE LENGTH = 80.0 PH-1 PH-2 PH-3 PH-4 PH-1 PH-2 PH-3 PH-4 EB LT X NB LT X TH X TH X X RT X RT X X PD X PD X WB LT X SB LT X TH X TH X X RT X RT X X PI) X PI) X GREEN 10.0 9.0 0.0 0.0 GREEN 14.0 20.0 8.0 0.0 YELLOW 4.0 __________________________________________________________________________ 4.0 0.0 0.0 YELLOW 3.0 5.0 3.0 0.0 LEVEL OF SERVICE LANE GRP. V/C G/C DELAY LOS APP. DELAY APP. LOS EB L 0.751 0.138 34.3 D 29.1 D LT 0.718 0.138 32.2 D R 0.782 0.313 25.1 D WB L 0.775 0.125 37.4 D 31.6 D LT 0.649 0.125 30.2 ' D R 0.176 0.225 19.0 C NB L 0.533 0.175 24.3 C 2003 C T 0.961 0.488 22.8 C R 0.357 0.575 5.1 B SB L 0.065 0.100 24.8 C 21.4 C T 0.940 0.412 23.5 C R __________________________________________________________________________ 0.251 '0.512 6.0 B . INTERSECTION: Delay = 22.8 (sec/veh) V/C = 0.967 L8S = C 1904 HCM: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS SUMMARY REPORT ************************************************************************** INTERSECTION..SEARS/FACTORY OUTLET/SHELBURNE ROAD AREA TYPE ..... OTHER ANALYST ....... KRF DATE .......... 3-29-89 TIME ........... PM PEAK HOUR COMMENT ....... __________________________________________________________________________ WITH 19.5 PROJECT & VAOT PHASING\NO E-W RIGHT TURNS VOLUMES : GEOMETRY EB WB NB SB : EB WB NB SB LT * 245 230 144 10 : L 10.0 L 10.0 L .11.0 L 11.0 TH 45 25 1450 1200 : T 10.0 T 10.0 T 11.0 T 11.0 RT 0 0 280 175 : 10.0 10.0 T 11.0 T 11.0 RR 0 0 0 0 : 12.0 12.0 R 11.0 R 11.0 : 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 __________________________________________________________________________ : 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 ADJUSTMENT FACTORS GRADE HV ADJ PKG BUSES PHF PEDS PED. BUT. ARR. TYPE (%) (%) Y/N Nm Nb Y/N min T EB 0.00 1.00 N 0 0 0.90 20 N 24.6 3 WB 0.00 1.00 N 0 0 0.90 20 N 24.6 3 NB 0.00 4.00 N 0 2 0.95 20 N 12.8 4 SB 0.00 __________________________________________________________________________ 4.00 N 0 2 0.95 20 N 12.8 4 SIGNAL SETTINGS CYCLE LENGTH = 80.0 PH-1 PH-2 PH-3 PH-4 PH-1 PH-2 PH-3 PH-4 EB LT X NB LT X TH X TH X RT RT X PD X PD X WB LT X SB LT X TH X TH X RT RT X PD X PD X GREEN 20.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 GREEN 8.0 39.0 0.0 0.0 YELLOW 4.0 __________________________________________________________________________ 0.0 0.0 0.0 YELLOW 4.0 5.0 0.0 0.0 LEVEL OF SERVICE LANE GRP. V/C G/C DELAY LOS APP. DELAY APP. LOS EB L 0.677 0.262 23.2 C 22.3 C T 0.114 0.262 17.1 C WB L 0.664 0.262 23.0 C 22.4 C T 0.064 0.262 16.8 C NB L 0.829 0.112 44.0 E 17.0 C T 0.914 0.512 17.3 C R 0.266 0.775 1.4 A SB L 0.058 0.112 24.1 C 9.7 B T 0.756 0.512 10.8 B R 0.166 0.775 1.3 A __________________________________________________________________________ INTERSECTION: Delay = 15.1 (sec/veh) V/C = 0.833 LOS = C acFtic� O NSPORI STATE OF VERMONT AGENCY OF TRANSPORTATION 133 State Street, Administration Building Montpelier, Vermont 05602 April 28, 1989 Fitzpatrick - Llewellyn, Inc. One Wentworth Drive Williston, VT 05495 Attn: Kevin Flanders MAY 2 1989 Re: Factory Outlet/Sears/Route 7 Intersection File: 8?3173 Dear Sir: We have reviewed your letter of April 13, 1989 and concur that Analysis C is appropriate. This inter- section is part of the ongoing South Connector project. Upon Completion of the project, sometime this Summer, the City of Burlington will be responsible for its operation. Because the city will have jurisdiction in this area, you may want to provide them with your analysis. If any changes are contemplated, please be aware that this intersection is part of an eleven signal coordinated system involving both State and City jurisdiction. If you have any questions please call Lynne Alden at 828-2695• GBM/L KA/d j w Very truly yours, Gordon B. MacArthur Traffic and Safety Engineer FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED Engineering and Planning Services One Wentworth Drive • Williston • Vermont • 05495 • (802) 878-3000 May 4, 1989 Mr. Donald Morley, Traffic Engineer City of Burlington Public Works Department 7 Kilburn Street Burlington, Vermont 05401 11�"_IUIJ�119 oil0d�1 RE: Shelburne Road/Sears/Factory Outlet intersection Burlington FILE: 88713 Dear Mr. Morley: We have been involved with the proposed expansion of the Factory Outlet on the South Burlington side of the above -referenced intersection. Our original evaluation of this intersection's capacity indicated that the phasing plan which was proposed in the TSM study by JHK would improve traffic congestion conditions substantially. Accordingly, we recommended that phasing to the City of South Burlington, who then incorporated it as a condition of their approval of this project. In discussing the modified phasing with the VAOT, it became apparent that both minor approach right -turn movements could have been appropriately excluded from the capacity analyses based on existing geometrics. Two letters are enclosed; one to the VAOT dated April 13, 1909 and the other from the VAOT dated April 28, 1909. These two letters outline the difference in the capacity analysis methodology and results. Based on the results of the revised analyses, we now recommend that the existing signal phasing be retained. The VAOT has effectively concurred with this in their letter of April 28th. Design • Inspection • Studies • Permitting • Surveying Mr. Donald Morley FILE: 88173 May 4, 1999 Page Two At the suggestion of the VAOT, we understand that it would be appropriate that you also review the foregoing and offer suggestions or comments. Should you have any questions, or if additional information is desired, please feel free to contact us. Sincerely, FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED f2er-'j Dickinson, P.E. cc w/ enclosures Craig Leiner Philip Mehler FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED Engineering and Planning Services FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED Engineering and Planning Services One Wentworth Drive • Williston • Vermont • 05495 • (802) 878-3000 June 27, 1999 Mr. Daniel Wilkins Transportation Engineer Asst. Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission P.O. Box 58 Essex Junction, Vermont 05452 RE: U.S. Route 7/Sears/Factory Outlet South Burlington FILE: ee173 Dear Mr. Wilkins: As requested, we have made two modifications in the capacity analyses of the above -referenced intersection. The first is to utilize the correct widths for the east and westbound approaches. The second is to use overlapping phasing for the northbound and southbound left - turns as opposed to the simultaneous phasing which presently exists. Enclosed is a copy of the results of the revised intersection capacity analysis. Comparing those results with Analysis C of our April 13th letter to the VAOT results in the following: 1. The impact of the first revision is to reduce projected vehicular delays on the east/west left -turns by approximately one second in each direction. 2. The second revision significantly reduces the projected vehicular delays encountered by the northbound left -turn movement without adversely impacting other north/south movements. As we discussed, this revision had been recommended by JHK in the 19e7 TSM Study, but had not been incorporated into the VAOT design plans of the recent traffic signal replacement at this intersection. Also enclosed are the requested copies of the VAOT design plans for the signal timing and progression throughout the Shelburne Road corridor. Design 0 Inspection 9 Studies • Permitting . • Surveying Mr. Daniel Wilkins FILE: 88173 June 27, 1989 Page Two As you can see, the progression patterns through each signalized intersection have been optimized to provide maximum service to the north/south traffic flow. To change the signal timing and phasing at the Sears/Factory Outlet intersection would also require evaluating the impact of such changes on the progression patterns. It is our understanding that the signal equipment now in place at this intersection could be easily reprogrammed, if desired to incorporate the overlapping north/south left -turn phasing. Since the improved traffic flow which would result from such a change does not affect traffic entering or exiting the Factory Outlet, it is our opinion that they should not be required to implement that revised phasing. That responsibility should instead rest with the Vermont Agency of Transportation and the City of Burlington, who jointly operate the signal equipment at this intersection. Should you have any questions, or if we may be of additional assistance, please feel free to contact us. Sincerely, FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN 1, E7g J. Dickinson, P.E. cc w/ enclosures. Philip Mehl r Joe Weith Lynne Alden Don Morley FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED Engineering and Planning Services 1985 HCM: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS SUMMARY REPORT ************************************************************************** INTERSECTION..SEARS/FACTORY OUTLET/SHELBURNE ROAD AREA TYPE ..... OTHER ANALYST ....... R. DICKINSON DATE .......... 6-26-89 TIME .......... PM PEAK HOUR COMMENT ....... __________________________________________________________________________ W/ 19.5 K PROJECT & VAOT PHASING\NO E-W RIGHT TURNS VOLUMES : GEOMETRY EB WB NB SB : EB WB NB SB LT 245 230 144 10 : L 12.0 L 11.0 L 11.0 L 11.0 TH 45 25 1450 1200 : T 12.0 T 11.0 - T 11.0 T 11.0 RT 0 0 280 175 : 12.0 12.0 T 11.0 T 11.0 RR 0 0 0 0 : 12.0 12.0 R 11.0 R 11.0 : 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 __________________________________________________________________________ : 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 ADJUSTMENT FACTORS GRADE HV ADJ PKG BUSES PHF PEDS PED. BUT. ARR. TYPE (%) (%) Y/N Nm Nb Y/N min T EB 0.00 1.00 N 0 0 0.90 20 Y 24.6 3 WB 0.00 1.00 N O 0 0.90 20 Y 24.6 3 NB 0.00 4.00 N 0 2 0.95 20 Y 14.1 4 SB 0.00 __________________________________________________________________________ 4.00 N 0 2 0.95 20 Y 14.1 4 SIGNAL SETTINGS CYCLE LENGTH = 80.0 PH-1 PH-2 PH-3 PH-4 PH-1 PH-2 PH-3 PH-4 EB LT X NB LT X TH X TH X X RT RT X X PD X PD X WB LT X SB LT X TH X TH X X RT RT X X PD X PD X GREEN 20.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 GREEN 10.0 25.0 8.0 0.0 YELLOW 4.0 __________________________________________________________________________ 0.0 0.0 0.0 YELLOW 4.0 5.0 4.0 0.0 LEVEL OF SERVICE LANE GRP. V/C G/C DELAY LOS APP. DELAY APP. LOS EB L 0.630 0.262 21.9 C ' 21.1 ' C T 0.106 0.262 17.0 C- I 0.637 0.262 22.2 C 21.7 C T 0.061 0.262 16.8 C NB L 0.678 0.138 30.4 D 16.1 C T 0.914 0.512 17.3 C R 0.278 0.738 1.9 A SB L 0.058 0.112 24.1 C 11.1 B T 0.795 0.488 12.3 B R __________________________________________________________________________ 0.180 0.712 2.1 A INTERSECTION: Delay = 15.1 (sec/veh) V/C = 0.730 LOS = C Chittenden Cotinty Regional Planning Commission 66 PEARL STREET P.O. BOX 108 ESSEX JUNCTION, VERMONT 05453 802 658-3004 July 20, 1989 Roger J. Dickinson, P.E. Fitzpatrick -Llewellyn One Wentworth Drive Williston, Vermont 05495 RE: Factory Outlet Dear Roger: I have reviewed your June 27, 1989 letter and the supplemental analysis; I have also discussed this with Joe Weith. My opinion is as follows: The JHK recommendations with respect to overlapping north/south left -turn phasing have considerable benefit and should be implemented by your client, consistent with the South Burlington Planning Commission approval, and subject to review and approval by the VAOT and Don Morley. Moreover, traffic operations should be monitored at this location on a regular basis by your client, with a periodic report to the South Burlington Planning Commission. I believe this is a critical intersection and South Burlington needs to retain continuing jurisdiction over traffic operations. Further, the balance of the JHK recommnedations - split phasing and dual lefts on the side streets - have Long term merit and may need to be implemented at a later date. Please call me if you have any questions. CTL:bf cc: ✓Joe Weith Don Morley Bolton St. George Sincerely, CRAIG Trr� L1INER TRANSP6�TATI.ON PROGRAM MANAGER ... Serving the Municipalities of ... Burlington Chorlotte Colchester Essex Junction FizF , To.an Hinesburg Huntington Jer-cho Milton Richmond Shelburne So Burlington Underhill Westford Williston Wincosk, ��oN1 AG STATE AGENCY OF VERMONT OF TRANSPORTATION O 133 State Street, Administration Building Montpelier, Vermont 05602 sposli September 20, 1989 Joseph Weith, City Planner City of South Burlington 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, Vermont 05403 Re: US7/Sears/Factory Outlet intersection - Burlington Dear Mr. Weith: This is to confirm our phone conversation of September 20, 1989 concerning potential changes at the Sears traffic signal as discussed in your letter of September 13, 1989. As you are aware, the Agency is nearing Completion of the first phase of the Burlington South Connector. The Sears signal is part of that contract. We request that you delay implementation of any changes until after project acceptance - sometime in the next few weeks. After acceptance, the signal will be the responsibility of the City of Burlington and thus it will be up to them to approve and implement any changes. The State's involvement is only in that this intersection is within an eleven signal coordinated system that will be jointly maintained by the City of Burlington (northern 3 signals) and the State (8 remaining signals). Any changes at Sears will have to work within the existing coordination parameters or the Developer will have to provide revised settings for the entire system for both City and State approval. If you have any questions, please call me at 828-2695. Very truly yours, Gordon B. MacArthur, P.E. Traffic and Safety Engineer by: Lynne K. Alden Traffic Signal & Lighting Engineer GBM/LKA/djw fop - AG STATE STATE OF V ERMONT �' AGENCY OF TRANSPORTATION �� 133 State Street, Administration Building Montpelier, Vermont 05602 O= December 4, 1989 �,9�SP0R�P,�` Mr. Roger J. Dickinson Fitzpatrick -Llewellyn, Inc. One Wentworth Drive Willistion, VT 05495 Re: Shelburne Rd/Sear/Factory Outlet Traffic Signal - File: 88173 Dear Roger: We have reviewed your November 22,1989 submittal showing the proposed traffic signal changes at the above referenced intersection. We do not have an objection to the concept of changing to a lead -lag left turn treatment but the following must be considered: 1. The present phasing provides a clearance between the Sears and Home Avenue signals such that US 7 SB clears before the side street phase at Home goes green and US 7 NB clears before the side street green at Sears/Factory Outlet. With the proposed phasing, the SB clears but the NB doesn't prior to its associated side street phase. 2. The 15 second exclusive pedestrian phase has not been taken into account. Consideration must be given to which phase(s) the 15 seconds will come from. We assume that you will be providing further detail at a later date for other time -of -day plans and for the with and without ped. phase condition. 3. The phasing change may require hardware modifications as well as timing and wiring changes. This may require consultation with Traconex. 4. No field changes can be made until the South Connector project is completed. At that time the signals (Ramp C, Sears and Home Avenue) will be turned over to the City of Burlington. The city will then be responsible for all changes as long as they do not interfere with the overall coordination on Shelburne Road. 2. If you have any questions, please call Lynne Alden at 828-2695. Very Truly Yours, Gordon B. MacArthur, P.E. Traffic and Safety Engineer GBM:LKA:dah CC: Donald Morley Joe Weith bcc: Central file Chrono file GBM file DAR/LKA Don Allen, Utilities -5-f7 LA- 1Jri-�---Ds 'TM 3C `D.,ic:5— �.. cn,�/zr Z FG 06-91 --LIS l S (/ _ �jo J.. ve- 4. � mac. ,® s-�• I� ,,�,�.�.,,+ r� �► �a..s �,,:.i o(�n,� s(;•-.a/ ? lil%/A /Hs !r. --2d IF 4 tvxoq W4 Geep G2S � � �•Z Uv v Gv�7/E ovrt --A A -u 7,-* as 4u24- City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 PLANNER 658-7955 September 13, 1.989 Ms. Lynne Alden Vermont Agency of Transportation 133 State Street Montpelier, Vermont 05602 ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Re: U.S. Route 7/Sears/Factory Outlet intersection, South Burlington Dear Ms. Alden: Attached is a traffic analysis of the above referenced intersec- tion. This analysis was conducted by Roger Dickinson of Fitzpat- rick -Llewellyn, Inc. as part of a proposal to construct an addi- tion to the Factory Outlet Mall. As indicated in the analysis, the use of overlapping phasing for the northbound and southbound left -turns would significantly reduce the projected vehicular delays encountered by the northbound left -turn movement without adversely impacting other north/south movement. As a result, the South Burlington Planning Commission stipulated in its approval that the applicant must. implement the overlapping phasing im- provements as described above. We request. that. the VOAT and City of Burlington approve the suggested improvements and work with the applicant, Heathcote Associates, to reprogram the signal accordingly. We strongly feel that any actions which can be taken to improve the traffic flow and safety on this high voliune roadway are worth pursuing. The City of South Burlington greatly appreciates your attention to this issue. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, ___ G �,,� Joe Weith, City Planner JW/mcp TELEPHONE MEMO Name: VIOE; Contact: (Ij?AI& P- re Signature Date: T/e,Y S u b j e c t A-VOC, �� ax W-M r Je �/"/�-•{:°`..ems-.-.w .,_, TELEPHONE MEMO Name: Date:'5�� Contact: — ser4 MOI L-L Py� Subject t r t c�.-tJ '-�.a.�'� � �� w r -,.�� Ski /� hz.�. dS .•1 N ri. e.- C-av� _.... __ .._.._.-_.._136 - �r he _ Kier► O� Signature TELEPHONE MEMO Name: 114E Al;:E/ 7,V Date: Contact: R0.1-ER i2lCi�AlSeAl—ff7r-;d" Subject x orb ZM-651c E--�WMP416�� wlr-. I/- Signature 1n� A K, 1>4 J ar� �►�• wit' ,f � s�� � � � �. n�����,► TELEPHONE MEMO Name: F �jj/°F� //�/ Date: Contact: t2O/tl %folf- LrlSubjecti/�yC IF Signature TELEPHONE MEMO Name: /.-0 Ove.,� Contact: CA00-14- 9!;fl4l*A ef-,10 C Date: elwO? --- Subject Awvlc.,072� 6,-u.-�.y' v .7 Signature Cliittenden County Regional Planning Commission 66 PEARL STREET P.O. BOX 108 ESSEX JUNCTION, VERMONT 05452 802 658-3004 November 18, 1987 Jane Lafleur, City Planner City of South Burlington 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, Vermont 05403 Dear Jane, I have reviewed the traffic analysis prepared for the proposed expansion of the South Burlington Factory Outlet, and have the following comments: 1. Level of service under existing (that is, 1986) PM. conditions at Shelburne Road/Sears/Factory Outlet is "E" with 46 seconds of delay; and at Shelburne Road/Home Avenue/O'dell Parkway, PM. level of service is "D" with 32 seconds of delay. 2. The consultant's traffic projections for 1990 are consistent with those in the TSM study done for CCRPC by JHK & Associates. 3. The signal equipment at the Sears/Factory Outlet intersection is to be upgraded by the VT Agency of Transportation. However, physical improvements are necessary at this location to achieve an accpetable level of service. The consultant has identified three actions that will improve conditions: a) Develop and implement a new signal phasing plan; b) Increase capacity by adding a second left turn lane for traffic exiting the Factory Outlet; and c) Remove the existing islands. I agree that these actions are necessary, and will improve traffic operations sufficiently to handle increased traffic from the proposed expan- sion. Specifically, the above actions should improve PM. level of service at Sears/Factory Outlet to "C" and at Home Avenue/O'dell Parkway to "B". More- over, these actions would implement recommendations presented in the TSM study. I suggest that these improvements be constructed by the applicant, at their expense, and that the improvements be coordinated with the expansion (if approved) so that the improvements are in place at the time the additional space is open for business. 20 Years of Service to the Municipalities of ... Bolton Burlington Charlotte Colchester Essex Junction Essex Town Hinesburg Huntington Jericho Milton Richmond St. George Shelburne So. Burlington Underhill Westford Williston Winooski Jane Lafleur, City Planner November 18, 1987 Page 2 If you have any questions, please call. CTL/cm Sincerely, CRAIG T. LEINER TRANSPORTATION ENGINEER �� y FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED Engineering and Planning Services The Kiln • 15 Brickyard Road • Essex Junction • Vermont • 05452 • (802) 878-3000 19 May 1986 Mr. Philip Mehler Philip Mehler Realty, Inc. 488 Madison Avenue, 17th Floor New York, NY 10022 RE: Addendum - Traffic Impact Evaluation Proposed 19,040 sq. ft. Expansion South Burlington Factory Outlet Center Shelburne Road South Burlington, Vermont FILE: 86027 Dear Mr. Mehler: This letter outlines the results of revised intersection capacity analyses created by the reduction in the proposed size of the above -referenced Project. Much of the data and methodology presented in our original evaluation, dated Februarry 20, 1986, remains valid. The only two areas which differ include the projected vehicular trip volumes as presented in Table 1, and the results of the intersection capacity analyses. Table 1, below, outlines the revised additional vehicular trip volumes which the proposed 19,040 sq. ft. expansion is estimated to generate. Average Weekday Vehicle Trip Ends TABLE 1 (REVISED) PROJECTED VEHICULAR TRIP VOLUMES ENTER EXIT TOTAL 634 VTE/DAY 635 VTE/DAY 1269 VTE/DAY A.M. Peak Hour 18 VTE/HR. 15 VTE/HR. 33 VTE/HR. P.M. Peak Hour 56 VTE/HR. 59 VTE/HR. 115 VTE/HR. Using the above P.M. peak hour volumes, the capacities and operating levels of service of the three major intersections closest to this Project were re -calculated. Table 2, below, outlines the results of those calculations. at L rr- :49 V V C 3t t 33 Design • Inspection • Studies • Permitting Mr. Philip Mehler FILE: 86027 19 May 1986 Page Two TABLE 2 (REVISED) DESIGN HOUR DELAYS SEC. AND LEVELS OF SERVICE Shelburne Road/Home Avenue Shelburne Road/Factory Outlet Shelburne Road/Swift Street 1986 w/o Project 35.8 (D) 38.2 (D) Oversat.(F) 1988 w/o Project 38.6 (D) 41.7 (E) Oversat.(F) 1988 w/ Project 42.5 (E) 45.3 (E) Oversat.(F) The above calculations were performed using existing signal timings and geometrics. Because of the unacceptable results, we proceeded to explore possible modifications at each of the three intersections. These modifications included: a.) Optimizing the existing signal timing. b.) Constructing a useable roadway connecting O'Dell Parkway with Farrell Street. This modification was estimated to divert 10% of all existing and future traffic generated by the Facotry Outlet Center, or 109 VTE during the P.M. peak hour. c.) Prohibiting southbound left turns at Swift Street during peak hours, and reallocating the green time from that phase to the northbound approach. Table 2A, below, presents the results of these modifications on the operating levels of service. It should be noted that at the Shelburne Road/Factory Outlet/Sears intersection, both (a) and (c) were found to be necessary to maintain Level of Service D. The results presented below for that intersection and the Shelburne Road/Home Avenue intersection therefore incorporate both (a) and (c). TABLE 2A DESIGN HOUR DELAYS SEC AND LEVELS OF SERVICE WITH PROPOSED INTERSECTION MODIFICATIONS AND FARRELL ST. CONNECTOR 1988 W/ PROJECT Shelburne Road/Horne Avenue 32.1 D Shelburne Road/Factory Outlet 38.0 (D) Shelburne Road/Swift Street 13.6 (B) Appendix A, attached, presents a detailed synopsis of the delays and operating levels of service, which were calculated at each approach of the three intersections, for each of several scenarios. FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED Engineering and Planning Services Mr. Philip Mehler FILE: 86027 19 May 1986 Page Three As can be seen, with the modifications outlined above, existing levels of service conditions at all three intersections can be maintained or improved. Our proposal to prohibit southbound left turns at the Shelburne Road/Swift Street intersection will require approval from both the City of South Burlington and possibly the Vermont Agency of Transportation. At the present time the southbound left turn movement at Swift Street services approximately 70 vehicles per hour during the afternoon peak traffic hours. The green time required to accomodate this movement directly impacts on the northbound approach which must accomodate a demand of almost 1,900 vehicles per hour. It is our opinion that with alternate routes, i.e. I-189 and Allen Road, available to the southbound left turn improvement, the benefits of implementing this proposed modification greatly outweighs the disadvantages. This proposed prohibition on southbound left turns at Swift Street would be temporary until the proposed modifications of the Shelburne Road/I-89 interchange associated with the Southern Connector are completed. We will be reviewing this addendum with both Jane Lafleur and Craig Leiner in the forthcoming week. In addition, we will also meet with the Agency of Transportation to obtain their reaction to the proposed Swift Street modifications. Should you have any questions, or if we can be of further assistance, please feel free to call us. Sincerely, FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED r',) ilv, Roger Dickinson, P.E. cc Jane Lafleur -,/ Chris Ramos Craig Leiner RJD:amo FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED Engineering and Planning Services APPENDIX A SOUTH BURLINGTON FACTORY CUTLET CENTER REVISED PROJECT (19,040 SO. FT.) DHV DELAYS (SEC.) AND LEVELS OF SERVICE SHELBURNE RCOAD!HOME ,..H!C'DELL NB LT NB IHRUIRT SB LT SB THRU/RT EB LT/THRU EB RT WB ALL OVERALL 1936 DHV W!C PROJECT A 23.92 (C) 18.82 (C) 23.52 (C) 48.52 (E) 25.16 (D) 31.47 (D) 106.52 (F) 35.8 (D) 1938 DHV W/O PROJEI A 24.03 (C) 19.41 (C) 23.52 (C) 55.13 (E) 25.22 (D) 33.60 (D) 106.52 (F) 38.6 (D) B h.82 (D) 18.22 (C) 25.97 (D) 44.85 (E) 23.08 (C) 33.60 (D) 50.72 (E) 32.1 (D) 1�38 DHV W/ PROJECT A 24.03 (C) 19.41 (C) 23.90 (C) 55.13 (E) 25.47 (D) 33.60 (D) 175.20 (F) 42.5 !E) B 26.82 (D) 18.22 (C) 26.60 (D) 44.85 (E) 23.23 (C) 33.60 (D) 76.36 (F) 33.5 (D) D 26.82 (D) 16.22 (C) 25.97 (D) 44.85 (E) 23.09 (C) 33.60 (D) 51.29 (E) 32.1 (D) SHELBURNE ROAD/SEARS: STORY OUILET CENTER NB LT NB THRU SB LT SB THRU EB LT EB THRU WB LT WB THRU OVERALL 1986 DHV W!O PROJECT A 39.59 (D) 31.17 (D) 21.69 (C) 41.33 (E) 33.99 (D) 24.27 (C) 58.16 (E) 24.73 (C) 39.2 (D) 1989 DHV W!O PROJECI A 39.59 (D) 33.64 (D) 21.69 (C) 47.53 (E) 33.99 (D) 24.27 (C) 58.16 (E) 24.73 (C) 41.7 (E) B 46.73 (E) 33.64 (D) 22.30 (C) 39.51 (D) 31.36 (D) 23.63 (C) 48.11 (E) 24.06 (C) 37.9 (D) 1999 DHV 1!! PROJECT A 39.59 (D) 33.64 (D) 21.74 (C) 47.53 (E) 35.14 (D) 24.34 (C) 100.59 (F) 24.93 (C) 45.3 (E) 46.73 (E) 33.64 (D) 22.35 (C) 39.51 (D) 32.14 (D) 23.70 (C) 77.76 (F) 24.20 (C) 40.3 (E) C 79.59 (D) 33.64 (D) 21.69 (C) 47.53 (E) 34.15 (D) 24.27 (C) 60.90 (F) 24.75 (C) 41.9 (E) D 46.73 (E) 33.64 (D) 22.30 (C) 39.51 (D) 31.46 (D) 23.63 (C) 49.98 (E) 24.08 (C) 38.0 (D) uELBURNE ROAD/SWIFT -T ,EET !d8 ALL SB LT SB THRU EB ALL WB LT WB RT OVERALL 1'8h W/O PROJECT A OVERSAT. 26.09 (D) 2.96 (A) 26.28 (D) 34.10 (D) 18.91 (C) OVERSAT. E 10.81 !B) 3.59 (A) 26.28 (D) 34.16 (D) 33.74 (D) 11.5 (B) !S88 W! PROJECT A OVERSAT. 26.12 (D) 3.51 (A) 26.32 (D) 35.14 (D) 18.96 (C) OVERSAT. E 1194 1) 3.72 (A) 26.32 (D) 35.14 (D) 34.28 (➢) 13.6 (B) A = EXISTING SIGNAL TIMING 6 GEOMETRIC CONDITIONS B = REVISED SIGNAL TIMING C = EXISTING TIMING 6 FARRELL ST. CONNECTOR D = REVISED TIMING L FAR'RELL ST. CONNECTOR E = NO SB LT DUPING PEAK HOUR r Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission 66 PEARL STREET P.O. BOX 108 ESSEX JUNCTION, VERMONT 05452 802 658-3004 March 13, 1986 Jane Lafleur, Planner City of South Burlington 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, Vermont 05401 J Dear Msy lour: I have reviewed the traffic impact analysis submitted for the proposed expansion of the South Burlington Factory Outlet Center. The proposed expansion consists of 27,000 square feet of additional retail space on the northeast corner of the existing center. The consultant for the applicant used trip generation rates from the ITE report for the land use category that corresponds to the proposed use. I have reviewed the trip generation estimates and agree with them as submitted. With respect to directional distribution, the consultant and I discussed a reasonable distribution prior to preparation of the report, and agreed that a 70/30 ratio was realistic. I reviewed the level of service calculations performed by the consultant with particular emphasis on the factory outlet intersection with Shelburne Road, and the Swift Street intersection with Shelburne Road. I agree with the report's estimate that these two intersections are currently operating at level of service D. Moreover, I agree that the Swift Street intersection will deteriorate to a level of service E with the proposed project, and without the southern connector. I disagree, however, with the estimate of future conditions at the factory outlet intersection. My calculations indicate a level of service E, with average stopped delay of 444 seconds. The ... Serving the Municipalities of .. . Bolton Burlington Charlotte Colchester Essex Junction Essex Town Hinesburg Huntington Jericho Milton Richmond St. George Shelburne So. Burlington Underhill Westford Williston Winooski Jane Lafleur -2- March 13, 1986 consultant's estimate for this location is level of service D, with intersection delay at 32 seconds. One possible reason for this difference is that the consultant apparently assumed no pedestrian phase; there is, however, a pedestrian button on the northbound approach, wtih a minimum timing of approximately 20 seconds when it is activated. It is important to note that both the consultant and I estimate that the westbound approach (that is, leaving the factory outlet center) will operate at an extremely poor level of service: F, with delay exceeding 75 seconds. I have enclosed the results of my analysis of these two intersections. The Shelburne Road/Flynn Avenue intersection was re -analyzed by the consultant at my request since the Sherman -Williams retail center forms a four-way intersection at this locations. Existing and future levels of service appear acceptable. I hope the above information is useful. Please call if you have any questions. Sincerely, c CRAIG T. L INER TRANSPORTATION ENGINEER CTL:bf Enclosures FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED Engineering and Planning Services The Kiln • 15 Brickyard Road • Essex Junction • Vermont • 05452 • (802) 878-3000 7 March 1986 Craig T. Leiner Transportation Engineer Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission P.O. Box 103 Essex Junction, Vermont 05452 RE: ADDENDUM Traffic Impact Evaluation -Proposed Expansion South Burlington Factory Outlet Center Shelburne Road, South Burlington, Vermont FILE: 86027 Dear Mr. Leiner: As requested, we have analyzed the Shelburne Road/Flynn Avenue intersection as a 4-way intersection; the westbound approach being the driveway accessing 370 Shelburne Road. Enclosed are copies of the intersection turning movement count, and of the intersection capacity/level of service calculations. Please note that the revised analyses determined that this intersection operates at Level Of Service C during DHV conditions, both before and after this Project. Thus, the conclusions contained within our original report remain unchanged. Should you have any questions, or if we may be of additional assistance, please feel free to contact us. Sincerely, FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED Roger . Dickinson, P.E. cc w/encl. Philip Mehler Chris Ramos Jane LaFleur RJD:amo Design • Inspection • Studies • Permitting TURNING MOVEMENT DATA SHEET CODE NO.s 860,. � FITZPATRICK•LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED. PLACE! Engineering & Planning Services _ DIR PC T TOT DIR PC T TOT NR DIR PC T TOT HR I 1 12 ao q A04 g _ 16ou x Jcls Iw I 15 a3r I a32 3 _ � IG45� a- - �Mr� N .. w +t TOT i% a q q TOT 1301 a ao3 TOT 35— O 35 - -- w n PC T TOT DIR DIR PC T TOT HR 11 I I 16uU 13 IN Ia is Ibls Ids I Iq NOIIfN 16 1�c )�0 I �� I5 I 16 ►I Il � 187Ff r. 14, F. ' . - 1 I 5 7 3 6 0 TOT TOT 5 U S0 PC T TOT DIR DIR PC T TOT FIR 16001 13 13 q. — 1951 /1 1.2 /0 ►�� - r rLyn�,v Z}vc SNcO,�)N- a_ ►���sl � Z aaa I L/3 U y3 TOT I S P �• _. �1�1 TOT c() I g PC T TOT DIR DIR PC T TOT I NR 1 `7 1 y-,)L- 1 143 In 15 i IS 20`I S 9 IG�S 9 1 N 3 IqW, 9Nv-r,2J35a -AK-A [i LL � V 14 L PCs All passenger cars and 2-axle,4-lire trucks l75 I 'U TOT Tom= Med urn and heavytrucks and busses. TOT '5 U DIR PC T I 'OT� DIR PC T TOT HR DIR PC T TOT HR 'e 16W Iq9 I 150 y ti 6�. 0 I 5 2 3 a06 3 ao Cl y 3- t 'oZl �S �� albs 5 2a3 Q - a 5i TOT 17 /U SIGNALIZED INTERSECrIONS 9-75 INPUT WORKSHEET Intersection: )H C.L2, (A 9 9:D aN N AVC . Date: /qW-) -DN U w10 9PUS Analyst: j � Time Period Analyzed: H ' S prn Area Type: O CBD Cd Other Project No.: GGU'al'l City/State: 18U'2 L.I NGTUN, V1 VOLUME AND GEOMETRICS Silwd N/S STREET 51 )a' ►a' a SB TOTAL i /y v rJC� i 4 0 I 6,� j� WB TOTAL 1105 t NORTH IDENTIFY IN DIAGRAM: -� 1. Volumes I I FLYA", /J✓E E/W STREET 2. Lanes, lane widths 3. Movements by lane �j I 1 �1 U 4. Parking (PKG) locations 5. Bay storage lengths 6. Islands 5 —� y �/ I 1 r I /, /V (physical or painted) J? I 7. Bus stops EB TOTAL Q7 �a' II a' NB TOTAL TRAFFIC AND ROADWAY CONDITIONS Approach pP Grade M % HV Ad'. Pkg. Lane Buses (Nd) PHF Conf. Peds. (peds./hr) Pedestrian Button Arr. Type Y or N Nm Y or N Min. Timing EB 1 °/u 3 04, N 0 W B —1 °/ N 0 � N 3 NB U 3 % SB U Grade: + up, — down NB: buses stopping/hr Min. Timing: min. green for HV. veh. with more than 4 wheels PHF: peak -hour factor pedestrian crossing Nm: pkg. maneuvers/hr Conf. Peds: Conflicting peds./hr Arr. Type: Type 1-5 PHASING D I R ,� y A M Timing G= 10 G= 3 G= `12, G= 17 G= G= G= G= Y+R=N) Y+R=O Y+R=3 Y+R=3 Y+R= Y+R= Y+R= Y+R= Pretimed or Actuated 'P I 'p I 'P _J Protected turns Permitted turnsI -------Pedestrian Cycle Length gU Sec 9-76 URBAN STREETS VOLUME ADJUSTMENT WORKSHEET O ® O O ® © O O O 0 ppr. Mvt. Mvt. Peak Flow Lane Flow rate Number Lane Adj. Prop. Volume Hour Rate Group in Lane of Lanes Utilization Flow of (vph) Factor vpp Group N Factor v LT or RT PHF (vp-h) va U (vph) PST or P.., T ® (vph) Table 9-4 (D X OO LT c( ? `i $ 01 EB TH y �Sq 5� _'�� lyv I L00 LI RT �07 , �64 Rr LT wB TH � l ,014 oZ 5 37 R r RT 51 LT NB TH io6q � �� � la3`1 2 (, 05 la��l l.T RT /0�y LT L(U `3 y LI S, SB TH �jCIS �q 13(5(�130�5�� � 3°%�7' 5%RT RT 5 6 9 H 6/ v,,-- =10 ( 3oq 01G U,)> I O(II Vt,r=530 < 1'302 Uv SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS 9-77 SATURATION FLOW ADJUSTMENT WORKSHEET LANE GROUPS @) Ideal Sat. Flow (pcphgpl) No. of Lanes N ADJUSTMENT FACTORS ,® Ad'. Sat. F�ow Rate 8 (vphg) (D Appr. 4) Lane Group Movements Lane Width fw © Heavy Veh f v ( Grade f It Pkg. f 0 Bus Blockage fte (A Area Ty e fp » Right Turn f 0 Left Turn f, Table 9-5 Table 9-6 Table 9-7 Table 9-8 Table 9-9 Table 9-10 Table 9-11 Table 9-12 EB � — ��o0 .`lea , �$ .91 I.00 I,U0 1.00 - G3 q9U 1�oo ( .`to ,9� .99 I.c►v WB E�, � ,93 I,Uu I.vl I,uU I,uc} I.uo �l ISUU 1 L(.C) ,CQ wo 1.C)o I.uv 1,00 .�Lq NB rA f ��SUf� Loo '91S 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,v0 /4l sB tt1 � � rw 1,00 I,uo I.C)o I,c)o 1,00 77 9-78 URBAN STREETS SUPPLEMENTAL WORKSHEET FOR LEFT -TURN ADJUSTMENT FACTOR, fLT INPUT VARIABLES EB WB NB SB Cycle Length, C (sec) g U 160 % O So Effective Green, g (sec) 1 '7 y a W 2 Number of Lanes, N I I Total Approach Flow Rate, v, (vph) 3 $ (, 167 q' y 5 I y 3 U Mainline Flow Rate, v,, (vph) '3 $ 6 `t (a q y 5 14 3c� Left -Turn Flow Rate, VLT (vph) 1 110 4`S Proportion of LT, PT Opposing Lanes, No Opposing Flow Rate, vo (vph) I GI 1930 e35 Prop. of LT in Opp. Vol., PLTO ' `i 9 . � I ' 03 0 COMPUTATIONS EB WB NB SB 1800 N„ SOP __ l+ P 400 + vM LT(l 1400 - vA1 3U 5 33y Y. = v., / S.,P . � a� . � I G g..=(g—CY.,)/(1—Y„) f, = (875 — 0.625 v„) / 1000 [ (N —I)gJ PL =PLT 1 + f5g + 4.5 JC L4 9 g.,=g—g„ y z S $, ot3 PT=I —PL L( ( 51 gi=2 P' [1—PT0.5gy1 P, JJ EL = 1800 / (1400 — v„) fm=9,+g.. g g[1+P,(E,-1) 1 +�(1+.PL) g fLT=(f.,,+N-1)/N .63 .66 Sys ,QII 5wg) i,� u , R 5 (I 3) = , Gy SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS 9-79 CAPACITY ANALYSIS WORKSHEET LANE GROUP G Adj. Flow Rate (vph) O Ad'. Sat. F�ow Rate (vphg) G Flow Ratio v/s 0 — ® Green Ratio g/C Lane Group P Capacity c (I X� °/c Ratio X s _ D Critical ? Lane Group Appr. © Lane Group Movements EB r> l�lv qua , 1�-(I a125 a10 , U7 ---y a96 133G , (gy .3srT5 N51 , 51C f WB 167 Ira .92125 99, .149 lNN /ja 6175 776 , /e6 NB /053 17yG sB 150a 394 3 170'3 , 09;z Cycle Length, C U sec E (v/s), Lost Time Per Cycle, L sec B (V/S)ci X C C—L 9-80 URBAN STREETS LEVEIGOF-SERVICE WORKSHEET Lane Group First Term Del a Second Term Delay Total Delay & LOS O Appr. O Lane Group Move- ments O v/c Ratio X O Green Ratio g/C © Cycle Length C (sec) © Delay d, (sec/veh) (D Lane Group Capacity c. (vph) O Delay dz (sec/veh) O Progression Factor PF Table 9-13 Lane Group Delay (sec/veh) (®+(b) X ® » Lane Group LOS Table 9-1 Approach Delay (sec/veh) Appr. LOS Table 9-1 Ell C- ,66°( a2_0 ed, 5. 3 1,0c) a�. - Sq () 113`15 <to 16-q I.I I,vo WB "749 .a12a a aa.y aai �,C[ NB i .6115 u 3. `I. 776 D �, (�D �j� .911 Gays 160 11.9 IaUo q (I 1"00 C SB �� .� � sas �v la.$ 170S N, 17.0 c Intersection Delay sec/veh Intersection LOS C (Table 9-1) SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS 9-75 INPUT WORKSHEET Intersection: SNCI._E(,AF2NE t Z), FLYNN A VG . Date: _19g� �%H v t'✓! C� Analyst: R�3 Time Period Analyzed: 1-/_ 5 pr-'t Area Type: [ICBD XOther Project No.: F662 7 City/Stater 9 0 /VG7&,,J VOLUME AND GEOMETRICS SNcw'3. R3, j a,37 N/S STREET SB TOTAL a I ' : � WB TOTAL I/3 NOKTH SA,m E- IDENTIFY IN DIAGRAM: 1. Volumes FiYN1v E/W STREET 2. lanes, lane widths 70 `� C ��rj 3. Movements by lane 9 4. Parking (PKG) locations t 5. Bay storage lengths �Q 6. Islands (physical or painted) 7. Bus stops EB TOTA1 NB TOTAL TRAFFIC AND ROADWAY CONDITIONS Approach Grade e� o /o HV Adj. Pkg. Lane Buses PHF Conf. Peds. Pedestrian Button Arr. Y or N Nn, Y or N Min. Timing � ) �Nu) cds. hr (p' / ) Type y EB WB NB SB Grade: + up, — down NB: buses stopping/hr Min. Timing: min. green for 1IV. veh. with more than 4 wheels PHF: peak -hour factor pedestrian crossing Nm: pkg. maneuvers/hr Conf. Peds: Conflicting peds./hr Arr. Type: Type 1-5 PHASING D 1 A G R SAm - A --- M Timing G= IY+R= G= G= G= G= G= G= G= Y+R= Y+R= Y+R= Y+R= Y+R= Y+R= Y+R= Pretimed or Actuated __i' Protected turns Permitted turns -------Pedestrian Cycle Length Sec 9-76 URBAN STREETS VOLUME ADJUSTMENT WORKSHEET O ® O © ® O O O O O ppr. Mvt. Mvt. Peak Flow Lane Flow rate Number Lane Adj. Prop. Volume Hour Rate Group in Lane of Lanes Utilization Flow of (vph) Factor vpp Group N Factor v LT or RT PHF (vp-h) vo U (vph) P,T or PRT (vph) Table 9-4 O X QQ LT EB TH �� ,�y 5� IW'� rya 5�r� LT C'9 , C6y -a WB TH (69 10 y9%LT 37% RT RT rj'� ►-� (� a LT IarJ �1( lyq I. I I,VU IyCi IDU% LT NB TH S vm 1101 11" 1,00 119,6 0697 RT 95 LT LI C( SB TH I1?`6 ,Jdq 1355 I�,� �LI73 I, u5 15L-/7 % 3Lr 5°Io R r SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS 9-77 SATURATION FLOW ADJUSTMENT WORKSHEET LANE GROUPS O Ideal Sat. Flow (pcphgpl) OO No. of Lanes N ADIUSTMENT FACTORS Ad;. Sat. Flow Rate s (vphg) OO Appr. ® Lane Group Movements ® Lane Width f © Heavy Veh f OO Grade f OO Pkg. f e0 Bus Blockage f @ Area Ty e fp ,p Right Turn f @ Left Turn f11vL Table 9-5 Tab a 9-6 Table 9-7 Table 9-8 Table 9-9 Table 9-10 Table 9-11 Table 9-12 EB ��00 I {(� �� ,�� I.oC) J.uv I,00 -. ,6a �7y --� I%Uv 1 ,9U 11Z ,99 Wo I.W LUo .05 I.00 1336 WB I�oo I 93 1,oO LU( I.)v 1,c0 1.00 .qq .66 j0g9 10600 , 1,00 1.00 11uu 11uv 1.00 _ 6y 1199 NB fir( /,/� 10 1 'l/l '.VV �/�( 1 lV ,1 (.V0 ,111 1,ou �y� 1.W ,l I.00 q �r 1 �} 1,00 M/,y/L ( 1 1V SB �� ,�,'� I SOU aZ I,Uo r oo oo I,()() 1. oo 1,00 1� 9 �o 320?" 9-78 URBAN STREETS SUPPLEMENTAL WORKSHEET FOR LEFT -TURN ADJUSTMENT FACTOR, fLT INPUT VARIABLIES EB WB NB SB Cycle Length, C (sec) v 30 19O i� v Effective Green, g (sec) 17 LI9 y 2 Number of Lanes, N a o2 Total Approach Flow Rate, v, (vph) 3 (, Cl y 7 y I y 7 3 Mainline Flow Rate, vn,, (vph) c. `7 7 L/ � 3 Left -Turn Flow Rate, v►T (vph) y Cl Proportion of LT, PIT 5 , y G 03 Opposing Lanes, Na a Opposing Flow Rate, vo (vph) �j 3 (� ILI 1-13 �(�U Prop. of LT in Opp. Vol., PLTo .03 0 COMPUTATIONS EB WB NB SB 1800 N„ SOP _ 1+P 400+vMI LT<� 11400 — v,,, Y,, = v" / S,,r g„=(g—CY„)/(1—Y„) f, _ (875 — 0.625 v„) / 1000 r (N-1)gl P, = PST 1 + J f,g„ + 4.5 , g,,=g—g„ PT=1—PL g1 = 2 PT [1 — PT P, 0.5 gyl JJ EL = 1800 / (1400 — v,,) fm +g[1+P�(E,—])]+g g (l+.P�) f,T=(fm+N—])/N SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS 9-79 CAPACITY ANALYSIS WORKSHEET LANE GROUP (I Adj. Flow O Ad'. Sat. F�ow ® Flow Ratio © Green Ratio Lane Grou Capacity p y 6 v/c Ratio Os Critical p O OO Appr. Lane Group Movements Rate Rate v/s 0 — ® g/C c (vph) X - Lane Group (Vph) (vphg) C4, x 6 EB I `�'� tgLq , , ILq 6 ---- 1336 , Ici v 33'15 W51 . 563 1 wB )O -19 , 161 gla5 75'� I q 9 1129 ,is 60S 776 NB (A 11aG I`1y6 ,6y5 5 ia2o �13X SB �� 15u1 q 3 We yS--z , 5,�5v Cycle Length, C U sec E (v/s) ,_ 3 S Lost Time Per Cycle, L 1 ( sec Y (V/S)�, X C C. 9 7 x_ _ _ C—L 9-80 URBAN STREETS LEVEGORSERVICE WORKSHEET Lane Group First Term Delay Second Term Delay Total Delay & LOS O Appr. ® Lane Group Move- ments O v/c Ratio X © Green Ratio g/C © Cycle Length C (sec) O Delay d, (sec/veh) O Lane Group Capacity c. (vph) O Delay dz (sec/veh) O Progression Factor PF Table 9-13 0 Lane Group Delay (sec/veh) (ZH4) X OO © Lane Group LOS Table 9-1 @ Approach Delay (sec/veh) 0 Appr. LOS Table 9-1 Es = (�Lo ,21a5 �v as a07 R, S.' 56� .337s 451 1.2 1,00 17.1 C ws "15 .a►a5 8v aa.'5 aa3 �(. `� 1. Uo NB c6O 3. y 776 O 1, UD 3. y A 3' 6%15 W W 1200 10.0 1.00 I �A C ss ►��� ,a►9 ,5.150 So 13.3 16��1 �.� I, Uv C Intersection Delay �' ? sec/veh Intersection LOS C (Table 9-1) G L A C2/2o/S8) 3Z(a 319 G L A � r , 4, a no t . s 9 0 4,00� 3 Z(o = 37 9 .t�,•-cAa�t ' ola 3 7 No Text No Text ,FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED OVA.- 3I %-IiI Engineering and Planning Services The Kiln • 15 Brickyard Road • Essex Junction • Vermont • 05452 • (802) 878-3000 20 February 1986 Mr. Philip Mohler Philip Mehler Realty, Inc. 488 Madison Avenue, 17th Floor New York, NY 10022 RE: Traffic Impact Evaluation - Proposed Expansion South Burlington Factory Outlet Center Shelburne Road, South Burlington, Vermont FILE: 86027 Dear Mr. Mehler: At your request we have analyzed the potential traffic impacts of the above -referenced Project. This Project consists of a proposed 27,600 square feet addition on the northeast corner of the existing Factory Outlet Center. The scope of this Project is shown on a plan entitled "Burlington Value Mall -Site Plan", by The Ramos Group, undated. Three major areas of concern to local officials are addressed herein; Traffic Congestion, Traffic Safety and Southern Connector Impacts. In our preliminary discussions with local officials concerning the scope of this evaluation, the study limits were defined to include Shelburne Road between, and including, the Flynn Avenue and Swift Street intersections. The objective of this evaluation is to identify and assess potential traffic impacts created by this Project in each of the above areas of concern, for both existing and future traffic conditions. TRAFFIC CONGESTION Information regarding existing traffic volumes on Shelburne Road within the study area was obtained from the following sources: 1. Automatic Traffic Recorder Count, Shelburne Road, Station D270 (north of Home Avenue), Vermont Agency of Transportation, February 6-16, 1984. 2. Automatic Traffic Recorder Count, Shelburne Road -Station D253 (south of Queen City Park Road), Vermont Agency of Transportation, April 24-May 1, 1984. 3. Turning Movement Count, Shelburne Road/Flynn & Proctor Avenues, FitzPatrick-Llewellyn Incorporated, February 3, 1986. 4. Turning Movement Count, Shelburne Road/Home Avenue & O'Dell Parkway, FitzPatrick-Llewellyn Incorporated, November 28, 1984. 5. Turning Movement Count, Shelburne Road/South Burlington Factory Outlet Center & Shelburne Road Plaza, FitzPatrick-Llewellyn Incorporated, February 7, 1986. Design 9 Inspection 0 Studies 0 Permitting Mr. Philip Mehler FILE: 86027 20 February 1936 Page Two 6. Turning Movement Count, Shelburne Road/Swift Street & I-189, Vermont Agency of Transportation, February 6, 1984. Copies of these counts are enclosed as Appendices A-F, respectively. The results of the above -referenced traffic counts were used to develop existing (1986) average daily traffic volumes (ADT) and design hourly volumes (DHV) on Shelburne Road. Growth factors and DHV/ADT ratios used to adjust the data to 1986 conditions were obtained from Vermont Agency of Transportation (VAOT) data. The DHV is defined as the 30th highest Hourly traffic volume occurring on an annual basis, and is used as a design parameter in the design of highways, intersections and traffic control_ systems. The D11V typically occurs on a weekday during the P.M. pea'„ Hour from 4:00 to 5:00 p.m. Appendix G illustrates the existing ADT's and DHV's of Shelburne Road within the study area. Because projects such as this are seldom fully constructed and occupied within a one year period, traffic volumes are typically projected to a future design year, and conditions also analyzed for that design year. For this Project, a two year projection, to 1988, was developed through the use of VAOT growth factors. This data indicates that in urban areas, traffic volumes will increase by 2% during this two year period. Once existing and future background traffic volumes were determined, it was necessary to estimate the volumes and directional patterns of the additional vehicular traffic which this Project will generate. The major determinant of the volume of traffic which will be generated by this Project, is the amount of gross leaseable floor area. Of the total additional floor area proposed, the leaseable portion equals 25,000 Square feet. The land use category, "Retail Shopping Center-100,000-199,999 G.S.F. (LUC 822)", from the "ITE Informational Report, Tr a Generation, 3rd Edition", was used to estimate the additional volumes of traffic generated by this Project. Table 1, below outlines the projected vehicular trip volumes which will result upon completion of this Project. Average Weekday Vehicle Trip Ends A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour TABLE 1 PROJECTED VEHICULAR TRIP VOLUMES ENTER EXIT TOTAL 833 VTE/Day 834 VTE/Day 1667 VTE/Day 23 VTE/Hr. 73 VTE/Hr. 20 VTE/Hr. 77 VTE/Hr. 43 VTE/Hr. 150 VTE/[-Ir. . FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED Engineering and Planning Services Mr. Philip Mehler FILE: 36027 20 February 1986 Page Three The directional distribution of traffic entering and exiting this Project was estimated from existing traffic patterns. Presently, 69% of all traffic generated by the existing Factory Outlet Center utilizes the primary entrance located directly in front of the Center, and the remaining traffic accesses it via O'Dell Parkway. For the purpose of distributing the additional traffic generated by this Project a '10/30 ratio was used. Additional turning movements at each intersection were distributed using existing turning movement patterns. Since traffic flow on a street network is typically limited by available capacity at intersections, the potential traffic congestion impacts of this Project were determined by performing intersection capacity analyses at the four intersections within the study area. The methodology used to determine intersection capacity and operating level of service was obtained from the "Highway CapacityManual, Special Report 209, Transportation Research Board, 1985". Traffic conditions were analyzed using existing (1986) DHV's without this Project and future (1988) DHV's with this Project. Table 2, below, presents the results of the intersection capacity analyses. Detailed calculations are attached as Appendices H-I. TABLE. 2 DESIGN HOUR LEVELS OF SERVICE Shelburne Rd./Flynn Avenue Shelburne Rd./Home Avenue Shelburne Rd./Factory Outlet Shelburne Rd./Swift Street 1986 w/o 1983 w/ PROJECT PROJECT L.O.S. C L.O.S. C L.O.S. D L.O.S. D L.O.S. D L.O.S. D L.O.S. D L.O.S. E Urban streets and intersections are generally designed to maintain Level of Service (L.O.S.) C to D during DHV conditions. The level of service designations have been developed to represent reasonable ranges in the degree of loading and resulting vehicular delays on urban streets and intersections. The specific parameters for each level have been defined by the 1935 Highway Capacity Manual to be: FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED Engineering and Planning Services Mr. Philip Mehler FILE: 36027 20 February 1986 Page Four L.O.S. DELAY DESCRIPTION A < 5 sec/veh. Most vehicles do not stop. B < 15 sec/veh. Some vehicles stop, individual cycles operate at below capacity. C < 25 sec/veh. Many vehicles stop, individual cycle failures begin to occur. D < 40 sec/veh. Most vehicles stop, individual cycle failures become noticeable. E < 60 sec/veh. Almost all vehicles stop, individual cycle failures become frequent. F > 60 sec/veh. Unacceptable delay, overall failure. The amount of additional vehicular traffic which will be generated by this Project is very low, compared to existing traffic volumes on Shelburne Road. For this reason, this Project is not projected to cause a --- noticeable increase on existing levels of traffic congestion on Shelburne Road within the study area. Presently, this portion of Shelburne Road serves as the primary north -south arterial highway in the greater Burlington area, and will continue to do so until other access routes are constructed (i.e. the Southern Connector). Because existing levels of congestion are caused primarily by high traffic volumes, and not geometric or traffic control system deficiencies, there are few, if any, corrective measures which could be undertaken to reduce existing congestion at this time. TRAFFIC SAFETY The safety of vehicular traffic traveling to and from this Project is largely dependent on the geometries and physical conditions of adjacent streets and intersections, traffic volumes, and on the presence of adequate traffic control devices. The accident history of Shelburne Road within the study area for a five year period, from 1980 to 1984, was obtained from the Vermont Agency of Transportation. These records give the precise location, date, time, road condition, cause, type, and the number of injuries and fatalaties for each accident. Table 3, below, summarizes the causes and types of accidents which occurred within the study area during this 5 year period. FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED Engineering and Planning Services Mr. Philip Mehler FILE: 36027 20 February 1936 Page Five TABLE 3 FIVE-YEAR ACCIDENT HISTORY CAUSE TYPE Backing into roadway 2 Backed into vehicle 2 Careless & negligent 9 Head on collision 2 Careless Pedestrian/Bicycle 5 flit building/pole/etc. 6 Defective brakes 1 Hit pedestrian/cyclist 7 Excessive speed 5 Rear end collision 60 Failure to yield ROW 39 Rt. angle -broadside 32 Following too close 40 Sideswipe-opp.dir. 4 flit and run 1 Sideswipe -same dir. 10 Improper passing 1 Turning-opp. dir. 32 Inattention 34 Turning -same dir. 13 Liquor, eitated 6 Other 6 Potholes 1 TOTAL: 174 Signal malfunction 1 Slippery road 1 Stop light/sign violation 16 Other/unknown 12 TOTAL: 174 Less than one-third of the above accidents involved personal injury. As can be expected in an urban area with numerous driveways and intersections, the majority of these accidents were rear end collisions or involved turning movements. Almost two-thirds of the accidents were caused by failure to yield right-of-way, following too close, or operator inattention. When compared to the statewide average accident rate on urban federal aid primary highways, this segment of Shelburne Road had a higher than average accident rate, but did not exceed the critical accident rate. If the latter had been exceeded, statistically, this portion of Shelburne Road would have been classified as a high accident location. Given the accident history of Shelburne Road within the study area, and the relatively small additional traffic volumes generated by this Project, there is no reason to conclude that this Project will cause an adverse impact with respect to traffic safety. FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED Engineering and Planning Services Mr. Philip Mehler FILE: 86027 20 February 1986 Page Sir, SOUTHERN CONNECTOR IMPACTS The proposed "Southern Connector" will provide a second access route for traffic entering and exiting the City of Burlington from I-189 and U.S. Route 7 (Shelburne Road). Construction of this highway has been in the planning and design phases for many years and its construction likewise postponed due to various reasons. A recent agreement between the VAOT and the City of Burlington has removed the last remaining obstacles to the construction of the Southern Connector and the VAOT is now finalizing its design drawings. Existing traffic volumes and patterns on Shelburne Road within the study area will be significantly affected by tine Southern Connector. The construction of this new highway will be performed in two distinct phases; the first involving a complete reconstruction of the Shelburne Road/T•-189 interchange, and the second completing the Southern Connector as a through route into Burlington. Construction of the first phase is anticipated to commence in 1987, with completion in 1988. This phase will accomplish the following: 1. Improve the operating Level of Service at the Shelburne Road/Swift Street intersection to L.O.S. B during 1988 DHV conditions with this Project. A copy of the intersection capacity analysis is included as Appendix J. 2. Concurrent with this phase, access to and internal traffic circulation within the Shelburne Road Plaza will be improved. FitzPatrick-Llewellyn Incorporated has been working with the owner of the Shelburne Road Plaza to design these improvements. Included among them will be a new entrance for westbound traffic off from I-189 into the shopping center, thereby eliminating the majority of the congestion which presently occurs at the northbound left turn entrance to tine Shelburne Road Plaza. The schedule for the construction of the second phase has not yet been finalized by tine VAOT. Their traffic projections indicate that upon completion of the second phase, future traffic volumes on Shelburne Road, north of the I-189 interchange, will de'crease_by 35-40% from existing volumes. Such a decrease in traffic volumes on this portion of Shelburne Road will improve the operating levels of service during future DIN conditions to L.O.S. C or better. FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED Engineering and Planning Services Mr. Philip Mehler FILE: 86027 20 February 1986 Page Seven CONCLUSION This report has evaluated potential traffic impacts resulting from a 27,600 square feet expansion of the existing South Burlington Factory Outlet Center on Shelburne Road. This Project will not significantly increase existing levels of traffic congestion on Shelburne Road. Existing (1986) and future (1983) design hour traffic volumes were utilized to determine intersection capacities and operating levels of service at the four intersection within the study area. Overall, DHV traffic conditions within the study area presently operate at L.O.S. D, and will continue to do so upon completion of this Project. Traffic safety was evaluated by examining the most recent available five year accident history of Shelburne Road between Flynn Avenue and Swift Street. No indication was found of existing traffic safety problems which would be unreasonably aggravated by this Project. Reconstruction of the Shelburne Road/I-139 interchange and completion of the Southern Connector, as currently planned, will significantly improve traffic conditions on Shelburne Road. Anticipated future design hour traffic conditions will operate at L.O.S. C or better. We wish to thank you for this opportunity to be of service, and remain available to present the results of this evaluation to local officials. Should you have any questions, or if we may be of additional assistance, please feel free to contact us. Sincerely, FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED Rog'� J .t' Dickinson, P.E. cc Chris Ramos Jane LaFleur RJD:amo FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED Engineering and Planning Services APPENDIX A AUTOMATIC TRAFFIC RECORDER COUNT SHELBURNE ROAD - STATION D270 FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED Engineering and Planning Services : - . MJN- Au_':Y TP.ANSPORTATI ON PROJE:,T P:..4NNINP" DIVISION 7RAFFI C RESEARCH SECTION T4 1 OZ '70 B F TOWN: 1 2 3 4 516 7 8 1 1 � - i a + � o .4 o +► V N �' c ROUTE: �1V• UNTER; Y69 CO-7 NUMBER: TF STATION - NUMB I ay D o S 3�z / 3 Hou r + ? ?-+ ? 456• 1 I ? .+ 12--1 + .+ 147-+ 230.+ +I I 1-2 .+ .+ 13 -+ 250- .+ 2-3 - - .+ .+ 61.+ 64-+ 110- .+��A7, _c ? -+ 54-+ 55-+ 48-+ 62. 41•+I .+ 4-5-- •+ 120-+ 98-+ 00-+ 44-+ .+ ??.+ 5-6 .+ .+ 449-+ 466-+ 169- g.+ -+ 6-7 .+ 1 286-+ 1 267-+ 1 353-+ ?21-+ .+ 1 ? .+ 7-F •+ 1 488-+ 1 564-+ 1 479-+ 333-+ .+ .+ _q 340• .+ 67 -+ 1 127.+ 1 088- 1 115-+ 997-+ 109-+ 1 181-+ 1 3 9 - 558-+ 808.+ .+ 1 307-+ 22 .+ i .+ a_]Q 10-11 -L -011a .+ 1 1' 376.+T 1 432.4 17B.+ 1 356•+ .+I ? ? + I ? 1?-1 1 290-+ 1 509.+ 1 1 479• .+I .+1 ? 2-+ 1 30 -+ 1 379- .+ 1 553-+ 1 576-+ 1 533- 1 508• 1 226.+ 1 242-+ ? .+ .+ -2 1 ? 5-+ 1 297-+ 1 419- 1 399-+ 1 408-+ 1 377-+ 1 529-1 1 456-+ 1 625-+ 1 410. 1 175. +11 AS 1.+ 11 598-+ 1 592-+ 1 599-+ 1 677.4 1 617-+ 1 809-+ J 1 143-+I1 717-+ 11 678-+ 4-5 1 444-+ 1 550-+ 1 512.4 1 508.+ .+ 95 1 141-+ 1 593-+ 1 689-+ S-6 .+ .+ 8- 091-+ 1 378-+ 834-+, .+ .+ �A_7- 834-+ 887-+ 926- 961- 1 209-+ 664-+11 012-+ 949-+ 7-8 648•+ 600-+ 733. 694- 4 977•+ 569-+I 73•+ 731-+ _ 546-+ 392-+ 573-+ 439-+ 654. 492- 616- 519- 887-+709, 590-+ 9.q 9. 447.+ 303-+1 F 5 -+ 400-+ 1 619•+ Q-14 430-+ 1 10-11 315-+ 308-+ 339. 348- 4 -+ 6,6 7. 259-+1 252.+ 386-+ 1-12 1 13 492. 44-40,6..* 20 503 • 055• . * 2 1088-* 5 -* iotaT /0:30 /6: is /0:30 DATA SUMMARY `1 ct, Day of Week Dail Volumes WeekAve. Total Day 1 Z 3 u n a v 429 N 2 -Monday 0 8 1 0 Tuesdays9S 14ednesday 216So3 20633 Thursday Dom FridayS Saturdav o iota of Average Days Without Weekend With Weekend 3o Adjusted Average Day Without Weekend 2-1 i-tnWeekendq e rote7'Cl assT� i cation. en ac r W Wkend � actor 19 84 AADT z:3?2o 4-JV- FV 9: �0 4 "J . . Remarks: Revised November 1QP =MJt;' A -EN-' OF TP.ANSPORTRTION PROJE:.T P:.4NNIN- DIVISION TRAFFIC RESEARCH SEI?ION F4 - �__V 1 � b zt d$ 0 T _._.. TOWN: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 -L.L ROUTE: �jai �" COUNTER NUMBER: STATIpN- l� w ;-' to c N11 B R�� ,' I aye S / _ XHourl 12-1 1 115.4 .+ I I 2-, 49.4 .+ T "� 51.4 s7.+ 4-5 .+Eg 5-6 461.4 491.+ 6-7 47. 1 366• 15. 1 580. 7-P- g15 9 . 1 148. 8,f 4- 9' I 1 C-1 1 I 1 1- i 4� -1_. -? 1529. - 1 732. 1 586- I d-4 S-6._.� 933. 701. ( 7_8 668• - 465• 359- I I I 10=11 1-lZ 20 833• 6 494. I I � iot2T � / y io:-1 DATA SUMMARY Day of Week 1 DailyVolumes Week �Ave. 2 3 4 , Total Day Sunday ,Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturdav Total of Average Days Without Weekend With Weekend Adjusted Average Day Without Weekend l-Ln Weekend Route "C7 assTfl cataori: W Wkendn factor 19 AADT Remarks: Revised November 17,� APPENDIX B AUTOMATIC TRAFFIC RECORDER COUNT SHELBURNE ROAD - STATION D258 FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED Engineering and Planning Services TL,— i:` D7 TRANSROPTATION DRCJE,�" p-ANNING' DIVISION TRAFFIr- RESEARCH SECTION 4 1 ; D z s8 B TO►�� e A_� 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 o °J ►— c o +� U ROUTE- Q 1 IIl 1 t- m � e0 L COUNTER (� �I� o NUMBER: NTATIRNv�'' y ►-' A � r J ` 6-- �z c 0<Z 7now ?23.+ ? .+ 12-1 .+ ? i—L ?.+ 63. . 2-3- - .+ 48.+ .+ + + 3-�- /o' r� 78•+ 70-+ .+ .+ .+ 4-5 165•+ 153.4 .+ ? .+ .+ Id- 5_6._ 765•+ 625•+cr .+ ? .+ 140• 566•+ 565•+ -S- 6-7 591•+ 1 237•+ 25 •+ 5? ,+ ? .+ 1 45 •+ C 3 0 7-E rly 880•+ 1 327.4 1 308•+ 948•+ 454• 1 598.+ 1 642•+ g_o 'a 451•+ 1 246.+ ?.+ .+ .+ ti3.�3 a-10 570•+ 1 445.4 1 61 .+ .+ 1 521.+ t /3Z5 1 .+ i� bQ3•+ 1 �U8•� 1_7 +I 1 942•+ 666•+ 1 760• ? ,+ .+ .+I 1 744•+ 1 275.+ 1 784• ? .+ ,+ ?. ,+ 1 589•+ 1 533•+ 1 836• 2 026•+ 1 54•+ .+ -� 1 731•+ 1 606•+ 1 862• ? .+ 1 734-+11 528• 1 692•+ 2 020•+ 1 736•+ 1 945• ? ?? ,+ .+ 1 532• 1 869•+' -5_ 2 002•+ 1 �� 665•+ 87,,. 2 175•+ 1 765•+ 1 535• 1 895•+ 5-6 .,�5.+ 1 2- .+ 1 762•+ 1 656•.+ 1 392• i 414•+ A_7 1 170•+ 933•+ 1 147• I .+ 1 192• 1 241•+ 7-8 ' 06.+ 739•+ 29• 1 261• 1 130•+ 940• 857.+ q b 9.+ 7T7. 923• 993•+ 746• , _ 496•+ 452• 637• 703•+ 450. - 387•+I I I 10=1? 435•+ 2 b. 574• 711•+ 288• 267•+ 1-1 - 23 824• 27 727• 24 8 ,,-,.* 4 ?83•* 117 ! Total 2z 8- DATA SUMMARY 7/ Dail v Volumes (,Week ¢+Ave. Day Week l 2 3 4 S Total Day un av/9(c30 -Monday- Z Z3 Tuesday z /Z Wednesday ZZ 39 22 Thursday z38Z Z38Z4 Friday 277Z71 Z77L 7 Saturdav z-y 9 5 1 Z489�y' iota o - Without Weekend Average Days With Weekend /0302, 16759Z Adjusted Without Weekend Average Day 1-th Weekend 02-61 2-39yZ Route Cl assi fi cation: W Wkendn� actorzo, 19a4-AADT Z,� 180 Remarks: Revised November 19f1 ✓ (i.f IYN APPENDIX C TURNING MOVEMENT COUNT SHELBURNE ROAD/FLYNN & PROCTOR AVENUES FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED Engineering and Planning Services FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED Engineering & Planning Services The Kiln - 15 Brickyard Road ESSEX JUNCTION, VERM014T 05452 • � 00�� � O�CID TOT TOT I 1 116a' PC T TOT DIR NORTH 15ti3�►t3vi 3`�U�yUi3 0 (Y Fi.yrVN 1�+E- /N /J u� c/ /�� 1�l r/ :'. TOT CODE NO.: Yf�J l PLACE: - /j, F _ 0 95 IHHRR� PC T TOT DIR HR U 3 �; I'7''I`7 � 19 a 5 I off✓ 5 l ' o 1 i PC I Ali pass* ag�r cars and 2-axle,4-fire trucks TOT T =Medium and heavytrucks and busses. DIR PC T TOT DIR PC T TOT HR S s d 7 11'7 77 93 T TO OLI jg16 TOT I�4.J 6 FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED Engineering & Planning Services The Kiln - 15 Brickyard Road ESSEX JUNCTION, VERMONT 05452 CODE NO.: 96 a a` PLACE: DIR PC T TOT DIR PC T TOT HR 5 L( N 15W 3 U 9 1515 15 . I$5 6 v 6 I�HS 971 1 v 1.1 IIF� 2ig_6 `1_ t) Ci lul5 96ci �a 2y ►6a„ y�. s 0 2 !L . APPENDIX D TURN_IN_G MOVEMENT COUNT SHELBURNE ROAD/HOME AVE. & O TELL PARKWAY FITZPATRICOLLEMLLYN INCORPORATED Engineering and Planning Services FFFZPATRIC_K_I.I_I:WCI.I_YN ASSWAA 11.S _ PLACE: SHGLgUliNC # NumC Fntllnnnrinq mud f Innnlnq Snrvb wo DIR PC T TOT DIR PC T TOT HR DIR PC T TOT o - - — ----- -- I a 147 � q k16R 19 —_5 59 M .. TOT TOT TOT w n PC T TOT DIR DIR PC T TOT FIR a s �r gO a'1 071b 31 olcb I _ - — 10 6 I TOT TOT PC �T SNci3, IIR TOT DIR DIR PC T TOT � 1213 _".e) aa6`�' P-14'r - -CIO 961 1976 v86 D14 V = Y 6 1 — 560 67061 oguol 511 _ IJSW 755 TOT I TOT PC _ T TOT DIR DIR Pt T TOT 11IR 1 I'7 WcYJ 15 RN.F = .S5 4`I_ MU � I07 — 1.. 8 6 1600 _ 11 PCs All Passenger cars and 1-am le, 4-fire trucks TOT T I Medium and heav trucks and busses, TOT DIR PC T I SOT DIR PC T TOT HR DIR PC T TOT HR 3 3 I3 070 -- Pf IN 17 -- - 26 a 1 7r7 — b a a � _ _ x u TOT TOT TOT APPENDIX E TURNING MOVEMENT COUNT SHELBURNE ROAD/SOUTH BURLINGTON FACTORY OUTLET CENTER & SHELBURNE ROAD PLAZA FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED Engineering and Planning Services TURNING MOVEMENT DATA SHEET CODE NO. s_ F60'a / FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED PLACE: _ Engineering & Planning Services ' DIR PC T TOT DIR PC TT TOT HR DIR PC- T TOT HR y3 - 113 a3o 9 _ I&OU 3c� - 3 o aao , L _ 'A3 1 - G J 1615 'k 2,w Cy 5�f - 5N 1a. 13 335 M _.- W M •. TOT Iyl 0 1171 TOT 11OS3 �lI 109q TOT --� aiol U o'Z�- M Cl PC T TOT DIR DIR PC T TOT HR 161s NOR T" I n I O f jU IG�15 9� as � P.N.F. - ,ea 1 3 5 U 115 TOT TOT PC T TOT DIR o DIR PC T TOT FIR 4 6 - /6 - 6�eI i 5 � `' �N.� _ •�9 � '. _ Via_ _ 16►5 5 _ _ S+•ae�suwNe S�u� r+ 3u��„v�;�,., / U - / U 1 d ���� >D 1�L.i�1A FracTur2 i Uu �� i ♦' - CLNTE✓L iI - -- v 56 7 TOT_ I 1 TOT _ PC T TOT DIR DIR PC T TOT I FiR 56 s c; N 5 y 5 k&u R N.F = . `f y 41 - yl 161s 2773 1986 Vo') 3313 9z Nj 163� IGds S6 5G `76 'iG - PCs All passenger cars and 2-axle,4-tire trucks 114 y'. TOT ss Med'urn and heav trucks and busses, TOT DIR PC T -T I SOT DIR PC T TOT HR DIR PC T TOT HR 5c� U 7l 12 /8 5 S:t 16uv I83 // /y _ 6 ( - G 1 1630 ��( 6LI 185 C I 7` '�`l 16a O P O a o X 'oZ TOT I a 0 a1 TOT ' 73 TOT '�SU U z APPENDIX F TURNING MOVEMENT COUNT SHELBURNE ROAD/SWIFT STREET & I-1 FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORA7 FJ► Engineering and Planning Services TURNING MOVEMENT DATA SHEET CODE NO.: �6-- aj FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED PLACE: Engineering & Planning Services DIR PC T TOT DIR PC T TOT HR DIR PC T TOT HR 4 lab II'1 5 _ 1aa 7 7 I 600 _a 16 IH3 A Iy6 _ 2a I � _13 13 6so o° X O — I czS M M . TOT 6 I'a 55�, TOT Ljc1Cl oiQ [' IU TOT—] M Cl PC T TOT DIR —� N011ltl DIR PC T TOT HR .� S a �j 1630 35 ibis 1119r _ .9_1 6 PC U T� 6 1 TOT TOT DIR L�J TOT g 5 y DIR PC T TOT FIR � 4 a � 16cv i I b � 16 -- S"'I" ST. 1615 I I� T-ISG water-F R,:i•,s� TOT PC II 5 159 131 I�1 T 13 8 7 9 TOT_ TOT DIR I� 67 136 la x Ig9 $ m h ?.14,F,= qU 1`186 via= alyU DIR PC T TOT HR 1Y 1 1600 a3 a3 1615 1� 1$ I �i, 5 1 36 I V'. C jt 3� �r DIR PC? All passenger cars and I-axle,4-Firs trucks TOT T = Medium and heav trucks and busses. PC T I TOT_DIR PC T TOT HR DIR ' TOT PC T TOT Hit 1�7I -- — a 5 16uc1 of Fi (J �t a g 4. C q 161 s Q 3Z4 5 3�6 /3 I L/ 1a. 33, _ Q q 5� otcl a N X T TOT -- -- — TOT /a23 2'0l TOT APPE14DIX G SHELBURNE ROAD AVERAGE DAILY & DESIGN HOURLY TRAFFIC VOLUMES FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED Engineering and Planning Services IgSG AaT APPENDIX H INTERSECTION C_A_PACI_TY ANALYSES �1986 DIN WITHOUT PROJECT FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED Engineering and Planning Services SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS 9-75 INPUT WORKSHEET Intersection:__SNct,3U►2NE- TD. / FLYNN ACE Date: 086 T>Jy w%o 'PyWJ Analyst: Time Period Analyzed: y- 5 �'`^^ Area Type: ❑ CBD aOther Project No.: "S6 0.2'7 City/State: VOLUME AND GEOMETRICS Swcus . 12D 1166 N/S STREET Ili' I SB TOTAL la C� I 6 fi ! `. _ i I _ r W B TOTAL b I NORTH IDENTIFY IN DIAGRAM: —� 1. Volumes I I F�vNN �� /W STREET 2. lanes, lane widths 3. Movements by lane I I2 I .1L 2 I. Parking (PKG) locations 5. Bay storage lengths �7 --► — 6. Islands (physical or painted) 7. Bus `� l I 1 �,�I 10,3 stops EB TOTAL 5 NB TOTAL TRAFFIC AND ROADWAY CONDITIONS Approach Grade o ��) 9'o HV Ad'. Pk . Lane Buses pHp Conf. Peds. Pedestrian Button Arr. Y or N Nm Y or N Min. Timing ( (NO) (peds./hr) Type EB 10/- y 04, N WB NB v % A) c1.95 1J 3 SB y % w a U. 9a nJ 3 Grade: + up, — down NB: buses stopping/hr Min. Timing: min. green for HV. veh. with more than 4 wheels PHF: peak -hour factor pedestrian crossing Nm: pkg. maneuvers/hr Conf. Peds: Conflicting peds./hr Arr. Type: Type 1-5 PHASING D I , R —� M Timing G= IU G= 3 G= 42 G= ( G= G= G= G= Y+R=7 Y+R=77 Y+R=2g Y+R=G3 Y+R= Y+R= Y+R= Y+R= Pretimed or Actuated v 'p p _i Protected turns _ _% Permitted turns -------Pedestrian7T Cycle Length--KO—Sec §-76 URBAN STREETS VOLUME ADJUSTMENT WORKSHEET O ppr. O Mvt. O Mvt. Volume (vph) O Peak Hour Factor PHF ® Flow Rate vpp (vp-h) O Lane Group O Flow rate in Lane Group vs (vph) O Number of Lanes N O Lane Utilization Factor U Table 9-4 O Adj. Flow v (vph) OT X Qe O Prop. of LT or RT PLT or PRT LT II - .06 130 --� 13 13v C EB TH _ RT 15 , 0 6 25 U --� 0.5 o I - a SU Rr LT WB TH RT LT 110 (16 NB TH 10B'7 I,US 11Ni LT RT LT _ SB TH I De . 5 2 ! 2 u 1 �� � �t u S 133 0 5 /'3 RT RT 6� !� b� SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS 9-77 SATURATION FLOW ADJUSTMENT WORKSHEET LANE GROUPS O Ideal Sat. Flow (pcphgpl) G No. of Lanes N AD USTMENT FACTORS , C� Aft) Sat. Flow Rate y (vphg) ,O Appr. ® Lane Group Movements © Lane Width fM, OO Heavy Veh fHv Or Grade f @ Pkg. f OO Bus Blockage f b O Area Type f. » Right Turn fRT @ Left Turn f T Ta a 9-5 Table 9-6 Table 9-7 Table 9-8 Table 9-9 Table' 9-10 Table 9-11 Table 9-12 ----� too i ,�o 1,00 , 9q i,w I.UV i.U� - .95 IS2L( EB —� I QUO 1 . qo . q-6 roo 1,00 1_00 .8S — 133 6 WB NB �� I 1 FUt� I.UD , 1,6 I,oc) I,UU I,cW I •oo — .�617 �35G SB Ov ,fig �.�0 SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS 9-79 CAPACITY ANALYSIS WORKSHEET LANE GROUP ® Adj. Flow Rate (vph) ® Ad'. Sat. F ow Rate (vphg) ® Flow Ratio v/s — ® Green Ratio g�C 6 Lane Group Capacity p y c (vph) Exa vac Ratio X _ (D Critical ? Lane Group 0 Appr. ® Lane Group Movements --�' 130 I5ay vas ,alas Say . y� EB a5C) 133� .I�7 2iP_5 WB NB `� I I ��`{ ( a3s6 • y��. , 5G25 13�5 , gC SB � 1330 3q�3 .38-1 59SO 1:i39 , �3 Cycle Length, C —1L sec E (v/s), = ' 67 Lost Time Per Cycle, L g sec I (v/s),i X C r%s X, C—L 9-80 URBAN STREETS LEVELGOF-SERVICE WORKSHEET Lane Group First Term Delay Second Term Delay Total Delay & LOS O Appr. ® Lane Group Move- ments O v/c Ratio X O Green Ratio g/C © Cycle Length C (sec) O Delay d, (sec/veh) O Lane Group Capacity c (vph) © Delay d2 (sec/veh) O Progression Factor PF Table 9-13 O Lane Group Delay (sec/veh) (1)�) X s0 » Lane Group LOS Table 9-1 9 Approach Delay (sec/veh) 0 Appr. LOS Table 9-1 EB �l aia_ v. 31-I o `I I, v 0 a1.0 C y.a 2izs W 23.9- Z-0 v 91,0 C WB NB �,� S6d' '60 II.3 ►3a5 `1,� I.vv I5,5 C SB �;� ,'73 5a C) II.I 1�3L-1 Intersection Delay /61 6 sec/veh Intersection LOS C (Table 9-1) SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS 9-75 INPUT WORKSHEET Intersection:__SHCC(3LAQ(ve, �D. ! 140y1\. AVG Date: 12K TOV w/o 'Re©J. Analyst: 2 Z Time Period Analyzed: �' S Pm y Area Type: ❑ CBD 0 Other Project No.: 6 2,' 1 City/State: 13Uy2 LI TQ UN i Vr. VOLUME AND GEOMETRICS S4CL3U✓2n f Rx 1163 N/S STREET SBTOTAL qU k'. 113 I 31 WBTOTAL 025 I NORTH IDENTIFY IN DIAGRAM: —� I. Volumes 1 I I Nnrnc, v E/W STREET 2. tones, lane widths �S } IUy5 3. Movements by lane LZaJ I. Parking (PKG) locations 5. Bay storage lengths 6. Islands (physical or J 3;7. I � / --� painted) Bus stops EB TOTAL I I NB TO"CAL TA TRAFFIC AND ROADWAY CONDITIONS Approach Grade M o/a HV Ad'. Pk Lane . Buses PHF on Cf. Peds. Pedestrian Button Arr. Y N Nm or (NB) (peds./hr) Y or N Min. Timing Type EB O _ .9U - /V 3 wB 0 % N _ - , 70 IV 3 NB O S% N y 7 - iv 3 SB Grade: + up, — down N.: buses stopping/hr Min. Timing: min. green for HV. veh. with more than 4 wheels PHF: peak -hour factor pedestrian crossing Nm: pkg. maneuvers/hr Conf. Peds: Conflicting peds./hr Arr. Type: Type 1-5 PHASING D A R A M Timing G=31 G= `' G= 19 G= 15 G= G= G= G= Y+R=56 Y+R=7'1 Y+R=69 Y+R='13 Y+R= Y+R= Y+R= Y+R= Pretimed or Actuatedif P I P P _i Protected turns _ _i Permitted turns ------- Pedestrian Cycle Length Sec 9*76 URBAN STREETS VOLUME ADJUSTMENT WORKSHEET O O O O ® © O O p ppr. Mvt. Mvt. Peak Flow Lane Flow rate Number Lane Adj. Prop. Volume Hour Rate Group in Lane of Lanes Utilization Flow of (vph) Factor v� Group N Factor v LT or RT PHF (vp) 0 _ ® vo U (vph) PLT or P RT (vph) Table 9-4 0 X QQ LT a 5 EB TH 3a , qo 3� 2 oZ 1,00 ��I IUD/�1i RT 9 a 9 . 90 a�/ 7 `� 267 I IU Ucw_lo �6 , , 1Z LT 31 .90 lq WB TH a 5 ,9() �� �' 16 21 '/o LT �, 2- Y. ,R. r RT 1U ci0 IJ0 LT I'�rj ,%7 IZ9 )19 1 1,00 11""1 tool. Li NB TH IUNS %�7 r� �U� 1 � I IU90 I 1,0S IIt_,S D 1a 'R T RT (; 13 LT 13 9v 10`l7 �? �aZ� LT SB TH 10)S ,9� 113 `i 1/67 a. 1,05 laa5 RT RT oZs �U �Zy SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS 9-77 SATURATION FLOW ADJUSTMENT WORKSHEET LANE GROUPS Ideal Sat. Flow (pcphgpl) No. of Lanes N ADJUSTMENT FACTORS , Ad. Sat. Fiow Rate s (vphg) (D Appr. 0 Lane Group Movements © Lane Width fy Heavy Veh f"V T Grade f T Pkg. f (1) Bus Blockage f b Area Tyrpe Ia 9 Right Turn fRT 9 Left Turn f T Ta le 9-9 Table 9-6 Table 9-7 Table 9-8 Table 9-9 Table 9-10 Table 9-11 Table 9-12 EB _ _y Noo 2 .73 I.00 I,uo I,uv 1,uo 1.uo fb5 .17 g'160 ----� I wo I A3 (.(V 1,0o 1,00 (,vv 1-00 ,W) - Ig23 wB I �0o ( ,S3 I.00 I.uo I,00 I.00 1,00 .91 9y 1939L- l BUD ! . 93 1,00 I, u(j I -uo I. ua ►. uo - q5 I S9 C? NB RUC) oZ .73 qv Luu 1,00 1.uu Ou 1,00 (VCR I ,y3 I,o0 Luc) I.00 I,uo I.Uu - 95 /5 Cl,� SB ►KOO ,93 ,T� i.ou I,uo I,ou Voo 1.oc) 9-78 URBAN STREETS SUPPLEMENTAL WORKSHEET FOR LEFT -TURN ADJUSTMENT FACTOR, fLT INPUT VARIABLES EB WB NB SB Cycle Length, C (sec) $ 1� S Effective Green, g (sec) Number of Lanes, N Total Approach Flow Rate, v, (vph) Mainline Flow Rate, v,,, (vph) Left -Turn Flow Rate, vLr (vph) agj 3� Proportion of LT, PI.T 10 Opposing Lanes, N. I a Opposing Flow Rate, v. (vph) 19142� ar( 4 Prop. of LT in Opp. Vol., PI.TI , 9-1 ., 1 U COMPUTATIONS EB WB NB SB 1800 N„ S„r _ I +PLT(, 400+vM H00 - VN, 159q 3y5`( Y„ = v,. / S,,,, , D `6 O O Ill &=(g—CY„)/(1—Y,,) 8165 `6-:r7�1 f, _ (875 — 0.625 v„) / 1000 _ rj G S , `7()L4 r (N-1)gl PI = PI.T 1 4J f,g,. + 4.5 gy=g —g. 6,35 PT = 1 — PL .'7643 . '7 9 gr = 2 Pi 11 - PT 0.5 gyl 3 76 .. �, 'i S EL = 1800 / (1400 - v„) fm g+ gU �]+PI.(E +. PL) O •� 1 . 1 y ])1+ I J fLT=(fm+N-1)/N .('`7 .�� SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS 9-79 CAPACITY ANALYSIS WORKSHEET LANE GROUP p Adj. Flow (D Ad)'. Sat. Flow ® Flow Ratio ® Green Ratio L® e Groupv/c Ca ac p y Ratio Critical 7 ® Appr. Lane Group Movements Rate (vph) Rate (vphg) v/s _ @ g/C c (vph) X 0 - Lane Group CI x Eli �'i y 976o 0 99 I'io5 '�71 •5 0� 207 ,(3r10 WB lad Mo ozi •ai5c( 3y3 .37A� Ns 'WE I 3yq y659 15a9 ,149 �I59 34S ,36-1 Ss 1 a� S 3�� � 373 ,363� 1193 ►- 09`7 Cycle Length, C �g sec E (v/s)�i Lost Time Per Cycle, L 13 sec X=INO, Xc-0.7gI. C—L 9-80 URBAN STREETS LEVEGOF-SERVICE WORKSHEET Lane Group First Term Delay Second lbrm Delay 7Ibtal Dela & LOS O Appr. ® Lane Group Move- ments O v/c Ratio X O Green Ratio g/C © Cycle Length C (sec) © Delay d, (sec/veh) O Lane Group Capacity c (vph) O Delay d2 (sec/veh) O Progression Factor PF Table 9-13 O Lane Group Delay (sec/veh) ((EH4) X ® O Lane Group LOS Table 9-1 Approach Delay (sec/veh) Appr. LOS Table 9-1 EB �� Spa ,1705 W�6 95.5 q,11 13 1,uo aG.g 9,5.3 3m'j 15,6 I,vv yo.9, WB . 66Y I"lo5 95,9 ayy t-1. S I , v o 30. y D NB .376 .y 393 0,3 1,00 aa, 7 C I %� .7ti9 g6Sq S, ly,17 I59-9 I, 5 WO I6.� C SB �� .367 ,�I s9 �Fs a�. � 3y 3 a.3 ► . U v 2a. � C UC.o /.017 .1636 1193 aG,9 1. �v q? s r Intersection Delay 3 V, Al sec/veh Intersection LOS V (Table 9-1) SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS 9-75 INPUT WORKSHEET Intersection: 10e nJ R. h # , B.F U. C Date: Ii$6 DN V l /lp �r2UJ. Analyst: RJR Time Period Analyzed: t i' S j'yy) Area Type: D CBD [Other Project No.: 6G U r1 City/State: �i u tQ t 1 NG 1`U r UT VOLUME AND GEOMETRICS 54c- a R� * 37 / 3 3 3 N/S STREET iu'I lo' Ilo' I SB T� I �► 56IOTAL �83 WB TOTAL a� f% i a6 I I I a�r, NORTH �--- 1 v IDENTIFY IN DIAGRAM: 10' — --� 1. volumes E/W STREET 2. lanes, lane widths 3. Movements by lane 1 6 I I a 5 3 jC 4. Parking (PKG) locations 5. Bay storage lengths 6. Islands (physical or painted) 7. Bus stops EB TOTAL ( I io' I10, 110, NB TOTAL 14 ON• -F r wPS TRAFFIC AND ROADWAY CONDITIONS Approach Grade o /o) % FiV Ad'. Pk . Lane Buses PHF Conf. Peds. Pedestrian Button Arr. Y or N Nm Y or N Min. Timing ( (NB) (peds./hr) Type EB U U N Al- 3 WB O v - 3 NB U 5�/J ,� a .9q SB Grade: + up, — down NB: buses stopping/hr Min. Timing: min. green for HV. veh. with more than 4 wheels PHF: peak -hour factor pedestrian crossing Nm: pkg. maneuvers/hr Conf. Peds: Conflicting peds./hr Arr. Type: Type 1-5 PHASING D I A_ R� A `J M Timing G= 3a G= 9 G= ►9 G= 15 G= G= G= G= Y+R=56 Y+R=73 Y+R=69 Y+R=73 Y+R= Y+R= I Y+R= Y+R= Pretimed or Actuated Q T T' —� Protected turns __i Permitted turns -------Pedestrian Cycle Length M Sec 9-76 URBAN STREETS VOLUME ADJUSTMENT WORKSHEET O ppr. ® Mvt. O Mvt. Volume (vph) O Peak Hour Factor PHF © Flow Rate vpp (vp-h) ® © Lane Group T Flow rate in Lane Group vg (vph) O Number of Lanes N O Lane Utilization Factor U Table 9-4 O Adj. Flow v (vph) O X QQ O Prop. of LT or RT P,T or PRT LT,OG 1� 7 _—a ��$� I 10o 1%- 1 � T EB TH 3 6 3 ,-j ---sue 37 I,00 37 RT LT aa� Bq �55 y--- 0q55 I I,0o ass 0 �c T WB TH 1�q �3 �--- 63 I �,vc7 63 RT LT a53 9y 1,00 o16 100 d c. i NB TH 131 ,5y 9�iv 9�U 1\Us IoLW RT - LT a Cf o 0� �q LT SB TH 13C)7 (�o 145;L ,� .� I952 2 1,US 1595 RT — )VI-4 = FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED Engineering and Planning Services One Wentworth Drive • Williston • Vermont • 05495 • (802) 878-3000 13 December 179 Mr. Joseph Weith, Planner City of South Burlington 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 RE: Factory Outlet Center; Signage FILE: 88173 Dear Mr. We i th : As discussed with you and the Planning Commission last week, we have developed a signing program for the revised Factory Outlet parking layout. Enclosed are three (3) copies of the proposed signage for your comment and files. We also spoke with Mr. Ward regarding the use of two company names on the directional parking signs, explaining the Planning Commission feels quite strongly that vehicles destined for T.J. Maxx should park in the rear of the complex, leaving the front parking area for the other high -volume generator, Grand Union. We are convinced that many drivers won't proceed to the rear parking lot unless assisted by directional signs, in this case people seeking T.J. Maxx. Mr. Ward said he would accept such signage on a "trial" basis, and emphasized the signs couldn't constitute advertising. We understand this, and are sending Mr. Ward a copy of this plan for his review. The Owner- has already begun preparations for installing the signs, and hopes to have them in place shortly so the Christmas shoppers will have an easier time negotiating the new parking lots. Should you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact us. Sincerely, FIT PATRICK-L WELYN INCORPORATED Douglas R. FitzPatrick, P.E. cc: Philip Mehler w/ encl John Dowling w/ encl Richard Ward w/ encl Tim Gallup w/ encl Design 0 Inspection 0 Studies 0 Permitting 0 Surveying City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 PLANNER 658-7955 February 6, 1990 Mr. Dou Fitzpatrick Fitzpatrick -Llewellyn Associates One Wentworth Drive Williston, Vermont 05495 Re: Heathcote Associates, Shelburne Road Dear Doug: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Enclosed are the December 5, 1989 Planning Commission meeting minutes. Please call if you have any questions. Sincerely, V' �CJ oe Weith, City Planner 1 Encl cc: Mr. Philip Mehler JW/mcp 1*1 City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 PLANNER 658-7955 February 6, 1990 Mr. Doug Fitzpatrick Fitzpatrick -Llewellyn Associates One Wentworth Drive Williston, Vermont 05495 Re: Heathcote Associates, Shelburne Road Dear Doug: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Enclosed are the January 9, 1990 Planning Commission meeting minutes. Please meet the stipulations contained in the approval motion before construction. Please call if you have any ques- tions. Sincerely, Joe Weith, City Planner 1 Encl. cc: Mr. Philip Mehler JW/mcp WIEMANN•LAMPHERE A R C H I T E C T S E N G I N E E R S P L A N N E R S I N T E R 1 O R S December 12, 1989 Joe Wieth City Planner City of South Burlington South Burlington, Vermont 05403 Re: South Burlington Factory Nutlet Job No. 8742 Dear Joe: Enclosed are two copies of "as -built" plans of the mall showing all tenant spaces and their square footage. The total gross leasable area is 119,402 s.f. Please note that the city approval allowed for up to 121,000 s.f. of G.L.A. Feel free to contact us if you have questions or need additional information. Sincerely, n t-_,�YVA_ -q Timothy M. Gallup, AlA CC: Phil Mehler COLCHESTER BUSINESS PARK • 30 SOUTH PARK DRIVE • COLCHESTER, VERMONT 05446 • 802-655-5020 • FAX 802-655-6567 66 Brewer parkway South Burlington, VT 05403 January 10, 1990 South Burlington Planning Commission 575 Dorset Street Bouth Burl i ngton, VT 05403 Dear Commission Members: Last evening I attended the meeting In which you addressed the problems of the Grand Onion parking lot. I was amazed that no really creatively different solutions to the situation were advanced. While I have not attended any other discussions concerning the problem, I can think of several simple plans which would might work and be easy to Implement. For example, the parking rows could be parallel to Shelburne Street with more than one right turn into the parking lanes. The departing traffic could be routed either around onto the east side of the building or northbound, but in a one way pattern, on the west side of the buldings through the present fire lane. There could be a couple of east -west walkways for pedestrians (with stop signs for traffic) so that pedestrians could get from the stores to their cars safely. If the parking must remain in east west rows, then the north -south parking row which lines up along Shelburne Street should be eliminated. The north -south drive lane could be moved westward to the western edge of the parking lot. This would eliminate the dangerous practice of people backing their cars directly Into that lane and should not lose any parking spots. All of the cement curbs are a hazard to pedestrians and cars alike and should be removed. To make a few more spaces available there could be an area designated only for compact cars. The west entrance to the mall could be closed altogether with all mall traffic routed to the east (only) entrance. The west door would remain, of course, as a safety exit. That would leave all parking places on the west side for customers of the stores which have no entrances on the east side. Respectfully submitted, Esther Abrams 0 i I h I ONWAY 5�►-� ► I� � �J d N� tA) A y s�� w T rf 1 I 1 Planning File Data for Computer Input 1. Original Property Owner L. Developer's Name 3 Name of Development 7,P. 4 Address of Development or Project --2- 5. Type of Project Minor Subdivision 01) Major Subdivision (MS) Site Plan (SP) 6. Zoning District 1 7. Zoning District 2 S. Zoning Board Approval date if Required q. Date of Planning Commission Hearings/Meetings Site Plan Date or Sketch Plan Date it). Preliminary Plat date 11. Final Plat Date I R'evised Final Plat Date 1 (it' applicable) Nevised Final Plat Date 2 (if applicable) 11 3 1 1 1 9 c--> j 14 Acreage of Total Project ['se of' Land 1 NIVpVt., U,e of Land 2 t;s,(- Of Land 3 <�I' Land 4 ',.umhor of Lots i i m h( r of S i n g I e Fa in i I Y U i i i I I fill ht r of IM11 I t i - t',A m i I v Un i t !.kl<,t ioll Cost nf, Bui (ding E 23. Size of Building (Square footage) 24. Streets City Street CS Private Street PS 25. Date of Acceptance of streets by City _ 26. Bond -Landscaping _ 27. Bond -Streets _ 28. Bond -Sewer 29. Bond -Water 30. Bond -Other 31. Date Mylar Due (90 days after approval) 32. Date Recorded 33. Expiration date of Approval 34. Date of First Building Permit 34. Tax Map Number 36. Map File Location 1 37. Map File Location 2 38. Map File Location 3 Other fees (Type and amount) Preparers Name: Date: IL 6 Ay _ Posted in Computer (Name, Date): 1/9/90 JW MOT ON OF APPROVAL I move the South Burlington Planning Commission approve the revised Final Plat application of Heathcote Associates to change the front parking lot as depicted on a plan entitled "Site and Utilities Plan, Revised: Alternate #3;" prepared by Fitzpatrick, Inc., and dated March, 1989, last revised , with the following stipulations: 1. A signage plan directing outlet and T.J. Maxx customers to the northwest and rear parking lots shall be submitted to the City Planner for approval prior to construction. Signs directing outlet and T.J. Maxx customers to the rear lot shall be installed prior to construction. 2. The revised Final Plat shall be recorded within 90 days or this approval is null and void. Memorandum January 9, 1990 meeting page 3 cont. 5) HEATHCOTE, REVISED PARKING LAYOUT Heathcote Associates is requesting permission to revise the parking layout in front of Grand Union. They would like a layout which provides more access points. Presently, there are two access points to the parking area. The proposed plan would provide 174 spaces while the present layout provides 162 spaces. The applicant claims that the current layout does not allow for adequate circulation (see enclosed letter from Doug Fitzpatrick). Additionally, the unimpeded travel lane in front of the Grand Union encourages drivers to speed, thereby endangering pedestrians. I observed the parking situation on several occasions in early December. In my opinion, the primary problem is that there are not enough spaces in front to serve the entire Mall, including Grand Union. Adding 12 spaces to the front lot will not fix this problem of meeting peak parking periods (i.e., weekends, holidays) Customers must somehow be encouraged to park in the rear. An extensive signage plan was submitted in December, however, this has not yet been implemented. This should be implemented immediately. The applicant should also consider providing more entrances in the rear of the building. This would most likely require significant interior alterations, / however, it should be seriously considered. Based on my observations, the circulation in the front parking lot worked fine, with / the exception of the bottleneck problem at the end of the "chute". This has since been addressed by increasing the turning radius. I will observe the parking lot again this weekend during the typical weekly peak parking demand period. I will provide a recommendation at the meeting. 6) HAL BENSEN, 2-LOT SUBDIVISION AND CARPORTS, EXECUTIVE DRIVE A Sketch Plan was reviewed on 11/7/89 for a 2-lot subdivision of a 3.7 acre parcel. The applicant is now requesting approval for construction of two carports on the 2.28 acre parcel to serve the 16 residential units. The memos for the 11/7/89 meeting are enclosed. The comments below address the proposed carports. COVERAGE: Coverage requirements are met. SETBACKS: Both carports do not meet the 30 foot P.U.D. perimater setback requirement. The carport near Jaycee park is only 8 feet from the property line. The other carport is 25 feet from the proposed new subdivision line. LANDSCAPING: Additional landscaping can be required based on the construction cost of the carports. 7) PUBLIC HEARING: SECTION 18.112, HEIGHT OF STRUCTURES Enclosed are the revised Draft #3 and Draft #4 of the proposed amendment to Section 18.112. Changes were made to Section 18.112 (b) and (g) based on comments made at the last meeting. M E M O R A N D U M To: South Burlington Planning Commission From: Joe Weith, City Planner Re: Factory Outlet Mall Front Parking Lot Date: January 9, 1990 I observed the parking situation at the Factory Outlet Mall on Friday and Saturday, January 5 and 6, 1990. My observations are summarized below: 1. Circulation in parking lot in front of Grand Union is inade- quate due to a number of vehicles parked in the travel. aisles. A clear indication that there are not enough spaces to serve demand. 2. Widened radii at end of "chute" (approved by Planning Com- mission on 12/20/90) has remedied the stacking problem. 3. A number of drivers confused on how to exit due to lack of signage. 4. Large number of unused parking spaces in rear parking lot. 5. During Friday evening peak, 100% of cars going to and from rear parking lot use north access. During Saturday after- noon peak, 80% use north access. Remaining 20% basically parked along south side of building after not being able to find a space in front of Grand Union. Discussion As previously mentioned, the primary problem with the front parking lot is that there are not enough parking spaces in front to serve the mall including Grand Union, Strawberries, Color Title and Arby's. This was reflected in the fact that the front parking lot was full during the peak period on Saturday and vehicles were parking in the travel aisles. Something must be done to encourage mall customers to park in the rear. The primary reason the Planning Commission approved the parking layout as it currently exists was to keep a free flowing circula- tion lane in front of the building in order to encourage custom- ers to park in back. However, observation shows that the clear majority of rear lot parkers are accessing the rear lot from the north. In addition, the signage plan submitted by the applicant would direct "TJ Maxx" customers to the rear around the north side of the building. 1 Memorandum - Planning Factory Outlet Mall Front Parking Lot January 9, 1990 Page 2 Recommendation Since the primary purpose behind the Commission's earlier deci- sion is not being served, I recommend that the revised layout be approved. Additional curb cuts would improve circulation in the front lot and would not adversely impact access to the rear lot. A stipulation should be attached which requires an extensive signage plan to be implemented immediately. In addition, I strongly urge the applicant to seriously consider opening more rear entrances for the mall and perhaps Grand Union. 2 CITY OF SOUl.'II BUlU ,IM;ION Sulxlivision Application - FINN, PLAT 1) Name of Applicant Heathcote Associates 2) Nane of Sulxlivision Factory Outlet 3) Indicate any changes to name, address, or phorie nu1lJx r of owner of record, applicant, contact person, engineer, surveyor,. attorney or plat designer since preliminary plat- application: 4) Indicate any challyes to the sulxliViSion, SLICII as nulllkx:r of lot; or Unit--;, property lines, applicant's legal interest in the prolxxrty, or (love .1c)[A entcll. t-inlet-able, since preliminary plat application: Propose to alter parkin layout in front of Grand Union and increase parking spaces by 12 stalls 5) Suhiidt Lour copies of a final set 01' pl:Ills cu11J1Jti1Ig of a final l.)LAL pl_u.c engineering dr.awin(as and containing all. inforlIVAtion rcc.Iuired Lifider section 20:..1 of the sulAivision regulIltions for a nll.nor Sulxlivision and Under section 204.1(a) for a major sukxlivision. G) Submit- two draft copies of: all legal dOCLJrllenLS reyuif0d under section 202.1 (11) and (12) of the subdivision fc)r a 111illol: SUIxllVision and under section 204.1(h) for a Ilk.IJ01- s1.11KI.I.ViSiOn. 1410-6 M, _ 11 December 1989 Da Le CITY OF -SOU11i BURLINGIUN Subdivision Application - FINAL PLAT 1) Name of Applicant 2) Name of Subdivision 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: 4) Indicate any changes to the subdivision, such as number of 7n*- its, property lines, applicant's legal 4 mental timetable, since preliminary plat' ((++ V1 S) Submit five oopies of a final set of; � ��, � Vl,di tus engineering.drawings and containing on 202.1 of the subdivision regulations', ��a I�t --ction 204.1 a for a major subdivision. 6) Submit t5o 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. (Signature) a contact person Da to