Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBATCH - Supplemental - 0792 Shelburne Roadm m— SITE INFORMATION: LOT SIZE- 72,300 S.F. BUILDING COVERAGE: 6400 S.F. LOT COVERAGE (DRIVES, PARKING * WALKS): 311381 S.F. TOTAL COVERAGE: 37/781ED S.F. % COVERAGE: 51 TOPOGRAPHY SURVEY HAS COMPLETED ON JANUARY 28, 2005 BY WILLIAM A. ROSENSTEIN A PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR. 17 242.-72' KOTO RESTAURANT (EXISTING 5LDQ) NEW 504 S.F. ADDITION — PIZZA HUT BURLINGTON PH LTD. PARTNERSHIP 764 SHELBURNE ROAD LANDSCAPING A F BIKE RACK Lu Lu (L CL W z IL (L (n I- L-----i 0 0 QD 0 q) 150.00, q2.72' 0 DEV. INC. J. KAUFMAN 28q PG. 161 RAMP r EXISTING PARKING SHADYMASTER HONEYLOCUST TREES Do NOT ENTER SNOW STORAGE SIGN AREA ------7 WOOD RAMP FOR PEDESTRAIN5 5'-0"Wx36'-0o:t L T PURPOSED 50 PARKIN SFRACEC?.,(49,374? Sf-) EXISTING DUMPSTER AREA A ONE —HAY 9 * M HANDY SIZE. 250'XI40' NEW CEDAR 55,000 S.F. (O.bO AC) WEDGE EXISTING (p FT. HIGH CHAIN LINK FENCE LR. JEWETT F. HANNON EXISTING STORAGE S14ED (12'XB') EXISTING 6 FT. HIGH WOODEN FENCE R. RUEL n z z z HiNt'),11 PROPOSED SITE PLAN I=1 SITE INFORMATION: LOT SIZE: 72,300 S.F. BUILDING COVERAGE: 6400 S.F. LOT COVERAGE (DRIVES, PARKING t NALKS): 31,351 S.F. TOTAL COVERAGE: 37, 7B1ED S.F. COVERAGE: 51 TOPOGRAPHY SURVEY WAS COMPLETED ON JANUARY 25, 2005 BY WII-LIAM A. ROBENSTEIN A PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR. 242.72' mod► 17 PARKING KOTO RESTAURANT (EXISTING BLDG) NEW 504 S.F. ADDITION — PIZZA HUT BURLINGTON PH LTD. PARTNERSHIP 764 SHELBURNE ROAD LANDSCAPING BIKE RACK (6) [ET SHADYMA5TER HONEYLOCUST TREES 0EPEE= NE oP, 1 RAMP* W �) ( (L 4 I Z Z WOOD RAMP FOR PEDE5TRAINS � L Q OL Q (L w (f) h 150.00° g2.72' 0 DEV. INC. J. KAUFMAN 28q PG. 161 20'-011 R.O.W. DO NOT ENTER SNOW STORAGE SIGN AREA —� NG PURPOSED 30 PARKING ONE-WAY SP,ACE�, ..,Q9, 3N S f) LO ` TR�FFl�c EXISTING DUMP5TER AREA R, JEWETT EXISTING STORAGE SHED (12'X8') AW, F. HANNON S $ M HANDY SIZE: 250'X140' _ 55,000 S.F. (0.80 AC) EXISTING 6 FT. HIGH CHAIN LINK FENCE C. MURRAY o Qti. y NEW CEDAR HEDGE EXISTING 6 FT. HIGH WOODEN FENCE sn R. RUEL Q �' � o dw w I— U) Ww13 O" o�E lz710i ORNM sr. soc CHECKED sn sas MaEcr osrD SHM TR1E PROPOSED SITE PLAN op'W" Ra Sp-1 w SITE INFORMATION: LOT SIZE: 721300 S.F. BUILDING COVERAGE: 6400 S.F. LOT COVERAGE (DRIVES, PARKING t WALKS): 31,38I S.F TOTAL COVERAGE: 37/781ED S.F. % COVERAGE: 51 TOPOGRAPHY SURVEY WAS COMPLETED ON JANUARY 25, 2005 BY WILLIAM A. ROSENSTEIN A PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR. 242.72' R 17 PARKING SPAC KOTO RESTAURANT (EXISTING BLDG) NEW 504 S.F. ADDITION — PIZZA HUT BURLINGTON PH LTD. PARTNERSHIP 764 SHELBURNE ROAD LANDSCAPING — BIKE RACK U V 4 IZ AD 4 (L Ln - _Z z -3L Y fy OL (L (f) Ih 4D 0 D 150.00, 92.72' O DEV. INC. 289 PG. 161 J. KAUFMAN 20' -0" R.O.W. - (6) E SHADYMASTER HONEYLOCUST TREES DO NOT ENTER SNOW STORAGE SIGN AREA EXIST NG d, 6'tA KI G 1 .' RAMP WOOD RAMP FOR PEDESTRAINS 5'-0"Wx3W-0"t L PURPOSED 30 PARKII's EXISTING DUMPSTER AREA R. JEWETT EXISTING STORAGE SHED (12'X8') RZ PL F. HANNON ONE-WAY S t M HANDY SIZE: 250'X140' - NEW CEDAR 55,000 S.F. (0.80 AC) HEDGE EXISTING 6 FT. HIGH CHAIN LINK FENCE C. MURRAY EXISTING 6 FT. HIGH WOODEN FENCE R. RUEL Q z o ME 0" 0 Y CHECKED BY: SCO waaacr_ "1 SHEET ME PROPOSED SITE PLAN Lftlmlim CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 (802) 846-4106 FAX (802) 846-4101 December 17, 2007 Steve Guild 110 Main Street Suite 102 Burlington, VT 05401 Re: Site Plan Application #SP-07-103 792 Shelburne Road Dear Mr. Guild: Enclosed, please find a copy of the Findings of Fact and Decision of the above referenced project approved by the South Burlington Administrative Officer on December 17, 2007. Please note the conditions of approval including that a zoning permit be obtained within six (6) months. Should you have any questions, please contact our office Sincerely, Betsy cDonough Brown Planning & Zoning Assistant Encl. Permit Number SP- Q - CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON APPLICATION FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW All information requested on this application must be completed in full. Failure to provide the requested information either on this application form or on the site plan will result in your application being rejected and a delay in the review before the Development Review Board. 1) OWNER OF RECORD (Name as shown on deed, mailing address, phone and fax M ; ) .11-F- CA U-, A AA '1 S � _ ( . 1) 2) LOCATION OF LAST RECORDED DEED (Book and page #) 3) APPLICANT (Name, mailing address, phone and fax #)��� �, �j C„c� 0 �jn , 1-1q � S�e.� �JC nQ, Qrc , 4) CONTACT PERSON (person who will receive all correspondence from Staff. Include name, address, phone.& fax ft � / -r ,�, 5) PROJECT STREET ADDRESS: 6) TAX PARCEL ID # (can be obtained at Assessor's Office) 7) PROJECT DESCRIPTION a) Existing Uses on Property (including description and size of each separate use) ktka `' ,'6% (4 b) Propose ses on property (include description and size of each new use and existing uses to remain) �Z,I x V t,--6o-0 -S4+r,0 0 T2�6IL 6f (�—Cg;-01 4,.i Z-Ay fT i c) Total building square footage on property (proposed buildings and existing buildings to remain) d) Height of building & number of floors (proposed buildings and existing buildings to remain, specify if basement and mezzanine) e) Number of residential units (if applicable, new units and existing units to remain) 1 f) Number of employees & Mee pany employees): I tI) CW p (existing and proposed, note office versus non -office g) Other (list any other information pertinent to this application not specifically requested above, please note if Overlay Districts are applicable): 8) LOT COVERAGE Total Parcel Size: 7 00 Sq. Ft. a) Building: Existing_ % / (,o sq. Proposed , 1Z" % / c sq. ft. �---• C,' !b b) Overall impervious coverage (build in , parking, outside storage, etc) Existing D % /3 sq. ft. Proposed% / sq. ft. C_ - no Q c) Front yard (along each street) Existing % / sq. ft. Proposed — % — sq. ft. i�C> Chi d) Total area to be disturbed during construction (sq. ft.) 0, (Q * Projects disturbing more than one-half acre of land must follow the City's specifications for erosion control in Article 16 of the Land Development Regulations. Projects disturbing more than one acre require a permit from the Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation. 9) COST ESTIMATES a) Building (including interior renovations): b) Landscaping: $ `sT,Q , 00 c) Other site improvements (please list with cost): 10) ESTIMATED TRAFFIC a) Average daily traffic for entire property (in and out): b) A.M. Peak hour for entire property (in and out): c) P.M. Peak hour for entire property (In and out): e2o-` $ 10 rn 11) PEAK HOURS OF OPERATION:S :_Jd 2 12) PEAK DAYS OF OPERATION: 2D .nn 13) ESTIMATED PROJECT COMPLETION DATE: �-G, I C) 14) ABUTTERS (please list all abutting landowner. Include mailing address. Also include those across a street or right-of-way. You may use a separate sheet if necessary) 15) SITE PLAN AND FEE A site plan shall be submitted which shows the information listed on Exhibit A attached. Five (5) regular size copies and one reduced copy (I I" x 17") of the site plan must be submitted. A site plan application fee shall be paid to the City at the time of submitting the site plan application (see Exhibit A). I hereby certify that all the information requested as part of this accurate to the best of my knowledge. ATURE�SF'APPLICANT SIGNATURE OF PROPERTY65WNER Do not write below this line been submitted and is DATE OF SUBMISSION: D REVIEW AUTHORITY: ❑ Development Review Board Administrative Officer I have revie ed this site plan application and find it to be: Complete / ❑ In7lete 17 (/(� C-,j of Planning & Zoning or Designee 4 I u n SITE INFORMATION: LOT SIZE: 72,300 S.F. BUILDING COVERAGE: 6400 S.F. LOT COVERAGE (DRIVES, PARKING 4 WALKS): 310351 S.F. TOTAL COVERAGE: 371781ED S.F. % COVERAGE: 51 TOPOGRAPHY SURVEY WAS COMPLETED ON JANUARY 28, 2005 BY WILLIAM A. ROBENSTEIN A PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR. 242.72' 17 PARKING SPAC KOTO RESTAURANT (EXISTING BLDG) NEW 504 S.F. ADDITION — PIZZA HUT BURLINGTON PH LTD. PARTNERSHIP 764 SHELBURNE ROAD LANDSCAPING OF BIKE RACK W O 1 I V W V - -- q q ----- ((L Z +�K Z Y � Y tY q (n r. 150.00' g2.72'q4 O DEV. INC. J. IGAUFMAN 2801 PG. 161 ON RAMP rl )'-0" .O.W. EXISTING PARKING (61) IEF7 SHADYMASTER HONEYLOCUST TREES DO NOT ENTER SNOW STORAGE SIGN AREA WOOD RAMP FOR PEDESTRAINS 5'-0"Wx36'-0°t L R. JEWETT EXISTING STORAGE SHED (12'XB') PURPOSED 30 PARKIN n 1 ME —WAY T� �w � 7 ip"/ !PIP" S t M HANDY SIZE: 250'X140' - NEW CEDAR 35,000 S.F. (0.80 AC) HEDGE 4i WOODENEXISTING 6 FT. HIGH EXISTING (p FT. HIGH CHAIN LINK FENCE F .- • PROPOSED SITE PLAN SP'� { a C=] SITE INFORMATION: LOT SIZE: 72,300 S.F. BUILDING COVERAGE: 51745 S.F. LOT COVERAGE (DRIVES, PARKING 4 WALKS): 31.361 S.F. TOTAL COVERAGE: 371126 S.F. % COVERAGE: 51: PIZZA HUT BURLINGTON PH LTD. PARTNERSHIP 764 544ELBURNE ROAD ak 242.72' 1 PERKTGSP, 4- 16 PARKING SPACES KOTO RESTAURANT (EXISTING BLDG) NEW 504 S.F. ADDITION — LANDSCAPING BIKE RACK O t CY UJ Lu U a (L z z— Y Y � a 4 <[ m r 0 EXISTING PARKING (2) NEW DECIDUOUS TREES NEW DECIDUOUS DO NOT ENTER TREES SIGN JNA / NEW DECIDUOUS TREES e'er\ \ \ C7 WOOD RAMP FOR PEDESTRAINS 5'-0"Wx36'-0"t L 111111#1//U. PURPOSED 30 ONE-WAY TRAFFIC PARKING SPACES FLOW (10,370 S.F.) 6?NOW Xq �\570R GE I 1g2't S t M HANDY SIZE: 250'X140' 35,000 S.F. (0.80 AC) EXTERIOR LIGHT FIXTURE o melee® 150.00' w7m g2.72' REXBO DEV. INC. J. KAUFMAN R. JEWETT F. HANNON VOL. 28q PG. 161 EXTERIOR LIGHT FIXTURE NEW CEDAR HEDGE (2) NEW DECIDUOUS TREES ---J Cd l M1 a z O 4 1- N +a z z >a z �O Qw Z wW 0(,4 0 Y PROPOSED SITE PLAN amom Ma SP-2 .- 4 - L-16 ' fG SITE INFORMATION: LOT SIZE: 72, 500 S.F. BUILDING COVERAGE: 51745 S.F. LOT COVERAGE (DRIVES, PARKING 4 WALKS): 511351 S.F. TOTAL COVERAGE: 37,126 S. F. COVERAGE: 51X 16 Fm PIZZA NUT BURLINGTON PH LTD. PARTNERSHIP 764 SHELBURNE ROAD 242.72' 4— KOTO RESTAURANT (EXISTING BLDG) NEW 504 S.F. ADDITION — LANDSCAPING BIKE RACK O 1�CV W Lu V V 4 4 0. OL Z v Y OL Q m r- �� EXISTING PARKING F7, (2) NEW DECIDUOUS TREES DO NEW DECIDUOUS /- SIGN NOT ENTER TREES -, ® WOOD RAMP FOR PEDESTRAI Ns 51-01IM56'-01't L D OD gm �4D 150.00, 012.72' tD as - REXHO DEV. INC. J. KAUFMAN R. JEWETT VOL. 25q PG. 161 / / / /// / /Lljvs I PURPOSED 30 ONE-WAY TRAFFIC PARKING SPACES FLOW (10,370 S.F.) Ig2'f 5 E M HANDY sizE: 250'X14o' 55,000 S.F. (0,W AC) EXTERIOR LIGHT FIXTURE EXTERIOR LIGHT FIXTURE NEW CEDAR HEDGE (2) NEW DECIDUOUS TREES A 4 F- z z A 5 t s Z _w QW Hix C/)::) m WW 0 r- 0 v PROPOSED SITE PLAN SP'21 I w SITE INFORMATION: LOT SIZE: 72,300 S.F. BUILDING COVERAGE: 5,745 S.F. LOT COVERAGE (DRIVES, PARKING d WALKS): 31,1351 S.F. TOTAL COVERAGE: 371126 S.F. % COVERAGE: 51. 16 PIZZA NUT BURLINGTON PH LTD. PARTNERSHIP 764 S4ELBURNE ROAD 242.72' 4- KOTO RESTAURANT (EXISTING BLDG) NEW 504 S.F. ADDITION — LANDSCAPING BIKE RACK O ry w w U U 4 Q a � Z � z Y Q a do L a t- �� EXISTING PARKING (2) NEW DECIDUOUS TREES /- NEW DECIDUOUS DO / SIGN NOT ENTER TREES -1 RAMP O► NEW DECIDUOUS TREES WOOD RAMP FOR PEDESTRAINS 5'-0"Wx36'-0"t L 04) sw 150.00, g2.72' ww BO DEV. INC. J. KAUFMAN R. JEWETT . 28q PG. 161 PURPOSED 30 ONE-WAY TRAFFIC PARKING SPACES FLOW (10,370 S.F.) y 1g2't S # M HANDY SIZE: 250'X140' m 35,000 S.F. (0.50 AC) EXTERIOR LIGHT FIXTURE F. HANNON C. EXTERIOR LIGHT FIXTURE NEW CEDAR HEDGE (2) NEW DECIDUOUS TREES d 61W 0 N z z Q 5.1 PROPOSED SITE PLAN CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 (802) 846-4106 FAX (802) 846-4101 January 18, 2007 Steve Guild 7 Ambrose Place Burlington, VT 05401 Re: Site Plan Application #SP-07-05 Koto Dear Mr. Guild: Enclosed, please find a copy of the Findings of Fact and Decision of the above referenced project approved by the Administrative Officer on January 18, 2007. Please note the conditions of approval including that you obtain a zoning permit within six (6) months. If you have any questions, please contact me. Sincerely, J' Betsy McDonough Planning & Zoning Assistant Encl. c� Permit Number SP-�- CITY OF SOUTH BUFLINGTON APPLICATION FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW All information requested on this application must be completed in full. Failure to provide the requested information either on this application form or on the site plan will result in your application being rejected and a delay in the review before the Development Review Board. 1) OWNER OF RECORD (Name as �wn on deed, mailing address, phone and fax #)___ A/ 1 a _ Jn� .- w I n. y 2) LOCATION OF LAST RECORDED r n� 3) APPLICANT arj�, mailing address (/(,CZ--r)r �. g 4) CONTACT PERSON (person who will receive all correspondence from Staff. Include name, address, 5) PROJECT STREET ADDRESS: 6) TAX PARCEL ID # (can be obtained at Assessor's Office) 7) PROJECT DESCRIPTION a) Existing Uses on Property -(including description and size of each separate use b) Proposed�Uses on property jinclude descriptioy, and size of each new use and existing uses to e c) Total buiNd square footage on property (proposed buildings and existing buildings to remain) d) Height of building & number of floors posed buildings and existing buildings to remain, specify if basement and mezzanine) c) Number of residential units (if applicable, new units and existing units to remain)__— c� 1 f) Number of employees &`ccoompany vehicles(ex-ting Vd proposed, note ffice versus non -office employees): g) Other (list any other information pertinent to this application not specifically requested above, please note if Overlay Districts are applicable): 8) LOT COVERAGE Total Parcel Size: OZ C?'9Sq. Ft. a) Building: Existing % / ; Si sq. ft. Propose d% / I gl' _sq. ft. b) Overall impervious coverage (building, park' g, outside storage, etc) Existing % / sq. ft. Proposed_% / sq. ft. c) Front yard (along each street) Existing_% / _ sq. ft. Proposed % •--__sq. ft. d) Total area to be disturbed during construction (sq. ft.) - * Projects disturbing more than one-half acre of land must follow the City's specifications for erosion control in Article 16 of the Land Development Regulations. Projects disturbing more than one acre require a permit from the Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation. 9) COST ESTIMATES a) Building (including interior renovations): $ b) Landscaping: $ 1,t`ao c) Other site improvements (please list with cost): 10) ESTIMATED TRAFFIC a) Average daily traffic for entire property (in and out): 0. CiO /AJ b) A.M. Peak hour for entire property (in and out): c) P.M. Peak hour for entire property (In and out): l l) PEAK HOURS OF OPERATION: 2 12) PEAK DAYS OF OPERATION: 13) ESTIMATED PROJECT COMPLETION DATE:_- AID 14) ABUTTERS (please list all abutting landowner. Include mailing address. Also include those across a street or right-of-way. You may use a separate sheet if necessary) 15) SITE PLAN AND FEE A site plan shall be submitted which shows the information listed on Exhibit A attached. Five (5) regular size copies and one reduced copy (I I" x 17") of the site plan must be submitted. A site plan application fee shall be paid to the City at the time of submitting the site plan application (see Exhibit A). 3 Ll C I hereby certify that all the information requested as part of this application has been submitted and is accurate to the best of my knowledge. SIGNATURE OF�AVPLICANT &&mkb,OVY401 SIGNATURE OF PROPERTY OWNER Do not write below this line DATE OF SUBMISSION: b REVIEW AUTHORITY: ❑ Development Review Board I have reviewed this site plan application and find it to be: L9'Complete ❑ Incomplete ZAdministrative Officer lanning & Zoning or Designee 4 lP A -05 11 , ) 06- VT Need Help With A Web Site Technical Issue, Contact The Webmaster At: webmiaster see.state.vt.us To Contact This Page's Content Editor Contact Melanie At: mhod a sec.state.vus $QS Home I Sale of Vermont Home I VT .aw I Matasez n a t I Hg1R I Printing Web Pages I Site Search I Site Matt Feedback I Disclaimer APPLICATION FOR LEGISLATIVE PAGE - 2007 This Site Is Best Viewed In Internet Explorer 4.0 or Above or Netscape 4.73 or Above Tap ._ Th_is- ._Rag e.... 1: 32: 26 P.M. Tuesday, 10/24/2006 ' Agencies & Depts. • Access Government 24j7 r Vermont.gov Privacy Policy ��r� . , A Vermont Government Website Copyright © 2004 State Of Vermont - All rights reserved Permit Number SP- 6 � - /0 CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON APPLICATION FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW All information requested on this application must be completed in full. Failure to provide the requested information either on this application form or on the site plan will result in your application being rejected and a delay in the review before the Development Review Board. 1) Q)kNER OF RECORD on deed, mailing address, phone and fax #) T 2) LOCATION OF LAST RECORDED DEED (Book and page # 3) APPLICAaNT (Nam , mailing address, phone and fax #) L li\rj exn 0 141'. 4) CONTACT PERSON (person who will receive all correspondence from Staff. Include name, address, 5) PROJECT STREET ADDRESS: 'I (a fin \ny [ nt ?—a , 6) TAX PARCEL ID # (can be obtained at Assessor's Office) 7) PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1pt�11 a) Existing Uses on Property (including description and size of each separate use)Tcty tY� b) Proposed Uses on property (include descriptip and size of each new use and existing uses to c) Total building square footage on property (proposed buildings and existing buildings to remain) d) Height of building & number of floors (proposed buildings and existing buildings to remain, specify if basement and mezzanine) e) Number of residential units (if applicable, new units and existing units to remain) •-- f) Number of employees & company employees): ID _.M olb�Ue (existing and proposed, note office versus non -office g) Other (list any other information pertinent to this application not specifically requested above, please note if Overlay Districts are applicable): 8) LOT COVERAGE Total Parcel Size: -1 a, `bOO Sq. Ft. a) Building: ExistingI. % / S - sq. ft. ` Proposed / / _ % / I Z lc-)_sq. ft. b) Overall impervious coverage (building, parking, outside storage, etc) Existing % / -I kg-U sq. ft. Proposed L %/ (g5 sq. ft. c) Front yard (along each street) Existing_% / sq. ft. Proposed % — sq. ft. d) Total area to be disturbed during construction (sq. ft.) 3 `1 S * Projects disturbing more than one-half acre of land must follow the City's specifications for erosion control in Article 16 of the Land Development Regulations. Projects disturbing more than one acre require a permit from the Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation. 9) COST ESTIMATES a) Building (including interior renovations): $ _?p , op 0 b) Landscaping: $ S O O c) Other site improvements (please list with cost): 10) ESTIMATED TRAFFIC a) Average daily traffic for entire property (in and out): 4c) (,-on i n k Ab 00+ 1 b) A.M. Peak hour for entire property (in and out): c) P.M. Peak hour for entire property (In and out): 3p pre — 11) PEAK HOURS OF OPERATION: 2 12) PEAK DAYS OF OPERATION: A A ,3A--N4- * 7�"r 13) ESTIMATED PROJECT COMPLETION DATE: OL 01-0 14) ABUTTERS (please list all abutting landowner. Include mailing address. Also include those across a street or right-of-way. You may use a separate sheet if necessary) 15) SITE PLAN AND FEE A site plan shall be submitted which shows the information listed on Exhibit A attached. Five (5) regular size copies and one reduced copy (I 1" x 17") of the site plan must be submitted. A site plan application fee shall be paid to the City at the time of submitting the site plan application (see Exhibit A). 3 I hereby certify that all the information requested as part of this application has been submitted and is accurate to the best of my knowledge. S GNATU F APPLICANT SIGNATURE OF PROPERTY OWNER Do not write below this line DATE OF SUBMISSION: LV� U� REVIEW AUTHORITY: ❑ Development Review Board /Administrative Officer I have reviewed this site plan application and find it to be: 2/complete ❑ Incom to Planning & Zoning or Designee 4 CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 (802) 846-4106 FAX (802) 846-4101 February 24, 2006 Steve Guild 7 Ambrose Place Burlington, VT 05401 Re: Koto Restaurant Dear Mr. Guild: Enclosed, please find a copy of the Findings of Fact and Decision of the above referenced project approved by the Administrative Officer on February 23, 2006. Please note the conditions of approval including that you obtain a zoning permit within six (6) months. If you have any questions, please contact me. Sincerely, Betsy on ugh Planning & Zoning Assistant Encl. Ll a 0 o' O to SITE INFORMATION: LOT SIZE: 72,300 S.F. 15UILDING COVERAGE: 51745 S.F. LOT COVERAGE (DRIVES, PARKING It WALKS;: 31,381 S.F. TOTAL QOVERAGE: 37,126 S.F. % COVERAGE: 51. TOPOGRAPHY SURVEY WAS COMPLETED ON JANUARY 25, 2005 BY WILLIAM A. ROBENSTF-IN A PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR. 16 242.72' KOTO RESTAURANT (EXISTING BLDG) NEW 504 S.F. ADDITION — PIZZA HUT BURLINGTON PH LTD. PARTNERSHIP 764 SHELBURNE ROAD rl YELLOW STRIPS BIKE RACK w O � 1 V w �} Q (L In Q N Z k5 Z_ Q� Y a O � h +�Ash 150.00, 0 DEV. INC. J. KAUFMAN 289 PG. 161 RAMP 7 EXISTING PARKING, (6) NEW I I I I I I I I I I I I I I V SHADYMASTER HONEYLOCUST TREES PURPOSED )'-0" .O.W. DO NOT ENTER SNOW STORAGE SIGN A I I I ARE b EXISTING. RAI KIIiG I A I I I � I \ -�1 ONE-WAY A 4 z z A \�fi1 MAN �WWD RAMP FORIP - - oll S 4 M HANDY 7EXTE - .- �'►�'J • • - aJ j EXTERIOR FIXTURE EXISTING !> CHAIN I -INK FENCE. • •EN FENCE F WA • . -- - - U a PROPOSED SITE PLAN I u -o� O O LID SITE INFORMATION: LOT SIZE: 72,500 S.F. BUILDING COVERAGE: 51745 S.F. LOT COVERAGE (DRIVES, PARKING * WALKS): 510581 S.F. TOTAL COVERAGE: 37,126 S.F. COVERAGE: 51: TOPOGRAPHY SURVEY WAS COMPLETED ON JANUARY 25, 2005 BY WILLIAM A. ROBENSTEIN A PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR. 16 242.72' KOTO RESTAURANT (EXISTING BLDG) NEW 504 S.F. ADDITION — PIZZA HUT BURLINGTON PH LTD. PARTNERSHIP 764 SHELBURNE ROAD BIKE RACK O _1 N N tN tu V V a Q U) i —1 z l•1 z- a 4 IL k4in (L t-- 150.00, g2.72' O DEV. INC. J. KAUFMAN 289 PG. 161 )'-O• .O.W. EXISTING PARKING (6) E S14ADYMASTER I-IONEYLOCUST TREES DO NOT ENTER SNOW STORAGE SIGN AREA —� EXTERIOR LIGW FIXTURE Ell R. JEWETT •%1 I �+ oy r r , - .- LIGHTll��a • • - a J 7�i ... • : • EXISTING 6 FT. HIGH rEXISTING 6 FT. HIGH CHAIN LINK FENCE I WOODEN FENCE C. MURRAY I R. RUEL ml A 37 A z z D A 51. PROPOSED SITE PLAN Impact Fee Calculation for New Non -Residential Construction i� t�l % , A Project Name ,' B Effective Date C Type of use D Type of construction E Value of construction per square foot from Appendix 1 F Total square feet of new construction D G Total value of new construction E x F H Above in units of$1,000 p c{� �� G / 1000 I Existing land value 4 IU1114 Grand list J Above in units of $1,000 —��".— I / 1000 K Total value of site and improvements after construction t G + I L Above in units of $1,000 7' K / 1000 ROAD IMPACT FEE M Base road impact fee per VTE N Estimated PM peak hour VTEs O Base road impact fee P Credit per $1,000 (Table RD-5) for past payments Q Credit for past payments R Credit per $1,000 (Table RD-6) for future payments S Credit for future payments T Total road impact fee FIRE PROTECTION FEE Estimated post construction value of structure and contents U in units of $1,000 V Base fire protection impact fee Credit per $1,000 of land value Q) for past tax payments W (Table FP-4) X Total credit applicable to project for past tax payments Post -construction value of structure and land excluding Y contents Z Above in units of$1,00 Credit per $1,000 of post -construction value for future tax AA pmts (Table FP-5) AB Total credit applicable to project for future tax payments AC Total fire protection impact fee TOTAL ROAD AND FIRE IMPACT FEE $144.56 MxN i� J x P 41 LxR O,'O-Q-S H x 1.875 $0.87 x U From FP-4 WxJ G + I 0 Y / 1,000 From FP-4 AAxZ V-X-AB Calculation sheets.xls 'ter' TRUDELL CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC. Febniary 1, 2005 Steve Guild Steve Guild Design, LLC 8 Ambrose Place Burlington, VT 05401 RE: Koto Restaurant Planting Dear Steve: tel: 802-879-6331 fax: 802-879-0060 www.trudeliconsulting.com As you requested, I have reviewed the proposed plant material as shown on SPl, Proposed Site Plan, prepared by you, and approve the 6 Honeylocusts and 65 Seagreen Junipers. They are both hardy within this zone, adaptable to the soil at the site, and salt tolerant Attached is a cost estimate of the installed plant material, and cut sheets describing each of the plants. Very truly yob TRUDELL CONSULTING ENGINEERS Landscape Architect Encl. P.O. Box 308 478 Blair Park Road Williston, Vermont 05495 Civil Engineering, surveying, Land Planning, Water and Wastewater, Landscape Architecture. Roadway Design, Permitting PLANT LIST Koto Restaurant Route 7, So. Burlington, VT Prepared by Trudell Consulting Engineers Karen Pettersen, Landscape Architect 211105 SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME QUAN. SIZE PRICE/PLANT" TOTAI Gleditsia triacanthos Shademaster Honeylocust inermis 'Shademaster' Juniperus chinensis Sea Green Juniper 'Sea Green' 6 21 /2"-3" $512.50 $3, 075.00 65 30"-36" $70.00 $4, 550.00 TOTAL $7,625.00 * The price per plant includes the cost of the plant, the installation, and a 1 year quarantee. T 2 HOUSING STYLE/ SIZE EXEC RT21 EXEC RT25 3 LAMP WATTAGE Executive �t;. ies RT21 /RT25/RT32 TOOLESS ACCESS Fully accessible by a front tooless push button —an Executive trademark. PRIMARY ELECTRICAL DISCONNECT All power is terminated as soon as the door opens. Fully serviceable without needing to shut down power to the entire circuit. No exposed live connections ON THE DOOR SERVICEABLITY Both the reflector and ballast tray assemblies mount directly to the extruded doorframe. Remove the entire door or each assembly without tools to service. Reflector hinges on door for easy re-lamping. Service with ease on the ground, in a truck or wherever most convenient. FULLY SEALED OPTICS All optical systems are fully sealed from exterior contaminants. To ensure great peformance year round. OPTIONAL ANODIZED FINISHES A finish that cannot peel, flake or fade, and is resistant to corrosive environments or harsh climate. 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 REFLECTOR VOLTAGE BALLAST MOUNTING LAMP SHIELD GENERAL wr OPIION OPTIONS OPTIONS 70HPS (ED23.5) 200PMH (aIu ED28) 70MH (ED17) 2H IOOHPS (ED235) 35OPMH (pd.ED281 100MH(EDi7) 3H 1 50HPS (ED23 5) 40OPMH (pd.ED281 150MH" (Em1 SH 250HPS (Ei81 175MH (ED28) 400HPS(E181 250MH(ED28) 2S 40OMH (ED281 3S 4L 150HPS (ED235) 20OPMH (pd.ED28) 40OMH IEDAT37) 4W 250HPS (E18) 350PMH (Ou ED281 175MH (®28) 5S 400HPS (E i 81 40OPMH Ip,1. ED281 250MH (ED281 EXEC RT32 750HPS(ED37) 75OPMH(pd.Br37) 1000HPS(ED25.9,ED376ydo) IOOOMH(BT56eg.,BT374raoI 2H Type -II Hydroformed 10 -{] 32111 3H Type -III Hydroformed LJ 0 5H Type-V Hydroformed 28 F--0 39 25 Type -II Segmented 3S Type -III Segmented 29 % 49 LJ t1J 4L Type -IV Long Fabricated L❑I 4W - Type -IV Wide Segmented 55 - Type-V Segmented • • • • N No Lamp (standard) LP'- Include Lamp BK Black BZ Dark Bronze WH - White AL - Natural Aluminum EXEC-RT21 EPA:1.6 WT:36lbs. Dimensions: a = 16" b = 21" c = 6.75" Arm: 2" x 4" x 8" C T F R fJ F R 120 C 208 240 277 347 480 SG - Stone Guard HS'- House Side Shield N - Not Applicable 10 M• SG WM° ? 28 LP' HS2 VF 29 HF n'- 32N _ 39 PRL L_ 49 PRP —'- 4y, FL - N ti: "150MH uses M102 lamp"Fixture standard WM'- Wall Mount VF Vertical Slip Fitter (2.38" O.0 HF Horizontal Slip Fitter (2.38" O.0 PRL Photocell Receptacle Luminaire PRP Photocell Receptacle Pole Cap FL Fuse Luminaire N Not Applicable LBZ Light Bronze Anodized ABK Black Anodized MBZ Medium Bronze Anodized AAL Natural Aluminum.- - - - DBZ Dark Bronze Anodized NS - Non-standard (provide color chip) EXEC-RT25 EXEC-RT32 EPA:2.2 WT:64lbs. EPA:3.5 WT:105lbs. Dimensions: a = 20 " b = 25" c = 8.75" Dimensions: a = 26 " b = 32.5" c = 10.75" Arm: 2" x 4" x 8" Arm: 2" x 5.75" x 8 NOTES: 1. '32' three at 120 available with round pole only or with pole top fitter. 2. Combination '5H' and 'HS' not available. 3. Select IF only if a lamp is to be included with the fixture. c 4. 'WM' not available with RT32. - L - I SM SITE PLAN FOR oleo* LOCATIONS LOCATIONS P49 avc WhWAIRE PJ OR P4, REFER TO .SITE PLAN LIGHT GESCRIPRON himNTINC HQGHT A P3 LS! CLASSIC — CL2 ;m# FORWARD THROW 400 W SUPER METAL HALIOE MODEL CL2 FT 400S" FMT PHOTOELEC TR(C CONTROL P4 LS1 CIVADON M ms FORWARD THROW 400 by SUPER METAL HALIDE MODEL C TM FT 400SdNR FMT PHOTOELEC TRIC CONTROL t `SURFACE CYL1NDLRS,,,,,,,,-,, t ' 'k: • Extruded aluminum housing with aluminum mounting arms and pendents. Galvanized steel box adapters for form support. Mounting styles include wall, 24" pendent and ceiling. Wall mounts have up/down series available. • Fixtures are available with open bottom, Clear alzak reflector or Blao baffle for PAR or R lamps. "A" lamp reflectors are available as on option. Top glass lens assembly for up/down units available as opt • Units produce a Type V distribution determined by the lamp (by o • Standard finishes are dark bronze, black, white and platinum. • All units are damp location listed. ae2SIPW Qpen dear Alzak Black Baffle B43-61VI B43-6CM B46-6M Incandescent 150W/R40 Wall -Down Broo — BF43-6CM — Fluorescent 13W/DTT Wall -Down Bror B44-61VI B44-6CM B48-61VI Incandescent 150W/R40 Wall-Up/Down Bra; C142-61VI C142-6CM C144-6M Incandescent 150W/R40 Ceiling Brcx — CF1426-6CM — Fluorescent 13W/DTT Ceiling Bros C145-61VI C145-6CM C147-61VI Incandescent 150W/R40 Pendant Broo — CF145-6CM — Fluorescent 13W/DTT Pendant Bros 8" Cylinders en Clear Alzak Black Baffle 843-8M B43-8CM B46-8M Incandescent 300W/R40 Wall -Down Bra B44-8M B44-8CM B48-8M Incandescent 300W/R40 Wall-Up/Down Bran C1428M C1428CM C1448M Incandescent 300W/R40 Ceiling Bra C1458M C1458CM C1478M Incandescent 300W/R4O Pendant Bra Note Units UL listed for damp locations. Standard pendants are 24 inches with 30` off vertical swivel. (B and C units). Note For optional finishes with extended lead times, change M to GW-white, KE-black, S-platinum. Options - Add Suffix 413 "A" Lamp Reflector - downlight 414 "A" Lamp Reflectors - up/downlight 426 Six inch Lens Assembly for top protection on up/down units (specify color)' 463 Eight inch Lens Assembly for top protection on up/down units (specify color)z 6" a 8" E �G T' C D F — — --B— —B— `� e a [ D E F 7 5/8" 6" 12" 9" 18" 24" 194 mm 152 mm 305 mm 229 mm 457 mm 610 mm 9" 8" 13" 11" 22" 24" 229 mm 203 mm 330 mm 279 mm 559 mm 610 mm CITY OF SOUTH BURL1INGTON, DEPARTMENT OF PLAT NHNG & ZGiN1NG 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGT0N, VERMOIST 05403 (802) 846-4106 FAX (802) 846-4101 May 18, 2005 Steve Guild 7 Ambrose Place Burlington, VT 05401 Re: Minutes Dear Mr. Guild: Enclosed, please find a copy of the minutes from the May 3, 2005 Development Review Board meeting. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Betsy McDonough Administrative Assistant Encl. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD 3 MAY 2005 Site Plan Application #SP-05-12 of Ichiban Oishii, Inc., to amend a previously approved plan for a 123 seat standard restaurant with: 1) a proposed 500 sq. ft. addition and 2) a proposed 38-space parking lot expansion. The amendment consists of revising the landscaping plan for the parking lot expansion: Mr. Guild said there is an existing wood fence that goes along 4 properties on the south side. They previously showed a hedgerow there. The owner felt that since there is a 6- foot fence, the hedgerow was not necessary. It would cost $4500. The lot is for overflow parking. Mr. Guild said they would agree to a stipulation that if the fence ever comes down, they would have 60 days to put in the hedgerow. Mr. Dinklage noted staff recommends denying this. Mr. Belair said they feel a hedgerow is still warranted. The proposed alternative would be an enforcement nightmare. Mr. Boucher moved to approve Site Plan Application #SD-05-12 of Ichiban Oishii as presented. Ms. Quimby seconded. The motion failed 0-7. The application has been denied. 9. Public Hearing: Application #VR-05-01 of Michael Hopwood for a variance from Section 3.06, Setbacks and Buffers, of the Land Development Regulations. Request is for permission to allow an addition to an auto repair service facility to project 17 feet into the required 30-foot front setback requirement, 63 Ethan Allen Drive: Mr. Hopwood showed the proposed plan and one which would tit within the setback. He said he felt they met the 5 criteria, for a variance as they cannot expand on the other side. They feel a square building is more appropriate. They also feel parking would be less impacted by a square building and that they would lose more spaces the other way and also lose less green space. Mr. Dinklage noted the lot is already developed, so there is no development hardship. Mr. Boucher moved to approve Application #VR-05-01 of Michael Hopwood. Mr. Farley seconded. Motion failed 0-7. The application has been denied. 10. Site Plan Application #SP-05-14 of Mike Hopwood to amend a previously approved plan for a 6,000 sq. ft. auto sales, service and repair facility. The amendment consists of constructing a 2240 sq. ft. addition, 63 Ethan Allen Drive: The applicant withdrew this application. -5- CITY OF SOUTH B TRLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNE'gG & ZONING 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 (802) 846-4106 FAX (802) 846-4101 April 29, 2005 Steve Guild 7 Ambrose Place Burlington, VT 05401 Re: 792 Shelburne Road Dear Mr. Guild: Enclosed is the agenda for next Tuesday's Development Review Board meeting and staff comments to the Board. Please be sure that someone is at the meeting on Tuesday, May 3, 2005 at 7:30 p.m. at the City Hall Conference Room, 575 Dorset Street. If you have any questions, please give us a call. Sincerely, 'KIBetsy onough Administrative Assistant Encl. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING 575 DORSET STREET SOUTI I BURL,INGTON, VERMONT 05403 (802) 846-4106 FAX (802) 846-4101 To: South Burlington Development Review Board From: Brian Robertson, Associate Planner RE: SP-05-12 Date: April 29, 2005 Cc: Steve Guild Agenda #9 Project Description Ichiban Oishii, Inc., hereafter referred to as the applicant, is seeking site plan to amend a previously approved plan for a 123 seat standard restaurant with: 1) a proposed 500 sq. ft. addition, and 2) a proposed 38-space parking lot expansion. The amendment consists of revising the landscaping plan for the parking lot expansion, 792 Shelburne Road. Staff is not in favor of the applicant's proposal to eliminate the landscaping that was recently approved on the subject property. The evergreen hedge that was approved was intended to screen the headlights of cars utilizing the proposed parking area from the residential uses adjacent to the subject property. This vegetation is required pursuant to Sections 13.06(B)(1) and 13.06(C) of the Land Development Regulations. The applicant believes that the existing fence along the property line of the residential properties is sufficient to screen the dwelling units from the headlights. However, staff does not believe this fence is sufficient because it is located on the properties of the residential uses. If this fence were to deteriorate or fall down, no screening mechanism would be present. It is not the responsibility of the residents to screen themselves from this commercial parking lot. Thus, staff strongly urges the Development Review Board to require the applicant to retain the recently -approved evergreen hedge or replace this hedge with an opaque fence, the material and height of which would need your approval. Staff recommends that the Development Review Board deny Site Plan application #SP-05-12, as submitted. F,Y , }•, f "AIM i M s>�" ... r �`K� i� � ,. � « +��r` � � R • r,� .,, ids`; * f v 4 r £ !f y f -- !mow>. M+.a.,s. a. :+^..A�..�. ���A�� L� .�.aYeYs«u.,......wu,.«r.+wu.+'•...+.+.+Iii.s,.-.. .iMgrwM...M.a✓ i...•* t•wse,rww.. j.�;.+11. '5.:. r li No Text 0 SITE INFORMATION: LOT SIZE: 72,300 S.F. BUILDING COVERAGE: 51745 S.F. LOT COVERAGE (DRIVES, PARKING 4 WALKS): 310 381 S.F. TOTAL COVERAGE: 37,126 S.F. % COVERAGE: 51: TOPOGRAPHY SURVEY WAS COMPLETED ON JANUARY 25, 2005 BY WILLIAM A. ROBENSTEIN A PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR. 242.72' 16 PARKING SPACES KOTO RESTAURANT (EXISTING BLDG) NEW 504 S.F. ADDITION — PIZZA HUT BURLINGTON PH LTD. PARTNERSHIP 164 SHELBURNE ROAD EXISTING PARKING (6) SHADYMASTER HONEYLOCUST TREES 01-0" .O.W. DO NOT ENTER SNOW STORAGE / SIGN AREA —� ING I FA IWA WA WA BIKE RACK • • -•_ • • wit. I 4 - I 1 %) •• %! :ram ��� • !� /► /�►%0. u. • 1 •. j 1 •— F 0 0 0e 150 , 00, 92.72' 10 DEV. INC. J. KAUFMAN 25q PG. 161 R. JEWETT (STING 6 FT. HIGH CHAIN LINK FENCE _ •lilt EXISTING EXISTING 6 FT, HIGH WOODEN FENCE F HANNON I C. MURRAYR E d E I A 8UEL 2 8 Zoos City of So. Burlington Z 11� =) O Q w m NNw W_ to Ory Fr 0 HHas I PROPOSED SITE PLAN Wmm ta SP-2 l CITE" OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 (802) 846-4106 FAX (802) 846-4101 May 4, 2005 Steve Guild 7 Ambrose Place Burlington, VT 05401 Re: Site Plan Application #SP-05-12 Koto Restaurant Dear Mr. Guild: Enclosed, please find a copy of the Findings of Fact and Decision from the May 3, 2005 Development Review Board meeting. If you have any questions, please contact me. Sincerely, Ell Betsy McDonough Administrative Assistant Encl. CERTIFIED MAIL: 7003 3110 00013598 6128 ��/ Permit Number SP_,�,,, / —L/&— CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON APPLICATION FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW All information requested on this application must be completed in full. Failure to provide the requested information either on this application form or on the site plan will result in your application being rejected and a delay in the review before the Development Review Board. ])OWNER O)~ CORD (N as shown on deed, mailing address, phone and fax #) 2) LOCATION OF LAST RECORDED DEED Gook and page #) 3) APPLICANT (Name, mailing address, phone d fax #) �� ► �s S 4) CONTA,C PERSON (Name, mailing addres , phone and fax #f) �c OS O 5) PROJECT STREET ADDRESS: Cl a. Sea �o�j rag-, i 6) TAX PARCEL ID # (can be obtained at Assessor's Office) 7) PROJECT DESCRIPTION ll a) Existing Uses on Property (including description and size of each separate use) �Ta V t' s4 l b) Proposed Uses on property (i and size of each pew use a,pd existing uses to c) Total building square footage on property (proposed buildings and existing buildings to remain) d) Height of building & number of floors (proposed buildings and existing buildings to remain, specify if basement and mezzanine) YLQ e) Number of residential units (if applicable, new units and existing units to remain) f) Number of employees & company vehicles (existing and proposed, note office versus non -office nnlnvPPcl / PJYYi6� I 1 o P .' S A 1-1 ; � n I- C.Z �" rY , n �1 f, (' g) Other (list any other information pertinent to this application not specifically requested above, please note if Overlay Districts are applicable): 8) 'LOT COVERAGE a) Building: Exist'in.g----SC�— % Proposed 1— % b) Overall (building, parkin , outside storage, etc) Existin % 1'roposed_"/> c) Front yard (along each street) Existing% Proposed--- % 9) COST ESTIMATES a) Building (including interior renovations): S �C() b) Landscaping: $ c) Other site improvements (please list with cost): i0) ESTIMATED TRAFFIC 1 a) Average daily traffic for entire property (in and out): b) A.M. Peak hour for entire property (in and out): Q c) P.M. Peak hour for entire property (In attd out): S ' 3� O r►'� — C� D ► y-1 11) PEAK HOURS OF OPERATION: 5.30 25y) 12) PEAK DAYS OF OPERATION: 13) ESTIMATED PROJECT COMPLETION DATE: r1 v t 14) SITE PLAN AND FEE A site plan shall be submitted which shows the information listed on Exhibit A attached. Five (5) regular size copies and one reduced copy (I V x 17") of the site plat[ trust be submitted. A site plan application fee shall be paid to the City at the time of submitting the site plan application (see Exhibit A) . I hereby certify that all the information requested as part of this application has been. submitted and is Accurate to the best of my knowledge. I NATURE P ICANT SIGNATURE OF PROPERTY nVVNER Do not write below this line i DATE OF SUBMISSION: REVIEW AUTHORITY: Development 0, iew Board Administrative Officer I have revie s site plan and find. it to be: /mpl� Incomplete ae P i ko Officer or Designee March 3, 2005 Steve Guild Steve Guild Design, LLC 8 Ambrose Place Burlington, VT 05401 RE: Koto Restaurant Planting Dear Steve: TRUDELL CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC. tel: 802-879-6331 fax: 802-879-0060 www.trudeliconsulting.com As requested, I have reviewed the proposed plant material as shown on SP2, Proposed Site Plan, prepared by you, and approve the proposed 6 Honeylocusts. This tree is hardy within this zone, adaptable to the soil at the site and is salt tolerant. The cost for installing the 6 21/2"-3" caliper trees is $3,075.00, which includes a 1 year guarantee. Very truly yours, TRUDELL CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC. Karen Ann Pettersen Landscape Architect 2005 Guild.doc P.O. Box 308 478 Blair Park Road Williston, Vermont 05495 Civil Engineering, surveying, Land Planning, Water and Wastewater, Landscape Architecture. Roadway Design, Permitting • Extruded aluminum housing with aluminum mounting arms and penclents. Galvanized steel box adapters for form support. Mounting styles include wail, 24" pendent and ceiling. Wall mounts have up/down series available. • Fixtures are available with open bottom, Clear aizak reflector or Black baffle for PAR or R lamps. "A" lamp reflectors are available as on option. Top glass lens assembly for up/down units available as option. • Units produce a Type V distribution determined by the lamp (by others) • Standard finishes are dark bronze, black, white and platinum. • All units are damp location listed. 843-8GW c uL S • a _,Application 6" Cylinders peen Clear Aizak Black Baffle B43-6M 843-6CM B46-6M Incandescent 150W/R40 Wall -Down Bronze — BF43-6CM — Fluorescent 13W/DTT Wall -Down Bronze B44-61VI B44-6CM 648-6M Incandescent 150W/R40 Wall-Up/Down Bronze C142-6M C142-6CM C144-6M Incandescent 150W1R40 Ceiling Bronze — CF1426-6CM — Fluorescent 13W/DTT Ceiling Bronze C145-6M C145-6CM C147-6M Incandescent 150W/R40 Pendant Bronze — CF145-6CM — Fluorescent 13W/DTT Pendant Bronze 8" Cylinders ODen Clear Alzak Black Baffle 843-8M 843-8CM B46-BM Incandescent 300WJR40 WaU-Down Bronze 844.8M 44- B8CM 848-BM Incandescent 300W/R40 Wall-Up/Down own Bronze C1428M C1428CM C1448M Incandescent 300W/R40 Ceiling Bronze C1458M C1458CM C1478M Incandescent 300W/R40 Pendant Bronze Note Units UL listed for damp locations. Standard pendants are 24 inches with 30' off vertical swivel. (Band C units). Note For optional finishes with extended lead times, change M to GW-white, KE-black, S-platinum. Option, =(:,j 3 ... IT v /13 "A" Lamp Reflector - downlight 414 "A" Lamp Reflectors up/downlight -126 Six inch Lens Assembly for top protection on up/down units (specify color)' -163 Eight inch Lens Assembly for top protection on up/down units (specify color)' A 8 C D E. r 7 518" 6" 12" 9" 18" 24" 194 mm 152 mm 305 mm 229 mm 457 mm 610 mm 9„ 8" 13., 1.1" 22" 24" 229 mm 203 mm 330 mm 279 mm 559 mm 610 mm Hubbell Lighting Executive Series RT21 / RT25/ RT32 TOOLESS ACCESS Fully accessible by a front tooless push button —an Executive trademark. . PRIMARY ELECTRICAL DISCONNECT All power is terminated as soon as the door opens. Fully serviceable without needing to shut down power to the entire circuit. No exposed five connections ON THE DOOR SERVICEABUTY Both the reflector and ballast tray assemblies mount directly to the extruded doorframe. Remove the entire door or each assembly without tools to service. Reflector hinges on door for easy re -tamping. Service with ease on the ground, in a truck or wherever most convenient. FULLY SEALED OPTICS All optical systems are fully sealed from exterior contaminants. To ensure great peformance year round. OPTIONAL ANODIZED FINISHES A finish that cannot peel, flake or fade, and is resistant to corrosive environments or harsh climate. 70HPS IEm.s 200PMH 0"E ml 70MH aDin 2H 100HP pn5l 350PMH;ix"m 1 100MHoin 3H 150HPSw,m 40OPM14lix"Eml 1SOMH' loin SH 250HPSIEie1 175MH") 400HPSVill 25OMH (mni 2S 40OMH iEwa) 3S 4L 1 SOHPS (EDn A 20OPMH w. am) 40OMH (D/aw) 4W 250HPS (E1®t 350PMH ip" s ml 175MH ie ml 55 400HPSEE1e1 400PMH (p&mml 250MH tEDml 7SOHPS Fw 75OPMH 1a.. rr3 1000HP5 isnsaq MV4V& l 1000MH 815s.g, 6TV47&l 2H Type -II Hydroformed 3H - Type -III Hydroformed 5H - Type-V Hydroformed 2S - Type -II Segmented 3S - Type -III Segmented 4L Type -IV Long fabricated 4W - Type -IV Wide Segmente SS - Type-V Segmented !K 1Z WN AL LBZ MBZ DBZ ABK AAL "150MH uses M102 6np--Fixtwe s"ard vndxxt 6r WM'- Wall Mount VF Vertical Slip Fitter (2.38' O.D. Tenon) HF Horizontal Slip Fitter (2.38" O.D. Tenw) PRL Photocell Receptacle Luminaire PRP Photocell Receptacle Pole Cap FL - Fuse Luminaire N - Not Applicable N - No Lamp (standard) BK - Bock LBZ Light Bronze Anodized ABK Black Anodized LP'- Include Lamp BZ Dark Bronze MBZ Medium Bronze Anodized AAL Natural Aluminum Anodized WH - White DBZ - Dark Bronze Anodized AL - Natural Aluminum NS - calNon-staltdard (pro+ide odoror diq) >iimensions EXEC-RT21 EXEC-RT25 EXEC-RT32 EPA:1.6 WT:36lbs. EPA:2.2 WT:64lbs. EPA:3.5 WT:105lbs_ Dimensions: a- 16" b = 21 " c = 675" Dimensions: a = 20 " 6 = 25" c = 8.75" Dimensions: o = 26 " 6 = 32.5" c = 10.75" Arm: 2' x 4" x 8" Arm: 2" x 4" z 8' Arm: 2" x 5.75' x 8" a b NOTES: 1. '32' three at 120 available with round pole only or with pole top fitter. I ! 2. Combin hm '5K and 'HS' not avalable 3. Seled'LP' ally if a 6np is to be included with die &lure. A. 'ww not available with RT32. STERNERTM LIGHTING SYSTEMS INC. log onto our Web site at www.stetTmdighting.com to download a complete -Executive" brochure for detailed information. SEE SITE PLAN FOR LOCATIONS P42 P3 OR P4, REFER TO STE PLAN P4� LSi S' SQUARE STEEL POLE NEWT VARIES BRONZE FINISH �,TyG�ed• T GAUCE STEEL A e A CPAs e AWAS 4' 1 j{ �PAr /iY 4 • VA In �(( PAINT EXPOSED F00RNc YELLOW .. i_ ITT I�;-TJ I {fi�I_7 SEE LUAGNAIRE FOOTING DE TAX TYPICAL LUM94AIRE x DX 2 rrwmu COMSt lwo p4wiss. INC Lmt MNwd e/Cyol LIGk7 OESCRIPT?ON MOLMITiNC HQGMT A P3 tSI CLASSIC - Ct2 26' FORWARD THROW 400 W SUPER METAL HALIDE MODEL CC2 Fr 400SA(HR F1�fT P+�fOTOEtEC TRtC CONTROL LS! CIFAAON 4 M.FORWARD THROW 400 W SUPER METAL HALIDE MODEL c �►+ Fr 400sMJ�R FMr PNO TOELEC TRtC CONTROL CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PI.ANNE'iG & ZONING 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 (802) 846-4106 FAX (802) 846-4101 March 17, 2005 Steve Guild 24 Fairway Drive. Essex Junction, VT 05452 Re: Minutes — 792 Shelburne Road Dear Mr. Guild: Enclosed, please find a copy of the minutes from the February 1, 2005 Development Review Board meeting. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Betsy McDonough Administrative Assistant Encl. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD 1 FEBRUARY 2005 The applicant asked to combine preliminary and final plats. Mr. Dinklage said this would be at the applicant's risk. 6. Public Hearing: Conditional Use Application 9CU-04-30 of Wesley & Patricia Eldred for conditional use approval under Section 14.10, Conditional Use Review, of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations. Request is for permission to expand the single family dwelling by enclosing a 560 sq. ft. portion of an open porch, 114 Central Avenue: Mr. Eldred showed the area to be enclosed. Mr. Belair said there are no issues for staff. Mr. Eldred asked about the requirement for landscaping. Mr. Dinklage explained that the amount for landscaping can be worked out with staff. Mr. Boucher moved to approve Conditional Use Application #CU-04-30 of Wesley & Patricia Eldred subject to the stipulations in the draft motion. Ms. Quimby seconded. Motion passed unanimously. T Continued site plan Application #SP-04-46 of Ichiban Oishii, Inc., to amend a previously approved plan for a 123 seat standard restaurant. The amendment consists of 1) constructing a 500 sq. ft. addition to the restaurant, and 2) constructing a 38 space parking lot expansion, 702 Shetlharne Road: Mr. Belair noted that the outstanding items were screening along the parking lot and one- way angled parking. The plan also now shows a right-of-way to indicate legal access. Mr. Kupferman asked about drainage. The applicant showed the direction of drainage and the location of catch basins. No other issues were raised. Mr. Boucher moved to approve Site Plan Application #SP-04-46 of Ichiban Oishii, Inc.. subject to the stipulations in the draft motion. Ms. Quimby seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 8. Sketch plan application #SD-05-01 of Anthony Basilere for a planned unit development to subdivide a 0.26 acre parcel developed with two single family dwellings into two lots of 0.13 acres each, 21 and 23 Meadow Road: The applicant explained that the 2 houses on the lot have existed for many years. Mr. Belair noted that dividing the lots will create 2 non -conforming lots. It was noted that the applicant has applied for a PUD so the dimensional standards can be waived. Staff recommends that waivers be granted for minimum lot size, building - 3 - � � l I Aff SITE INFORMATION: LOT SIZE: 72,300 S.F. BUILDING COVERAGE: 5,745 S.F. LOT COVERAGE (DRIVES, PARKING $ WALKS): 310351 S.F. TOTAL COVERAGE: 37,126 S.F. COVERAGE: 513 EXISTING BUILDING (OFFICE AND WAREHOUSE) EXISTING PARKING PIZZA HUT BURLINGTON PH LTD. PARTNERSHIP 764 SHFI..BURNF ROAD 242.72' KOTO RESTAURANT (EXISTING HLDG) NEW 504 S.F. ADDITION --- (2) NEW NEW SHADEMASTER SHADEMASTER HONEYLOCUST HONEYLOCUST I I I I I I i l l l l E�IStrNG 04RKIIN4 BIKE RACK NEW RAMP 7 — O, � -, Z- NEW SHADEMASTER 65 S7E�AGEN (2) NEWIHONEYLOCUST JUNIP(TYP.) SHADEMASTER z;�o 'D HONEYLOCUST- _150.00, 012.72' REXBO DEV. INC. J. KAUFMAN R. JEWETT VOL. 2801 PG. 161 S 4 M HANDY SIZE: 250'X140' _ 351000 S.F. (0.50 AC) F. HANNON C. MURRAY PROPOSED LANDSCAPING PLAN I 11 U SITE INFORMATION: LOT SIZE: 72,300 S.F. BUILDING COVERAGE: 51745 S.F. L,OT COVERAGE (DRIVES, PARKING * WALKS): 519551 S.F. TOTAL COVERAGE: 37112(o S.F. % COVERAGE: 51s TOPOGRAPHY SURVEY HAS COMPLETED ON -JANUARY 25, 2005 BY HILLIAM A. ROBENSTEIN A PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR. 16 242.72' KOTO RESTAURANT (EX15TING 5LDQ) NEW 504 S.F. ADDITION -- PIZZA PUT BURLINGTON PH LTD. PARTNERSHIP 764 SHELBURNE ROAD BIKE RACK 0 CV Lu tu 4 z- V_ IL IL cn 0 600 q2.72' 0 DEV. INC. 280. Pa. 161 J. KAUFMAN w L-1 rXISTING PARKING DO NOT ENTER SIGN PURPOSED 50 PARKIN SPACES (10,370 S.F.) EXTERIOR LIGHT FIXTURE d gq� ul'] $NON STORAGE AREA 0, ONE-WAY TRAFFIC FLOW I q 2'± 4—/ 9 i N HANDY SIZE: 250'XI40' - 35t000 S.F. (0.80 AC) - MI. C. MURRAY EXTERIOR LIGHT FIXTURE y PROPOSED SITE PLAN DP.%"Q la SP-2 t"ITY OF SOUTHBURLIl�TGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING 575 DORSET STREET SO UTH BURLINGTON, VERMONI' 05403 (802) 846-4106 FAX (802) 846-4101 February 2, 2005 Steve Guild 24 Fairview Drive Essex Junction, VT 05452 Re: Site Plan Application #SP-04-46 Dear Mr. Guild. - Enclosed, please find a copy of the Findings of Fact and Decision of the above referenced project approved by the South Burlington Development Review Board on 2/1/05 (effective 2/1/05). Please note the conditions of approval, including that the applicant shall obtain a zoning permit within six (6) months of this approval or this approval is null and void If you have any questions, please contact me. Sincerely, Betsy McD nough Administrative Assistant Encl. Certified Mail- Return Receipt Requested - #7003 3110 0001 3598 5244 CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BliRLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 (802) 846-4106 FAX (802) 846-4101 January 28, 2005 Steve Guild 24 Fairview Drive Essex Junction, VT 05452 Re: 792 Shelburne Road Dear Mr. Guild. - Enclosed is the agenda for next Tuesday's Development Review Board meeting and staff comments to the Board. Please be sure that someone is at the meeting on Tuesday, February 1, 2005 at 7:30 p.m. at the City Hall Conference Room, 575 Dorset Street. If you have any questions, please give us a call. Sincerely, Betsy Mc onough Administrative Assistant Encl. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD Report preparation date: January 24, 2005 \drb\sit\koto\site_plan.doc Plans received: January 24, 2005 792 SHELBURNE ROAD SITE PLAN APPLICATION #SP-04-46 Agenda #7 Meeting date. February 1, 2005 Owner Applicant Montaha Handy Ichiban Oishii, Inc. 75 Winooski Avenue 792 Shelburne Road Burlington, VT 05401 South Burlington, VT 05403 Property Information Tax Parcel 0020-01215-C Mixed Industrial & Commercial (IC) Zoning District 1.51 acres Location Ma w 4 49 .. II CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 2 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING \drb\sit\koto\site plan.doc Ichiban Oishii, hereafter referred to as the applicant, is seeking site plan approval to amend a previously approved plan for a 123 seat restaurant. The amendment consists of: 1) constructing a 500 square foot addition to the restaurant, and 2) constructing a 38 space parking lot expansion, 792 Shelburne Road. Associate Planner Brian Robertson and Administrative Officer Ray Belair, referred to herein as Staff, have reviewed the plans submitted on January 24, 2005 and have the following comments. The expanded parking lot, which the subject of this application, has already been constructed in violation of the Land Development Regulations. This application is to correct that violation. The applicant appeared before the Development Review Board on December 7, 2004 (minutes enclosed). However, the application was continued to give the applicant time to bring the proposed project closer into compliance with Section 13.06(B) of the Land Development Regulations. Zoning District & Dimensional Requirements: Table 1. Dimensional Requirements C1 Zoning District Required ] Proposed Min. Lot Size 40,000 SF 72,300 SF Max. Building Covera a 40% 8% �1 Max. Overall Coverage 70% 51 % Max. Front Yard Coverage 30% 13% �l Min. Front Setback 30' 60' �1 Min. Side Setback 10, 15' �1 Min. Rear Setback 30' 52' zoning compliance SITE PLAN REVIEW STANDARDS Section 14.06 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations establishes the following general review standards for all site plan applications: (a) The site shall be planned to accomplish a desirable transition from structure to site, from structure to structure, and to provide for adequate planting, safe pedestrian movement, and adequate parking areas. The proposed project is for the construction of a 500 square foot addition to an existing building and a 38 space parking lot. The site plan has been designed to accomplish a desirable transition from structure to site or from structure to structure. Planting areas and pedestrian movement patterns are sufficient. Pursuant to Table 13-2 of the Land Development Regulations, the proposed addition will require 9 parking spaces. The subject property was previously approved at 41 parking spaces, so a CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 3 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING \drb\sit\koto\site plan.doc total of 50 parking spaces are required. The applicant is proposing to provide 81 parking spaces. The new parking area is sixty (60) feet in width. The 600 parking spaces proposed would allow the width to be reduced by 5.4 feet, for a total width of 54.6 feet. Reducing the pavement width would eliminate unnecessary pavement, which would reduce stormwater runoff. 1. The plans shall be revised to depict the pavement width reduced by 5.4 feet, for a total width of 54.6 feet, prior to issuance of a zoning permit. 2. Pursuant to Section 13.01(G)(5) of the Land Development Regulations, the plans shall be revised to depict a bicycle rack, prior to issuance of a zoning permit. (b) Parking shall be located to the rear or sides of buildings to the greatest extent practicable. The existing parking area on the subject property is to the side of the subject building and the proposed parking area is to the rear of the subject building. (c) Without restricting the permissible limits of the applicable zoning district the height and scale of each building shall be compatible with its site and existing or adjoining buildings. The maximum height of the building will remain unchanged. (d) Newly installed utility services and service modifications necessitated by exterior alterations or building expansions shall, to the extent feasible, be underground. 3. Pursuant to Section 15.13(E) of the Land Development Regulations, any new utility lines, services, and service modifications shall be underground. (e) The DRB shall encourage the use of a combination of common materials and architectural characteristics, landscaping, buffers, screens and visual interruptions to create attractive transitions between buildings of different architectural styles. The proposed project does not involve any buildings of different architectural styles, so this criterion is not applicable. (f) Proposed structures shall be related harmoniously to themselves, the terrain, and to existing buildings and roads in the vicinity that have a visual relationship to the proposed structures. The proposed addition relates harmoniously to the existing buildings in the area. Site plan applications shall meet the following specific standards as set forth in Section 14.07 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations: (a) The reservation of land may be required on any lot for provision of access to abutting properties whenever such access is deemed necessary to reduce curb cuts onto an arterial of collector street to provide additional access for emergency or other purposes, or to improve general access and circulation in the area. Staff does not feel it is necessary to require any additional access easements as part of the proposed project. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 4 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING \drb\sit\koto\site plan.doc (b) Electric, telephone and other wire -served utility lines and service connections shall be underground. Any utility installations remaining above ground shall be located so as to have a harmonious relation to neighboring properties and to the site. Pursuant to Section 15.13(E) of the Land Development Regulations, any new utility lines, services, and service modifications shall be underground. (c) All dumpsters and other facilities to handle solid waste, including compliance with any recycling or other requirements, shall be accessible, secure and properly screened with opaque fencing to ensure that trash and debris do not escape the enclosure(s). The plans show a dumpster on the property, which appears to be adequately screened. (d) Landscaping and Screening Requirements Pursuant to Table 13-9 of the Land Development Regulations, the proposed project will require a minimum of $240 of landscaping. The application is not proposing any additional site landscaping. However, pursuant to Section 13.06(B) of the Land Development Regulations, all parking areas containing twenty-eight (28) or more contiguous parking spaces and/or in parking lots with more than a single circulation lane, at least ten percent (109,o) of the interior of the parking lot shall be landscaped islands planted with trees, shrubs and other plants. All interior and perimeter planting shall be protected by curbing unless specifically designed as a collection and treatment area for management of stormwater runoff. Interior planted islands shall have a minimum dimension of six (6) feet on any one side, and shall have a minimum square footage of sixty (60) square feet. Large islands are encouraged. Landscaping shall include a variety of trees, shrubs, grasses and ground covers. All planting shall be species hardy for the region and, if located in areas receiving road runoff or salt spray, shall be salt -tolerant. At least one (1) major deciduous shade tree shall be provided within or near the perimeter of each parking area, for every five (5) parking spaces. The trees shall be placed evenly throughout the parking lot to provide shade and reduce glare. Trees shall be placed a minimum of thirty (30) feet apart. Trees shall have a caliper equal to or greater than two and one-half (2 %) inches when measured on the tree stem, six (6) inches above the root ball. Where more than ten (10) trees are installed, a mix of species is encouraged; the species should be grouped or located in a manner that reinforces the design and layout of the parking lot and the site. The plans have been revised to comply with Section 13.06(B) of the Land Development Regulations, which deals with the internal landscaping of parking areas with at least twenty-eight (28) contiguous parking spaces. 4. Pursuant to Sections 13.06(F) and 13.06(G) of the Land Development Regulations, the applicant shall submit a letter from a landscaping professional approving the proposed landscaping plan, and a landscaping budget prepared by a landscaping professional, prior to site plan approval. 5. The applicant shall post a landscape bond for the value of the proposed landscaping, prior to issuance of a zoning permit. This bond shall remain in effect for three (3) years to assure that the landscaping has taken root and has a good chance of surviving. Pursuant to Section 13.06(B) of the Land Development Regulations, the plans depict snow storage areas that will minimize the potential for run-off. Lighting Pursuant to Section 13.07(A) of the Land Development Regulations, all exterior lighting shall be CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 5 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING \drb\sit\koto\site plan doc shielded and downcasting to prevent light from spilling onto adjacent properties and rights -of -way. The applicant submitted exterior lighting details for the proposed parking area lighting fixtures (attached). They are in compliance with Appendix D of the Land Development Regulations. Access/Circulation Access to the subject property is provided via Shelburne Road and will not be altered through the proposed project. However, the vehicles in the proposed parking area shall exit only via the right- of-way that connects to Swift Street. As such, the traffic in the aisle of the proposed parking area is one-way, moving towards the Swift Street access. In addition, the width of the access drive connecting the existing and proposed parking areas has been reduced to 12' wide to discourage two-way traffic. Finally, a "Do Not Enter" sign at the westerly end of the proposed parking area, adjacent to the ramp to the existing parking area has been depicted on the plans. Traffic According to the ITE, 7fh Edition (Land Use 931), the proposed 500 square foot addition will increase traffic on the subject property by 3.75 P.M. peak -hour vtes, for a total of 46.81 P.M. peak - hour vtes. 6. Prior to issuance of a zoning permit, the applicant shall pay applicable traffic impact fees. Other The City Engineer reviewed the plans and provided comments in a memorandum dated October 28, 2004 (attached). 7. The plans shall be revised to comply with the requests of the City Engineer, prior to site plan approval. 8. The plans shall be revised to show the right of way extending from the subject property to Swift Street, prior to site plan approval. 9. The plans shall be revised to replace the word "purposed" with "proposed'; prior to site plan approval. Staff recommends that the South Burlington Development Review Board approve Site Plan Application #SP-04-46, conditional upon the applicant addressing the numbered items in the "comments" section of this document. Respectfully submitted, Brian Robertson, Associate Planner Copy to: Ichiban Oishii, applicant DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD 7 DECEMBER 2004 applicant will provide the owner of the property to the north an access easement to the applicant's property, if deemed necessary by the Development Review Board in connection with a plan approved for development of the property to the north. Mr. Boucher moved to approve Preliminary Plat #SD-04-79 and Final Plat #SD-04-80 of Patrick Malone subject to the stipulations in the draft motion as amended above. Ms. Quimby seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 5. Preliminary Plat Application #SD-04-77 and Final Plat Application #SD-04-78 of Michael Gravelin, dba A & M Construction Corp., for a planned unit development to convert a 2142 sq. ft. single family dwelling to Day Care and/or General Office use, 1060 Hinesburg Road: Mr. Belair said the applicant has asked to continue because of a missing survey plat. There are some issues which also need to be resolved including 2 maple trees which the neighbor would like to have remain and a drainage issue which may require changing the drainage system. Ms. Quimby moved to continue Preliminary Plat Application #SD-04-77 and Final Plat Application #SD-04-78 of Michael Gravelin until 18 January 2005. Mr. Boucher seconded. Motion passed unanimously. X-S 6. Site Plan Application #SD-04-46 of Ichiban Oishii, Inc., to amend a previously approved plan for a 123 seat standard restaurant. The amendment consists of. 1) constructing a 500 sq. ft. addition to the restaurant, and 2) constructing a 38 space parking lot expansion, 792 Shelburne Road: Mr. Belair noted the parking lot had already been constructed without approval and without a permit. It does not comply with landscaping requirements. Mr. Belair then reviewed the history of the property. It was subdivided from a property off Swift St. All traffic was to be directed from the upper parking lot to Swift St. The exit will have to be narrowed and signed to this effect. He suggested one-way traffic through the area. They could then angle parking and not have as much pavement. Mr. Dinklage asked why there are so few parking spaces. Mr. Belair said he wasn't sure whether these were built from the old regulations or the new. He will check on this as requirements have been increased -3- DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD 7 DECEMBER 2004 The issue of the abutting neighbors in the residential district was raised. Mr. Belair said there will have to be a significant buffer and additional landscaping may be required to block headlights from shining into neighbors' backyards. The applicant indicated the presence of a berm for this purpose. Mr. Belair said this must be shown on the plan. Mr. Boucher then moved to continue Site Plan #SP-04-46 until IFebruary 2005. Ms. Quimby seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 7. Public Hearing: Appeal #AO-04-02 of Karen Alence appealing the decision of the Administrative Officer to issue zoning permit #ZP-04-391 for a single family dwelling at 11 Lyons Avenue: Mr. Belair said he received an application to raze an existing house at 11 Lyons Avenue and build a new house. The proposed new house met all the setback and height requirements. A single family home is a permitted use in that district. The maximum building coverage allowed is 20% and the proposed house is 14.6%. Mr Belair said he believed the proposed house met all the requirements of the Land Development Regulations, so he issued the permit. Ms. Alence said she had a question as to whether what is being built is what is shown on the plan. She was concerned that the applicant is not required to provide a survey and that she would have to bear the cost of a survey if she thought the house was being put too close to her property line. Mr. Krupp, a neighbor, expressed concern that the proposed house would block the sunlight from his house. He said there used to be a rule that you couldn't build a house that would block sunlight from another house. Mr. Dinklage said the city attempts to deal with this via setbacks and height restrictions. That is the extent of the DRB's involvement. Mr. Richardson added that 25 feet is the lowest allowable height in the city, and the proposed house meets that requirement. Mr. Dinklage reminded the applicant that it is their responsibility to place the foundation correctly so they don't put themselves in jeopardy. He also reminded the applicant that the current foundation is non -conforming and can't be used. Mr. Dinklage hoped the applicant would take care of concerns about the slope and potential erosion. He suggested that when the new foundation is staked out, the applicant show the area to neighbors to be sure it makes sense and there are no problems. -4- BILL SZYMANSKI, City Engineer City of South Burlington 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 846-41o6 (phone) 846-4101 (fax) COMMENTS Koto Shelburne Road 10/28/04 1. Details of exterior light fixtures shall be furnished for review and approval. 2. New parking lot drainage shall be shown on the plan. 3. Vacant area of the new parking lot shall be cleared of debris and the area leveled and reseeded. AN AA= AW Executive Series RT21 / RT25/ RT32 TOOLESS ACCESS Fully accessible by a front tooless push button —an Executive trademark. PRIMARY ELECTRICAL DISCONNECT All power is terminated as soon as the door opens. Fully serviceable without needing to shut down power to the entire circuit. No exposed live connections ON THE DOOR SERVICEABILITY Both the reflector and ballast tray assemblies mount directly to the extruded doorframe. Remove the entire door or each assembly without tools to service. Reflector hinges on door for easy re-lamping. Service with ease on the ground, in a truck or wherever most convenient. FULLY SEALED OPTICS All optical systems are fully sealed from exterior contaminants. To ensure great peformance year round. OPTIONAL ANODIZED FINISHES A finish that cannot peel, flake or fade, and is resistant to corrosive environments or harsh climate. 1 2 3 d� 5 6 7 EI 9 10 1 HOUSING STVI!/ IAMR RFFIFCTOR VOLTAGE BALLAST MOUNTING WAR SHIELD OENIRAL I iRFWI SIZE 1- WAttAEFF OPTION OPTIONS OPTIONS—L � I � EXEC RT21 70HPS iED23 s1 20OPMH (p.A. ED2% 70MH IED17) 2H 120 C 10 N" SG WW SK I OOHPS IED23 s) 35OPMHIw11.Exal 100MH(Eoi71 3H 208 28 03 HSI VF BZ 150HPS(Eo235) 40OPMH (FWs.Em) 150W (Ewl 5H 240 29 HF WH 250HP5 (E1 el 175MH (ED261 277 32' N AL 400HPS(EIeI 250MH (m281 2S FIR 40OMH (ED281 35 347 39 LBZ 4L 480 49 PRP MBZ EXEC RT25 1 SOHPS 1m23st 20OPMH (pAwED281 40OMH im7BT37) 4W FL DBZ 250HPS (E161 350PMH (p..M2B1 1751AH (m2el 55 ABK 400HPS fE181 40OPMH (.6 Ema1 25OMN (ED2e) N AAL NS 013C RT32 750HPSIEovI 750PMH(wuBT37I I OOOHPS (025-� , E037 hy&.) 1000MH (BT56s.g . BT37+ydro ; 150MH uses MI 02 lamp"Fixture standard without (arno iY ha" 2H Type -II Hydroformed 10 -0 321 SG Stone Guard WM'- Wall Mount 3H Type -III Hydroformed HSI - House Side Shield VF Vertical Slip Fitter (2.38" O.D. Tenon) SH Type-V Hydroformed 28 o-0 39 N - Not Applicable HF Horizontal Slip Fitter (2.38" O.D. Tenon) 2S Type -II Segmented PRL Photocell Receptacle Luminaire 3S Type -III Segmented 29 �J 49l_ttt� PRP Photocell Receptacle Pole Cap 4L Type -IV Long Fabricated L❑J FL Fuse Luminaire 4W - Type -IV Wide Segmented N Not Applicable 5S - Type-V Segmented I N No Lamp (standard) BK Black LBZ Light Bronze Anodized ABK - Black Anodized LP' Include Lamp BZ Dark Bronze MBZ Medium Bronze Anodized AAL Natural Aluminum Anodized WH - White DBZ Dark Bronze Anodized AL - Natural Aluminum NS - Non-standard (provide color chip) FAR EXEC-RT21 EXEC-RT25 EXEC-RT32 EPA:1.6 WT:3616s. EPA:2.2 WT:641bs. EPA:3.5 WT:105Ibs. Dimensions: a = 16" b = 21 " c = 6.75" Dimensions: a = 20 " 6 = 25" c - 8.75" Dimensions: a = 26 " b = 32.5" c = 10.75" Arm: 2" x 4" x 811 Arm: 2" x 4" x 8" Arm: 2" x 5.75" x 8" a b NOTES: 1. '32' three at 120 availoble with round pole only or with pole top fitter. 2. Combination'5H' and'HS' not wailoble. 3. Select'Ll" only if a lamp is to be included with the finture. 4. 'WM' not available with RT32. STERNERi C� SEE SITE PLAN FOR 0180' LOCATIONS P42 LUMINAIRE P3 OR P4, REFER TO S17E PLAN LIGHT ascaJPTIOk MWNnHC HQGHT A P3 LSI CLASSIC - C!2 26' FORWARD THROW 400 W SUPER METAL HALIDE MODEL CL2 FT 400SMHR FUT PHOTOELECTRIC CONTROL P4 LS CITATION 0 FORWARD THROW 400 W SUPER METAL HALIDE MODEL C TM FT 400SMHR FMT PHOTOELEC TRIO CONTROL tr UOU 00RStAWG ENOMEERS. INC lair p.k..c S/o2los L—LTG \��� � \\©� % . � %� � � /\ � � d� . \� � \ »���°� ^ � \ -cry r'• GPI SITE INFORMATION: LOT SIZE: 72,300 S.F. BUILDING COVERAGE: 5,745 5.F. LOT COVERAGE (DRIVES, PARKING # WALKS): 31,381 S.F. TOTAL COVERAGE: 37,126 S.F. % COVERAGE: 513 PIZZA HUT BURLINGTON PH LTD. PARTNERSHIP 764 SHELBURNE ROAD 242.72' -♦ BIKE o RACK nZNEW RAMP 16 P KIN PACE w V w V 4 Q C7 z z Y Y - KOTO RESTAURANT (EXISTING BLDG) NEW 504 S.F. ADDITION - EXISTING BUILDING (OFFICE AND WAREHOUSE) EXISTING PARKING (2) NEW NEW DECIDUOUS DO NOT ENTER DECIDUOUS TREES SIGN , , TREES �.♦ PARKING SPACES (10,310 S.F.) Q IL NEW m �.. DECIDUOUS I� TREES 174 GOOD DO C4 aft 150.00' g2.72' BO DEV. INC. J. KAUFMAN R. JEWETT . 28q PG. 161 1e%E1v4A1lr1 LWJ J TRAFFIC FLOW \A -NOW _ ZTORA E A ig2't 5tMHANDY SIZE: 250'X140' _ 35, 000 S.F. (0.80 AC) EXTERIOR LIGHT FIXTURE Or F. HANNON C. MURRAY EXTERIOR LI FIXTURE NEW CEDAR HEDGE (2) NEW DECIDUOUS BE 0 E Q 1� z z ,a 5.1 s PURPOSED SITE PLAN February 1, 2005 Steve Guild Steve Guild Design, LLC 8 Ambrose Place Burlington, VT 05401 RE: Koto Restaurant Planting Dear Steve: TRUDELL CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC. tel: 802-879-6331 fax: 802-879-0060 www.trudeliconsulting.com As you requested, I have reviewed the proposed plant material as shown on SPI, Proposed Site Plan, prepared by you, and approve the 6 Honeylocusts and 65 Seagreen Junipers. They are both hardy within this zone, adaptable to the soil at the site, and salt tolerant Attached is a cost estimate of the installed plant material, and cut sheets describing each of the plants. Very truly yours, TRUDELL CONSULTING ENGINEERS Encl. P.O. Box 308 478 Blair Park Road Williston, Vermont 05495 Civil Engineering, Surveying, Land Planning, Water and Wastewater, Landscape Architecture. Roadway Design, Permitting PLANT LIST Koto Restaurant Route 7, So. Burlington, VT Prepared by Trudell Consulting Engineers Karen Pettersen, Landscape Architect 211105 SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME QUAN. SIZE PRICE/PLANT* TOTAL Gleditsia triacanthos Shademaster Honeylocust inermis 'Shademaster' Juniperus chinensis Sea Green Juniper 'Sea Green' 6 21/2"-3" $512.50 $3,075.00 65 30"-36" $70.00 $4, 550.00 TOTAL $7,625.00 * The price per plant includes the cost of the plant, the installation, and a 1 year quarantee. 6" AND 8" DIAMETER Ordering Information Catalog Numbers • Extruded aluminum housing with aluminum mounting arms and pendents. Galvanized steel box adapters for form support. Mounting styles include wall, 24" pendent and ceiling. Wall mounts have up/down series available. • Fixtures are available with open bottom, Clear alzak reflector or Black baffle for PAR or R lamps. "A" lamp reflectors are available as on option. Top glass lens assembly for up/down units available as option. • Units produce a Type V distribution determined by the lamp (by others) • Standard finishes are dark bronze, black, white and platinum. • All units are damp location listed. )1��C C-f L t " O F_�Z_ 6" Cylinders Open CClear Alzak ftrk Baffle B43-61VI B43-6CM B46-6M Incandescent 150W/R40 Wall -Down Bronze — BF43-6CM — Fluorescent 13W/DTT Wall -Down Bronze B44-6M B44-6CM B48-61VI Incandescent 150W/R40 Wall-Up/Down Bronze C142-6M C142-6CM C144-6M Incandescent 150W/R40 Ceiling Bronze — CF1426-6CM — Fluorescent 13W/DTT Ceiling Bronze C145-61VI C145-6CM C147-61VI Incandescent 150W/R40 Pendant Bronze — CF145-6CM — Fluorescent 13W/DTT Pendant Bronze 8" Cylinders Open Clear Alzak Black Baffle B43-81VI B43-8CM B46-8M Incandescent 300W/R40 Wall -Down Bronze B44-8M B44-8CM B48-8M Incandescent 300W/R40 Wall-Up/Down Bronze C1428M C1428CM C1448M Incandescent 300W/R40 Ceiling Bronze C1458M C1458CM C1478M Incandescent 300W/R40 Pendant Bronze Note Units UL listed for damp locations. Standard pendants are 24 inches with 30° off vertical swivel. (B and C units). Note For optional finishes with extended lead times, change M to GW-white, KE-black, S-platinum. Options - Add Suffix 413 "A" Lamp Reflector downlight 414 "A" Lamp Reflectors - up/downlight 426 Six inch Lens Assembly for top protection on up/down units (specify color)' 463 Eight inch Lens Assembly for top protection on up/down units (specify color)' Dimensions 6" ® 8" HUBBEL "jj Hubbell Lighting LLJ A B C D E F 7 5/8" 6" 12" 91, 18" 24" 194 mm 152 mm 305 mm 229 mm 457 mm 610 mm 91, 8" 13" 11" 22" 24" 229 mm 203 mm 330 mm 279 mm 559 mm 610 mm 0 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD 7 DECEMBER 2004 applicant will provide the owner of the property to the north an access easement to the applicant's property, if deemed necessary by the Development Review Board in connection with a plan approved for development of the property to the north. Mr. Boucher moved to approve Preliminary Plat #SD-04-79 and Final Plat #SD-04-80 of Patrick Malone subject to the stipulations in the draft motion as amended above. Ms. Quimby seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 5. Preliminary Plat Application #SD-04-77 and Final Plat Application #SD-04-78 of Michael Gravelin, dba A & M Construction Corp., for a planned unit development to convert a 2142 sq. ft. single family dwelling to Day Care and/or General Office use, 1060 Hinesburg Road: Mr. Belair said the applicant has asked to continue because of a missing survey plat. There are some issues which also need to be resolved including 2 maple trees which the neighbor would like to have remain and a drainage issue which may require changing the drainage system. Ms. Quimby moved to continue Preliminary Plat Application #SD-04-77 and Final Plat Application #SD-04-78 of Michael Gravelin until 18 January 2005. Mr. Boucher seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 06ite Plan Application #SD-04-46 of Ichiban Oishii, Inc., to amend a previously approved plan for a 123 seat standard restaurant. The amendment consists of: 1) constructing a 500 sq. ft. addition to the restaurant, and 2) constructing a 38 space parking lot expansion, 792 Shelburne Road: Mr. Belair noted the parking lot had already been constructed without approval and without a permit. It does not comply with landscaping requirements. Mr. Belair then reviewed the history of the property. It was subdivided from a property off Swift St. All traffic was to be directed from the upper parking lot to Swift St. The exit will have to be narrowed and signed to this effect. He suggested one-way traffic through the area. They could then angle parking and not have as much pavement. Mr. Dinklage asked why there are so few parking spaces. Mr. Belair said he wasn't sure whether these were built from the old regulations or the new. He will check on this as requirements have been increased -3- DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD 7 DECEMBER 2004 The issue of the abutting neighbors in the residential district was raised. Mr. Belair said there will have to be a significant buffer and additional landscaping may be required to block headlights from shining into neighbors' backyards. The applicant indicated the presence of a berm for this purpose. Mr. Belair said this must be shown on the plan. Mr. Boucher then moved to continue Site Plan #SP-04-46 until 1February 2005. Ms. Quimby seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 7. Public Hearing: Appeal #AO-04-02 of Karen Alence appealing the decision of the Administrative Officer to issue zoning permit #ZP-04-391 for a single family dwelling at 11 Lyons Avenue: Mr. Belair said he received an application to raze an existing house at 11 Lyons Avenue and build a new house. The proposed new house met all the setback and height requirements. A single family home is a permitted use in that district. The maximum building coverage allowed is 20% and the proposed house is 14.6%. Mr Belair said he believed the proposed house met all the requirements of the Land Development Regulations, so he issued the permit. Ms. Alence said she had a question as to whether what is being built is what is shown on the plan. She was concerned that the applicant is not required to provide a survey and that she would have to bear the cost of a survey if she thought the house was being put too close to her property line. Mr. Krupp, a neighbor, expressed concern that the proposed house would block the sunlight from his house. He said there used to be a rule that you couldn't build a house that would block sunlight from another house. Mr. Dinklage said the city attempts to deal with this via setbacks and height restrictions. That is the extent of the DRB's involvement. Mr. Richardson added that 25 feet is the lowest allowable height in the city, and the proposed house meets that requirement. Mr. Dinklage reminded the applicant that it is their responsibility to place the foundation correctly so they don't put themselves in jeopardy. He also reminded the applicant that the current foundation is non -conforming and can't be used. Mr. Dinklage hoped the applicant would take care of concerns about the slope and potential erosion. He suggested that when the new foundation is staked out, the applicant show the area to neighbors to be sure it makes sense and there are no problems. -4- CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 (802) 846-4106 FAX (802) 846-4101 December 27, 2004 Steve Guild 24 Fairview Drive Essex Junction, VT 05452 Re: Minutes Dear Mr. Guild. - Enclosed, please find a copy of the minutes from the December 7, 2004 Development Review Board meeting. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Betsy Mc onough Administrative Assistant Encl. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONP 05403 (802) 846-4106 FAX (802) 846-4101 December 3, 2004 Steve Guild 24 Fairview Drive Essex Junction, VT 05452 Re: 792 Shelburne Road Dear Mr. Guild: Enclosed is the agenda for next Tuesday's Development Review Board meeting and staff comments to the Board. Please be sure that someone is at the meeting on Tuesday, December 7, 2004 at 7:30 p.m. at the City Hall Conference Room, 575 Dorset Street. If you have any questions, please give us a call. Sincerely, McDonough 9h Administrative Assistant Encl. e b U a a w V � H G W� EXISTING Q EXIT Q V � w EXISTING EXIT fi NEW ADDITION (504 scq ft) kvmm EXISTING KOTO RESTAURANT (5745 sc, ft) 0 n I— Z =a Q� -- - n W- W° Ix Z O1 0 � a 0 Y �E.DFLOOR i'LAN- 4�/ERALL�: ,,16.-,e RECEIVED 0410 SHW IMM OCT 2 ; 20M PROPOSED City Of SO. Budington FLOOR PLAN - OVERALL OR*" Ma Al U a a w 3 0 Al445 n A EXISTING DOOR -� EXISTING KOTO 8'-0"t— RESTAURANT (5745 sc,ft) FREEZER 0 STORAGEcli 0 i 2 Z ap Ai INFILL EXISTING COOLER DOOR, MATCH < I-- W EXISTING cl)o -__- 3'-0fix( -8" W z EXISTING DOOR INSULATED STEEL 00 TO REMAIN --- DOOR A/PANIC F—a HARDWARE DO n EXISTING NEW ADDITION _ ." D DPOW fff CHECKED O peak a,o RECEIVED %wnttE PROPOSED FLOOR FLAN OCT 2 a 2004 PROPOSED 1/50 a 1'-0" City of Bo. Burlington A2 EXISTING EXHAUST VENT EXISTING CMU WALL ASPHALT SHINGLES (MATCH EXISTING) — EXTERIOR' LIGHT FIXTURE NEW ADDITION _ EXISTING DOOR 1"X8" VERTICAL EXISTING VENT WOOD SIDING (STAIN FINISH) (-,'\�F.ROPOSE.DEAST ELEVAT' I ON 1/8" - 1'-0" NO _CEILING �► o ,I Ist FLOOR . EXISTING GAS METERS NEW ADDITION EXISTING EXISTING GALV. VENT ASPHALT BOTH SIDES SHINGLES 12 L PAVEMENT `— I"X8" VERTICAL WOOD SIDING (STAIN FINISH) PROPOSED NORTH ELEVATION 1/6" - I' —On EXISTING BRICK VENEER U a CA I I CHECKM ffe: sm srErr IME RECEIVED PROPOSED ELEVATIONS OCT z 7 2004 mtem m. * � pA *� City of So. Burlington No Text 4106 ^ :t. 20 2004 12:44PM P1 I Permit Number SP-A---�(— CITY OF SOUTH BUn NGTON APPLICATION FOR siTE PLAN REVIEW All information requested on this application must be completed in M. Failure to provide the requested information either on this application form or on the site plan will result in your application being rejected and a delay in the review before the Development Review Board. 1) OWNER OF RECORD (Nance as shown on deed, mailing address, phone and fax #) 7 (0' 2) LOCATION OF LAST RECORDED DEED (Book and page #) 3) APPLICANT (Name, mailing address phone and fax #) [ eh 1� c, a b i nN, 1 111;Z S�n�ll�u c ner ac 4) CONTACT PERSON (Name, mailing address, phone and fax #) ` ,�,Ida!!J Fg, i r-A -y '�� 1%T 5) PROJECT STREET ADDRJESS: 191 one ODV C A . Vd 6) TAX PARCEL ID # (can be obtained at Assessor's Office) 7) PROJECT DESCRIPTION a) Existing Uses on Property (including description and size of each separate use) M b) Propose Uses on property (include descrip 'on and size of each new use and a isting uses to main) X end GV.IL1�1�Ar c) Total building square footage on property (proposed buildings and existing buildings to remain) d) Height of building & number of floors (proposed buildings and existing buildings to rcmain, specify if basement and mezzanine) tD he, e) Number of residential units (if applicable, new units and existing units to remain) f) Number of employees & c9mpany vehicles (existing and proposed, note office versus non -office FROM : City of So. B I FAX NO. : 1 602 846 4106 "ct. 20 2004 12:45PM P2 I g) Other (list any other information pertincrit to this application not specifically requested above, please note if Overlay Districts are applicable): 8) LOT COVERAGE a) Building: Existing % Proposed % b) Overall (building, parkin , outside storage, etc) Existin %Proposed�l—%, c) Front yard (along each street) ExistinE; 13 _"/o Proposed % 9) COST ESTIMATES a) Building (including interior renovations): $ 8 Ben b) Landscaping: $ c) Other site improvements (please list with cost): � O[9D F- Obu` � OM 10) ESTIMATED TRAFFIC a) Average daily traffic for entire property (in and out): ad in 2 e,0 b) A-M. Peak hour for entire property (in and out): c) P.M. Peak hour for entire property (In and out): S �;5!7 D Ki g iZ;?,jj 11) PEAK HOURS OF OPERATION. •�J17 ►'7r+r� — f2y,rYl T� 12) PEAK DAYS OF OPERATION: :t i 8�4 r ► tc�- `t u r c�� 13) ESTIMATED PROJECT COMPLETION DATE: /O 402 %ter 1C`✓ . 14) SITE FLAN AND FEE 'x mul o"looS - - t �'l A site plan shall be submitted which shows the information listed on Exhibit A attached. Five (5) regular size copies and one reduced copy (1 V x 17") of the site plan must be submitted. A site plan application fee shall be paid to the City at the time of submitting the site plan application (see Exhibit A). F, FROM : City of So. B FAX NO. : 1 8e2 846 4106 Oct. 20 2004 12:45PM P3 1 hereby certify that all the information requested as part of this application has beer, submitted and is accurate to the best of my knowledge. Do not write below this line DATE OF SUBMISSION: REVIEW AUTHORITY: Development Review Board Administrative Officer I have reviewed this site plan and find it to be: Complete Incomplete Administrative Officer or Designee Date wo."; 0 ovvm 574, -IN i No Text k f• Ia� T* C� 1 Y .a becs nor. r� ale0 No Text CITY of SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT of PLANNING AND ZONING I i 'o'_ ICHIBAN OISHII - 792 SHELBURNE ROAD SITE PLAN APPLICATION #SP-04-46 FINDINGS of FACT AND DECISION Ichiban Oishii, hereafter referred to as the applicant, is seeking site plan approval to amend a previously approved plan for a 123 seat restaurant. The amendment consists of: 1) constructing a 500 square foot addition to the restaurant, and 2) constructing a 38 space parking lot expansion, 792 Shelburne Road. The Development Review Board held a public meeting on December 7, 2004. Steve Guild represented the applicant. Based on testimony provided at the above mentioned public meeting and the plans and supporting materials contained in the document file for this application, the Development Review Board finds, concludes, and decides the following: FINDINGS of FACT 1. The applicant is seeking site plan approval to amend a previously approved plan for a 123 seat restaurant. The amendment consists of: 1) constructing a 500 square foot addition to the restaurant, and 2) constructing a 38 space parking lot expansion, 792 Shelburne Road. 2. The expanded parking lot, which the subject of this application, has already been constructed in violation of the Land Development Regulations. This application is to correct that violation. (NOTE -Do we need to include this) 3. The subject property is located in the Commercial 1-Residential 15 Zoning District. 4. The owner of record of the property is Montaha Handy. 5. The plans consist of ??? Zoning District & Dimensional Requirements: Table 1. Dimensional Requirements C1 Zoning District Required Proposed A Min. Lot Size 40,000 SF 72,300 SF Max. Building Coverage 40% 8% A Max. Overall Coverage 70% 51 % 4 Max. Front Yard Coverage 30% 13% 4 Min. Front Setback 30' 60' 4 Min. Side Setback 10' 15, 4 Min. Rear Setback 30' 52' zoning compliance SITE PLAN REVIEW STANDARDS Section 14.06 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations establishes the following general review standards for all site plan applications: (a) The site shall be planned to accomplish a desirable transition from structure to site, from structure to structure, and to provide for adequate planting, safe pedestrian movement, and adequate parking areas. The proposed project is for the construction of a 500 square foot addition to an existing building and a 38 space parking lot. The site plan has been designed to accomplish a desirable transition from structure to site or from structure to structure. Planting areas and pedestrian movement patterns are sufficient. Pursuant to Table 13-2 of the Land Development Regulations, the proposed addition will require 9 parking spaces. The subject property was previously approved at 41 parking spaces, so a total of 50 parking spaces are required. The applicant is proposing to provide 81 parking spaces. (b) Parking shall be located to the rear or sides of buildings to the greatest extent practicable. The existing parking area on the subject property is to the side of the subject building and the proposed parking area is to the rear of the subject building. (c) Without restricting the permissible limits of the applicable zoning district, the height and scale of each building shall be compatible with its site and existing or adjoining buildings. The maximum height of the building will remain unchanged. (d) Newly installed utility services and service modifications necessitated by exterior alterations or building expansions shall, to the extent feasible, be underground. Pursuant to Section 15.13(E) of the Land Development Regulations, any new utility lines, services, and service modifications shall be underground. (e) The DRB shall encourage the use of a combination of common materials and architectural characteristics, landscaping, buffers, screens and visual interruptions to create attractive transitions between buildings of different architectural styles. The proposed project does not involve any buildings of different architectural styles, so this criterion is not applicable. (f) Proposed structures shall be related harmoniously to themselves, the terrain, and to existing buildings and roads in the vicinity that have a visual relationship to the proposed structures. The proposed addition relates harmoniously to the existing buildings in the area. Site plan applications shall meet the following specific standards as set forth in Section 14.07 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations: (a) The reservation of land may be required on any lot for provision of access to abutting properties whenever such access is deemed necessary to reduce curb cuts onto an arterial of collector street, to provide additional access for emergency or other purposes, or to improve general access and circulation in the area. It is not necessary to require any additional access easements as part of the proposed project. (b) Electric, telephone and other wire -served utility lines and service connections shall be underground. Any utility installations remaining above ground shall be located so as to have a harmonious relation to neighboring properties and to the site. Pursuant to Section 15.13(E) of the Land Development Regulations, any new utility lines, services, and service modifications shall be underground- (c) All dumpsters and other facilities to handle solid waste, including compliance with any recycling or other requirements, shall be accessible, secure and properly screened with opaque fencing to ensure that trash and debris do not escape the enclosure(s). The plans show a dumpster on the property, which appears to be adequately screened. (d) Landscaping and Screening Requirements Pursuant to Table 13-9 of the Land Development Regulations, the proposed project will require a minimum of $240 of landscaping. The application is not proposing any additional landscaping. However, pursuant to Section 13.06(B) of the Land Development Regulations, all parking areas containing twenty-eight (28) or more contiguous parking spaces and/or in parking lots with more than a single circulation lane, at least ten percent (10%) of the interior of the parking lot shall be landscaped islands planted with trees, shrubs and other plants. All interior and perimeter planting shall be protected by curbing unless specifically designed as a collection and treatment area for management of stormwater runoff. Interior planted islands shall have a minimum dimension of six (6) feet on any one side, and shall have a minimum square footage of sixty (60) square feet. Large islands are encouraged. Landscaping shall include a variety of trees, shrubs, grasses and ground covers. All planting shall be species hardy for the region and, if located in areas receiving road runoff or salt spray, shall be salt -tolerant. At least one (1) major deciduous shade tree shall be provided within or near the perimeter of each parking area, for every five (5) parking spaces. The trees shall be placed evenly throughout the parking lot to provide shade and reduce glare. Trees shall be placed a minimum of thirty (30) feet apart. Trees shall have a caliper equal to or greater than two and one-half (2 %) inches when measured on the tree stem, six (6) inches above the root ball. Where more than ten (10) trees are installed, a mix of species is encouraged; the species should be grouped or located in a manner that reinforces the design and layout of the parking lot and the site. The proposed parking area will have to conform these landscaping requirements, so the minimum landscaping requirement will be exceeded. Lighting Pursuant to Section 13.07(A) of the Land Development Regulations, all exterior lighting shall be shielded and downcasting to prevent light from spilling onto adjacent properties and rights -of -way. The applicant submitted exterior lighting details for the proposed parking area lighting fixtures (attached). They are in compliance with Appendix D of the Land Development Regulations. Access/Circulation Access to the subject property is provided via Shelburne Road and will not be altered through the proposed project. However, the vehicles in the proposed parking area shall exit only via the right-of-way that connects to Swift Street. As such, the traffic in the aisle of the proposed parking area shall be one-way, moving towards the Swift Street access. In addition, the width of the access drive connecting the existing and proposed parking areas shall be reduced to 10' wide to discourage two-way traffic. Finally, signage indicating that traffic movement within the aisles of the proposed parking area is one- way shall be installed, in addition to a "Do Not Enter" sign at the westerly end of the proposed parking area, adjacent to the ramp to the existing parking area. Traffic According to the ITE, 7th Edition (Land Use 931), the proposed 500 square foot addition will increase traffic on the subject property by 3.75 P.M. peak -hour vtes, for a total of 46.81 P.M. peak -hour vtes. Other The City Engineer reviewed the plans and provided comments in a memorandum dated October 28, 2004. DECISION Motion by , seconded by to approve Site Plan Application #SP-04-46 of Ichiban Oishii, subject to the following conditions: 1. All previous approvals and stipulations, which are not superseded by this approval, shall remain in effect. 2. This project shall be completed as shown on the plans submitted by the applicant, as amended by this decision, and on file in the South Burlington Department of Planning and Zoning. 3. The plan shall be revised to show the changes below and shall require approval of the Administrative Officer. Three (3) copies of the approved revised plan shall be submitted to the Administrative Officer prior to permit issuance. a. The plans shall be revised to comply with the requests of the City Engineer, prior to site plan approval. b. The plans shall be revised to show the right of way extending from the subject property to Swift Street. c. Pursuant to Section 13.01(G)(5) of the Land Development Regulations, the plans shall be revised to depict a bicycle rack. d. The plans shall be revised to comply with Section 13.06(B) of the Land Development Regulations. e. Pursuant to Section 13.06(B) of the Land Development Regulations, the plans shall be revised to depict snow storage areas that will minimize the potential for run-off. f. The plans shall be revised to indicate that traffic in the aisle of the proposed parking area shall be one-way, moving towards the Swift Street access. g. The plans shall be revised to indicate that signage regulating traffic movement within the aisles of the proposed parking area to one-way will be installed, in addition to a "Do Not Enter" sign. h. The plans shall be revised to reduce the width of the access drive connecting the two parking areas to 10' wide. 4. The applicant shall reply with the requests of the City Engineer as outlined in his comments dated October 28, 2004. 5. Pursuant to Section 15.13(E) of the Land Development Regulations, any new utility lines, services, and service modifications shall be underground. 6. Prior to issuance of a zoning permit, the applicant shall pay applicable traffic impact fees. 7. The applicant shall obtain a zoning permit within six (6) months pursuant to Section 17.04 of the Land Development Regulations or this approval is null and void. 8. The applicant shall obtain a Certificate of Occupancy/Compliance from the Administrative Officer prior to the use of the newly constructed parking lot and addition. 9. Any change to the site plan shall require approval by the South Burlington Development Review Board. Chuck Bolton — yea/nay/abstain/not present Mark Boucher — yea/nay/abstain/not present John Dinklage — yea/nay/abstain/not present Roger Farley — yea/nay/abstain/not present Michele Kupersmith — yea/nay/abstain/not present Larry Kupferman — yea/nay/abstain/not present Gayle Quimby — yea/nay/abstain/not present Motion carried by a vote of = Signed this day of December, 2004 by John Dinklage, Chair Please note: You have the right to appeal this decision to the Vermont Environmental Court, pursuant to 24 VSA 4471 and VRCP 76 in writing, within 30 days of the date this decision is issued. The fee is $225.00. If you fail to appeal this decision, your right to challenge this decision at some future time may be lost because you waited too long. You will be bound by the decision, pursuant to 24 VSA 4472 (d) (exclusivity of remedy; finality). CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD Report preparation date: December 1, 2004 \drb\sit\koto\site_plan.doc Plans received: October 27, 2004 792 SHELBURNE ROAD SITE PLAN APPLICATION #SP-0"6 Agenda #5 Meeting date: December 7, 2004 Owner Applicant Montaha Handy Ichiban Oishii, Inc. 75 Winooski Avenue 792 Shelburne Road Burlington, VT 05401 South Burlington, VT 05403 Property Information Tax Parcel 0020-01215-C Mixed Industrial & Commercial (IC) Zoning District 1.51 acres Location Ma h4 I 1. li CITY OF SOUTH BURLING TON 2 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING \drb\sit\koto\site plan doc Ichiban Oishii, hereafter referred to as the applicant, is seeking site plan approval to amend a previously approved plan for a 123 seat restaurant. The amendment consists of: 1) constructing a 500 square foot addition to the restaurant, and 2) constructing a 38 space parking lot expansion, 792 Shelburne Road. Associate Planner Brian Robertson and Administrative Officer Ray Belair, referred to herein as Staff, have reviewed the plans submitted on October 27, 2004 and have the following comments. The expanded parking lot, which the subject of this application, has already been constructed in violation of the Land Development Regulations. This application is to correct that violation. Zoning District & Dimensional Requirements: Table 1. Dimensional Requirements C1 Zoning District Required Proposed Min. Lot Size 40,000 SF 72,300 SF Max. Building Coverage 40% 8% Max. Overall Coverage 70% 51 % Max. Front Yard Coverage 30% 13% v' Min. Front Setback Min. Side Setback Min. Rear Setback 30' 52' 4 zoning compliance SITE PLAN REVIEW STANDARDS Section 14.06 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations establishes the following general review standards for all site plan applications: (a) The site shall be planned to accomplish a desirable transition from structure to site, from structure to structure, and to provide for adequate planting, safe pedestrian movement and adequate parking areas. The proposed project is for the construction of a 500 square foot addition to an existing building and a 38 space parking lot. The site plan has been designed to accomplish a desirable transition from structure to site or from structure to structure. Planting areas and pedestrian movement patterns are sufficient. Pursuant to Table 13-2 of the Land Development Regulations, the proposed addition will require 9 parking spaces. The subject property was previously approved at 41 parking spaces, so a total of 50 parking spaces are required. The applicant is proposing to provide 81 parking spaces. 1. Pursuant to Section 13.01(G) (5) of the Land Development Regulations, the plans shall be revised to depict a bicycle rack, prior to issuance of a zoning permit. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 3 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING \drb\sit\koto\site plan doc (b) Parking shall be located to the rear or sides of buildings to the greatest extent practicable. The existing parking area on the subject property is to the side of the subject building and the proposed parking area is to the rear of the subject building. (c) Without restricting the permissible limits of the applicable zoning district, the height and scale of each building shall be compatible with its site and existing or adjoining buildings. The maximum height of the building will remain unchanged. (d) Newly installed utility services and service modifications necessitated by exterior alterations or building expansions shall, to the extent feasible, be underground. 2. Pursuant to Section 15.13(E) of the Land Development Regulations, any new utility lines, services, and service modifications shall be underground. (e) The DRB shall encourage the use of a combination of common materials and architectural characteristics, landscaping, buffers, screens and visual interruptions to create attractive transitions between buildings of different architectural styles. The proposed project does not involve any buildings of different architectural styles, so this criterion is not applicable. (fj Proposed structures shall be related harmoniously to themselves, the terrain, and to existing buildings and roads in the vicinity that have a visual relationship to the proposed structures. The proposed addition relates harmoniously to the existing buildings in the area. Site plan applications shall meet the following specific standards as set forth in Section 14.07 of the South Burlington Land Development Requlations� (a) The reservation of land may be required on any lot for provision of access to abutting properties whenever such access is deemed necessary to reduce curb cuts onto an arterial of collector street to provide additional access for emergency or other purposes, or to improve general access and circulation in the area. Staff does not feel it is necessary to require any additional access easements as part of the proposed project. (b) Electric, telephone and other wire -served utility lines and service connections shall be underground. Any utility installations remaining above ground shall be located so as to have a harmonious relation to neighboring properties and to the site. Pursuant to Section 15.13(E) of the Land Development Regulations, any new utility lines, services, and service modifications shall be underground. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 4 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING \drb\sit\koto\site plan dog (c) All dumpsters and other facilities to handle solid waste, including compliance with any recycling or other requirements, shall be accessible, secure and properly screened with opaque fencing to ensure that trash and debris do not escape the enclosure(s). The plans show a dumpster on the property, which appears to be adequately screened. (d) Landscaping and Screening Requirements Pursuant to Table 13-9 of the Land Development Regulations, the proposed project will require a minimum of $240 of landscaping. The application is not proposing any additional landscaping. However, pursuant to Section 13.06(B) of the Land Development Regulations, all parking areas containing twenty-eight (28) or more contiguous parking spaces and/or in parking lots with more than a single circulation lane, at least ten percent (10%) of the interior of the parking lot shall be landscaped islands planted with trees, shrubs and other plants. All interior and perimeter planting shall be protected by curbing unless specifically designed as a collection and treatment area for management of stormwater runoff. Interior planted islands shall have a minimum dimension of six (6) feet on any one side, and shall have a minimum square footage of sixty (60) square feet. Large islands are encouraged. Landscaping shall include a variety of trees, shrubs, grasses and ground covers. All planting shall be species hardy for the region and, if located in areas receiving road runoff or salt spray, shall be salt -tolerant. At least one (1) major deciduous shade tree shall be provided within or near the perimeter of each parking area, for every five (5) parking spaces. The trees shall be placed evenly throughout the parking lot to provide shade and reduce glare_ Trees shall be placed a minimum of thirty (30) feet apart. Trees shall have a caliper equal to or greater than two and one-half (2 %) inches when measured on the tree stem, six (6) inches above the root ball. Where more than ten (10) trees are installed, a mix of species is encouraged, the species should he nrniin'Orf nr lnr n#f el in om41 4 n _,c_ . _ 4L - .J # J. _r l6_ pa-1,r_i y,-"-- -1 �ni v 1rrcu1i1c1 uia[ Ichnvil.cJ u,C UCP0JgU c11/U ICIYVU! UI Iflu rKl/ly IU( and the site. The proposed parking area will have to conform these landscaping requirements, so the minimum landscaping requirement will be exceeded. 3. The plans shall be revised to comply with Section 13.06(B) of the Land Development Regulations, prior to site plan approval. 4_ Pursuant to Section 13.06(B) of the Land Development Regulations, the plans shall be revised to depict snow storage areas that will minimize the potential for run-off, prior to issuance of a zoning permit. Lighting Pursuant to Section 13.07(A) of the Land Development Regulations, all exterior lighting shall be shielded and downcasting to prevent light from spilling onto adjacent properties and rights -of -way. The applicant submitted exterior lighting details for the proposed parking area lighting fixtures (attached). They are in compliance with Appendix D of the Land Development Regulations. Access/Circulation Access to the subject property is provided via Shelburne Road and will not be altered through the proposed project. However, the vehicles in the proposed parking area shall exit only via the right- of-way that connects to Swift Street. As such, the traffic in the aisle of the proposed parking area shall be one-way, moving towards the Swift Street access. In addition, the width of the access drive connecting the existing and proposed parking areas shall be reduced to 10' wide to discourage two-way traffic. Finally, signage indicating that traffic movement within the aisles of the CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 5 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD PLANNING & ZONING \drb\sit\koto\site plan doc proposed parking area is one-way shall be installed, in addition to a "Do Not Enter' sign at the westerly end of the proposed parking area, adjacent to the ramp to the existing parking area. 5. The plans shall be revised to indicate that traffic in the aisle of the proposed parking area shall be one-way, moving towards the Swift Street access, prior to site plan approval. 6. The plans shall be revised to indicate that signage regulating traffic movement within the aisles of the proposed parking area to one-way will be installed, in addition to a `Do Not Enter" sign, prior to site plan approval. 7. The plans shall be revised to reduce the width of the access drive connecting the two parking areas to 10' wide, prior to site plan approval. Traffic According to the ITE, 71h Edition (Land Use 931), the proposed 500 square foot addition will increase traffic on the subject property by 3.75 P.M. peak -hour vtes, for a total of 46.81 P.M. peak - hour vtes. 8. Prior to issuance of a zoning permit, the applicant shall pay applicable traffic impact fees. Other The City Engineer reviewed the plans and provided comments in a memorandum dated October 28, 2004 (attached). 9. The plans shall be revised to comply with the requests of the City Engineer, prior to site plan approval. 10. The plans shall be revised to show the right of way extending from the subject property to Swift Street, prior to site plan approval.. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the South Burlington Development Review Board not approve Site Plan Application #SP-04-46, until the plans have been revised to comply with Section 13.06(B) of the Land Development Regulations. Respectfully submitted, i Brian Robertson, Associate Planner Copy to: Ichiban Oishii, applicant I SITE INFORMATION: LOT SIZE: 72,300 S.F. BUILDING COVERAGE: 5,745 S.F. LOT COVERAGE (DRIVES, PARKING t WALKS): 28,460 E TOTAL COVERAGE: 34,205 S.F. q COVERAGE: 47% PIZZA NUT BURLINGTON PH LTD. PARTNERSHIP 764 SHELBURNE ROAD 242.72' PARKING EXISTING PARK I NG Mo ` I ` I 17 PARKING SPACES 1 � I i o P UP o_ q PARKING ONE-WAY TRAFFIC FLOW JAMA JPA E o O � 16 PA KIN PACE w w Q 4 0. N 1g2't 25'- 0 z S M HANDY —W SIZE: 250'X140' = 35, 000 4 - 4 4 WOOD FRAME S.F. (0.80 AC) o KOTO RESTAURANT 0. STORAGE SHED (EXISTING BLDG) �n o O GROWN-UP NAY DUMPSTER AND SHRUBS Fl 'Wf' 'WY q ••} \ H\ 150.00' g2.72' _ 50 A REX80 DEV. INC. J. KAUFMAN R. JEWETT VOL. 28q PG. 161 F. NANNON G. HURRAY R. RUEL as SSE: ,- _ 40w DATE: TD/TS O DRNW or CHECKED Or PROJECT: 0 SHEET TITLE. - EXISTING SITE PLAN MI" ro. Sp-1 0 LO SITE INFORMATION: LOT SIZE: 72,300 S.F. BUILDING COVERAGE: 6,24q S.F. LOT COVERAGE (DRIVES, PARKING 4 WALKS): 31.0551 S.F. TOTAL COVERAGE: 37,630 S.F. COVERAGE: 52: RECEIVED NO` ° 3 0 2004 City of So. Burlington 16 ,PARKI PIZZA HUT BURLINGTON PH LTD. PARTNERSHIP 764 SHELBURNE ROAD 242.72' w V z KOTO RESTAURANT (EXISTING BLDG) NEW 504 S.F. ADDITION 0 0 QD ® e _150.00, g2.72' _ BO DEV. INC. J_ KAUFMAN . 2801 PG. 161 w w u 4 IL N z Y 4 a- . w EXISTING PARKING EXISTING PARKING tPI i i I I I I I I lu"I I I 1 1 RA1�P 38 PARKING PAVED 1 1 SPACES 1 (q,g84 S.F.) �® LL - L-—a------�---� t 1`1 HANDY ZS j® EXTERIOR LIGHT SIZE: 250'X140' = EXTERIOR LIGHT FIXTURE 351000 S.F. (0.80 tFITUREX DUMPSTER AC) GROWN-UP HAY AND SHRUBS R. JEWETT I F. HANNON C, 0 4 C~ z z A PURPOSED SITE PLAN SP-2 BILL SZYNIANSKI, City Engineer City of South Burlington 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 846-4io6 (phone) 846-4101 (fax) COMMENTS Koto Shelburne Road 10/28/04 1. Details of exterior light fixtures shall be furnished for review and approval. 2. New parking lot drainage shall be shown on the plan. 3. Vacant area of the new parking lot shall be cleared of debris and the area leveled and reseeded. a plom Uyl. sm HWKm 9r: wxzr.. SHM WME EXISTING SITE PLAN awwa mm Sp-1 CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLAN—,NL TING & ZONE',TC 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 (802) 846-4106 FAX (802) 846-4101 December 50, 2002 Tom Cheng Koto Restaurant 792 Shelburne Road 5. Burlington, Vermont 05403 Re: Parking Expansion Dear Mr. Cheng: Enclosed please find a copy of the Findings of Fact and Decision issued by the Director of Planning & Zoning dated December 50, 2002. Pleaoe note the conditions of approval including the requirement that the site plan be revised. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Raymond J' Belair Administrative Officer CC: Joe Handy Encl. (,--117' -F SOF T aaZ s,TCTTON DE- ARTIMED,7 0F PLANNE4G i ZONEIG 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURiLLNGTOi,T, VEFiMOINT 05403 (802)846-4106 FAX (802) 846-4101 Permit Number SP- APPLICATION FOR SITE PLAN W All information requested on this application must be completed in M. Failure to provide the requested information either on this application form or on the site plan will result in your application being rejected and a delay in the review before the Development Review Board. 1) OWT TJ —R OF RECORD (Narne as shown on deed, mailing address, phone and fax #) MuvN�%r- v�,v� \Vacs A 2) LOCATION OF LAST RECORDED DEED (Book and page 4) ox ; a agZ — 02 S 3) APPLICANT (Name, mailing address, phone and fax,4) 4) CONTACT PERSON (Name; mailing address, prone and fax 4) 5) PROJECT STREET ADDRESS: V\ ci L S \�•z \ �a�- C—�� 6) TAX PARCEL ID # (can be obtained at Assessor's Office) �:� 1 `� Z — C-- 7) PROJECT DESCIZIPTION' a.) EXisting Uses on Property (including description and size of each separate use; 9-4—S V t,, (-Lw)C— - b) Proposed -Uses on property (include description and size of each new use and existing uses to remain) c' c) Total building square footage on property (proposed buildings and existing buildings to remain) d.) Height of building & number of floors (proposed buildings and existing buildings to remain, specify if basement and mezzanine) 0 at Fc e) Number of residential ]hits (if applicable, new units and existing units to remain) f) -Nlutnber of ernplovees &- company vehicles (existing and proposed, note office versus non -office emploveesl g) Other (7I5I any other infbnnahon ver"—riel]t to 'CIS ag'3pLicaE1(:31 net %;e ;iLcally requested above, please note if Overiay E1'�.cts are applicable): 3) LOT COVED.. GE a) Building E�dstihg _6 % Proposed % b) Overall (building, par -Icing, outside storage, etc) Existin&__-4_j_% Proposed % c) Front yard (along each street) Exdstin.gIj% Proposed % 9) COST ESTUVIATES a) Building (including interior renovations): $ 'o) Landscaping: 3 5 L t � lzv c) Other site insprovements (please list with cost): 10) ESTIMATED TRAFFIC a) Average daily trza Elie for entire property (in and out): b) A /i. Peak hour for entire property (in and out): c) P.M. Peak hour for entire property (In and out): c�1e�5 11) PE_� K HOURS OF OPERATION: cl 12) PEAK DAYS OF OPERATION: 13) ESTl%IATED PROJECT COMPLETI0N DATE: l4) SITE PLA2N AND FEE A site plan shall be submitted which shows the information listed on Ea-l3,ibit A attached. Five (5) _egniar size copies and one reduced copy (11" :, 17") of the site plan must be submitted. A site plan application fer shall be paid to the C'ty at the time of subm-itting the site plan application. (see Exhibit ). i hereby Certify that all the information requested as part of this application has been submitted and is accurate to the best of my knowledge. tlelllti SIGMA GF A, PLICANT 11 SIGNATURE OF P, GPE OWNER Do not write below this lime DATE OF SUBMISSION: �� � � 6 REVIEW AUTHORITY: ❑ Development Review Board Director, Planning &.Zoning I have reviewed this site plan application and find it to be: Complete ❑ Incomplete of Planning & .Zoning or Designee Date SWIFT STltwr — OWAV NoTow ALL 09-O MM TO M V19tWISD ATM MTS AND ' ItIPM, ANY POCROMAM" TOM OSSIWbt. M. STWVw* 6R 1 SWIFT *TEAT � 67 SHIFT STRM � o z I U (O"MMAND'MINIMUM) hM z A � A PWA M!r MftMGTGN FH LTD. PAWNIMMIF PaSTING PARKING 764 SWNLS~ ROAD ITFT I I I I I FTFF) 0 OQSTMG ►ARKMG o:T _ ao.rx — • H w -low LAWN peo.os' Dual f or. AFIAb V, aaqq LN1J G1 V I-ARKMG IWACSS T RAfs� 0 PARKMS WACAS � O(N � rl Q MAW 1� D TR.I�NCNE 9 s S r7 FMNDY RAtltf OD sK:N 96d)MO' • 0.000 S.r, Ct (06o Ac1 • .) � olgOL. E 11 STONES 91 AM I I-L* WAY Reim- 0211' orwn er: sco MOM _ . SHM IIRC LAWN (Nxwr. . HLM) - o • r ORAM M"PW ER EXISTING SITE SLSGT, 7 0 PLAN a — LAWN • • � �+• � � — 6NJAIP N0. a SP1RDVD DN. INC. VOI.. 9M tS. 1N J. KAI "W, R. JSWl7'T F. NAmww R, PLANNER 658-7955 City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT05403 FAX 658-4748 September 27, 1994 SECOND NOTICE Salamin & Mountaha Handy 1333 Williston Road South Burlington, Vermont 05403 Re: Zoning Violations, 792 Shelburne Road Dear Mr. & Mrs. Handy: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Please be advised that you are in violation of Section 27.10, Zoning Permits of the City of South Burlington Zoning Regulations. Your violation consists of commencing land development without a zoning permit. The land to the south of 45 Swift Street, which is now part of 792 Shelburne Road, is being used for the storage of motor vehicles and filling without zoning permits. Pursuant to 24 VSA 4444, you have seven (7) days in which to cure this violation or be subject to legal action and fines of up to $50 per day for each day the violations continue. You are not entitled to an additional warning notice for a violation occurring after the seven (7) days. If you have any questions, please give me a call. Sin rely, Raymond J. Belair, Zoning and Planning Assistant RJB/mcp cc: Richard Ward Dianne Kenney, Esquire Certified Letter #P 280 219 053 CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 (802) 846-4106 FAX (802) 846-4101 February 28, 2002 Koto's Restaurant 792 Shelburne Road South Burlington, Vermont 05403 Re: Parking Lot Expansion Dear Sir or Madam: Please be advised that removal of a portion of a fence behind your property for the . purpose of cleaning up the land to the east of the restaurant is acceptable. The use of this area for a parking lot cannot begin until a zoning permit is issued by the City. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Raymond J. Belair Administrative Officer Td STEVEN F. STITZEL PA171 R. PAGE- DIANNE L. KENNEY (iALtiO AUMI-I`I'K ll IN N.Y.) STITZEL & PAGE, P.C. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 171 BATTERY STREET BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05401 (802) 660-2555 (VOICEITDD) FAX (802) 000-2552 May 12, 1994 Salamin & Mountaha Handy 133 Williston Road South Burlington VT 05403 Re: Zoning Violations at 792 Shelburne Road Dear Mr. and Mrs. Handy: OF COUNSEI. ARTHUR W. CI?RNOSIA ROBERT 1.. FLIETCHER This firm represents the City of South Burlington. On May 3, 1994, you were informed by the City that you are currently storing motor vehicles and filling on the property which is now part of 792 Shelburne Road, in violation of the City of South Burlington Zoning Regulations. Since you have taken no action in response to that letter, the City has authorized us to commence legal action against you. In the event that you do not completely remedy this violation or make an agreement with the City of South Burlington on a date certain upon which the violation will be remedied, we will begin legal action on Tuesday, May 17, 1994. DLK/mld cc: Ray Belair SON1397.cor #2674 Sincerely, Dianne L. Kenney 47, .�P/1-yy City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 FAX 658-4748 PLANNER 658-7955 May 3, 1994 Salamin & Mountaha Handy 1333 Williston Road South Burlington, Vermont 05403 Re: Zoning Violations, 792 Shelburne Road Dear Mr. & Mrs. Handy: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Please be advised that you are in violation of Section 20.10, Zoning Permits of the City of South Burlington Zoning Regulations. Your violation consists of commencing land development without a zoning permit. The land to the south of 45 Swift Street, which is now part of 792 Shelburne Road, is being used for the storage of motor vehicles and filling without zoning permits. Pursuant to 24 VSA 4444, you have seven (7) days in which to cure this violation or be subject to legal action and fines of up to $50 per day for each day the violations continue. You are not entitled to an additional warning notice for a violation occurring after the seven (7) days. If you have any questions, please give me a call. Sincebly, �- �(4 Raymo d J. Belair, Zoning and Planning Assistant RJB/mcp cc: Richard Ward Dianne Kenney, Esquire Certified Letter #P280 219 013 Pag _,�� l�l' l T ljlyr.ttn� vrrl�.r� ,)- ''11 Received 19.�;at LQ-A_M Recorded in ' _._ on page- / Of So. Burlia, I Land Rector —/ Attest: WARRANTY DEED Margaret A. Picard, City 6" KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS: THAT, ROBERT C. KELLY of Shelburne, in the County of Chittenden and State of Vermont, GRANTOR, in the consideration of TEN AND MORE DOLLARS paid to my full satisfaction by SALAMIN HANDY and MOUNTAHA HANDY, of Colchester in the County of Chittenden and State of Vermont, GRANTEE, by these presents, do freely GIVE, GRANT, SELL, CONVEY AND CONFIRM unto the said GRANTEE, SALAMIN HANDY and MOUNTAHA HANDY, husband and wife as tenants by the entirety, and their heirs and assigns forever, a certain piece of land in South Burlington in the County of Chittenden and State of Vermont, described as follows, viz: Being all and the same lands and premises and right of way and easement conveyed to Robert C. Kelly by warranty deed of Robert C. Kelly and Charles E. Jennings dated October � 1992 and recorded in Volume , Page of the City of South Burlington Land Records and being more particularly described therein as follows: "A. A parcel of land with any and all improvements thereon, being located southerly of Swift Street in the City of South Burlington and containing 0.80 acres, more or less, the herein conveyed parcel of land being depicted as "Kelly & Jennings to S. & M. Handy, 0.80 Ac." on a plan entitled "Plan Showing Annex to Handy Property From Kelly & Jennings, Shelburne Rd., So. Burl., Vt." prepared by Warren A. Robenstien dated January, 1992 and recorded in Volume , Page of the City of South Burlington Land Records and being more particularly described as follows: Beginning at a point marked by an iron pipe set in the ground, said point being located south 19 degrees, 54 minutes west, a distance of 275.34 feet, more or less, from the southerly sideline of Swift Street, said point being in the boundary between the herein conveyed lands and premises and lands and premises depicted on the above -referenced plan as now or formerly of S. & M. Handy and marking the northwesterly corner of the herein conveyed parcel of land, and proceeding in a southerly direction along the boundary of said lands and premises depicted as now or formerly of S. & M. Handy for a distance of 140.00 feet, to a point marked by an iron pin set in the ground, said point marking the southwesterly L ATNA M. & T corner of the herein conveyed lands and premises SCHWEYER & ETZETZLAFF and marking the intersection of the boundaries of PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION the herein conveyed lands and premises and lands ATTORNEYS 308 MAIN STREET �9. LATHAM, EASTMAN, '-IWEYER & TETZLAFF IFESSIONAL CORPORATION ATTORNEYS 306 MAIN STREET P.O. BOX S66 BURLINGTON. VERMONT C05402-OS68 and * imises depicted on the above- ferenced plan as n, or formerly of S. & M. Handy .nd R. Jewett; thence turning left forming an interior angle of 90 degrees, 21 minutes, 50 seconds and proceeding in an easterly direction along the boundaries of lands and premises depicted on the above -referenced plan as now or formerly owned by R. Jewett, F. Hannon, C. Murray, and R. Ruel for a distance of 250.04 feet, more or less, to a point marked by an iron pipe set in the ground, said point marking the southeasterly corner of the herein conveyed lands and premises and the intersection of the boundaries of the herein conveyed lands and premises and lands and premises depicted on the above -referenced plan as now or formerly of R. Ruel, E. LeBlanc and now or formerly of Dunn & St. Amond; thence turning left forming an interior angle of 89 degrees, 37 minutes, 45 seconds and proceeding in a northerly direction along the boundary of lands and premises depicted on said plan as now or formerly of Dunn & St. Amond for a distance of 140.00 feet, more or less, to a point marked by an iron pipe set in the ground, said point marking the northeasterly corner of the herein conveyed lands and premises; thence deflecting to the left forming an interior angle of 90 degrees, 22 minutes, 15 seconds and proceeding in a westerly direction for a distance of 250.02 feet, more or less, to the point or place of beginning. Grantee is hereby given an easement and right of way for storing snow removed from a portion of the lands and premises described above subject to the terms and conditions set forth herein. The area subject to this easement is located northerly of the northwest corner of the above described parcel of land and is rectangular with easterly and westerly lines of 4 feet and northerly and southerly lines of 40 feet. The herein granted easement is for the storage of snow removed from the portion of a driveway to be constructed immediately southerly and adjacent to the easement only. No other snow shall be stored on the area subject to this easement. Portions of the herein conveyed lands and premises are subject to an easement for use by the public as a recreational and bicycle pathway as established by an easement deed from Robert C. Kelly and Charles E. Jennings to the City of South Burlington dated October :�o , 1992 and recorded in Volume , Page of the City of South Burlington Land Records and is depicted on the above -referenced plan. The herein conveyed lands and premises are conveyed subject to Deferral of Permit No. DE-4-1815 dated September 28, 1992 and recorded in Volume , Page of the City of South Burlington Land Records and are subject to the following: WAIVER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS -2- LATHAM. EASTMAN. SCHWEVER & TETZLAFF PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION ATTORNEYS 308 MAIN STREET P.O. BOX 568 BURLINGTON, VERMONT OS402-0568 In order to comply with th, tate of Vermont Environmental Protection Rules on the subdivision of lands and the disposal of waste, including sewage, the grantee shall not construct or erect a structure or building on the parcel of land conveyed herein, the useful occupancy of which will require the installation of plumbing and sewage treatment facilities or convey this land without first complying with said State Regulations. The grantee by acceptance of this deed acknowledges that this lot may not qualify for approval for development under the appropriate environmental protection or health regulations and that the State may deny an application to develop the lot. Reference is hereby made to the following: 1. State of Vermont Water Supply and Waste Water Disposal Permit No. WW-4-0547 dated September 28, 1992 and recorded in Volume , Page of the City of South Burlington Land Records. 2. State of Vermont Subdivision Permit No. EC-4-1691 dated September 28, 1992 and recorded in Volume , Page of the City of South Burlington Land Records. Reference is hereby made to a deed of easement from Lewis E. Wolfe, Roger B. Kennedy and Melvin Lichtig to the New England Telephone and Telegraph Company dated August 9, 1977 and recorded in Volume 131, Page 490 of the City of South Burlington Land Records. The herein conveyed parcel of land is a portion of the lands and premises conveyed to Robert C. Kelly and Charles E. Jennings by warranty deed of the New England Telephone and Telegraph Company dated September 25, 1987 and recorded in Volume 254, Page 93 of the City of South Burlington Land Records. B. A right of way and easement over the existing driveway extending from the northerly boundary of the above -described lands and premises to the southerly sideline of Swift Street. The herein conveyed right of way and easement is 20 feet in width and consists of the right of way depicted on the above -referenced plan as 1120-foot R.O.W." The herein conveyed right of way and easement extends over the remaining lands and premises conveyed to Robert C. Kelly and Charles E. Jennings by warranty deed of the New England Telephone and Telegraph Company dated September 25, 1987 and recorded in Volume 254, Page 93 of the City of South Burlington Land Records. The right of way and easement shall be used in common with the owners, assignees and tenants of the remaining property for ingress and egress to Swift Street. -3- LATHAM. EASTMAN, SCHWEVER & TETZLAFF PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION ATTORNEYS 306 MAIN STREET P.O. BOX 568 BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05402-0568 Th- herein grantee, his heirs, s—cessors and as gns shall be solely responsi : for maintaining the right of way and easement in good repair. Grantee agrees to pave the right of way and easement and construct appropriate curbs. Grantee further agrees to enlarge the existing curb cut on Swift Street serving the right of way and easement from 10 feet to 20 feet. Grantee's obligation to pave the right of way and easement, construct appropriate curbs and enlarge the existing curb cut on Swift Street shall not arise until such time as the above -described lands and premises are developed as part of a project involving adjacent property now owned by Salamin Handy and Mountaha Handy, the adjacent property having been conveyed to Salamin Handy and Mountaha Handy by warranty deed of Lowell T. Spillane and Susan G. Spillane dated February 17, 1987 and recorded in Volume 219, Page 247 of the City of South Burlington Land Records. Reference is hereby made to the above mentioned instruments, the records thereof, the references therein made and their respective records and references in further aid of this description. The parcel hereby conveyed shall upon such conveyance be merged with the property owned by grantees which they acquired by warranty deed of Lowell T. Spillane and Susan G. Spillane dated February 17, 1987 and recorded in Volume 219, Page 247 of the land records of the City of South Burlington. The property with which the parcel is hereby being merged is commonly known as 792 Shelburne Road in South Burlington, Vermont. Upon recording of this deed the parcel conveyed hereby and the above -referenced property with which the parcel is being merged shall be considered a single parcel of land. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD said granted premises, with all the privileges and appurtenances thereof, to the said GRANTEES, SALAMIN HANDY and MOUNTAHA HANDY, husband and wife, as tenants by the entirety, their heirs and assigns, to their own use and behoof forever; And I the said GRANTOR, ROBERT C. KELLY, do for myself and my heirs, executors and administrators, do covenant with the said GRANTEES, SALAMIN HANDY and MOUNTAHA HANDY, their heirs 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 same in manner aforesaid, that they are FREE FROM EVERY ENCUMBRANCE, except as above stated and except for the real estate taxes which shall be prorated MIC Vol. Fagg as of the date of this conveyance. I hereby engage to WARRANT AND DEFEND the same against all lawful claims whatever, except as above stated. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I hereunto set my hand and seal this �SbVt- day of October, 1992. #en C, Robert C. Kelly STATE CHITTENDEN COUNTY, SS. At , Vermont, this day of October, 1992, ersonally appeared Robert C. Kelly and he acknowledged this instrument,(by him sealed and subscribed to be his freejaLande(Ld Before me Nota blic NDW1392 a:kelly2.wd.1-5/tami Vermont property Transfer Tax 32 V. S. A. Chap. 231 - ACKNOWLEDGEMENT - FrUN FEUD -TW PAD - SGAM CF HEX7,1 CERT OECD. VT LN0 = L DEVELOP en F}" AU CM NECD Return No. 'TrDate A1�r�7 `� 19a•2 LATHAM, EASTMAN. `—LAMOUREUX & STONE- 14 Morse Drive Consulting Engineers, Inc. Essex )unction, Vermont 05452 (802) 878-4450 June 1, 1992 Mr. Salamin Handy 75 South Winooski Avenue Burlington, Vermont 05401 RE: Proposed Motel and Addition to Bonanza Restaurant 792 Shelburne Road, South Burlington Dear Mr. Handy: 27 High Street St. Albans, Vermont 05478 (802) 524-5245 As requested, we have reviewed the parking requirements and proposed trip generation for the above -referenced project, which has been revised to add a 72-room motel and to reduce the Bonanza restaurant from 5,000 sq.ft. to 3,750 sq.ft. The seating capacity of the restaurant will be similarly reduced from 178 to 123. The required number of parking spaces necessary to adequately serve both the new motel and restaurant were originally obtained from Joe Weith, City Planner. According to Mr. Weith's calculations, the South Burlington Zoning Regulations require 83 parking spaces for an 80 room motel plus 67 spaces for a 178 seat restaurant, for a total of 150 parking spaces. This was for the original proposal. With the new reductions in the project size, the motel will require 75 spaces, and the restaurant 49 spaces, for a new total of 124 parking spaces. The combination of certain land -uses can reduce the required number of parking spaces through the use of shared parking. According to the publication "Shared Parking, Urban Land Institute, 1983", when restaurants and motels are combined, the number of parking spaces needed by the restaurant can be reduced by 50%. No other diurnal or seasonal reductions are permitted for the combination of these two land -uses. For this project, shared parking reduces the required number of spaces to 100. `}" 5 eel L.4s � /tod 4,44 Likewise, it can be reasonably expected that there will be some reduction in the trip generation of this project due to the combination of these two land -uses. We met with Joe Weith on May 18th to discuss the procedures for calculating the trip generation of this project. The outcome of that meeting was that it was agreed to treat this project Civil, Environmental & Transportation Engineering • Planning • Land Surveying Mr. Salamin Handy June 1, 1992 Page 2 as an hotel instead of a separate restaurant and motel. It was also agreed that the calculations must be based on full occupancy, not average occupancy. For the revised project, using these procedures results in an estimated p.m. peak hour trip generation of 56 vte/hour. (� v t e f i�,� s� ��• , f y r�., .�. ��,,° �,i We thank you for this opportunity to be of service. Should you have any questions or if we may be of additional assistance, please feel free to contact us. Sincerely, Ikrra Roger Dickinson, P.E. cc. Gabe Handy Joe Weith r/9211 han3.rjd 171X/J�J/) /lam%E� ��J//%i.li S .�3 -T7CC�'e CS3%) Qu,4��rY �S7�/�n�T - 5-� ; o GF�} - / �8 S69%5 ,JP OAIA5� pn '64J X/4 � 55-) -= 3,,� f -7— — o;?K. 75- r ----------- 6174-4 azn h / i #t 0 V) PAR * -1' / i N P v T a (t 0' v v v We call our NP system the third system in electrophotography. Always • to Lfi' S #+ !'°) t+ Vt guarantees sharp and Clear images. Completely dry copies. Uses ordinary i td e-eft h# $, ,i!aKJ, il:i paper. High sensitivity, high contrast. high quality. Fine eradation and O91.5 jjjjI -' IIIII2 5 t 'A4 elimination of the edge effect. High economy in copy making and low • 11 running cost. In comparison with conventional elect rophotographic system p 10 111 p�l "� already on the market, the CANON NI' System offers many superior I I2.2 I_f fi �_- �36 = features and a wide range of application. We call our NI' system the lk T t'b t <c 2.0 i third system in electrophotography. Always guarantees sharp and Clear images. Completely dry copies. Uses ordinary paper. High sensitivity. iF�x II I_8 We call � ® ®■■■■. to paper. L 2 5 I paper. IIIII 111111.4 IIIII .6 1 0 9 a 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 eliminate t f�#ti'ttC���t', 7i=i9'��F6i CI3y"� C. 'I4oft'AI_b$in runningcost. In comparison with conventional e t`��t'##•i'/i�hitl:1L'>t#�Ft• 1►Z#�IMYlk"#i#Fr�tCtt>'ixrlfF�i`t' already on the market, the CANON NP Syst Z t' b + NIMC t. i' / i it 1`19)I91It -Ir N P v x -T 1. U 0 :9) features and a wide range of application. W -. -----. -- ---- - _ 147-!�A)�ATt. t/,tdl0A, t�tatfi'tibt'�blE(I� �' it '�d t' *fi/i#t0ODPAR -t'/iNPIz7.1.(10-=V) 19% rAt:L7),C. -) f ttt'tr=t 1� 84.- K9T td =1 t-fifth#$. A-!5It, Al:1 -Zt, IRL. i�lL:6t, <fV1V-IIAx(119 t, rt Yet_ 11(1NPvA-314fh6illLtl t; 7 R F 62<13r%� 1�tci; vy#l1�fi'f:';L'#ki�i. '#►#tIFtE!'! ®g 4 Ile VS, N t. 6td 9 We ca em the third system in elec guara Clear images. Completely paper. 10 ity, high contrast, high qu elimin ge effect. High economy running cost. In comparison with conventional e already on the market, the CANON NP Syst features and a wide range of application. We third system in electrophotography. Always`k * -Ir l i N P i� T 1 1t sTS v7 !c•;c?tc F =� 4 to � e->tif t tL� t, i;':i.�,.419:. i'::i� -z-t�. 3CL. i�L 6 tt < f#f/•(t,k:Ur1Z`t. i!t1W i TIZfs4b7iiJ, •FtLIINPi7, J.;;fflLtz 1iIblttCt_LXt', 1 :,7=7, b i<13�fyi io)#.q;(:;ilE''I%#ilWf, %X,it!If,%, �Tt'bf�7•fS(''F�dlTt. fit'/ itttl�INl4��t:i' 44, t /� tj t. b. y 6 4, IIIII I t. lfidt�itEt_ic"it I:F7Qti�l�— We call our NP system the third system in electrophotography. Always 11 guarantees sharp and Clear images. Completely dry copies. Uses ordinary paper. High sensitivity, high contrast, high quality. Fine eradation and elimination of the edge effect. high economy in copy making and low (� running cost. In comparison with conventional electrophotographic system already on the market, the CANON NP System offers many superior features and a wide range of application. We call our NI' system the third system in electrophotography. Always guarantees sharp and Clear canon TEST SHEET-NA2 CUSTOMER: MODEL: SERIAL NO.: DATE: EXPOSURE SETTINC: COUNTER READING: COPY MODE []BEFORE []AFTER ADJUSTMENT (CHOOSE ONE) ttifVAJiAT't. el-til04, 6%-7)0f.%311v1k10ItX:3t' We call our NP system the third system in electrophotography. Always guarantees sharp and Clear images. Completely dry copies. Uses ordinary paper. high sensitivity, high contrast, high quality. Fine eradation :out elimination of the edge effect. High economy in copy making and low running cost. In 1.0 i-" ul12.8 IIIII 2�.5 uryry tographic system already on the � 1.. s many superior features and a S=° �II��� 2.2 I I= NP system the third system in a 116 IlM sharp and Clear images. Comple — WO IIII 2 0 High sensitivity, high contrast, hi IIIII 1 1 tion of the edge # -t' / i N P i A =r• L. It •"1: .9) -G f•''i t R[It,99)�ttt>ti �.0 So 1111122_1 IIIII2-5 1 3.2 III 22_2 3.66 �.� 1.0 II 20 11 I8 IIIII 25 I 1.4 1.6 mparison with convention !roph rket, the CANON NI' S�efft offe e range of application. We call of �-t/iNPi7TL(til''.' :O)lr-itl 6R;►.l44o> '% ttt' r-tifi:i r bpi C S�fi•Itikil(tfZ #. ,�ENF!i C S)t -ftL11NPv7t1, IZJIILt- -r 7i=i1>7, F 6V<ilEl� <, 7 t'/'.tilG!#iti. t"l�tsLfi•tibt'�b 8 t1_st6ta<ik c stem the third system in electrop d Clear images. Completel• I c ivity, high contrast, high edge effect. high economy in c mparison with conventional electroph, rket, the CANON NP System nffe: e range of application. We call oc ctropholography. Always guarantee, NPv7,T1.13•'.1S •.f"i•!' 6t' �6t4.'!"AV) ILk,t'::7 rl'.li $11.11NPixT1I-1ZIll1.fz*•'V ; io�t,'i':fiYL'r'#£ifi, 'I!�#tll+l4'A2ut#tIFry Tt. �i-/ i3tl'Iv)INIiL•Pt•/ iN I' t'!',tilf�l#ii. tl..taLti•i,6t�t6#4:t� ilk T� !_ ti?!_ F 9 •f r. � h __ fi. ti ti i Gl '� s59i -:: --V x G / --z (00- lQh I - xa i� , Ys� l �f7LZ/1 .... .. ......... Y of 14 Morse Drive Essex Junction, Vermont 05452 (802) 878-4450 Mr. Salamin Handy 75 South Winooski Avenue Burlington, Vermont 05401 LAMOUREUX & STONE Consulting Engineers, Inc. May 12, 1992 RE: Proposed Motel and Addition to Bonanza Restaurant 792 Shelburne Road, South Burlington Dear Mr. Handy: 27 High Street St. Albans, Vermont 05478 (802) 524-5245 As requested, we have reviewed the parking requirements and proposed trip generation for the above -referenced project, which is to add an 80-room motel behind and connected to the existing Bonanza restaurant. The required number of parking spaces necessary to adequately serve both the new motel and restaurant was obtained from Joe Weith, City Planner. According to Mr. Weith's calculations, the South Burlington Zoning Regulations require 83 parking spaces for the motel plus 67 spaces for the restaurant, for a total of 150 parking spaces. The combination of certain land -uses can reduce the required number of parking spaces through the use of shared parking. According to the publication "Shared Parking, Urban Land Institute, 1983", when restaurants and motels are combined, the number of parking spaces needed by the restaurant can be reduced by 50%. No other diurnal or seasonal reductions are permitted for the combination of these two land -uses. For this project, shared parking reduces the required number of spaces to 117. Likewise, it can be reasonably expected that there will be some reduction in the trip generation of this project due to the combination of these two land -uses. There are two adjustments which can be made to the trip generation which has been previously estimated for this project. The first would be to treat this project as simply a motel instead of a motel plus a restaurant. In the ITE land -use description for a motel, a motel "often" includes a restaurant. As noted in our letter of April 1, 1992, when treated as two separate land -uses, a motel plus a restaurant, the projected p.m. Civil, Environmental & Transportation Engineering • Planning • Land Surveying Mr. Salamin Handy May 12, 1992 Page 2 peak hour trip generation of this project equals 68 vte/hour. In contrast, if this project were to be treated as an 80-room motel, in which the restaurant is an ancillary facility, its p.m. peak hour trip generation would be estimated to equal 46 vte/hour. Both of the above estimates are based on full occupancy. Since the ITE trip generation data for motels and hotels are also based on 'occupied room", a second adjustment would be to factor in an average occupancy rate. According to information which you have provided, the typical annual average occupancy rate for motels and hotels in this area is less than 60%. Using an average occupancy factor of 60% reduces the average weekday p.m. peak hour trip generation of an 80-room motel with ancillary restaurant to 28 vte/hour. We thank you for this opportunity to be of service. Should you have any questions or if we may be of additional assistance, please feel free to contact us. Sincerely, i Roger Dickinson, P.E. cc. Gabe Handy r/9211 han3.rjd r LAMOUREUX & STONE 14 Morse Drive Consulting Engineers, Inc. Essex Junction, Vermont 05452 (802) 878-4450 April 1, 1992 Mr. Salamin Handy 75 South Winooski Avenue Burlington, Vermont 05401 RE: Proposed Motel and Addition to Bonanza Restaurant 792 Shelburne Road, South Burlington Dear Mr. Handy: 27 High Street St. Albans, Vermont 05478 (802) 524-5245 As requested, we have calculated the revised trip generation of adding an 80-room motel behind and connected to the existing Bonanza restaurant. Our traffic impact evaluation of February 20, 1992, analyzed the impacts of a 60- room motel. The following table presents the original and revised p.m. peak hour vehicular trip generation of this project. 4 .1 _1 Proposed Proposed F--J-Existing (60-morn motel) I (80-room motel) Bonanza 22 22 22 Motel - 35 46 II TOTAL I 22 I 57 68 The increased trip generation of an 80-room motel at this location, compared to that of a 60-room motel, is not large enough to change any of the conclusions or recommendations of the previous traffic impact evaluation for this project. However, we do wish to reiterate that the proposed one-way traffic circulation pattern is vital to preventing any adverse impacts on existing Shelburne Road traffic conditions. Civil, Environmental & Transportation Engineering • (Tanning • Land Surveying Mr. Salamin Handy_ April 1, 1992 Page 2 We thank you for this opportunity to be of service. Should you have any questions or if we may be of additional assistance, please feel free to contact us. Sincerely, Rog r kinson, P.E. cc. Gabe Handy r/9211 han2.rjd LAMOUREUX & STONE - Consulting Engineers, Inc. 14 Morse Drive Essex )unction, Vermont 05452 (802) 878-4450 February 20, 1992 Mr. Salamin Handy 75 South Winooski Avenue Burlington, Vermont 05401 RE: Proposed 60-Room Motel and Addition to Bonanza Restaurant 792 Shelburne Road, South Burlington Dear Mr. Handy: As requested, we have examined the potential traffic impacts of adding a 60-room motel immediately behind and connected to the existing Bonanza restaurant at 792 Shelburne Road in South Burlington. In performing this evaluation, we have utilized the proposed site plan entitled "New Motel - Addition to Bonanza" by Gordon G. Woods Assoc. Architects, last revised December 27, 199-1 . The above site plan shows the existing restaurant, the proposed motel, parking and traffic circulation layout. The latter is of particular importance, as we understand a one-way traffic circulation pattern is being proposed for the Bonanza portion of this project. That circulation pattern will make the Bonanza's Shelburne Road access an entrance only. All vehicles generated by both the Bonanza and the proposed motel will then exit via a new driveway onto Swift Street. The Swift Street driveway will also serve as a two-way access for those vehicles using the new parking area on the motel parcel. The areas of potential impact, traffic congestion and safety, were evaluated. The following presents the methodology and results of our analyses. TRAFFIC CONGESTION The study area for potential traffic congestion impacts was determined by the City of South Burlington to include the accesses onto Shelburne Road and Swift Street plus Civil & Environmental Engineering • I'lanning • Land Surveying Mr. Salamin Handy February 20, 1992 Page 2 the intersection of Shelburne Road and Swift Street. Background design hour traffic volumes were calculated from the followfing traffic counts: 1. Automatic Traffic Recorder Count - Shelburne Road Sta D105, Vermont Agency of Transportation, May 1988. 2. Automatic Traffic Recorder Count - Shelburne Road Sta D105, Vermont Agency of Transportation, May 1990. 3. Automatic Traffic Recorder Count - Shelburne Road Sta D258, Vermont Agency of Transportations May 1988. 4. Turning Movement Count - Shelburne Road & Swift Street, Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission, June 9, 1990. 5. Trip Generation Count - Bonanza & Pizza Hut Restaurants, Lamoureux & Stone, January 29, 1992. Detailed design hour volume calculations are attached as Appendix A. The volumes and directional patterns of restaurant -generated traffic at,thetexisting Shelburne Road access were determined from (5). This count included both the noon and p.m -peak hour periods. From this count and the motel trip generation rates from "Trip Generation, Institute of Transportation Engineers, 5th Edition", existing and proposed trip generation and corresponding directional assignments were calculated. These calculations are attached as Appendix B. One important conclusion reached from the observed trip generation was that both the Bonanza and Pizza Hut exhibited trip generation characteristics of quality restaurants rather than high -turnover ones. Table 1 illustrates the resulting p.m. peak hour vehicular trip generation estimates for the Bonanza restaurant and proposed motel. Having calculated the background design hour volumes and the additional project - generated traffic, the next step in determining the potential traffic congestion impacts was to perform capacity analyses at the three intersections-, Shelburne Road/Existing Access, Shelburne Road/Swift Street and Swift Street/Proposed Access. These analyses were performed using the methodology outlined in "Special Report 209 - Highway Capacity Manual, Transportation Research Board, 1985" for signalized and unsignalized r e Mr. Salamin Handy February 20, 1992 Page 3 intersections. Detailed capacity calculations for each intersection are attached as Appendices C-E. TABLE 1 P.M. PEAK HOUR VEHICULAR TRIP GENERATION Existing Proposed Bonanza 22 22 Motel 35 l` TOTAL I 22 I 57 The Highway Capacity Manual uses "level of service" to define traffic congestion. There are six levels of service, ranging from A to F. The criteria for each level of service at intersections are outlined below. Typically, the desired minimum level of service for a signalized intersection located in an urban area is D. For unsignalized intersections, particularly those on high -volume roadways, level of service E is often experienced by the minor street left -turn movement. Level of Service Signalized Intersections Average Delay (sec/veh) Unsignalized Intersections Reserve Capacity (pcph) Expected Traffic Delay A <5 >400 Little or no delay B 5-14.99 300-399 Short traffic delays C 15-24.99 200-299 Average traffic delays D 25-39.99 100-199 Long traffic delays E 40-59.99 0-99 Very long traffic delays F >60 <0 Failure - extreme congestion Table 2 presents the level of service and average vehicular delay for each lane groups at the Shelburne Road/Swift Street intersection. It is evident from the this table that the project traffic will not significantly change the level of service and delays at this intersection. r Mr. Salamin Handy February 20, 1992 Page 4 TABLE 2 SHELBURNE ROAD/SWIFT STREET INTERSECTION DHV LEVELS OF SERVICE AND AVERAGE VEHICULAR DELAYS w/o Project w/ Project 1992 1997 1992 1997 Swift St. WB LT D (30.0) D (33.7) D (30.9) D (35.2) Swift St. WB RT C (17.1) C (18.1) C (17.5) C (18.6) Shelburne Rd. NB TH/RT B (14.3) C (20.7) B (14.2) C (20.3) Shelburne Rd. SB LT D (27.2) D (38.0) D (27.2) D (38.0) Shelburne Rd. SB TH A (2.7) A (3.5) A (2.7) A (3.5) Shelburne Rd. SB RT B (13.0) D (31.3) B (13.0) D (31.3) OVERALL B (12.2) 1 C (19.0) B (12.2) 1 C (18.9) At the existing access onto Shelburne Road, the results of the capacity analyses for background conditions without the proposed motel indicated that the left -turn movement exiting the two restaurants experiences level of service E (64 pcph) during both 1992 and 1997 conditions. For the right -turn exiting movement, the level of service equaled B (306 pcph) in 1992 and C (255 pcph) in 1997. With this project and the proposed one-way traffic circulation pattern, the levels of service at the existing access onto Shelburne Road remained the same. Similarly, the reserve capacities of each movement did not experience any significant changes. It should be noted that even with the proposed one-way circulation pattern, vehicles will continue to exit from the Pizza Hut at this access. At the proposed access onto Swift Street, the results of the capacity analyses for projected 1997 DHV conditions with this project indicated that the left -turn exiting movement would expel iunce level of service C (231 pcph). TRAFFIC SAFETY Existing traffic safety conditions were evaluated from the accident experience of Shelburne Road and Swift Street in the immediate vicinity of this project. The accident Mr. Salamin Handy February 20, 1992 Page 5 experience data was obtained from the VAOT for the most recent available five-year period; 1986-1990. This data was analyzed to determine the accident rate at the intersection of Shelburne Road & Swift Street, on Shelburne Road between Swift Street & Brewer Parkway and on Swift Street between Shelburne Road & Farrell Street. Table 4 presents the results of these calculations. TABLE 3 ACCIDENT RATES LOCATION NUMBER ACCIDENTS ACCIDENT RATE' STATEWIDE AVERAGE RATE CRITICAL ACCIDENT RATE SHELBURNE ROAD & SWIFT STREET 32 0.516 0.504 0.660 SHELBURNE ROAD (BREWER -SWIFT) 70 7.610 3.442 4.503 SWIFT STREET (SHELBURNE-FARRELL) 2 1.044 3.442 5.908 Expressed in units of accidents per million vehicles at intersections and accidents per million vehicle -miles on roadway segments. These results indicate that the accident rate of the portion of Shelburne Road between Swift Street and Brewer Parkway exceeds the critical accident rate. From that, the portion of Shelburne Road in the immediate vicinity of this project would be classified as a high accident location. They also indicate that while the accident rate at the intersection of Shelburne Road & Swift Street exceeds the statewide average rate for sli nilar intersections, it does not exceed the critical rate and thus would not be considered to be a high accident location. The proposed one-way traffic flow pattern into and through the Bonanza site will help to minimize vehicular conflicts at the Shelburne Road access. Since exiting traffic, particularly left -turns, has been found to create the most impact at driveways, reducing the .-'-:me of the exiting movements at this location will help to improve traffic safety conditions on Shelburne Road. Along Swift Street, available intersection sight distances were measured from the location of the proposed access. To the west towards Shelburne Road, the available sight distance extends to the Shelburne Road intersection (450 feet -t). To the east, Mr. Salamin Handy February 20, 1992 Page 6 oncoming vehicles are visible as they pass through the Farrell Street intersection, but drop out of sight as they climb the grade towards the project access. The available intersection sight distance to the east was measured from the point at which oncoming westbound traffic again becomes visible. That distance, based on a driver's eye height of 3.5 feet and an oncoming vehicle height of 4.75 feet, equaled 340 feet. In comparison, based on the posted speed limit of 35 mph, the minimum safe stopping sight distance equals 250 feet and the recommended intersection sight distance equals 475 feet. The former is the minimum required to avoid creating unreasonable impacts, while the latter is recommended in order to minimize potential impacts. If the posted speed limit on Swift Street between Shelburne Road and Farrell Street were to lowered to 30 mph, _the recommended intersection sight distance would be reduced to 375 feet, more in line with the available sight distances from this and other driveways in the immediate area. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the above analyses, it appears that the proposed one-way traffic circulation pattern will effectively mitigate the potential traffic congestion and safety impacts of additional motel -generated traffic. However, in examining the proposed site plan, we have reservations concerning the potential degree of compliance with this pror—Qr circulation pattern. Our specific concerns and recommendations relate to elements of the site circulation and parking layout which do not strictly enforce the desired one-way traffic flow. In particular, they include: The presence of an interconnection between the Pizza Hut and Bonanza parking lots to the rear of the parcel which will allow exiting Bonanza traffic to circumvent the desired one-way traffic circulation pattern. The installation of channelizing geometry, pavement markings and traffic signs may be an alternative to closing this interconnection. • Retaining perpendicular (as opposed to angled) parking in the Bonanza parking lot. Angled parking with a reduced aisle width should be considered in this area. The width of the connector linking the Bonanza parking area to the new parking area in the rear should also be reduced in order to promote one-way flow. Mr. Salamin Handy February 20, 1992 Page 7 • Additional pavement markings and traffic signs will be necessary in the Bonanza portion of the parking area to regulate traffic flow and inform motorists of the proper exit. In summary, our conclusion that additional motel -generated traffic will not create adverse traffic congestion or safety impacts is contingent upon obtaining a high degree of compliance with the proposed one-way traffic circulation pattern. Accordingly, we recommend that the proposed site plan be engineered to improve and reinforce the desired one-way traffic circulation pattern. Additionally, we recommend that the posted speed limit on Swift Street between Shelburne Road and Farrell Street be reduced because of the limited sight distances and numerous driveways in this area. We thank you for this opportunity to be of service. Should you have any questions or if we may be of additional assistance, please feel free to contact us. Sincerely, c 1T rY-,"' Rod r )ick.inson,' P.E. cc. Gabe Handy 9211 hand.rjd City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 FAX 658-4748 PLANNER 658-7955 October 6, 1993 Gabriel Handy c/o Bonanza Restaurant 792 Shelburne Road South Burlington, Vermont 05403 Re: Motel Addition, Six (6) Month Extension Dear Mr. Handy: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 This is to inform you that the South Burlington Planning Commission at their meeting held on September 28, 1992 granted a six (6) month extension to the expiration date of the site plan approval for your motel addition. The new expiration date is now March 23, 1994. If you have any questions, please give me a call. Si c relly, ie .1 abL� Weith, City Planner JW/mcp h `•: TIM MOTION OF APPROVAL GABE HANDY I move the South Burlington Planning Commission approve the revised site plan application of Gabe Handy for to change the footprint and G location of an approved 64 room hotel and 123 seat quality restaurant as depicted on a two ( 2 ) page set of plans, page one entitled "New Motel - Addition to Bonanza", prepared by Gordan G. Woods, Associates and dated 9/90, last revised 1/20/93, with the following stipulations: 1. All previous approvals and stipulations which are not superseded by this approval shall remain in effect. 2. The cedar hedge to be planted along the fence line on residential properties to the south shall be planted prior to or at the same time construction begins. Applicant shall obtain permission from adjoining landowners to plant the landscaping. and for_t-aii�tg the land rapi,n,g-. a— es.ired_-blc --the _-r-es denti-a-1 - i-andowner . 3. All exterior lighting shall be downcasting and shielded and shall not cast light beyond the property line. Any change in existing lighting or new lighting shall be approved by the City Planner prior to installation. 5. The applicant shall obtain a zoning/building permit within six (6) months or this approval is null and void. 6. The applicant shall obtain a Certificate of Occupancy from the Administrative -Officer prior to occupancy of the building. 7. The site plan shall not be revised without first obtaining approval by the Planning Commission. (mo-gh) � J MOTION OF APPROVAL GABE HANDY I move the South Burlington Planning Commission approve the revised site plan application of Gabe Handy for to change the footprint and location of an approved 64 room hotel and 123 seat quality restaurant as depicted on a two ( 2 ) page set of plans, page one entitled "New Motel - Addition to Bonanza", prepared by Gordan G. Woods, Associates and dated 9/90, last revised 1/20/93, with the following stipulations: 1. All previous approvals and stipulations which are not superseded by this approval shall remain in effect. 2. The cedar hedge to be planted along the fence line on residential properties to the south shall be planted prior to or at the same time construction begins. Applicant shall obtain permission from adjoining landowners to plant the landscaping and shall be responsible for maintaining the landscaping if so desired by the residential landowner. 3. All exterior lighting shall be downcasting and shielded and shall not cast light beyond the property line. Any change in existing lighting or new lighting shall be approved by the City Planner prior to installation. 5. The applicant shall obtain a zoning/building permit within six (6) months or this approval is null and void. 6. The applicant shall obtain a Certificate of Occupancy from the Administrative Officer prior to occupancy of the building. 7. The site plan shall not be revised without first obtaining approval by the Planning Commission. (mo-gh) Mr. Gabriel dandy c/o tonanza Restaurant 712 Shelburne Road. South zu.rlington, Vermont 05403 I�r. .Toe Weith Sept. 15. 1993 City Planner, City of South Burlington, Vt. 575 Dorset Street `>outh Burlington, Vermont 05403 He: NEW 'iOTEL ADDITION to THE EXISTING BONANZA RESTAURANT 792 Shelburne road, South Burlington, Vermont 05403 Dear Nor Weith; hay this letter serve as an application request for the extension of 6 months of time for the above project, in regards to the zoning/building permit. The site plans was approved !'larch 23, 1993. "Thank You..... Very truly* yours, Gabriel Dandy hs/orb Ide PLANNER 658-7955 City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 FAX 658-4748 September 16, 1993 Gordon G. Woods 104 Church Street Burlington, Vermont 05401 Re: Revised Motel Addition, 792 Shelburne Road Dear Mr. Woods: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Enclosed please find a copy of the Findings of Fact and Decision on the above referenced project which was approved on 3/23/93. Please note the conditions of approval and the requirement that a zoning/building permit be obtained within six (6) months of the approval date. If you have any questions, please give me a call. S lWeith, ere y, J City Planner 1 Encl JW/mcp cc: Gabe Handy PLANNING COMMISSION 28 SEPTEMBER 1993 The South Burlington Planning Commission held a meeting on Tuesday, 28 September 1993, at 7:30 pm, in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset St. Members Present: William Burgess, Chairman; William Craig, Mac Teeson, Mary - Barbara Maher, David Austin, Catherine Peacock Also Present: Joe Weith, City Planner; Sid Poger, The Other Paper; Thomas Tavares, Shelly Myers, Ronald Scott-, Rick Scott, Roger Phelps, Ernie Pomerleau, Paul Valois, Steve Abair, Tim Duff, Michael Nicholson, Roger Dickinson 1. Other Business: a. Mr. Weith advised that Gabe Handy is requesting a 6-month ex- tension to the site plan approval for the motel and restaurant at the Bonanza site. Mrs. Maher moved to a rove the 6-month extension on the Hand motel -restaurant site lan a roval as requested. Ms. Peacoc seconded. Motion passed unanimously. b. Mrs. Maher asked Mr. Weith to find out about the large trailer in the parking lot of the Merchant's Bank on Kimball Avenue. 2. Minutes of 31 August 1993: Ms. Peacock moved to approve the Minutes of 31 August as written. Mrs. Maher seconded. Motion passed 4-0 with Mr. Teeson abstain- ing. 3. Sketch plan application of Thomas and Nancy Tavares and Connie Weems for a boundary line adjustment involving two existing par- cels of 0.53 and 0.26 acres to create two newly configured parcels of 0.31 and 0.48 acres, 76 and 80 Shunpike Road: Mr. Tavares said they will take the common boundary and extend it due east to meet the property line. They have no intention of building there. Mr. Weith advised the applicant 'that the final plat will have to show all buildings on both lots. Mrs. Maher asked whether the lot would now be big enough for a duplex. Mr. Tavares said there isn't enough frontage. 4. Site Plan application of Contact Communications for conver- sion of a 2500 sq. ft. builidng to general office use (communi- cations facility), 2026 Williston Rd: Mr. Valois said they got a conditional use permit for a tower PLANNING COMMISSION 9 June 1992 page 2 3. Final Plat application of Howard Slack for subdivision of 0.72 acres of land into two parcels of 0.38 acres and 0.34 acres_, 24 Gilbert Street: Mr. Burgess noted the lots will be equal in size to other lots on the street. Mr. Austin moved the Plannin Commission approve the final plat application of Howard Slack for subdivision on 0.72 acres of land into two (2) parcels of 0.38 acres and 0.34 acres as depicted on a plat entitled "Revised Plan - Pine Tree Farm Lots, Williston Road," prepared by Warren Robenstein and dated March 1992, last revised 5/11/92, with_the followinq stipluations: 1. The applicant for a zonin!l/building permit for a structure on lot 13 shall pay the required sewer fee and per unit recreation fee prior to issuance of the zonin /buildin permit. 2. The final plat shall be recorded in the South Burlington land records within 90 days or this approval is null and void. Mrs. Maher seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 4. Continue Site Plan application of Salamin Handy for an 80-room motel and 178 seat quality.restaurant, 792 Shelburne Road: Mr. Burgess asked the applicant to describe the changes to the plan. Mr. Handy said they have removed 25 ft. of restaurant to conform with the gas statioanext door. They have reduced the motel to 64 rooms and the restaurant to 123 seats. They have also re -angled the parking and put up a barrier between this lot and the Pizza Hut lot. There is more space for fire trucks to negotiate turns. The reduction in size and number of rooms reduces traffic. Mr. Sheahan asked if there is adequate room for trucks servicing the restaurant to turn around. Mr. Handy said there is a 12 ft. space between buildings. Trucks will have to follow the same pattern as everyone else. Mr. Craig asked what other cars will do when trucks park to unload. Mr. Handy said deliveries are very early in the morning. The only problem would be the blocking of one handicapped space. Mr. Craig and Mr. Sheahan felt it would be a tough situation. Mr. Sheahan asked if the motel would turn away tractor trailers that want to stay the night. Mr. Handy said they can refuse anyone they want. He noted they'd had a problem once and had to refund money to other guests because of the noise of the trucks. They won't allow tractor trailers in this facility. PLANNING COMMISSION 9 June 1992 page 3 Mr. Sheahan felt this should be stipulated. Mr. Handy said he would have no problem with that. kis. Peacock noted the possibility of having more delivery trucks serving this lot. Mr. Handy said the benefit of not having the Pizza Hut traffic going back out onto Shelburne Rd. should mitigate the impact of a few more trucks. Mr. Burgess noted the applicant is asking for a 24-space parking waiver which is 20.3%. Mr. Handy said they don't usually have 100% occupancy. Chuck Jennings next door has 56 parking spaces and has said this facility could use some of them if needed. Mr. Handy felt the restaurant would cater mostly to motel guests as it will not be a franchise restaurant and will be quite small. Mr. Austin said it seemed awkward to have so many of the res- taurant parking spaces out back with the entrance to the res- taurant in front. He felt the applicant was trying to have too much on the site. Mr. Sheahan agreed and felt a lot of people will use Pizza Hut's parking spaces. Mrs. Maher felt the layout suits the uses and though it wasn't ideal it was still good to get people out onto Swift St. instead of Shelburne Rd. Ms. Peacock said the motel patrons would park in back and walk to the restaurant and to Pizza Hut. Regarding landscaping, Mr. Handy said they have lots of land- scaping and there is no place left to plant. Ms. Peacock said she would prefer to see larger caliper trees than the 16 ft. high evergreens. Mr. Woods said they are trying to get something that will cover the spaces between this use and the residential use on the adjacent lots. Mr. Handy said he had met with the res- idents on this. Mr. Jewett said the applicant has indicated a willingness to purchase their property providing it can be zoned commercial. If this can be done, Mr. Jewett said they would support the application; otherwise, they wanted the trees. Mrs. Maher asked how many homes are involved. Mr. Handy said they want to purchase the first three homes. Mr. Burgess reminded members they have to deal with what is warned tonight and cannot make an approval contingent on a zoning change. Mr. Kaufman, one of the neighbors, said his house is rented and he would have one opinion on the project if he still owned the house and another if he doesn't. Mr. Burgess again said the Com- mission cannot make a decision on any possible zoning change. Mr. Kaufman said if he were a resident, he would not be happy with a 2-story motel backing up to his home. He would look for a lot of screening from a 35 ft. hotel looking down into his backyard. Mr. Handy said the hotel is 65 ft. from the property line. Mrs. Maher asked if residents objected to the 16 ft. arba- i PLANNING COMMISSION 9 June 1992 page 4 vitae on their property. Mr. Handy said he was going to con- tinue the existing hedge. Mr. Kaufman said he has no problem with the hedge if Mr. Handy plants and maintains it. Other neighbors agreed. Mr. Weith noted there is no place else that landscaping can go. Mr. Austin again said the applicant is trying to do too much on the lot if he has to put landscaping on someone else's pro- perty. Ms. Peacock suggested tall trees on the south side of the flower garden for more privacy for the residents. Traffic: Mr Craig noted the applicant is asking for a 60% waiver. He said he is not convinced the Commission should waive to that extent and that to do so would set a bad precedent. Mr. Sheahan felt it was a plus to eliminate left turns onto Shelburne Rd. but he was not sure it would be significantly better because cars will eventually get right back onto Shelburne Rd. Mrs. Maher didn't see the motel as a high traffic generator and felt the ingress and egress would be safe. Ms. Peacock agreed with Mrs. Maher and also felt Pizza Hut customers would use the Swift St. egress. Mr. Burgess felt it was too much of an increase to be offset by the benefit. Mr. Austin said he wasn't enthusiastic but did feel putting traffic onto Swift St. was a plus. Mr. Dunn said he uses this intersection ever day and was shocked by this application. He said it is a very difficult inter- section and when the Southern Connector opens it will also use this intersection. It is very dangerous to turn left onto Queen City Park Rd. with people turning into Pizza Hut/Bonanza. It was noted that the proposed use will have different peak hours from the current use. Mr. Weith noted that ITE says a high turn- over restaurant generates 113 vehicles per peak hour and the proposed use is 50 for the motel and restaurant. Mr. Burgess said there is no reason to say this is not an improvement in traffic. Ms. Peacock asked about the drainage plan. Mr. Weith said this will have to be submitted to and approved by the City Attorney. Mr. Weith noted the building height would actually be 38 ft. from the average pre -construction grade. The building would have to be moved 1.5 ft. to the north to conform. Members felt the parapet would have to be lowered by 3 ft. The applicant agreed to do this. Mr. Austin moved the Planning Commission approve the site plan application of Salamin Handy for a 64 room motel and 123 seat quality restaurant as depicted on a three page set of plans, _gage one entitled "New Motel - Addition to Bonanza," prepared by Gordon G. Woods, Associates and dated September, 1990, last re- PLANNING COMMISSION 9 June 1992 page 5 vised 5/29/92 with the following —stipulations: 1. The applicant shall post a $20,500, 3-year landscaping bond rio_ to issuance of a_zonin2/buildinq permit. The landsca e plan shall be revised prior to permit to show the followin a. the size of proposed Norway Maple increased to 3 3 5 inch caliper b. 6' - 8' hi h Red or Austrian Pine substituted for proposed Cedar. c. new trees (e. ., pin oak or maple) planted along the southern boundary of the flower garden. 2. Cedar Hedge to be planted along fence line on residential properties to the south shall be planted prior to or at the same time construction begins. Applicant shall obtain permission from adjoining landowners. 3. This approval is conditioned on a quality restaurant use I.T.E. defines a quality restaurant as "eating establishments of hi h quality and with turnover rates generally of at least one hour or longer._ Generally_,a quality restaurant does not serve breakfast and mayor may not serve lunch.—" The existing "Bonanza" does not qualify as a quality restaurant and shall be terminated prior to occupancy of the new motel Prior to oc- cupancy of the restaurant space by a new restaurant tenant, the City Planner shall confirm that the proposed restaurant meets the definition of quality restaurant Applicant shall submit any pertinent information requested by the City Planner. 4. This approval is conditioned on a maximum restaurant seatin capacity of 123 seats (i.e., restaurant, bar and banquet areas Any increase in seatinq shall require Planning Commission aj roval. 5. This property is located within Traffic Overlay Zone 1 which allows_ a maximum peak hour trip generation of 27 vehicle trip ends (vte's). It is estimated based on I.T.E.that the proposed motel_ and quality restaurant will generate 50 vte's durin the peak hour or 23 vte's above that which is permitted It is also estimated_ based on I.T.E. that the present hi h turnover restau- rant use generated 113 trip ends during the peak hour. Section 17.50 of the zoning regulations allows the Planning Commission to a rove pqakhour volumes above the normal standard if the Com- mission determines that other site improvements will produce a net benefit for traffic flow in the vicinity.__It is the Commis- sion's determination that the directing of existin traffic to Swift Street will improve traffic safety in the vicinity and the PLANNING COMMISSION 9 June 1992 page 6 change in use will reduce vte's during_peak hour from 113 vte's to 50 vte's and therefore approves the estimated 50 peak hour vte's estimated to be generated by this project. 6. Prior to issuance of a zoning/building permit, the applicant shall submit a drainage plan to the City Engineer for approval. 7. A sewer allocation of 4,800 gpd is ranted. The applicant shall pay the $2.50 per gallon sewer fee prior to issuance of a zoning/builinq___ permit. 8. All li htin shall be downcasting shielded luminaire and shall not cast light beyond the property line. 9. The Planning Commission does not_ approve a buildi_n_g height over 35 feet as shown on sheet A5. Prior to permit, sheet A5 shall be revised to show a maximum building height of 35 ft. 10. The plan shall be revised prior to issuance of a zoning/ building permit to show the width of the driveway access con- necting the front and back parking lots no less than 12 feet. 11. The number of parking spaces recuired by standard is 118. The applicant proposed 94 spaces which represents a shortfall of 24 spaces, or 20%. Due to the shared parking opportunities offered by the two uses, the Planning Commission approves 94 spaces. 12. Prior to issuance of a zoning/building permit, the owner of the adloininq property to the north (45 Swift Street) shall re- cord in the South Burlin ton land records an easement allowing the applicant to store snow on 45 Swift Street property along the portion ofthezkpplicantls driveway where the drivewa abuts the property line of 45 Swift Street. If property owner of 45 Swift Street does not agree to the easeemnt, snow shall be removed from the site. 13. As expressly represented by the applicant, there shall be no overnight parking of trucks on -site which require the engine or other equipment to run continuously. 14. A zoning/buildin permit shall be obtained within 6 months or this approval is null and void. Mrs. Maher seconded the motion which then passed 5-1 with Mr. Sheahanopposing. . 5. Revised final plat application of O'Brien Brothers Agency, Inc, to amend the landscaping plan for a 4-unit residential building on lot 17 of the 18-lot Kirby Road/Patchen Road subdi- City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 FAX 658-4748 PLANNER 658-7955 May 25, 1993 Gordon G. Woods 104 Church Street Burlington, Vermont 05401 Re: Revised Motel Addition, 792 Shelburne Road Dear Mr. Woods: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Enclosed please find a copy of the March 23, 1993 Planning Commission meeting minutes. Please note the conditions of approval and the requirement that a zoning/building permit be obtained within six (6) months of the date of approval. If you have any questions, please give�me a call. Jo Weith, City Planner 1 Encl JW/mcp cc: Gabe Handy PLANNING C_OMM_ISSION 23 March 1993WW� 5. The ap lic_antWsh_a_ll obtain a zonin buildi_nocermit within six months or this approval is null and void. 6._The__22plicant shall obtain a Certificate ofWOccupancy from the Administrative Officer prior to occupancy of L11t addition. 7. The site plan shall not be revisedWwithoutWfirstWobtainin2 ap- proval_bv the Planni g Commission._ W WW��WWW W�WWW WWWWW Ms. Peacock seconded. —Motion passed unanimously. 5. Revised Site Plan application of Gabe Handy to change the footprint and location of an approved 64 room hotel and 123 seat quality restaurant, 792 Shelburne Rd. Mr. Burgess noted he had gotten a call from David Kaufman who is an abutter and said he had not been notified of the hearing. Ap- parently, the house is rented, and Mr. Kaufman lives at another address and didn't get the notice. Since he could not attend the meeting tonight, he provided comments in writing. He had a concern about headlights shining into his house. He felt there should be a fence in good repair and evergreen screening. He would be willing to have the applicant plant screening on his property, but the applicant would be required to maintain it. Mr. Handy then outlined changes since the last approval. He said they have been to the Zoning Board which gave permission to leave the 20 feet of the existing building (the Commission had required this be removed to meet setback requirements). All landscape, traffic, lighting stay the same. Mr. Burgess asked whether anything from prior approvals changed Mr. Weith said there are no changes. Mr. Burgess then asked about screening. Mr. Weith said the applicant was told to beef up screening in one area. The applicant had offered to plant a hedge on neighbors' property. Some neighbors wanted this, some did not. The original plan callsfor a 16 ft. high cedar hedge. Bonding was not required for this. Mr. Burgess suggested some- thing that has a reasonable chance for survival and suggested an 8 to 12 foot hedge. Mr. Jewett suggested trees be planted before construction begins to keep toxic substances from their property (from the old paint place). After a brief discussion, members agreed to require eight to ten ft. high tree buffer and to nave the applicant bond for these. Mr. -Austin moved the Planning Commission approvt the revised site 2lan_2Mlication of WGabe Handy to�chanoe the Wfoot orint and loca- tion of analapproved 64 room hoteland_ 123Wseatouality restaurant as depicted on a twoWcaoe__set of_plansL.oaoe one entitled "New��W -7- PLANNING C_OMMISS_ION 23 March 1993 W �a �.8 Motel - Addition toB_ona_nza _R eoared byWGordan G. Woods, Assoc- iates and Wdate dW9�90�Wlast revised 1/20/93, with the foliowin stipulations: 1 �.p All appro previous vals and sti ulations which are not super- ....,...r� .-- ;- - - - - - - seded by this approval -shall remain in effect. 2. The cedar hedge to be planted alon_q the fence line on the res- idential Properties to the south shall_ bee�lantedPrio_r to or at W the same time const_r_uction_ be ins. The plan shall be revised to show 8' to 10, hLa cedarsto be Planted. Applicant shall obtain peermissionWfromWadloini.ng lanedowners to plant the land_scaoinq.. Prior to issuance ofa zonin /builthe applicant shall submit toWthe city Planner a list of those ad '_oining,ypro; ert owners who_approve lantin on their p _22 t_y-. The appli- p,.r..�' - - -r..� �..g�---.- - -- - cant shall be required to post a bond to cover theWcost of the cedar hed e. The bond shall remain in effect for_2,_period 0 three years to as_su_r_e_that the cedars take root and have a good chance of surviving. The_ residents_ will beWres onsible for main- - _.. taininq the cedars after the three ears. nd shielded and snail noz uad5 L. istin li htin or new lightin, Planner Prior to installation. 4. The applicant shall obtain_ a zonin buildin Permit within six mnni-ham n,- this aoorovalWis null and Mid.. 5. The applicant shall obtain a Certificate of Occupancv_f_rom the ...--_ -- - ._.rr...__. Administrative Officer_prior_to occucancy_2L heWbuilding.W 6._The site plan rshall not be revised without first obtainin ap- provalWbyWthe Planning Commission. Mrs. Maher seconded the motion which then passed 5-1 with Mr. Teeson opposincWandWMr. Sheahan abstaininq Sketch plan application of Landrum for construction of a 15,820 sq. ft. addition to an existing 120,537 sq. ft. building used for manufacturing/printing, Lane Press, Hinesburg Road: Mr. Weith noted that the relocated water main must be at least 20 ft. from the addition and hydrants must be relocated. The appli- cant agreed to this. Mr Weith also noted the applicant is requesting a landscaping credit. $12,500. is required. Mr. Sheahan said he would like to `�- see some landscaping on the south side. Mr. Adams said there are 700 plants on the site, and they will spend $6,000-$7,000 to move City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 FAX 658-4748 PLANNER 658-7955 1 March 29, 1993 Gabe Handy Bonanza Restaurant 792 Shelburne Road South Burlington, Vermont 05403 Re: Motel Addition, Six (6) Month Extension Dear Mr. Handy: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Enclosed please find a copy of the November 17, 1992 Planning Commission meeting minutes. If you have any questions, please let me know. Sin erel , J e Weith, C ty Planner 1 Encl JW/mcp CPLANNING COMMISSION 17 NOVEMBER 1992 The South Burlington Planning Commission held a meeting on Tuesday, 17 November 1992 at 7:30 pm, in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset St. Members Present: William Burgess, Chairman; Mary -Barbara Maher, William Craig, Catherine Peacock, David Austin, Terry Sheahan Also Present: Joe Weith, City Planner; Sid Poger, The Other Paper, James Condos, City Council; Terry Boyle, Charles Brush, Bill Wessel, Nile Duppstadt, John Jaeger, Greg Rabideau, John Larkin 1. Other Business: a. Regarding the NowlandjRamgeFdevelopments, Mr. Weith noted that the Commission had reviewed sketch plans for both. Preliminary Plat work has now begun, and the Nowland plan has been revised to show 40 more units than at sketch. This is allowed; however, the applicant has to treat it as one application. Mr. Weith asked whether the Commission wants a new sketch plan or will let the applicant go right to Preliminary Plat. After a brief dis- cussion, the Commission said they want a new sketch. b. Mr. Weith advised that Gabe Handy is asking for a 6-month ex- tension on the Bonanza/Motel plan. Mrs. Maher moved to rant a 6-month extension on the Bonanza motel lan on Shelburne Rd. as re uested bly the a licant. Ms. Peacock seconded. Motion passed 5-0 with Mr. Sheahan abstaining. Mr. Craig asked that the applicant be advised this is the only extension that will be granted. c. Members agreed to a development meeting on 29 December. 2. Minutes of 20 October 1992: Mrs. Maher moved to approve the Minutes of 10 October as written. Ms. Peacock seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 3. Continue consideration of Chittenden Bank to amend a condi- tion of approval requiring termination of the drive -through banking service at the Factory Outlet Mall, Shelburne Rd. The request is to amend the condition so that the date at which the drive -through service must be terminated shall be extended to 1 May 1993. Mr. Austin moved that the Commission depy the,application and that it ado t the notice of decision entitled: In Re: A lica- MEMORANDUM To: Bill Burgess, Chair South Burlington Planning Commiss From: David Kaufman 7 Windsor Court / 864-4357 Subj: Handy Hotel on Shelburne Road Date: 3/23/93 Following -up on our conversation today, there are a couple of items I would like to be certain are a part of the Planning Commission's deliberations as to the site aspects of Mr. Handy's approved project on Shelburne Road. As I mentioned to you, I was not notified of the Zoning Board's actions on Mr. Handy's project, nor was I aware of tonight's meeting until I happened to call the city offices to inquire as to the status of the project. Very simply, the city did not use my home address to send me any notices, therefore I did not receive them. I have asked that this be corrected for future reference. Understanding that the Zoning Board has approved the project, my concerns are with ensuring that the value of my property at 2 Lindenwood Drive is protected. Without having seen the final plans for the project, I can only outline my concerns in general and will have to leave it to the Planning Commission to see that they are adequately addressed. As to traffic flow, I would not want to see a flow that resulted in additional early morning or late evening noise immediately abutting the fence between the properties, nor would I want to see a flow such that headlights from vehicles would shine into the rear of the house. As to screening, I believe Mr. Handy suggested substantial screening when he presented his early plan sometime in 192. From my perspective, such screening must include: 1) A stockade fence similar to what now exists, but in good repair; for which Mr. Handy takes full responsibility for installation and continuing maintenance. 2) Substantial evergreen screening consisting of a row of multiple trees of an appropriate screening type, planted along the fence. These can go on "my side" of the fence, provided Mr. Handy assumes responsibility for their care and annual fertilizing, plus replacement of any that die at anytime. I would suggest that initial plantings should be at least 12' in height and that a professional landscape firm be required to select, determine distance between trees (so that a solid barrier is formed), and plant the trees. Something similar to what screens Gary Farrell's property from Spear Street would seem to be appropriate. Please note that I consider both 1) and 2) essential components of an adequate screen. These are the only two concerns that come to mind as I recall the meeting I attended in 192. I would appreciate the Planning Commission's discussion of these concerns and look to you to ensure that they are incorporated into your review and potential approval of Mr. Handy's project. Thank you very much. MOTION OF APPROVAL GABE HANDY I move the South Burlington Planning Commission approve the revised site plan application of Gabe Handy for to change the footprint and location of an approved 64 room hotel and 123 seat quality restaurant as depicted on a two (2) page set of plans, page one entitled "New Motel - Addition to Bonanza", prepared by Gordan G. Woods, Associates and dated 9/90, last revised 1/20/93, with the following stipulations: 1. All previous approvals and stipulations which are not superseded by this approval shall remain in effect. 2. The cedar hedge to be planted along the fence line on residential properties to the south shall be planted prior to or at the same time construction begins. Applicant shall obtain permission from adjoining landowners to plant the landscaping and shall be responsible for maintaining the landscaping if so desired by the residential landowner. 3. All exterior lighting shall be downcasting and shielded and shall not cast light beyond the property line. Any change in existing lighting or new lighting shall be approved by the City Planner prior to installation. 5. The applicant shall obtain a zoning/.building permit within six (6) months or this approval is null and void. 6. The applicant shall obtain a Certificate of Occupancy from the Administrative -Officer prior to occupancy of the building. 7. The site plan shall not be revised without first obtaining approval by the Planning Commission. (mo-gh) Memorandum - Planning March 23, 1993 agenda items March 19, 1993 Page 10�� L� � h Landscaping: The landscaping requirement for ths&s project is $1,650 which will be met. Plantings will include Potentilla, White Pine and Honeylocust. Sewer: No additional allocation needed. Lighting: No additional lighting proposed. 5) SALAMIN HANDY - BONANZA MOTEL REVISION - SITE PLAN This application is to revise the footprint of the Bonanza Restaurant and the proposed 64 room motel that was previously approved on 6/9/92 (minutes enclosed). The applicant was granted a variance by the Zoning Board of Adjustment on 2/22/93 to expand a noncomplying structure (restaurant building) more than the 25% allowed under Section 19.002. A variance was also granted to allow a structure to be only 20 feet from a residential district instead of the required 65 feet. This property located at 792 Shelburne Road is, within the Commercial 1 District. It is bounded on the north by an auto service station, Pizza Hut restaurant, and a multi -use commercial building, on the east by self -storage warehouse business, on the south by five (5) single family residences on Lindenwood Drive and an auto service station and on the west by Shelburne Road. Access/circulation: No changes are proposed to access or circulation. The current two-way 42 foot wide access on Shelburne Road would be changed to a one-way ingress only access. All vehicles would exit onto Swift Street via a two-way 20' r.o.w. across the Kelly and Jennings property. The parking spaces in front of the restaurant have been angled to further identify this access for ingress only. Traffic circulation on the site is acceptable. Signage, pavement markings and a pipe barrier will be used to discourage traffic from going in the wrong direction and exiting through Pizza Hut. Coverage/setbacks: Building coverage is 15.8% (maximum allowed is 30%). Overall coverage is 68.8% (maximum allowed is 70%). Front yard coverage is unaffected by this application. 10 Memorandum - Planning March 23, 1993 agenda items March 19, 1993 Page 11 Setback requirements are being met. The motel addition will not exceed the height limitations so it is setback the 65 foot minimum from the residential district. Parking: No changes will be made to the parking. This project requires 118 parking spaces and 94 spaces are being provided. This 20% shortfall was approved by the Planning Commission due to shared parking opportunities. Landscaping: The conditions of the 6/9/92 approval relating to landscaping have been incorporated into this plan. These include increasing the size of the Norway Maples to 3-3 1/2" caliper, substituting 6'- 8' Austrian Pine for Cedar and additional Norway Maples along the southern boundary. The $12,934 short fall has been reduced to $6,180. Traffic: No change in traffic generation since there will be no change in restaurant seats or motel rooms. Sewer: No changes Lighting: No changes Building height: Building elevations now show the motel addition with a maximum building height of 35 feet. This was a condition of the 6/9/92 approval. Other: 6) a snow storage easement has been recorded allowing the applicant to store snow on the 45 Swift Street property. LANE PRESS - ADDITION - SKETCH PLAN This project consists of the construction of a 15,280 square foot addition to an existing 120,537 square foot building used for manufacturing/printing. The Planning Commission approved a 40,320 square foot addition to this facility on 12/9/86 (minutes enclosed). 11 City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT05403 FAX 658-4748 PLANNER 658-7955 November 19, 1992 Gabe Handy Bonanza Restaurant 792 Shelburne Road South Burlington, Vermont 05403 Re: Motel Addition, Six (6) Month Extension Dear Mr. Handy: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 This is to inform you that the South Burlington Planning Commission at their meeting held on November 17, 1992 approved your request for a six (6) month extension. This extension extends the period by which you must obtain a zoning/building permit for the motel addition approved by the Planning Commission on June 9, 1992. The new expiration date is now June 9, 1993. If you have any questions, please give me a call. Syncgrely, e Weith, ity Planner JW/mcp 292 Shelburne Rd. South Burlington, VT 05403 November 12 , 1992 South Burlington Planning Commission South Burlington, VT 05443 Dear Joe; I would like to request approval on the motel to be Please present this request - Thank you. an extension of time for the built. over Bonanza Restaurant.. to the board. U�� Gabe Handy pa uT•K< - z_ • Mp,F:eNIPMY alai.RW.OMw•R.rWPNI•.w,l[:loW-4'MS .G y T li . - -' a _ --�-%I. ♦r r+e s,te e• tweTco.,ra.cTJ4. I TJ T+e .R<+ITb GT FoR . ��� OIC�S•o4 9L•FJKL P2JCaedw4 _ 1 r ' �'1/� RECEIVED JUN 0 2 1992 I3 i'.rew Mra. x O t- f r e � > _ Y .i •I i - o NOTES: • �- �- _-.- MHAN2A iF,Ngk'..IN4 I1 ed 1 to :T,Ny. M: TE1 1—SeAPI.<. IS �i \\ L ' -I .00�no« •« «oTat TNE IANOSCGo1NL � j)ii ♦- ... �� p/�� �1 cI �IONG THE $11[E PATH SNel1 n o .K. ...Od OO....f OV!+ •_ - V �. 3E.➢GNE 91e_THE CI TY-OF ICVTII —WIC NEwecaaN 1we Felice. 0•1 e ... v un•+c .,..., r �`,e"�`-�a. . a.,c .n n.e. u. a •[`.r� 7 --- 7tal 1- 1 1 If I 1 1111 5 1 1 E P L A N- L ANOSCAPIneG City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 FAX 658-4748 PLANNER 658-7955 September 28, 1992 Gordon Woods, Architect 104 Church Street Burlington, Vermont 05401 Re: Bonanza Motel Addition, 792 Shelburne Road Dear Mr. Woods: ZONING ADMINISTRATOn 658-7958 Enclosed please find a copy of the Findings of Fact and Decision on the above referenced project. Please note the conditions of approval and the requirement that a zoning/building permit be obtained within six (6) months or the approval is null and void. If you have any questions, please give me a call. i cerel , J e Weith, City Planner 1 Encl JW/mcp cc: Gabe Handy City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 FAX 658-4748 PLANNER 658-7955 August 14, 1992 Gordon Woods, Architect 104 Church Street Burlington, Vermont 05401 Re: Bonanza Motel Addition, 792 Shelburne Road Dear Mr. Woods: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Enclosed please find a copy of the June 9, 1992 Planning Commission meeting minutes. Please note the conditions of approval and the requirement that the zoning/building permit be obtained within six (6) months of the approval date. If you have any questions, please give me a call. ncere , e Weith, ity Planner 1 Encl JW/mcp cc: Gabe Handy ---------------------- iW I 1 ,000f Z Jq4) 7 oAJ 17 7- M E M O R A N D U M To: South Burlington Planning Commission From: Joe Weith, City Planner Re: July 14, 1992 agenda items Date: July 10, 1992 3) SITE PLAN APPROVAL CLARIFICATIONS a) Handy, 64 room Motel and Restaurant, Shelburne Road: A question has been raised regarding the issue of installing landscaping on adjoining residential properties which was proposed as part of the application. A neighbor has asked whether Mr. Handy can continue with his project if neighbors deny him permission to plant landscaping on their properties. It is staff's understanding that Mr. Handy would be required to plant landscaping on the adjoining residential properties only if the neighbors grant him permission. If permission is not granted, Mr. Handy can continue with his project. However, this understanding is not entirely clear. Therefore, staff is requesting that the Commission make a formal ruling regarding this issue. Facts of this application include: o The approved site plan shows landscaping on the residential properties along the boundary and includes a note which states, "Additional evergreen trees for more screening." o The approval included a condition which states, "Cedar hedge to be planted along the fence line on residential properties to the south shall be planted prior to or at same time construction begins. Applicant shall obtain permission from adjoining landowners prior to installation of cedars." o Applicant proposed planting cedars on neighbors properties since there was not enough room on his property to plant a landscaping screen, due primarily to the recreation path easement which wals dedicated to the City. Memorandum - Planning July 14, 1992 agenda items July 10, 1992 o The approval motion did not include a condition which clearly made granting of site plan approval conditioned on planting cedars on adjoining properties. b) Twin Oaks - Employee Parking Lot: A question has been raised, again by an adjoining residential landowner, regarding whether Twin Oaks Tennis center is required to pave the 24 space parking lot. Staff needs a ruling from the Commission on this issue. Facts of the application include the following: o Planning Commission approved construction of a 24 space employee parking lot on 8/17/88 (minutes enclosed). o Approved site plan includes a note which identifies the parking lot as "gravel parking lot." o It was stated by the applicant several times during the hearing that Twin Oaks was intending to pave the lot (see 6/28/88 and 8/17/88 minutes). o A condition was added to the approval which states, "Final grading plan will be revised and approved by the City Engineer prior to paving." o The approval did not include a condition which clearly required the applicant to pave the lot, or revise the plan to clearly indicate that the lot would be paved. The concerned neighbor informed staff that she attended all public meetings regarding this application and understands that the ---!:cant was required to pave the lot. She is concerned with dust which is emitted from the lot. Twin Oaks does not agree that they are required to pave the lot. It is their understanding that if and when they decide to pave the lot, they shall submit a revised grading plan to Bill Szymanski for approval. I do not remember what the intent of the Commission's approval was. I will check with the City Attorney to see if the Commission can legally require the applicant to pave the lot based on representations made at the hearing. 2 City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 FAX 658-4748 PLANNER ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7955 658-7958 July 10, 1992 Salamin Handy 75 South Winooski Avenue Burlington, Vermont 05401 Re: Motel/Restaurant, 792 Shelburne Road Dear Mr. Handy: Enclosed is an agenda for next Tuesday's Planning Commission meeting and staff comments to the Commission. The Planning Commission will be discussing the issue of installing landscaping on adjoining residential properties and whether the project can continue if landowners do not grant permission for installing the landscaping. Please feel free to attend the meeting if you are interested. The meeting will begin at 7:30 P.M. S' cerely, J e Weith, City Planner Encls JW/mcp cc: David`Kaufman Raymond Jewett Frederick Hannon Charles Murray Rusanna Ruel Ernest LeBlanc Carolyn Mitchell PO M E M O R A N D U M To: South Burlington Planning Commission From: Joe Weith, City Planner Re: July 14, 1992 agenda items Date: July 10, 1992 3) SITE PLAN APPROVAL CLARIFICATIONS a) Handy, 64 room Motel and Restaurant, Shelburne Road: A question has been raised regarding the issue of installing landscaping on adjoining residential properties which was proposed as part of the application. A neighbor has asked whether Mr. Handy can continue wiLb his project if neighbors deny him permission to plant landscaping on their properties. It is staff's understanding that Mr. Handy would be required to plant landscaping on the adjoining residential properties only if the neighbors grant him permission. If permission is not granted, Mr. Handy can continue with his project. However, this understanding is not entirely clear. Therefore, staff is "requesting that the Commission make a formal ruling regarding this issue. Facts of this application include: b o The approved site plan shows landscaping on the residential properties along the boundary and includes a note which states, "Additional evergreen trees for more screening." o The approval included a condition which states, "Cedar hedge to be planted along the fence line on residential properties to the south shall be planted prior to or at same time construction begins. Applicant shall obtain permission from adjoining landowners prior to installation of cedars." o Applicant proposed planting cedars on neighbors properties since there was not enough room on his property to plant a landscaping screen, due primarily to the recreation path easement which was dedicated to the City. Memorandum - Planning July 14, 1992 agenda items July 10, 1992 o The approval motion did not include a condition which clearly made granting of site plan approval conditioned on planting cedars on adjoining properties. 1 b) Twin Oaks - Employee Parking Lot: A question has been raised, again by an adjoining residential landowner, regarding whether Twin Oaks Tennis center is required to pave the 24 space parking lot. Staff needs a ruling from the Commission on this issue. Facts of the application include the following: o Planning Commlission approved construction of a 24 space employee parking lot on 8/17/88 (minutes enclosed). o Approved site plan includes a note which identifies the parking lot as "gravel parking lot." o It was stated by the applicant several times during the hearing that Twin Oaks was intending to pave the lot (see 6/28/88 and 8/17/88 minutes). o A condition was added to the approval which states, "Final grading plan will be revised and approved by the City Engineer prior to paving." o The approval did not include a condition which clearly required the applicant to pave the lot, or revise the plan to clearly indicate that the lot would be paved. The concerned neighbor informed staff that she attended all public meetings regarding this application and understands that the applicant was required to pave the lot. She is concerned with dust which is emitted from the lot. Twin Oaks does not agree that they are required to pave the lot. It is their understanding that if and when they decide to pave the lot, they shall submit a revised grading plan to Bill Szymanski for approval. I do not remember what the intent of the Commission's approval was. I will check with the City Attorney to see if the Commission can legally require the applicant to pave the lot based on representations made at the hearing. E P 6/9/92 JW MOTION OF APPROVAL I move the South Burlington Planning Commission approve the site plan application of Salamin Handy for a 64 room motel and 123 seat quality.restaurant as depicted on a three (3) page set of plans, page one entitled, "New Motel - Addition to Bonanza", prepared by Gordon G. Woods, Associates and dated September, 1990, last revised 5/29/92 with the following stipulations: 1. The applicant shall post a $20,500, 3-year landscaping bond - prior to issuance of a zoning/building permit. The landscape plan shall be revised prior to permit to snow the following: a) the size of proposed Norway Maple increased to 3 - 3 1/2 inch caliper. b) 6' - 8' high Red or Austrian Pine substituted for proposed Cedar. / L ' W G) n�ti- 6 e.y �;n 7%C 5dd i, o wr a� 2. Cedar Hedge to be planted along fence line on residential properties to the south shall be plant9d prior to or a.t same time construction begins. �/I/y/�Le�/J� `ah!// J/�/�(n /JIIi►►iJf/JN or., zcl�o.n��� �2 c/ v� 3. This approval is conditioned on a quality restaurant use. I.T.E. defines a quality restaurant as "eating establishments of high quality and with turnover rates generally of at least one hour or longer. Generally, a quality restaurant does riot serve breakfast and may or may not serve lunch". The existing "Bonanza" does not qualify as a quality restaurant and shall be terminated prior to occupancy of the new motel. Prior to occupancy of the restaurant space by a new restaurant tenant, the City Planner shall confirm that the proposed restaurant meets the definition of quality restaurant. Applicant shall submit any pertinent information requested by City Planner 4. This approval is conditioned on a maximum restaurant seating - capacity of 123 seats (i.e., restaurant, bar and banquet areas). Any increase in seating shall require Planning Commission approval. 5. This property is located within Traffic Overlay Zone 1 which allows a maximum pea), hour trip generation of 27 vehicle -trip ends (vte's). It is estimated based on I.T.E. that the proposed motel and quality restaurant. :!ill generate 50 vte's during the peak hour or 23 vte's above that which is permitted. Section 17.50 of the zoning regulations allows the Planning Commission to 1 1 s e /S o -eSf r.. c.c�Y" L a s4 &f o^ _T 7 t i/�Q p.tinirT-Vt � � 3 �- l 1 � v' n 7-01'� approve peak hour volumes above the normal standard if)the Commission determines that other site improvements will produ net benefit. for traffic flow in the vicinity. It is Commission's determination that the directing of exiting trato Swift Street will improve traffic safety in the vicinit.y an therefore approves the estimated 50 peak hour vte's estimated to be generated by the project. 6. Prior to issuance of a zoning/building permit, the applicant shall submit a drainage plan to the City Engineer for approval. ke/Prr/ooad mp.z ger�6r �rppl i n�-qhl .t. r add 9 t.Q the A sewer allocation of 4,800 gpd is granted. The applicant shall pay the $2.50 per gallon sewer fee prior to issuance of a zoning/building permit. All lighting shall be downcasting shielded luminaire and shall not cast light. beyond the property line. oCot_.s K o f over 3 s 4. The Planning Commission / approve# a building height of 38- feet as shown on Sheet A5. Prior to permit, the;ite glary- ha� 5l o f AS- s l,..a. '6-e. e v u .� k,si,f of 3s �t . The plan shall be revised prior to issuance of a zoning/building permit to show the width of the driveway access connecting tY,e front and back parking lots no less than 12 feet. YJ. The number of parking spaces required by standard is 11e. The applicant proposes 94 spaces which represents a shortfall of J*e2lspaces, or b ' Due to the shared parking opportunities offered by the two uses, the Planning Commission approves the 94 spaces. r�.f �Si- t1F Prior to issuance of a zoning/building permit., the adjoining property to the north (45 Swift Street) shall record in the South Burlington land records an easement allowing the applicant to store snow on 45 Swift Street property along the portion of the applicant's driveway where the driveway abuts the p opert.y line Of 45 Swift. Street.. If p-r,-'y of yS S ^.4 µ r" 4'. s�ow Sttwll 6, yewto.tcf f-or.. si�- 14. A zoning/building )ermit shall be obtained within 6 months or this approval is null and void. �-J ri s 4-, City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 FAX 658-4748 PLANNER 658-7955 June 30, 1992 Gordon Woods, Architect 104 Church Street Burlington, Vermont 05401 Re: Bonanza Motel Addition, 792 Shelburne Road Dear Mr. Woods: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 lk Enclosed please find a copy of the May 12, 1992 Planning Commission meeting minutes. Please note the conditions of approval and the requirement that the zoning/building permit be obtained within six (6) months of the approval date. If you have any questions, please give me a call. i cerel , «3� J e Weith, City Planner 1 Encl JW/mcp cc: Gabe Handy PLANNING COMMISSION 12 May 1992 page 2 4. Public Hearing: Final Plat application of Salamin Handy, B. Kelly, and C. Jennings for a boundary line adjustment involving two parcels of 2.4 acres and 0.85 acres, thereby creating two reconfigured parcels or 1.6 acres and 1.45 acres, 45 Swift St. and 792 Shelburne Rd. Mr. Handy said there had peen no changes since the preliminary approval. Mr. Austin moved the Planning Commission approve the Final Plat application of S. Handy, B. Kelly and C. Jennings for a boundary line adjustment involvingtw_o existing parcels of 2.4 acres and 0.85 acres thereby creating two reconfi ured parcels of 1.6 acres and 1.45 acres as depicted on a plat entitled "Plan Showing Annex to Handy Property from Kelly & Jennings, Shelburne Road, South Burlington, Vermont," prepared by Warren Robenstein and dated January 1992 with the following stipulations: 1. The sheds and concrete pads shown as "to be removed shall be removed prior to recording the final lat. 2. The existing paved area which is proposed to be converted to greeh_area in order to comply with coverage requirements shall be so converted prior to recording the final plat, or within six months of recording the final plat. 3. Appropriate legal documents merging the 0.8 acres with the ex- isting Handy parcel shall be submitted to the City Attorney for approval and shall be recorded in the South Burlin ton Land Records at the same time the plat is recorded. 4. Appropriate legal_ documents for the 20 ft. r.o.w. over the Kelly/Jennings parcel shall be submitted to the City Attorney for approval and shall be recorded in the South Burlin ton land re- cords prior to or at the same time the final plat is recorded. 5. Appropriate legal documents for the proposed bikepath easement shall be submitted to the City Attorney for approval and shall be recorded in the South Burlington land records prior to or at the same time the final plat is recorded. 6. The final plat shall be recorded in the land records within 90 days or this approval is null and void. The plat shall be signed by the _Planning Commission chair or clerk prior to recording. Mrs. Maher seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 5. Site Plan application of Salamin Handy for an 80-room motel and 178 seat quality restaurant, 792 Shelburne Road: PLANNING COMMISSION 12 May 1992 page 3 Mr. Handy said the motel would be 2 stories over the restaurant. A question arose as to building height as the second building would be 3 ft. too high. Mr. Woods felt it could be lowered. Traffic would enter from Shelburne Rd. and ,exit onto Swift Street which would also have an entrance. There would be 96 parking spaces. The building would be tudor-style with a flower garden between this property and the neighbors. It will have an in- door swimming pool. Mr. Weith noted there is a problem as to whether this is considered one or two buildings. Since it is a non -conforming building, if it is ruled to be one building, it would fall under the 25% rule for alterations that applies to all construction. If it is considered to be two buildings, it doesn't meet the p.u.d. requirement for lot size (4 acres). Mr. Weith said he and —parking lot h-ave e4itm�.d#�- considering it one building because it is joined at the second level.- Mr. Burgess said it can't be considered one building to meet one criteria and two buildings to meet another criteria. It has to be one or the other. Mr. Weith said he could ask the Zoning Administrator to explain his decision. Members suggested tabling the item until the Administrator explains his decision. Mr. Crai_g_moved to continue the hearin until 9 June 1992. Ms. Peacock seconded. Motion asked unanimously. 6. Sketch Plan application of J.W.J. Realty for a commercial complex consisting_of two buildin s totaling 21,800 sq. ft. for automobile sales and service, 1095 Shelburne Rd. Mr. Savoie said they are planning a Saturn car dealership. Their first consideration was to break up the "sea of parking" look, so they created an access drive. This will be 30 ft. wide and will run back from Shelburne Rd. to the Saturn building. It will create several smaller parking areas. They have hidden the larger parking lots behind the Chrysler -Plymouth building. Mr. Craig noted that the parking lot in front removed the grass buffer the Commission is striving.for along Shelburne Rd. and asked that the first two parking spaces be removed. The appli- cant said this would be OK. The applicant would upgrade the facade on the Chrysler -Plymouth building and will create a plaza effect in front with customer parking. He then showed the Saturn Building concept which is similar to all of their other dealerships. They are very con- cerned with landscaping and will line the access road with 3" caliper trees. They will also save many of the good oaks and maples in the back area which will then be graveled. J I - 1- 9,:z /fie s LAGS 6/9/92 JW MOTION OF APPROVAL I move the South Burlington Planning Commission approve the site plan application of Salamin Handy for a 64 room motel —and 123 seat quality restaurant as depicted on a three (3) page set of plans, page one entitled, "New Motel - Addition to Bonanza", prepared by Gordon G. Woods, Associates and dated September, 1990, last revised 5/29/92 with the following stipulations: 1. The applicant shall post a $20,500, 3-year landscaping bond prior to issuance of a zoning/building permit. The landscape plan shall be revised prior to permit to show the following: a) the size of proposed Norway Maple increased to 3 - 3 1/2 inch caliper. b) 6' - 8' high Red or Austrian Pine substituted for proposed Cedar. 2. Cedar Hedge to e planted along fence line on residential properties to the south shall be planted prior to or at same time construction begins. �vo- 3. This approval is conditioned on a quality restaurant uce. I.T.E. defines a quality restaurant as "eating establishments of high qualit-y and with turnover rates generally of at least one hour or longer. Generally, a quality restaurant does riot serve breakfast and may or may not serve lunch". The existing "Bonanza" does not, qualify as a quality restaurant and shall be terminated prior to occupancy of the new motel. Prior to occupancy of the restaurant space by a new restaurant tenant, the City Planner shall confirm that the proposed restaurant meets the definition of quality restaurant. Applicant shall submit any pertinent information requested by City Planner 4. This approval is conditioned on a maximum restaurant seating capacity of 123 seats (i.e., restaurant, bar and banquet areas). Any increase in seating shall require Planning Commission approval. 5. This property i, 1,-._�aL.ed within Traffic-. Overlay Zone 1 which allows a rl,3xi.mtun ? 11.. hear trip generation of 27 vehicl f., trip ends (vte's). It is estimated based on I.T.E. that the proposed motel and quality restaurant will generate 50 vte's during the peak hour or 23 vte's above that which is permitted. Section 17.50 of the zoning regulations allows the Planning Co4nission to �� I "' n 0 V-er � approve peak hour volumes above the normal standard if the Commission determines that other site improvements will produce a ,,,�" net benefit. for traffic flow in the vicinity. It is the Y .r,1-Commission's determination that the directing of exiting traffic to Swift Street will improve traffic safety in the vicinity andiv 1 therefore approves the estimated 50 peak hour vte's estimated to be generated by the project. `{v 6. Prior to issuance of a zoning/building permit, the applicant shall submit a drainage plan to the City Engineer for approval. 7'. Ppermit t pplic //``hall ntr$719 �o the hShPF��rst energl(.e'd by fhb prof J,W. A sewer allocation of 4,800 gpd is granted. The applicant shall pay the $2.50 per gallon sewer fee prior to issuance of a zoning/building permit. X. All lighting shall be downcasting shielded luminaire and shall not cast lightbeyond the property line. (&C-5 ", f --- The Planning Commissions approveg,a building height of 38 feet as shown on Sheet A5. Prior to permit, —setb-ack p,e1. The plan shall be _revised prior to issuance of a zoning/building permit to show the width of the driveway access, connecting the front and back parking lots no less than 12 feet. JJ The required number of parking spaces required by standard !� is 11t The apt scant proposes 94 spaces which represents a shortfall of 1,6 � aces , or l�.4Z Due to the shared parking opportunities offered by the two uses, the Planning Commission approves the 94 spaces. ft000<3. Prior t:o issuance of a zoning/building permit, the adjoining property to the north (45 Swift Street) shall record in the South Burlington land records an easement allowing the applicantto store snow on 45 Swift Street property along the portion of the applicant's driveway where the driveway abuts the property line of 45 Swift Street.. Tf- eusc-. Y' nql -.-1" 161;i-� 14. A zoning/building permit shall be obtained within 6 months or this approval is null and void. 13. /V O dy-4 M,Lrt ar A'04-S- 4 Memorandum - May 12, 1992 May 8, 1992 Page 4 Planning agenda items 2. The existing paved area which green area in order to comply with so converted prior to recording months of recording the final plat. is proposed to be converted to coverage requirements shall be the final plat, or within 6 3. Appropriate legal documents merging the 0.8 acres with the existing Handy parcel shall be submitted to the City Attorney for approval and shall be recorded in the South Burlington land records at the same time the plat is recorded. 4. Appropriate legal documents for the 20 foot r.o.w. over the Kelly/Jennings parcel shall be submitted to the City Attorney for approval and shall be recorded in the South Burlington land records prior to or at the same time the final plat is recorded. 5. Appropriate legal documents for the proposed bike path easement shall be submitted to the City Attorney for approval and shall be recorded in the South Burlington land records prior to or at the same time the final platis recorded. These same conditions should be attached to the final plat approval. 5) HANDY MOTEL ADDITION - 792 SHELBURNE ROAD This project consists of constructing an 80 room motel addition to an existing 178 seat" restaurant. The addition would involve adding two (2) stories to the current single story restaurant and constructing a four (4) story addition to the rear. Both buildings would be connected. The Planning Commission met with the applicant. on 8/6/91 (minutes enclosed) to informally discuss this proposal. `lhi:, property located at 792 Shelburne Road is within the Commercial I District.. It is bounded on the north by an auto service station, Pizca Hut restaurant, and a multi -use commercial building, on the east by a self-St.orage warehouse business, on the south by five (5) single family residences on Lindenwood Drive and an auto service station and on the west. by Shelburne Read. 4 Memorandum - May 12, 1992 May 8, 1.992 Page 5 Planning agenda items Access/circulation: The current two-way 42 foot wide access on r„ Shelburne Road would be changed to a one-way ingress only access. All vehicles would exit onto Swift Street via a two-way 20, r.o.w. across the Kelly and Jennings property. Traffic circulation on the site is acceptable. Staff suggests that the one-way access drive located to the north of the new motel building be reduced in width from 24 feet to 15 feet. This would help to discourage traffic from exiting in the wrong direction and would provide for more green space. One-way do not enter signs will be placed on either side of the one-way access drive to direct traffic towards Swift Street. The applicant should also consider angled parking in front of the restaurant to further discourage exits onto Shelburne Road. Coverage/setbacks: Building coverage is 14.8% (maximum allowed is 30%). Overall coverage is 68.3'% (maximum allowed is 70%). Front yard coverage is unaffected by this application. A portion of the existing restaurant does not meet the 65 foot. setback requirement from a residential district. This building is therefore a noncomplying structure and the proposed additional two (2) stories are subject. to Section 19.002 of the zoning -0 regulations and the 25'% ruie on expansion of noncomplying structures. The applicant is being asked to submit. cost estimates for the addition to determine compliance with this section. The motel building located at the rear of the restaurantwill meet all setbacl- requirements including the additional. setback required for the additional height being i-•Gquested (see discussion on ..eight). Parking: This project require., a total of 152 parking spaces and only 94 spaces are being r `� p g provided including f..�ur (4) handicapped spaces. This proposal represents a 58 space or 38% shortfall. The applicant claims that there will be adequate parking due to the shared parking that will. take place but no supporting evidence was submitted. Staff has requested a snared parking analysis but we have received nothing to date. Parking stall dimensions meet minimum dimensions. Parking aisle widths meet minimum requirements. Memorandum - Planning May 12, 1992 agenda items May 8, 1_992 Page 6 Landscaping: The minimum landscaping requirement for this project is $20,500. The applicant is proposing only $3,768 new landscaping, a $16,732 shortfall. Plantings include Cedar, Norway Maple, Sargent Juniper and Burning Bush. It is staff's opinion that there is not enough room to install additional�;�! plantings. However, more substantial species and sizes should be planted than what is proposed. 6'-8' Red Pine should be planted instead of the Cedar, and the proposed 1 1/2 inch Norway Maple should be increased to 3-3 1/2 inch. - - Traffic.: This property is in Traffic Overlay Zone 1 which would allow this property to generate a maximum of 27 vehicle trip ends (vte's) during the P.M. peak hour. Applicant's traffic consultant estimates that the restaurant currently generates 22 vte's and the motel will generate 46 vte's for a total of 58 vte's. This number is based on an actual count for the restaurant and I.T.E. estimates for the motel. Staff suggests that the a391& proposed restaurant be evaluated using I.T.E. estimates. This method yields an estimate of 75 vte's or 48 more trips than permitted. The existing restaurant currently generates 22 vte's and the proposed motel addition will add 53 vte's for a total of 75 vtelz which will exceed the limit allowed for this property. Sectiorz 17.50 of the zoning regulation:, allows the Planning Commission to �, approve peak hour volumes above the normal standards if it determines that other site improvements will produce a net. benefit for traffic flow in the vicinity. The traffic study concludes that "the proposed cane -way traffic circulation pattern will effectively mitigate the potential traffic congestion and Safety impacts of additional motel -generated traffic". The level of service (LOS) analysis for the Shelburne R.oad/Swift Street. intersection indicates that in 1997 this intersection would operate with a LOS of C for both build and no build scenarios. Conditions should actually be slightly improved because of the diversion of traffic onto Swift Street. This LOS analysis was based on a 60 unit. motel and should be updated for the proposed 80 unit motel. The traffic study indicated that with regards to traffic safety, the proposed one-way traffic 21ow pattern will reduce conflicts at. the "helbuArne Road access. This in turn will improve traffic safety conditions on Shelburne Road. 6 Memorandum - May 12, 1992 May 8, 1992 Page 7 Planning agenda items Applicant has indicated that the restaurant will be changed from a High Turnover Sit -Down Restaurant to a Quality Restaurant. I.T.E. describes High Turnover (Sit -Down) Restaurants as "sit down eating places where customers generally stay less than one hour. Restaurants in this group are usually moderately priced and frequently belong to chains. These restaurants serve breakfast, lunch, and dinner and are sometimes open 24 hours per day". High Quality Restaurants are described as "eating establishments of high quality and with turnover rates generally of at least one hour or longer. Generally, a quality restaurant does not serve breakfast and may or may not serve lunch". This approval should be conditioned on the requirement that the City Planner review the operation of the restaurant to be certain it conforms to the description of a Quality Restaurant. L i The applicant would be required to contribute $1,284 to the Shelburne Road Traffic Impact. Fund based on the 50 additional-WI, dditional trips to be generated. G�- Sewer: The sewer allocation needed for this project is 6,000 gpd. The applicant will be required to pay the $2.50 per gallorJ�� fee prior to permit. Lighting: - i ht.ing:_ Additional exterior lighting proposed consists of five (5) 400 watt metal halide lights on 16 foot poles, two (2) 175 watt metal halide lights attached to the north side of the motel, build-ing and four (4) ground lights in the flower garden area , which is adjacent to the residential uses. The pole and attached light.s will have cutoff luminaires. The ground lights will be 75 watt incandescent lights with hoods and louvers. W Height: The applicant is requesting an increase in height to 38 feet for the four ( 4 ) story section of the motel. Section 18.112(b) of the zoning regulations allows the Planning �"� Commission to approve an increase in height up to 45 feet if it determines that a taller structure will meet the three (3) --�-°' criteria contained in this section. The applicant has met the requirement in paragraph (c) of this section by moving the building an additional 1.5 feet from the side lot line. 7 Memorandum - May 12, 1992 May 8, 1992 Page 8 Other: Planning agenda items a screened dumpster is being proposed. the applicant has not submitted a drainage plan as requested by Bill Szymanski. the applicant should address the concerns expressed at the 8/6/91 meeting with trucks with refrigeration units using the motel and running the trucks all night. applicant has indicated that he has no problem in complying with the Fire Chief's recommendations. staff is concerned that the proposal is too dense for this site and perhaps should be down scaled for the following reasons: 1) A 38% waiver in parking is significant, motel and quality restaurant use tend to peak at the same time, 2) based on traffic study, traffic will increase threefold and exceed traffic overlay district, 3) a three story, 38 foot high, flat roofed structure will not be compatible with adjoining residential homes. The applicant has indicated that he can obtain a parking easement from the adjoining Jennings parcel to meet evening peaks. Also, he has indicated that they will either lower the building to 35 feet or construct a 38 foot high building with a peaked roof. Either of these would bring the building more into compatibility with surrounding buildings. Applicant. has •also suggested planting a cedar hedge on adjoining residential properties to lessen imp,,t. If all of these are done, staff concerns will be satisfied. U' S 6) J.W.J. REALTY - SATURN DEALERSHIP -- 1095 SHELBURNE ROAD This project- consists of constructing an 8,310 square foot building to contain a new auto dealership on the site of an existing Chrysler -Plymouth dealership. Auto sales is not a permitted nor conditional use in this district.. The 'Zoning Board of Adjustment. on April 13, 1992 granted a use variance for this use. This property at .1095 Shelburne Road is within the Commercial 1 District. It. is bounded on the north by a cemetery and undeveloped land awned by Pomerleau, on the west by the undeveloped residential portion of L&M Park, on the south by the commercial portion of L&M Park, on the east by a retail building and Shelburne Road. 8 z/y ,4T- E�cJO GA s T-1E�7i�G . �/a/t-Ae.(,,r/ ;~TUvSC Ge�.PJZ 1J LA,c k ,� •J N fir, 70T- ve- 4i4N/) �r AfO7-6 L-Ile STA urC,QNT Corj"j'/IvUF TuiE City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 FAX 658-4748 PLANNER 658-7955 June 5, 1992 Gordon Woods, Architect. 104 Church Street. _Burlington, Vermont. 05401 Re: Bonanza Motel Addition, 792 Shelburne Road Dear Mr. Woods: 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, June 9, 1992 at 7:30 P.M. to represent your request.. If you have any questions, please give me a call. Sincerely, /beWeit.ri,'� City Planner Enc.1 s IW/mcZ CC: Gabe Handy _ L n U p J G O P I U Lf S G W IL p u L (-_ -P)-a 4' T I N4. 1 0 T I N LIOME _ -317E-- --ROeT Lou OljloN ,q,T MAT. OM NO :]YN. WM1J.E -LIDO% TNUJ s• OGG U,)E4TOICS _:: -=1 _. Te4 DOLLED f OU4LGP j%2 j A NC,Un•r mp..PLE Act,.' 2v02uM le' So i6ALLE9 8UVLAp to F. S A4G CANT JUwIFEC JUNIPER cl"W11% '—IC- fWMt P — 5- C -Bv41l+4 P+GSM CUPwy Mvf ALATU+ 2I" Di' aseLLen +I •�oL+P — 15 D NDTF:-AUDITI&HAL 01244E'C95-AWDIWINC I.A"WWWVV%- WHITE CE004- W HT 2" 12 U OVITING 15`/3TDMtI ING Me 0fl NO. M--A-400-SGN •P ♦"W 50P94 Mt TA4 NALIOF �. -ADDITIONAL &f Zg sr¢e- — - S I T p ,L A µ_- L A N D 5C A P I N G foe IAee¢ SG■¢CNIN4� u OT L=S'. ALL DIMG NSIONS TO BE V@R1F1140 Al TINE SITL 61 148 CONTRACTOR. ANY CRROR OR POIN75 IN QUESTION mu%T BE RuraeRLD To TW@ ARCHITECT FOR A Decl SION FjLFORI: PRC)caaDIwG W ITH 'jNL- WORK. RECEIVED I JUN 0 2 1992 City of So. Burlingtc: NC[ES: rSONANzA LANgSCAPIN4 IS EXI STIN4- MOTEL LAN")SCAPIWC IS NEW. 1ANDSCA P I H L -ALQNC THE. bIV E PATH SNALL :SE--DOWE _BtiTIAV CITY__OF. SODTH PJUELIN&TOW,VT., LAI,5 NEW CAAIN LI411C FE$-lc`- J.0 9HPT• 1940 /ewL■ 1 1"14 = 20 FC--T 4o ILI ■ Me. /N■■T oR ■w■■s • r�C�tr� Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission 66 PEARL STREET P.O. BOX 108 ESSEX JUNCTION, VERMONT 05453 802 658-3004 May 19, 1992 Mr. Joseph Weith City Planner 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, Vermont 05403 RE: Addition to Bonanza restaurant Dear Joe: I have reviewed the traffic analysis prepared by Lamoureux and Stone for the proposed 80 room motel addition to Bonanza restaurant. Regarding trip generation, the counts performed on January 29 were not seasonally adjusted to represent an average day of the year. Therefore, ITE generated trips should be used. In ITE, it is appropriate to classify both Pizza Hut and Bonanza as high turnover restaurants. Consequently, this would yield a higher estimate of trips. I feel that even with the proposed one-way traffic circulation pattern, there are still too many uncontrolled access points and not enough positive guidance (signs, physical elements to direct traffic) to make reasonable trip distribution assumptions. If necessary, a revision to current site plan should be implemented. If you have any questions,, please call me at 658-3004. Sincerely, Tr �- Todd E. Landry Transportation Engineer TEL:bf ... 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 2 77,� Y7 CITY COUNCIL 4 May 1992 page 7 Executive Session: Mr. Dinklage moved the Board adjourn and reconvene as City Council in Executive Session to discuss real property acquisition and a personnel matter and to resume regular session only for the purpose of adjournment. Mr. Condos seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Regular Session: The City Council returned to regular session. Mr. Condos moved adjournment, Mr. Dinklage seconded. The motion passed unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 10:00 PM. Total Room Days Collected Add: Curr. Month Coll. Next Mo. Less: Prior & Next Month Coll. Adjusted Total Days Number of Days in Month Average * Rooms Rented / Day (` - -:!ncy Percentage (%) Total Room Rentals Collected Add: Curr. Month CoII.Next Mo. Less: Prior & Next Month Coll. Collected for Current Month Average Room Rental / Month Average * of Rooms Rented / Day Average Room Rentals Coll. Occupancy Percentage (%) MAPLE RIDGE MOTEL OCCUPANCY ANALYSIS FOR THE YEAR ENDED 1991 OCCUPANCY January February March April May June July August September October November December 329 50 46 355 57 (50) 361 52 57) 410 51 (53) 555 51 (91) 482 90 56) 658 79 (78) 835 85 (88) 698 76 (90) 594 34 (67) 457 113 (16 495 72 112 333 31 362 28 356 31 408 30 515 31 516 30 659 31 832 31 684 30 561 31 554 30 455 31 10.74 12.93 11.48 1 13.60 1 16.61 17.20 21.26 26.84 1 22.80 18.10 18.47 14.68 0 AVERAGE ROOM RENTALS $11,563 $15,395 $13,108 $17,799 $24,750 $20,078 $29,400 $38,042 $34,761 $35,789 $19,219 $17,290 1,458 1,725 1,672 1,620 1,705 3,759 2,936 4,418 2,821 1,083 3,307 2,510 1,231 1,458 1,725 1,602 3,109) 1,650) (3,107) 3,256 4,569 2,582) 43 3,272 $11,790 $15,662 $13,055 $17,817 $23,346 $22,187 $29,229 $39,204 $33,013 $34,290 $22,089 $16,528 $35.41 $43.27 $36,67 $43.67 $45.33 $43.00 $44.35 $47.12 $48.26 $61.12 $39.87 $36.33 YEAR-TO-DATE 10.74 11.84 1 11.72 1 12.19 1 13.07 1 13.76 1 14.83 1 16.33 17.05 17.16 11 17.28 17.06 $35.41 $39.34 $-W.45 1 $39.75 1 $40.87 1 $41-OT $41.67 1 $42.35 $43.01 $44.82 11 $44.37 $43.70 31.59% 34.81 °/ 34.47°/ 35.85°/ 38.45°/ 40.47°/ 43.62°/ 48.04% 50.15% 50.46% 1 50.81 N I 50.17 Prepared for Internal Management Use Only LARKIN REALTY 410 Shelburne Road, South Burlington, VT 05403 • 864 7444 May 8, 1992 To whomever it may concern, My Howard Johnson's Hotel located at 1720 Shelburne Road, So. Burlington ran a 58% occupancy rate on 205 rooms for the year 1991. ohn P Larkin CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON SITE PLAN APPLICATION 1) OWNER OF RECORD (name, address, phone #) G'j p - Z/ 2) APPLICANT (name, address, phone #) ;663 47/0 V7 0j-1/v/ rlZ JlZ f� Z�!„�(i4N�� T1��n; �• L?L J�C/ 3) CONTACT PERSON (name, address, phone #)S� , zn!�L Vr, o1�id� 4 ) PROJECT STREET ADDRESS: 5) LOT NUMBER (if applicable) 6) PROPOSED USE (S) 7) SIZE OF PROJECT (i.e. total building square footage, # units, maximum height and # floors, squ�rfeet per floor) •; ;�li2aN Q 8) NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES 9) LOT COVERAGE: building %; landscaped areas % building, parking, outside storage % v - 10) COST ESTIMATES: Buildings $ ,�,�rr , Landscaping $ Other Site Improvements (please list with cost) $ 11) ESTIMATED PROJECT COMPLETION DATE: 12) ESTIMATED AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC (in and out) Estimated trip ends (in and out) during the following hours: Monday through Friday 11-12 noon 12-1p.m. 1-2 p.m. 2-3 p.m. 3-4 p.m. 4-5 p.m. 5-6 P.M. 6-7 p.m. 13) PEAK HOURS OF OPERATION: 14) PEAK DAYS OF OPERATION: Z DATE OF SUBMISSION DATE OF HEARING SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT PLEASE SUBMIT FIVE COPIES AND ONE REDUCED COPY (11 X 17) OF THE SITE PLAN WITH THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION: Lot drawn to scale (20 foot scale if possible.) Location of streets, abutting properties, fire hydrants, existing buildings, existing landscaping. Existing and proposed curb cuts, pavement, walkways. Proposed landscaping plan (nbmber, variety and size) equal to of greater than the required amount in the Zoning Regulations. Number and location of Parking Spaces: (9' x 18') with 22 or 24 foot aisles as required. Number and location of compact car spaces. (This requires sepa- rate Planning Commission approval). Number and location of handicapped spaces as required. (13 feet by 20 feet in size, one per every fifty spaces). Location of septic tanks (if applicable). Location of any easements. Lot coverage information: Building footprint, building, parking and outside storage, and landscaped areas. Location of site (Street # and lot #). North arrow Name of person or firm preparing site plan and date. -Z!�4 tb )(,g IZ— ` -az /51�7 cg9 =G7 M mololl'o L Q LI c n la I ki [, S c LI 12 1) U L E: T �- -���• —_- V L f1 AI I N 4 � [ .- PLAI,/ Nai... 'T '.•>uUIIIaIJ 1„A NO 74N. y-_— Aul TIt1AN Plrvl P1Nu! NIGRA L 4. Te a' psuku}AUKL4D L"•$' j 4 NCWhi YdF.F�. i- AcCI; ftv G4u/-� 10' Sn PALLej�8U QL4� S-3i 16 P, 5 AR4 CY1Nj JUNIPE�L J--m, CHINLU1\,b .1-jiN11 it' 24" P,++.LC+% "P 41AP PUQrN4 P.V :N Ct�nwy M✓S ALA IJA '[A" SG" ' 4.A.t lr> . P�,II.Ap -- ..l� I) NOTE: ADDITIONAL CUERGGF[Kp•Ap.blLllNS LANocWNt'yy• WNITC CGOA.2' G HT " " Y" 12 1-160(1N4 ''J-,Te Mt, 111[, W DLL. lee. M.1A A-400- mH•P Ae,!W Sort.. M( rA♦ PAIIUG. .h fO�i VM02L`r SC�i L-1�N1NG ,1c" ��_ S t T P L A N- L ANDCANING SCA Le!-- rJ U T L• :3'. ALL D1Aau NSIONS Tv bl-. v1t121F,,at AT 741.- SITU kS4 TWL CoNTgACTO;, ANy L•r21:urn OR poled T'S IN QUUSTION MUST gr- RUV`URwLI. TO TLICc ARCN1TQCT FOR A DL'CISION P3UF0wiL- PROCL-L-DLNq WITA THL- WDRK, k E L E -VE D FEB 2 5 1993 ,ity of So. Burlington Notes; k.GNb\NZA L�NI)SCA�INy IS ex1 STIN4. ,AAC'fEL LANDSCAPIW4 IS N F- I\1. NCT :THE LANDSCAPING ALONG THE ?,AkE PATH 5WALL P UK BY THE CITY OF 'SCUTS P.U¢LINCrTON,VT,, _ AI 50 HCW CONN LINK FD-Ice. _.QEWO 2-72 -n Q/LI! LO 1-70• Q = INVII1AD S.e,-9:. 4- Rr'l'I SEu Ir•t7.• RGJIp rp 7. 11 RaWS U: -�, Qe✓ISr,, 1.-I-4� krVlKl. 5.51•ii P. rig, r ., PLANNER 658-7955 City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT05403 FAX 658-4748 February 9, 1993 Gordon G. Woods 104 Church Street Burlington, Vermont 05401 Re: Revised Motel Addition, 792 Shelburne Road Dear Mr. Woods: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Enclosed please find some preliminary comments on the above referenced project form City Engineer Bill Szymanski, Fire Chief Jim Goddette and myself. Please submit revised and/or additional information no later than Friday, March 12, 1993. If you have any questions, please give me a call. Sincepply, Ra4mo/ J. Belair, Zoning and Planning Assistant Encls RJB/mcp cc: Gabe Handy M E M O R A N D U M To: Project Files From: Raymond J. Belair, Zoning and Planning Assistant Re: Preliminary Comments - March 23, 1993 agenda items Date: January 26, 1993 SALAMIN HANDY - BONANZA MOTEL REVISION - SITE PLAN --- applicant must obtain a variance from the Zoning Board of Adjustment to allow an addition to a noncomplying structure to exceed 25% of the property's fair market value. --- landscaping plan and schedule should be revised to incorporate the conditions of the 6/9/92 approval. --- a drainage plan should be submitted. --- the width of the driveway access connecting the front and rear parking lots should be no less than 12 feet. --- indicate what type of screening will be used around the dumpster, if plantings are used, the plant material should be included in the planting schedule. M E M O R A N D U M To: South Burlington Planning Commission From: William J. Szymanski, City Engineer Re: Preliminary Comments March 23, 1993 agenda items Date: February 9, 1993 BONANZA RESTAURANT & MOTEL, SHELBURNE ROAD Prior conditions of approval dated September 22, 1992 should apply to the revised plan received January 27, 1993. 5uutb S urlingtnn N tre D rpartment ~" 575 l4lnrset �fteet vi 3nutll 'Burlington. Vermont II5403 FAX: (802) 658-4748 TO: SO. BURLINGTON PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: CHIRP GODDETTE RE: TUESDAY MARCH 2301993 AGENDA ITEM DATE: FRIDAY JANUARY 29,1993 1. NEW MOTEL -ADDITION TO BONANZA SHELBURNE ROAD �iI L • (802)658-7960 JOB # 9027 REVISED 1120193 SITE PLAN HAS BEEN REVIEWED BY THE FIRE DEPARTMtNT AND AT THIS TIME 1 DO NOT SEE A PROBLEM IN GIVEN EMERGENCY PROTECTION. yM4MM .woo ,� — ,ram �� � o �. 5 y� -- Ali, s�o 57 No Text PLANNER 658-7955 City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT05403 FAX 658-4748 March 19, 1993 Gordon G. Woods 104 Church Street Burlington, Vermont 05401 Re: Revised Motel Addition, 792 Shelburne Road Dear Mr. Woods: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Enclosed is an agenda for next Tuesday's Planning Commission meeting and my comments to the Planning Commission. Please be sure someone is present on Tuesday, March 23, 1993 at 7:30 P.M. to present your request. if you have any questions, please give rite a call. Sincerely, Joe Weith,R'"/-? City Planner Encls JW/mcp cc: Gabe Handy NMII+ a 0 z 77 0 W F frA ... - A44 Dlmv."14SIOMS TO. Sib VG2tFl(;o ONTk:ACTO+z. TNCs 81T1: Y T C G AnA4 QP-90e Oe POIWTS IN • _ s,c QUL'.STION MUST BG- ei:FL722L-0 �'-,+ - �• TO THG AeCIAITC,CT Me A pS:,claloN 91CF'D213 PR:UCL:L:OING Y f - It ue WITA Ti4m Wofu. L G CA�T IJ AA o A 51 1 T t 'ICI Lk': I' = NUTES: MEN M_OTEL7 44 20aMS NEW AA0TEL 1`'PPV196-y0 CARS Ul)5 SS ^.,INCLro+bL0DVllLFS . 4b MSPAor. Co CRACLE.; k6LLYQJEW91K4S Lai, LOT 51m. 46,25o s,F G¢Eeil AREA• 20,5COS,F PXlL0lMg, PAVIM4,CTcr. 47,7SD f,F VVICCAT 6REELL: 3C%. C W ERA4C; MOTEL#66HA11LA JUW LOT SIZE; 11,814 V, 417eEN AREA; 22, 111 S,r. b LAU`.1 t-14, PAVINq TC.: A,) 1615,E F00047 4hEGN: 32yP EE5,TAU RAM T 12 5 SEATS Q L15 T NATnou A¢EA C WLR'I ELS; QKTAuvA4 T IT rACOTE L 15 REZ"CA W. � vv, JAN2 7 lr'F City of So. Bur{ingLUi 1try SC f. I. W-In Rtvlt to S-11-S2 tl.CVISrO A--14-9"+ ttvI sm D- IS•Q2 Rtv,s6a 17-71••'11 - QW15C11 I-R7-•li -1 015F9 T. z>-q1 91VI51% T� II-qt RCULSEA' 6.T I.41 Rrvt SCn S-41-qi P. Paltq 5-SO•gl owawN iW Onia IJ sePT i99a. as JOa NO. �j02t ■Naar RCJ�jE'7 awaaia '1. P 4041TI N4 LO11N 1111 [k _ fW; LA P1Mp _ ROOT 4o41p111ow pIA No 1VN, NNITE• 4UVOIC TN UJA o4G1 U E 41 T A I LS t •1w8 0"Ltp}4UD:64,P Il', .j A NCWAv lea P..F 4 cr4 Ru TiQ UAN 16, So &ALLZI>46UQLAp Vo to 6 SA94CA91 JL)NIPE¢ JU.wea CNINpy Sly JAA,CNTI It' 24" PI-LC-O Pwa"P PVQISL4 P•. '+M CtIONYMJS ALATUA 24" Oi" P.ALLCn 4IFW%ILAP — 55 D NDTE. ADDITIONAL CVEYL<t1ECAl5•Ap101MIN4 LANpAWNE'VS' WHITE e.EDA12- W 41 • 211 12 LIOIITING !,VITEM%, IN[. Me DCL No. mom -A. 40O-:NN •M ♦CO.W SVpE.I METAL MALIOF L ADDITIONAL 11Vl;e4te"Im" Tt¢CS Foot MOMS SGIRU WIN4. S .I T E_ P L L,A N- L /AN03CAPING SCA Le: I" '[UI IJOT L S•. ) ALL DIM 1"s NS..,NS TO be V%RIFIt1D AT THE SITE BY TNL CONTRACTOt<. ANY ERROR OR POIN75 IN QUESTION MOOT 9Cx RereRRLD TO THC ARC6ktTQGT FOR A 011'Ci SION fSEFORQ PROCLL'-Lalwq WITH THE WORK. NOTES: gONAN2A LT1Nq SCAP1N4 I'S EX»TIN4. MOTEL LANOSCAPIN4 IS N C IV. kE'LE r�* Vff E` D p pity of So. Burlington :THE LAWD,CAPINa ALONG THE EdIILE PATH SHALL _3E WRE BY. THE CIT`f OF 'SOUTH eJUILL INCArOW, VT. , &L.SIA SEW CNAiN LINK FE}ICE. ¢CV I SE•1 1.10- " 96411tD 11-21•y2 REUISCO 4-le9l CeV1 st0 RE;-It•9i JISE O It- E1- 4 OEVISeO 1.214, MJ/5w T•n-gt f EVl5T1) 6-I-• qI DEV1561 5-11.91 1', P, 11IIT 5-1c 1 0- 5 PL AFT[ft DIIIV'C,1'Nlat-1GE -GMf Wn,+� _,_-- _7^u RfMt-Tm NLly k/WTN U.r!%F_ Memorandum - Planning June 9, 1992 agenda items June 5, 1992 Page 2 4) HANDY MOTEL ADDITION - 792 SHELBURNE ROAD This is a continuation of the site plan review began at the May 12, 1992 meeting. Modifications have been made to the project to comply with the 25% expansion rule and emergency access requirements. The major change involves reducing the size of the restaurant building so that it complies with setback requirements and therefore is no longer nonconforming, and a reduction in the number of rooms in the motel from 80 rooms to 64 rooms. The restaurant will now have only 123 seats. This property located at 792 Shelburne Road is within the Commercial 1 District. It is bounded on the north by an auto service station, Pizza Hut restaurant, and a multi -use commercial building, on the east by self -storage warehouse business, on the south by five (5) single family residences on Lindenwood Drive and an auto service station and on the west by Shelburne Road. Access/circulation: The current two-way 42 foot wide access on Shelburne Road would be changed to a one-way ingress only access. All vehicles would exit onto Swift Street via a two-way 20' r.o.w. acros the Kelly and Jennings property. The parking space.e in front of the restaurant have been angled to further identify this access for ingress only. Traffic circulation: on the site is acceptable. Signage, pavement markings and a pipe barrier will be used to discourage traffic fromgoing in the wrong direction and exiting through Pizza Hut. �- The Fire Chief has asked that there be at least 12 feet between the pipe barrier and the southerly edge of the access drive. Coverage/setbacks: Building coverage is 12.7'% (maximum allowed is 30%). Overall coverage is 68% (maximum allowed is 70%). Front yard coverage is unaffected by this application. Setback requirements are being met. The motel addition will not exceed the height limitation so it is setback the 65 foot minimum from the residential district.. 7 M Memorandum - June 9, 1992 June 5, 1992 Page 3 Planning agenda items Parking: This project requires a total of 110 parking spaces and 94 spaces are being provided including three (3) handicapped parking spaces. This proposal represents a 16 space or 14.5% shortfall. The applicant's traffic consultant has indicated that the ULI Shared Parking publication allows for the parking requirement for restaurants combined with motels to be reduced by 50%. Calculating the parking requirement in this manner results in 94 spaces required which is exactly the number proposed. Parking stall dimensions meet minimum dimensions. Parking aisle widths meet minimum requirements. Landscaping: The minimum landscaping requirement for this project is $20,500. The applicant is proposing only $7566 in new landscaping, a $12,934 shortfall. Plantings include Cedar, Norway Maple, Sargent Juniper and Burning Bush. It is staff's opinion that there is not enough room to install additional plantings. However, more substantial species and sizes should be planted than what is proposed. 6"-8" Red Pine should be planted instead of the Cedar, and the proposed 1 1/2 inch Norway Maple should be increased to 3-3 1/2 inch. The applicant is proposing to plant 16 foot high evergreens on the adjacent residential property to provide additional screening. Traffic: This property is in Traffic Overlay Zone 1 which would allow this property to generate a maximum of 27 vehicle trip ends (vte's) during the P.M. peak hour. Based on the traffic analysis submitted by the applicant the existing use generates 22 trip ends during the average weekday peak. The proposed use is estimated to generate 43 trip ends during the P.M. peak. The applicant is proposing various improvements to benefit traffic: flow and exiting, namely directing exiting traffic to Swift. Street.. Sewer: The sewer allocation needed for this project is 4800 gpd. The applicant will be required to pay the $2.50 per gallon fee prior to permit. 3 Memorandum - Planning June 9, 1992 agenda items June 5, 1992 Page 4 Lighting: Additional exterior lighting proposed consists of five (5) 400 watt metal halide lights on 16 foot poles, two (2) 175 watt metal halide lights attached to the north side of the motel building and four (4) ground lights in the flower garden area which is adjacent to the residential uses. The pole and attached lights will have cutoff luminaires. The ground lights will be 75 watt incandescent lights with hoods and louvers. Other: --- a screened dumpster is being proposed. -- the applicant has not submitted a drainage plan as requested by Bill Szymanski. --- the applicant should address the concerns expressed at the 8/6/91 meeting with trucks with refrigeration units using the motel and running the trucks all night. --- the one-way access drive connecting the restaurant parking with the motel parking does not provide a five (5) foot snow storage area for a distance of about. 40 feet. The applicant should obtain a snow storage easement from the adjoining property owner to the north. q1,7 G v 5) O'BRIEN BROTHERS - REVISED FINAL PLAT - PATCHEN ROAD This application is to amend the landscaping plan only for the. four (4) unit multi -family dwelling which was part of an 18 lot residential subdivision approved on 8/29/89 (minutes enclosed). This subdivision was revised on 2/5/91 but the revisions did not affect this four (4) unit building. This building is currently under construction and nearing completion. This property located on Patchen Road is within the R4 District. The lot on which this multi -family dwelling is located is bounded on the south by a single family dwelling, on the east by a city park, on the north by a CO District and on the west by Patchen Road. Landscaping: This is the only issue which is affected by this application. The landscaping requirement for this building is $6,150 which was not met at the time of the original approval in 1989. The landscaping value currently proposed is now $2,664 or 4 Al'= eel 76,�TA - 6 (..) (to "), -% 80 T�n� = f l5a SDr�S --LAMOUREUX & STONE - Consulting Engineers, Inc. 14 Morse Drive Essex Junction, Vermont 05452 (802) 878-4450 February 20, 1992 Mr. Salamin Handy 75 South Winooski Avenue Burlington, Vermont 05401 RE: Proposed 60-Room Motel and Addition to Bonanza Restaurant 792 Shelburne Road, South Burlington Dear Mr. Handy: As requested, we have examined the potential traffic impacts of adding a 60-room motel immediately behind and connected to the existing Bonanza restaurant at 792 Shelburne Road in South Burlington. In performing this evaluation, we have utilized the proposed site plan entitled "New Motel - Addition to Bonanza" by Gordon G. Woods Assoc. Architects, last revised December 27, 1991. The above site plan shows the existing restaurant, the proposed motel, parking and traffic circulation layout. The latter is of particular importance, as we understand a one-way traffic circulation pattern is being proposed for the Bonanza portion of this project. That circulation pattern will make the Bonanza's Shelburne Road access an entrance only. All vehicles generated by both the Bonanza and the proposed motel will then exit via a new driveway onto Swift Street. The Swift Street driveway will also serve as a two-way access for those vehicles using the new parking area on the motel parcel. The areas of potential impact, traffic congestion and safety, were evaluated. The following presents the methodology and results of our analyses. TRAFFIC CONGESTION The study area for potential traffic congestion impacts was determined by the City of South Burlington to include the accesses onto Shelburne Road and Swift Street plus Civil & Environmental Engineering . Planning • Land Surveying Mr. Salamin Handy February 20, 1992 Page 2 the intersection of Shelburne Road and Swift Street. Background design hour traffic volumes were calculated from the following traffic counts: 1. Automatic Traffic Recorder Count - Shelburne Road Sta D105, Vermont Agency of Transportation, May 1988. 2. Automatic Traffic Recorder Count - Shelburne Road Sta D105, Vermont Agency of Transportation, May 1990. 3. Automatic Traffic Recorder Count - Shelburne Road Sta D258, Vermont Agency of Transportation, May 1988. 4. Turning Movement Count - Shelburne Road & Swift Street, Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission, June 9, 1990. 5. Trip Generation Count - Bonanza & Pizza Hut Restaurants, Lamoureux & Stone, January 29, 1992. Detailed design hour volume calculations are attached as Appendix A. The volumes and directional patterns of restaurant -generated traffic at the existing Shelburne Road access were determined from (5). This count included both the noon and p.m. peak hour periods. From this count and the motel trip generation rates from "Trip Generation, Institute of Transportation Engineers, 5th Edition", existing and proposed trip generation and corresponding directional assignments were calculated. These calculations are attached as Appendix B. One important conclusion reached from the observed trip generation was that both the Bonanza and Pizza Hut exhibited trip generation characteristics of quality restaurants rather than high -turnover ones. Table 1 illustrates the resulting p.m. peak hour vehicular trip generation estimates for the Bonanza restaurant and proposed motel. Having calculated the background design hour volumes and the additional project - generated traffic, the next step in determining the potential traffic congestion impacts was to perform capacity analyses at the three intersections; Shelburne Road/Existing Access, Shelburne Road/Swift Street and Swift Street/Proposed Access. These analyses were performed using the methodology outlined in "Special Report 209 - Highway Capacity Manual, Transportation Research Board, 1985" for signalized and unsignalized Mr. Salamin Handy February 20, 1992 Page 3 intersections. Detailed capacity calculations for each intersection are attached as Appendices C-E. TABLE 1 P.M. PEAK HOUR VEHICULAR TRIP GENERATION Existing I Proposed Bonanza 22 22 Motel _ 35 II TOTAL I 22 I 57 11 The Highway Capacity Manual uses "level of service" to define traffic congestion. There are six levels of service, ranging from A to F. The criteria for each level of service at intersections are outlined below. Typically, the desired minimum level of service for a signalized intersection located in an urban area is D. For unsignalized intersections, particularly those on high -volume roadways, level of service E is often experienced by the minor street left -turn movement. Level of Service Signalized Intersections Average Delay (sec/veh) Unsignalized Intersections Reserve Capacity (pcph) Expected Traffic Delay A <5 >400 Little or no delay B 5-14.99 300-399 Short traffic delays C 15-24.99 200-299 Average traffic delays D 25-39.99 100-199 Long traffic delays E 40-59.99 0-99 Very long traffic delays F >60 <0 Failure - extreme congestion Table 2 presents the level of service and average vehicular delay for each lane groups at the Shelburne Road/Swift Street intersection. It is evident from the this table that the project traffic will not significantly change the level of service and delays at this intersection. Mr. Salamin Handy February 20, 1992 Page 4 , TABLE 2 SHELBURNE ROAD/SWIFT STREET INTERSECTION DHV LEVELS OF SERVICE AND AVERAGE VEHICULAR DELAYS w/o Project w/ Project 1992 '' 1997 1992 1997 Swift St. WB LT D (30.0) D (33.7) D (30.9) D (35.2) Swift..St. WB-RT _ _ C (17.1) C- (18.1) C (1-7.5)-- - C---(18.6) Shelburne Rd. NB TH/RT B (14.3) C (20.7) B (14.2) C (20.3) Shelburne Rd. SB LT D (27.2) D (38.0) D (27.2) D (38.0) Shelburne Rd. SB TH A (2.7) A (3.5) A (2.7) A (3.5) Shelburne Rd. SB RT B (13.0) D (31.3) B (13.0) D (31.3) OVERALL B (12.2) C (19.0) B (12.2) C (18.9) At the existing access onto Shelburne Road, the results of the capacity analyses for background conditions without the proposed motel indicated that the left -turn movement exiting the two restaurants experiences level of service E (64 pcph) during both 1992 and 1997 conditions. Fob' the right -turn exiting movement, the level of service equaled B (306 pcph) in 1992 and C (255 pcph) in 1997. With this project and the proposed one-way traffic circulation pattern, the levels of service at the existing access onto Shelburne Road remained the same. Similarly, the reserve capacities of each movement did not experience any significant changes. It should be noted that even with the proposed one-way circulation pattern, vehicles will continue to exit from the Pizza Hut at this access. At the proposed access onto Swift Street, the results of the capacity analyses for projected 1997 DHV conditions with this project indicated that the left -turn exiting movement would experience level of service C (231 pcph). TRAFFIC SAFETY Existing traffic safety conditions were evaluated from the accident experience of Shelburne Road and Swift Street in the immediate vicinity of this project. The accident Mr. Salamin Handy February 20, 1992 Page 5 experience data was obtained from the VAOT for the most recent available five-year period; 1986-1990. This data was analyzed to determine the accident rate at the intersection of Shelburne Road & Swift Street, on Shelburne Road between Swift Street & Brewer Parkway and on Swift Street between Shelburne Road & Farrell Street. Table 4 presents the results of these calculations. TABLE 3 ACCIDENT RATES LOCATION NUMBER ACCIDENTS ACCIDENT RATE' STATEWIDE AVERAGE RATE CRITICAL ACCIDENT RATE SHELBURNE ROAD & SWIFT STREET 32 0.516 0.504 0.660 SHELBURNE ROAD (BREWER -SWIFT) 70 7.610 3.442 4.503 SWIFT STREET (SHELBURNE-FARRELL) 2 1.044 3.442 5.908 ' Expressed in units of accidents per million vehicles at intersections and accidents per million vehicle -miles on roadway segments. These results indicate that the accident rate of the portion of Shelburne Road between Swift Street and Brewer Parkway exceeds the critical accident rate. From that, the portion of Shelburne Road in the immediate vicinity of this project would be classified as a high accident location. They also indicate that while the accident rate at the intersection of Shelburne Road & Swift Street exceeds the statewide average rate for similar intersections, it does not exceed the critical rate and thus would not be considered` to be a high accident location. The proposed one-way traffic flow pattern into and through the Bonanza site will help to minimize vehicular conflicts at the Shelburne Road access. Since exiting traffic, particularly left -turns, has been found to create the most impact at driveways, reducing the volume of the exiting movements at this location will help to improve traffic safety conditions on Shelburne Road. Along Swift Street, available intersection sight distances were measured from the location of the proposed access. To the west towards Shelburne Road, the available sight distance extends to the Shelburne Road intersection (450 feet ±). To the east, If j Mr. Salamin Handy February 20, 1992 Page 6 oncoming vehicles are visible as they pass through the Farrell Street intersection, but drop out of sight as they climb the grade towards the project access. The available intersection sight distance to the east was measured from the point at which oncoming westbound traffic again becomes visible. That distance, based on a driver's eye height of 3.5 feet and an oncoming vehicle height of 4.75 feet, equaled 340 feet. In comparison, based on the posted speed limit of 35 mph, the minimum safe stopping sight distance equals 250 feet and the recommended intersection sight distance equals 475 feet. The former is the minimum required to avoid creating unreasonable impacts, while the latter is recommended in order to minimize potential impacts. If the posted speed limit on Swift Street between Shelburne Road and Farrell Street were to lowered to 30 mph, the recommended intersection sight distance would be reduced to 375 feet, more in line with the available sight distances from this and other driveways in the immediate area. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the above analyses, it appears that the proposed one-way traffic circulation pattern will effectively mitigate the potential traffic congestion and safety impacts of additional motel -generated traffic. However, in examining the proposed site plan, we have reservations concerning the potential degree of compliance with this proposed circulation pattern'. Our specific concerns and recommendations relate to elements f the site circulation and parking layout which do not strictly enforce the desired one-way traffic flow. In particular, they include: The presence of an interconnection between the !-fut and Bonanza parking lots to the rear of the parcel which will allow exiting Bonanza traffic -to circumvent the desired one-way traffic circulation pattern. The installation of channelizing geometry, pavement markings and traffic signs may be an alternative to closing this interconnection. • Retaining perpendicular (as opposed to angled) parking in the Bonanza parking lot. Angled parking with a reduced aisle width should be considered in this area. The width of the connector linking the Bonanza parking area to the new parking area in the rear should also be reduced in order to promote one-way flow. r Mr. Salamin Handy February 20, 1992 Page 7 • Additional pavement markings and traffic signs will be necessary in the Bonanza portion of the parking area to regulate traffic flow and inform motorists of the proper exit. In summary, our conclusion that additional motel -generated traffic will not create adverse traffic congestion or safety impacts is contingent upon obtaining a high degree of compliance with the proposed one-way traffic circulation pattern. Accordingly, we recommend that the proposed site plan be engineered to improve and reinforce the desired one-way traffic circulation pattern. Additionally, we recommend that the posted speed limit on Swift Street between Shelburne Road and Farrell Street be reduced because of the limited sight distances and numerous driveways in this area. We thank you for this opportunity to be of service. Should you have any questions or if we may be of additional assistance, please feel free to contact us. cc. Gabe Handy 9211 hand.rjd Sincerely, Y Roo r )iCkinson, P.E. 14 Morse Drive Essex Junction, Vermont 05452 (802) 878-4450 -LAMOUREUX & STONE - Consulting Engineers, Inc. April 1, 1992 Mr. Salamin Handy 75 South Winooski Avenue Burlington, Vermont 05401 RE: Proposed Motel and Addition to Bonanza Restaurant 792 Shelburne Road, South Burlington Dear Mr. Handy: 27 Nigh Street St. Albans, Vermont 05478 (802) 524-5245 As requested, we have calculated the revised trip generation of adding an 80-room motel behind and connected to the existing Bonanza restaurant. Our traffic impact evaluation of February 20, 1992, analyzed the impacts of a 60- room motel_ The following table presents the original and revised p.m. peak hour vehicular trip generation of this project. I Proposed I Proposed Existing (60-roorn motel) (80-room motell Bonanza 22 22 22 Motel - 35 46 lI TOTAL I 22 I 57 I 68 11 The increased trip generation of an 80-room motel at this location, compared to that of a 60-room motel, is not large enough to change any of the conclusions or recommendations of the previous traffic impact evaluation for this project. However, we do wish to reiterate that the proposed one-way traffic circulation pattern is vital to preventing any adverse impacts on existing Shelburne Road traffic conditions. Civil, Environmental & Transportation Engineering - (Tanning • Land Surveying r Mr. Salamin Handy_ April 1, 1992 Page 2 We thank you for this opportunity to be of service. Should you have any questions or if we may be of additional assistance, please feel free to contact us. cc. Gabe Handy - r/9211 han2.rjd Sincerely, Rog r kinson, P.E. LAMOUREUX & STONE - Consulting Engineers, Inc. 14 Morse Drive Essex Junction, Vermont 05452 (802) 878-4450 February 20, 1992 Mr. Salamin Handy 75 South Winooski Avenue Burlington, Vermont 05401 RE: Proposed 60-Room Motel and Addition to Bonanza Restaurant 792 Shelburne Road, South Burlington Dear Mr. Handy: As requested, we have examined the potential traffic impacts of adding a 60-room motel immediately behind and connected to the existing Bonanza restaurant at 792 Shelburne Road in South Burlington. In performing this evaluation, we have utilized the proposed site plan entitled "New Motel - Addition to Bonanza" by Gordon G. Woods Assoc. Architects, last revised December 27, 1991. The above site plan shows the existing restaurant, the proposed motel, parking and traffic circulation layout. The latter is of particular importance, as we understand a one-way traffic circulation pattern is being proposed for the Bonanza portion of this project. That circulation pattern will make the Bonanza's Shelburne Road access an entrance only. All vehicles generated by both the Bonanza and the proposed motel will then exit via a new driveway onto Swift Street. The Swift Street driveway will also serve as a two-way access for those vehicles using the new parking area on the motel parcel. The areas of potential impact, traffic congestion and safety, were evaluated. The following presents the methodology and results of our analyses. TRAFFIC CONGESTION The study area for potential traffic congestion impacts was determined by the City of South Burlington to include the accesses onto Shelburne Road and Swift Street plus Civil & I nvironmewal Engineering • Planning • Land Surveying Mr. Salamin Handy February 20, 1992 Page 2 the intersection of Shelburne Road and Swift Street. Background design hour traffic volumes were calculated from the following traffic counts: 1. Automatic Traffic Recorder Count - Shelburne Road Sta D105, Vermont Agency of Transportation, May 1988. 2. Automatic Traffic Recorder Count - Shelburne Road Sta D105, Vermont Agency of Transportation, May 1990. 3. Automatic Traffic Recorder Count - Shelburne Road Sta D258, Vermont - Agency -of Transportation, May 1988. 4. Turning Movement Count - Shelburne Road & Swift Street, Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission, June 9, 1990. 5. Trip Generation Count - Bonanza & Pizza Hut Restaurants, Lamoureux & Stone, January 29, 1992. Detailed design hour volume calculations are attached as Appendix A. The volumes and directional patterns of restaurant -generated traffic at the existing -Shelburne Road access were determined from (5). This count included both the noon and p.m. peak hour periods. From this count and the motel trip generation rates from "Trip Generation, Institute of Transportation Engineers, 5th Edition", existing and proposed trip generation and corresponding directional assignments were calculated. These calculations are attached as Appendix B. One important conclusion reached from the observed trip generation was that both the Bonanza and Pizza Hut exhibited trip generation characteristics of quality restaurants rather than high -turnover ones. Table 1 illustrates the resulting p.m. peak hour vehicular trip generation estimates for the Bonanza restaurant and proposed motel. Having calculated the background design hour volumes and the additional project - generated traffic, the next step in determining the potential traffic congestion impacts was to perform capacity analyses at the three intersections-, Shelburne Road/Existing Access, Shelburne Road/Swift Street and Swift Street/Proposed Access. These analyses were performed using the methodology outlined in "Special Report 209 - Highway Capacity Manual, Transportation Research Board, 1985" for signalized and unsignalized Mr. Salamin Handy February 20, 1992 Page 3 intersections. Detailed capacity calculations for each intersection are attached as Appendices C-E. TABLE 1 P.M. PEAK HOUR VEHICULAR TRIP GENERATION Existing Proposed Bonanza 22 22 Motel 35 TOTAL 22 57 The Highway Capacity Manual uses "level of service" to define traffic congestion. There are six levels of service, ranging from A to F. The criteria for each level of service at intersections are outlined below. Typically, the desired minimum level of service for a signalized intersection located in an urban area is D. For unsignalized intersections, particularly those on high -volume roadways, level of service E is often experienced by the minor street left -turn movement. Level of Service Signalized Intersections Average Delay (sec/veh) -Unsignalized Intersections Reserve Capacity (pcph) Expected Traffic Delay A <5 >400 Little or no delay B 5-14.99 300-399 Short traffic delays C 15-24.99 200-299 Average traffic delays D 25-39.99 100-199 Long traffic delays E 40-59.99 0-99 Very long traffic delays F >60 <0 Failure - extreme congestion Table 2 presents the level of service and average vehicular delay for each lane groups at the Shelburne Road/Swift Street intersection. It is evident from the this table that the project traffic will not significantly change the level of service and delays at this intersection. Mr. Salamin Handy February 20, 1992 Page 4 TABLE 2 SHELBURNE ROAD/SWIFT STREET INTERSECTION DHV LEVELS OF SERVICE AND AVERAGE VEHICULAR DELAYS w/o Project w/ Project 1992 1997 1992 1997 Swift St. WB LT D (30.0) D (33.7) D (30.9) D (35.2) Swift St. WB RT C (17.1) C (18.1) C (17.5) C (18.6) Shelburne Rd. NB TH/RT B (14.3) C (20.7) B (14.2) C (20.3) Shelburne Rd. SB LT D (27.2) D (38.0) D (27.2) D (38.0) Shelburne Rd. SB TH A (2.7) A (3.5) A (2.7) A (3.5) Shelburne Rd. SB RT B (13.0) D (31.3) B (13.0) D (31.3) OVERALL B (12.2) C (19.0) B (12.2) C (18.9) At the existing access onto Shelburne Road, the results of the capacity analyses for background conditions without the proposed motel indicated that the left -turn movement exiting the two restaurants experiences level of service E (64 pcph) during both 1992 and 1997 conditions. For the right -turn exiting movement, the level of service equaled B (306 pcph) in 1992 and C (255 pcph) in 1997. With this project and the -proposed one-way traffic circulation pattern, the levels of service at the existing access onto Shelburne Road remained the same. Similarly, the reserve capacities of each movement did not experience any significant changes. It should be noted that even with the proposed one-way circulation pattern, vehicles will continue to exit from the Pizza Hut at this access. At the proposed access onto Swift Street, the results of the capacity analyses for projected 1997 DHV conditions with this project indicated that the left -turn exiting movement would experience level of service C (231 pcph). TRAFFIC SAFETY Existing traffic safety conditions were evaluated from the accident experience of Shelburne Road and Swift Street in the immediate vicinity of this project. The accident Mr. Salamin Handy February 20, 1992 Page 5 experience data was obtained from the VAOT for the most recent available five-year period; 1986-1990. This data was analyzed to determine the accident rate at the intersection of Shelburne Road & Swift Street, on Shelburne Road between Swift Street & Brewer Parkway and on Swift Street between Shelburne Road & Farrell Street. Table 4 presents the results of these calculations. TABLE 3 ACCIDENT RATES LOCATION NUMBER ACCIDENTS ACCIDENT RATE' STATEWIDE AVERAGE RATE CRITICAL ACCIDENT RATE SHELBURNE ROAD & SWIFT STREET 32 0.516 0.504 0.660 SHELBURNE ROAD (BREWER -SWIFT) 70 7.610 3.442 4.503 SWIFT STREET (SHELBURNE-FARRELL) 2 1.044 3.442 5.908 Expressed in units of accidents per million vehicles at intersections and accidents per million vehicle -miles on roadway segments. These results indicate that the accident rate of the portion of Shelburne Road between Swift Street and Brewer Parkway exceeds the critical accident rate. From that, the portion of Shelburne Road in the immediate vicinity of this project would be classified as a high accident location. They also indicate that while the accident rate at the intersection of Shelburne Road & Swift Street exceeds the statewide average rate for similar intersections, it does not exceed the critical rate and thus would not be considered to be a high accident location. The proposed one-way traffic flow pattern into and through the Bonanza site will heir to minimize vehicular conflicts at the Shelburne Road access. Since exiting traffic, particularly left -turns, has been found to create the most impact at driveways, reducing the volume of the exiting movements at this location will help to improve traffic safety conditions on Shelburne Road. Along Swift Street, available intersection sight distances were measured from the location of the proposed access. To the west towards Shelburne Road, the available sight distance extends to the Shelburne Road intersection (450 feet ±). To the east, Mr. Salamin Handy February 20, 1992 Page 6 oncoming vehicles are visible as they pass through the Farrell Street intersection, but drop out of sight as they climb the grade towards the project access. The available intersection sight distance to the east was measured from the point at which oncoming westbound traffic again becomes visible. That distance, based on a driver's eye height of 3.5 feet and an oncoming vehicle height of 4.75 feet, equaled 340 fe t. In comparison, ba� see on the pose speed limit of 3 mph, the minimum safe stopping sight distance equals 250 feet and the recommended intersection sight distance equals 475 feet. The former is e minimum required to avoid creating unreasonable impacts, while the latter is recommended in order to minimize potential impacts. If the posted speed limit on Swift Street between Shelburne Road and Farrell Street were to lowered to 30 mph, the recommended intersection sight distance would be reduced to 375 feet, more in line with the available sight distances from this and other driveways in the immediate area. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the above analyses, it appears that the proposed one-way traffic circulation pattern will effectively mitigate the potential traffic congestion and safety impacts of additional motel -generated traffic. However, in examining the proposed site plan, we have reservations concerning the potential degree of compliance with this proposed circulation pattern. Our specific concerns and recommendations relate to elements of the site circulation and parking layout which do not strictly enforce the desired one-wav traffic flow. In particular, they include: The presence of an interconnection between the Pizza Hut and Bonanza parking lots to the rear of the parcel which will allow exiting Bonanza traffic to circumvent the desired one-way traffic circulation pattern. The installation of channelizing geometry, pavement markings and traffic signs may be an alternative to closing this interconnection. • Retaining perpendicular (as opposed to angled) parking in the Bonanza parking lot. ,Angled parking with a reduced aisle width should be considered in this area The width of the connector linking the Bonanza parking area to the new parking area in the rear should also be reduced in order to promote Q one-way flow. Mr. Salamin Handy February 20, 1992 Page 7 Additional pavement markings and traffic signs will be necessary in the Bonanza portion of the parking area to regulate traffic flow and inform motorists of the proper exit. In summary, our conclusion that additional motel -generated traffic will not create adverse traffic congestion or safety impacts is contingent upon obtaining a high degree of compliance with the proposed one-way traffic circulation pattern. Accordingly, we recommend that the proposed site plan be engineered to improve and reinforce the desired one-way traffic circulation pattern. Additionally, we recommend that the posted speed limit on Swift Street between Shelburne Road and Farrell Street be reduced because of the limited sight distances and numerous driveways in this area. We thank you for this opportunity to be of service. Should you have any questions or if we may be of additional assistance, please feel free to contact us. Sincerely, � .J Ro r ickinson, P.E. cc. Gabe Handy 'i 9211 hand.rjd - J—LAMOUREUX&STONE- Consulting Engineers, Inc. 14 Morse Drive Essex Junction, Vermont 05452 (802) 878-4450 February 20, 1992 Mr. Salamin Handy 75 South Winooski Avenue Burlington, Vermont 05401 RE: Proposed 60-Room Motel and Addition to Bonanza Restaurant 792 Shelburne Road, South Burlington Dear Mr. Handy: As requested, we have examined the potential traffic impacts of adding a 60-room motel immediately behind and connected to the existing Bonanza restaurant at 792 Shelburne Road in South Burlington. In performing this evaluation, we have utilized the proposed site plan entitled "New Motel - Addition to Bonanza" by Gordon G. Woods Assoc. Architects, last revised December 27, 1991. The above site plan shows the existing restaurant, the proposed motel, parking and traffic circulation layout. The latter is of particular importance, as we understand a one-way traffic circulation pattern is being proposed for the Bonanza portion of this project. That circulation pattern will make the Bonanza's Shelburne Road access an entrance only. All vehicles generated by both the Bonanza and the proposed motel will then exit via a new driveway onto Swift Street. The Swift Street driveway will also serve as a two-way access for those vehicles using the new parking area on the motel parcel. The areas of potential impact, traffic congestion and safety, were evaluated. The following presents the methodology and results of our analyses. TRAFFIC CONGESTION The study area for potential traffic congestion impacts was determined by the City of South Burlington to include the accesses onto Shelburne Road and Swift Street plus Civil & Environmental Engineering • Planning • Land Surveying Mr. Salamin Handy February 20, 1992 Page 2 the intersection of Shelburne Road and Swift Street. Background design hour traffic volumes were calculated from the following traffic counts: 1. Automatic Traffic Recorder Count - Shelburne Road Sta D105, Vermont Agency of Transportation, May 1988. 2. Automatic Traffic Recorder Count - Shelburne Road Sta D105, Vermont Agency of Transportation, May 1990. 3. Automatic Traffic Recorder Count - Shelburne Road Sta D258, Vermont - -- Agency of Transportation, May 1988. 4. Turning Movement Count - Shelburne Road & Swift Street, Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission, June 9, 1990. 5. Trip Generation Count - Bonanza & Pizza Hut Restaurants, Lamoureux & Stone, January 29, 1992. Detailed design hour volume calculations are attached as Appendix A. The volumes and directional patterns of restaurant -generated traffic at the existing Shelburne Road access were determined from (5). This count includeti both the noon and p.m. peak hour periods. From this count and the motel trip generation rates from "Trip Generation, Institute of Transportation Engineers, 5th Edition'; existing and proposed trip generation and corresponding directional assignments were calculated. These calculations are attached as Appendix B. One important conclusion reached from the observed trip generation was that both the Bonanza and Pizza Hut exhibited trip generation characteristics of quality restaurants rather than high -turnover ones. Table 1 illustrates the resulting p.m. peak hour vehicular trip generation estimates for the Bonanza restaurant and proposed motel. Having calculated ti is uackground design hour volumes and the additional project - generated traffic, the next step in determining the potential traffic congestion impacts was to perform capacity analyses at the three intersections; Shelburne Road/Existing Access, Shelburne Road/Swift Street and Swift Street/Proposed Access. These analyses were performed using the methodology outlined in "Special Report 209 - Highway Capacity Manual, Transportation Research Board, 1985" for signalized and unsignalized Mr. Salamin Handy - February 20, 1992 Page 3 intersections. Detailed capacity calculations for each intersection are attached as Appendices C-E TABLE 1 P.M. PEAK HOUR VEHICULAR TRIP GENERATION Existing Proposed Bonanza 22 22 Motel - 35 11 TOTAL I 22 I 57 The Highway Capacity Manual uses "level of service" to define traffic congestion. There are six levels of service, ranging from A to F. The criteria for each level of service at intersections are outlined below. Typically, the desired minimum level of service for a signalized intersection located in an urban area is D. For unsignalized intersections, particularly those on high -volume roadways, level of service E is often experienced by the minor street left -turn movement. Level of Service Signalized Intersections Average Delay (sec/veh) Unsignalized Intersections Reserve Capacity (pcph) Expected Traffic Delay A <5 >400 Little or no delay B 5 14.99 300-399 Short traffic delays C 15-24.99 200-299 Average traffic delays D 25-39.99 100-199 Long traffic delays E 40-59.99 0-99 Very long traffic delays F >60 <0 Failure - extreme congestion Table 2 presents the level of service and average vehicular delay for each lane groups at the Shelburne Road/Swift Street intersection. It is evident from the this table that the project traffic will not significantly change the level of service and delays at this intersection. Mr. Salamin Handy February 20, 1992 Page 4 TABLE 2 SHELBURNE ROAD/SWIFT STREET INTERSECTION DHV LEVELS OF SERVICE AND AVERAGE VEHICULAR DELAYS w/o Project w/ Project 1992 1997 1992 1997 Swift St. WB LT D (30.0) D (33.7) D (30.9) D (35.2) Swift St. WB RT C (17.1) C (18.1) C (17.5) C (18.6) Shelburne Rd. NB TH/RT B (14.3) C (20.7) B (14.2) C (20.3) Shelburne Rd. SB LT D (27.2) D (38.0) D (27.2) D (38.0) Shelburne Rd. SB TH A (2.7) A (3.5) A (2.7) A (3.5) Shelburne Rd. SB RT B (13.0) D (31.3) B (13.0) D (31.3) OVERALL B (12.2) 1 C (19.0) B (12.2) C (18.9) At the existing access onto Shelburne Road, the results of the capacity analyses for background conditions without the proposed motel indicated that the left -turn movement exiting the two restaurants experiences level of service E (64 pcph) during both 1992 and 1997 conditions. For the right -turn exiting movement, the level of service equaled B (306 pcph) in 1992 and C (255 pcph) in 1997. With this project and the proposed one-way traffic circulation pattern, the levels of service at the existing access onto Shelburne Road remained the same. Similarly, the reserve capacities of each movement did not experience any significant changes. It should be noted that even with the proposed one-way circulation pattern, vehicles will continue to exit from the Pizza Hut at this access. At the proposed access onto Swift Street, the results of the capacity analyses for projected 1997 DHV conditions with this project indicated that the left -turn exiting movement would experience level of service C (231 pcph). TRAFFIC SAFETY Existing traffic safety conditions were evaluated from the accident experience of Shelburne Road and Swift Street in the immediate vicinity of this project. The accident Mr. Salamin Handy February 20, 1992 Page 5 experience data was obtained from the VAOT for the most recent available five-year period; 1986-1990. This data was analyzed to determine the accident rate at the intersection of Shelburne Road & Swift Street, on Shelburne Road between Swift Street & Brewer Parkway and on Swift Street between Shelburne Road & Farrell Street. Table 4 presents the results of these calculations. TABLE 3 ACCIDENT RATES LOCATION NUMBER ACCIDENTS ACCIDENT RATE' STATEWIDE AVERAGE RATE CRITICAL ACCIDENT RATE SHELBURNE ROAD & SWIFT STREET 32 0.516 0.504 0.660 SHELBURNE ROAD (BREWER -SWIFT) 70 7.610 3.442 4.503 SWIFT STREET (SHELBURNE-FARRELL) 2 1.044 3.442 5.908 Expressed in units of accidents per million vehicles at intersections and accidents per million vehicle -miles on roadway segments. These results indicate that the accident rate of the portion of Shelburne Road between Swift Street and Brewer Parkway exceeds the critical accident rate. From that, the portion of Shelburne Road in the immediate vicinity of this project would be classified as a high accident location. They also indicate that while the accident rate at the intersection of Shelburne Road & Swift Str­t exceeds the statewide average rate for similar intersections, it does not exceed the critical rate and thus would not be considered to be a high accident location. The proposed one-way traffic flow pattern into and through the Bonanza site will help to minimize vehicular conflicts at the Shelburne Road access. Since exiting traffic, particularly left -turns, has been found to create the most impact at driveways, reducing the volume of the exiting movements at this location wiii help to improve traffic safety conditions on Shelburne Road. Along Swift Street, available intersection sight distances were measured from the location of the proposed access. To the west towards Shelburne Road, the available sight distance extends to the Shelburne Road intersection (450 feet ±). To the east, Mr. Salamin Handy February 20, 1992 Page 6 oncoming vehicles are visible as they pass through the Farrell Street intersection, but drop out of sight as they climb the grade towards the project access. The available intersection sight distance to the east was measured from the point at which oncoming westbound traffic again becomes visible. That distance, based on a driver's eye height of 3.5 feet and an oncoming vehicle height of 4.75 feet, equaled 340 feet. In comparison, based on the posted speed limit of 35 mph, the minimum safe stopping sight distance equals 250 feet and the recommended intersection sight distance equals 475 feet. The former is the minimum required to avoid creating unreasonable impacts, while the latter is recommended in order to minimize potential impacts. If the posted speed limit on Swift Street between Shelburne Road and Farrell Street were to lowered to 30 mph, the recommended intersection sight distance would be reduced to 375 feet, more in line with the available sight distances from this and other driveways in the immediate area. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the above analyses, it appears that the proposed one-way traffic circulation pattern will effectively mitigate the potential traffic congestion and safety impacts of additional motel -generated traffic. However, in examining the proposed site plan, we have reservations concerning the potential degree of compliance with this proposed circulation pattern. Our specific rnncerns and recommendations relate to elements of the site circulation and parking layout which do not strictly enforce the desired one-way traffic flow. In particular, they include: The presence of an interconnection between the Pizza Hut and Bonanza parking lots to the rear of the parcel which will allow exiting Bonanza traffic to circumvent the desired one-way traffic circulation pattern. The installation of channelizing geometry, pavement markings and traffic signs may be an alternative to closing this interconnection. Retaining perpendicular (as opposed to angled) parking in the Bonanza parking lot. Angled parking with a reduced aisle width should be considered in this area. The width of the connector linking the Bonanza parking area to the new parking area in the rear should also be reduced in order to promote one-way flow. Mr. Salamin Handy February 20, 1992 Page 7 Additional pavement markings and traffic signs will be necessary in the Bonanza portion of the parking area to regulate traffic flow and inform motorists of the proper exit. In summary, our conclusion that additional motel -generated traffic will not create adverse traffic congestion or safety impacts is contingent upon obtaining a high degree of compliance with the proposed one-way traffic circulation pattern. Accordingly, we recommend that the proposed site plan be engineered to improve and reinforce the desired one-way traffic circulation pattern. Additionally, we recommend that the posted speed limit on Swift Street between Shelburne Road and Farrell Street be reduced because of the limited sight distances and numerous driveways in this area. We thank you for this opportunity to be of service. Should you have any questions or if we may be of additional assistance, please feel free to contact us. Sincerely, �i ir•., � , � , n, �i r � f . � VV Ro r ickinson, P.E. cc. Gabe Handy 9211 hand.rjd 14 Morse Drive Essex Junction, Vermont 05452 (802) 878-4450 Mr. Salamin Handy 75 South Winooski Avenue Burlington, Vermont 05401 LAMOUREUX & STONE - Consulting Engineers, Inc. April 1, 1992 RE: Proposed Motel and Addition to Bonanza Restaurant 792 Shelburne Road, South Burlington Dear Mr. Handy: 27 High Street St. Albans, Vermont 05478 (802) 524-5245 As requested, we have calculated the revised trip generation of adding an 80-room motel behind and connected to the existing Bonanza restaurant. Our traffic impact evaluation of February 20, 1992, analyzed the impacts of a 60- room motel. The following table presents the original and revised p.m. peak hour vehicular trip generation of this project. Proposed I Proposed m Existing (60-roomotel) (80-room motel) Bonanza 22 22 22 Motel - 35 46 11 TOTAL I 22 I 57 I 68 J The increased trip generation of an 80-room motel at this location, compared to that of a 60-room motel, is not large enough to change any of the conclusions or recommendations of the previous traffic impact evaluation for this project. However, we do wish to reiterate that the proposed one-way traffic circulation pattern is vital to preventing any adverse impacts on existing Shelburne Road traffic conditions. Civil, Environmental & Transportation Engineering • Planning • Land Surveying Mr. Salamin Handy_ April 1, 1992 Page 2 We thank you for this opportunity to be of service. Should you have any questions or if we may be of additional assistance, please feel free to contact us. Sincerely, Rog r kinson, P.E. cc. Gabe Handy r/9211 han2.rjd -- 1—L.AMOUREUX & STONE - Consulting Engineers, Inc. 14 Morse Drive Essex function, Vermont 05452 (802) 878-4450 February 20, 1992 Mr. Salamin Handy 75 South Winooski Avenue Burlington, Vermont 05401 RE: Proposed 60-Room Motel and Addition to Bonanza Restaurant 792 Shelburne Road, South Burlington Dear Mr. Handy: As requested, we have examined the potential traffic impacts of adding a 60-room motel immediately behind and connected to the existing Bonanza restaurant at 792 Shelburne Road in South Burlington. In performing this evaluation, we have utilized the proposed site plan entitled "New Motel - Addition to Bonanza" by Gordon G. Woods Assoc. Architects, last revised -December 27, 1991. The above site plan shows the existing restaurant, the proposed motel, parking and traffic circulation layout. The latter is of particular importance, as we understand a one-way traffic circulation pattern is being proposed for the Bonanza portion of this project. That circulation pattern will make the Bonanza's Shelburne Road access an entrance only. All vehicles generated by both the Bonanza and the proposed motel will then exit via a new driveway onto Swift Street. The Swift Street driveway will also serve as a two-way access for those vehicles using the new parking area on the motel parcel. The areas of potential impact, traffic congestion and safety, were evaluated. The following presents the methodology and results of our analyses. TRAFFIC CONGESTION The study area for potential traffic congestion impacts was determined by the City of South Burlington to include the accesses onto Shelburne Road and Swift Street plus Civil & Environmental Engineering . Planning • Land Surveying Mr. Salamin Handy February 20, 1992 Page 2 the intersection of Shelburne Road and Swift Street. Background design hour traffic volumes were calculated from the following traffic counts: 1. Automatic Traffic Recorder Count - Shelburne Road Sta D105, Vermont Agency of Transportation, May 1988. 2. Automatic Traffic Recorder Count - Shelburne Road Sta D105, Vermont Agency of Transportation, May 1990. 3. Automatic Traffic Recorder Count - Shelburne Road Sta D258, Vermont Agency of Transportation, May 1988. 4. Turning Movement Count - Shelburne Road & Swift Street, Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission, June 9, 1990. 5. Trip Generation Count - Bonanza & Pizza Hut Restaurants, Lamoureux & Stone, January 29, 1992. Detailed design hour volume calculations are attached as Appendix A. The volumes and directional patterns of restaurant -generated traffic at the existing Shelburne Road access were determined from (5). ' This count included both the noon and p.m. peak hour periods. From this count and the motel trip generation rates from "Trip Generation, Institute of Transportation Engineers, 5th Edition", existing and proposed trip generation and corresponding directional assignments were calculated. These calculations are attached as Appendix B. One important conclusion reached from the observed trip generation was that both the Bonanza and Pizza Hut exhibited trip generation characteristics of quality restaurants rather than high -turnover ones. Table 1 illustrates the resulting p.m. peak hour vehicular trip generation estimates for the Bonanza restaurant and proposed motel. Having calculated the background design hour volumes and the additional project - generated traffic, the next step in determining the potential traffic congestion impacts was to perform capacity analyses at the three intersections; Shelburne Road/Existing Access, Shelburne Road/Swift Street and Swift Street/Proposed Access. These analyses were performed using the methodology outlined in "Special Report 209 - Highway Capacity Manual, Transportation Research Board, 1985" for signalized and unsignalized Mr. Salamin Handy February 20, 1992 Page 3 intersections. Detailed capacity calculations for each intersection are attached as Appendices C-E TABLE 1 P.M. PEAK HOUR VEHICULAR TRIP GENERATION Existing Proposed Bonanza 22 22 Motel 35 11 TOTAL I_ 22 I 57 11 The Highway Capacity Manual uses "level of service" to define traffic congestion. There are six levels of service, ranging from A to F. The criteria for each level of service at intersections are outlined below. Typically, the desired minimum level of service for a signalized intersection located in an urban area is D. For unsignalized intersections, particularly those on high -volume roadways, level of service E is often experienced by the minor street left -turn movement. ..a Level of Service Signalized Intersections Average Delay (sec/veh) Unsignalized Intersections Reserve Capacity (pcph) Expected Traffic Delay A <5 >400 Little or no delay B 5-14.99 300-399 Short traffic delays C 15-24.99 200-299 Average traffic delays D 25-39.99 100-199 Long traffic delays E 40-59.99 0-99 Very long traffic delays F >60 <0 Failure - extreme congestion Table 2 presents the level of service and average vehicular delay for each lane groups at the Shelburne Road/Swift Street intersection. It is evident from the this table that the project traffic will not significantly change the level of service and delays at this intersection. Mr. Salamin Handy February 20, 1992 Page 4 TABLE 2 SHELBURNE ROAD/SWIFT STREET INTERSECTION DHV LEVELS OF SERVICE AND AVERAGE VEHICULAR DELAYS w/o Project w/ Project 1992 1997 1992 1997 Swift St. WB LT D (30.0) D (33.7) D (30.9) D (35.2) Swift St. WB RT _ C (17.1) - C- (18.1)- C (17.5) C (18.6) Shelburne Rd. NB TH/RT B (14.3) C (20.7) B (14.2) C (20.3) Shelburne Rd. SB LT D (27.2) D (38.0) D (27.2) D (38.0) Shelburne Rd. SB TH A (2.7) A (3.5) A (2.7) A (3.5) Shelburne Rd. SB RT B (13.0) D (31.3) B (13.0) D (31.3) OVERALL B (12.2) 1 C (19.0) At the existing access onto Shelburne Road, the results of the capacity analyses for background conditions without the proposed motel indicated that the left -turn movement exiting the two restaurants experiences level of serviceRfE (64 pcph) during both 1992 and 1997 conditions. For the right -turn exiting movement, the level of service equaled B (306 pcph) in 1992 and C (255 pcph) in 1997. With this project and the proposed one-way traffic circulation pattern, the levels of service at the existing access onto Shelburne Road remained the same. Similarly, the reserve capacities of each movement did not experience any significant changes. It should be noted that even with the proposed one-way circulation pattern, vehicles will continue to exit from the Pizza Hut at this access. At the proposed access onto Swift Street, the results of the capacity analyses for projected 1997 DHV conditions with this project indicated that the left -turn exiting movement would experience level of service C (231 pcph). TRAFFIC SAFETY Existing traffic safety conditions were evaluated from the accident experience of Shelburne Road and Swift Street in the immediate vicinity of this project. The accident Mr. Salamin Handy February 20, 1992 Page 5 experience data was obtained from the VAOT for the most recent available five-year period; 1986-1990. This data was analyzed to determine the accident rate at the intersection of Shelburne Road & Swift Street, on Shelburne Road between Swift Street & Brewer Parkway and on Swift Street between Shelburne Road & Farrell Street. Table 4 presents the results of these calculations. TABLE 3 ACCIDENT RATES LOCATION NUMBER ACCIDENTS ACCIDENT RATE' STATEWIDE AVERAGE RATE CRITICAL ACCIDENT RATE SHELBURNE ROAD & SWIFT STREET 32 0.516 0.504 0.660 SHELBURNE ROAD (BREWER -SWIFT) 70 7.610 3.442 4.503 SWIFT STREET (SHELBURNE-FARRELL) 2 1.044 3.442 5.908 Expressed in units of accidents per million vehicles at intersections and accidents per million vehicle -miles on roadway segments. These results indicate that the accident rate of the portion of Shelburne Road between Swift Street and Brewer Parkway exceeds the critical accident rate. From that, the portion of Shelburne Road in the immediate vicinity of this project would be classified as a high accident location. They also indicate that while the accident rate at the intersection of ,',elburne Road & Swift Street exceeds the statewide average rate for similar intersections, it does not exceed the critical rate and thus would not be considered to be a high accident location. The proposed one-way traffic flow pattern into and through the Bonanza site will help to minimize vehicular conflicts at the Shelbur 1 access. Since exiting traffic, particularly left -turns, has been found to create the most impact at driveways, reducing the volume of the exiting movements at this location will help to improve traffic safety conditions on Shelburne Road. Along Swift Street, available intersection sight distances were measured from the location of the proposed access. To the west towards Shelburne Road, the available sight distance extends to the Shelburne Road intersection (450 feet ±). To the east, Mr. Salamin Handy February 20, 1992 Page 6 oncoming vehicles are visible as they pass through the Farrell Street intersection, but drop out of sight as they climb the grade towards the project access. The available intersection sight distance to the east was measured from the point at which oncoming westbound traffic again becomes visible. That distance, based on a driver's eye height of 3.5 feet and an oncoming vehicle height of 4.75 feet, equaled 340 feet. In comparison, based on the posted speed limit of 35 mph, the minimum safe stopping sight distance equals 250 feet and the recommended intersection sight distance equals 475 feet. The former is the minimum required to avoid creating unreasonable impacts, while the latter is recommended in order to minimize potential impacts. If the posted speed limit on Swift Street between Shelburne Road and Farrell Street were to lowered to 30 mph, the recommended intersection sight distance would be reduced to 375 feet, more in line with the available sight distances from this and other driveways in the immediate area. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the above analyses, it appears that the proposed one-way traffic circulation pattern will effectively mitigate the potential traffic congestion and safety impacts of additional motel -generated traffic. However, in examining the proposed site plan, we have reservations concerning the potential degree of compliance with this proposed circulation pattern. Our specific concerns and recommendations relate to elements of the site circulation and parking layout which do not strictly enforce the desired one-way traffic flow. In particular, they include: • The presence of an interconnection between the Pizza Hut and Bonanza parking lots to the rear of the parcel which will allow exiting Bonanza traffic to circumvent the desired one-way traffic circulation pattern. The installation of channelizing geometry, pavement markings and traffic signs may be an alternative to closing this interconnection. • Retaining perpendicular (as opposed to angled) parking in the Bonanza parking lot. Angled parking with a reduced aisle width should be considered in this area. The width of the connector linking the Bonanza parking area to the new parking area in the rear should also be reduced in order to promote one-way flow. y Mr. Salamin Handy February 20, 1992 Page 7 • Additional pavement markings and traffic signs will be necessary in the Bonanza portion of the parking area to regulate traffic flow and inform motorists of the proper exit. In summary, our conclusion that additional motel -generated traffic will not create adverse traffic congestion or safety impacts is contingent upon obtaining a high degree of compliance with the proposed one-way traffic circulation pattern. Accordingly, we recommend that the proposed site plan be engineered to improve and reinforce the desired one-way traffic circulation pattern. Additionally, we recommend that the posted speed limit on Swift Street between Shelburne Road and Farrell Street be reduced because of the limited sight distances and numerous driveways in this area. We thank you for this opportunity to be of service. Should you have any questions or if we may be of additional assistance, please feel free to contact us. cc. Gabe Handy 9211 hand'.rjd Sincerely, Ro r )ick-inson, P.E. 14 Morse Drive Essex Junction, Vermont 05452 (802) 878-4450 -LAMOUREUX & STONE - Consulting Engineers, Inc. April 1, 1992 Mr. Salamin Handy 75 South Winooski Avenue Burlington, Vermont 05401 RE: Proposed Motel and Addition to Bonanza Restaurant 792 Shelburne Road, South Burlington Dear Mr. Handy: 27 High Street St. Albans, Vermont 05478 (802) 524-5245 As requested, we have calculated the revised trip generation of adding an 80-room motel behind and connected to the existing Bonanza restaurant. Our traffic impact evaluation of February 20, 1992, analyzed the impacts of a 60- room motel. The following table presents the original and revised p.m. peak hour vehicular trip generation of this project. r II I I Proposed I Proposed fs II Existing (60 roomotel) (80-room motel) Bonanza 22 22 22 Motel - 35 46 I TOTAL I 22 I 57 I 68 II The increased trip generation of an 80-room motel at this location, compared to that of a 60-room motel, is not large enough to change any of the conclusions or recommendations of the previous traffic impact evaluation for this project. However, we do wish to reiterate that the proposed one-way traffic circulation pattern is vital to preventing any adverse impacts on existing Shelburne Road traffic conditions. Civil, Environmental & Transportation Engineering • Planning • Land Surveying N Mr. Salamin Handy_ April 1, 1992 Page 2 We thank you for this opportunity to be of service. Should you have any questions or if we may be of additional assistance, please feel free to contact us. Sincerely, 1� Rog r kinson, P.E. cc. Gabe Handy r/9211 han2.rjd -LAMOUREUX & STONE - Consulting Engineers, Inc. 14 Morse Drive Essex Junction, Vermont 05452 (802) 878-4450 February 20, 1992 Mr. Salamin Handy 75 South Winooski Avenue Burlington, Vermont 05401 RE: Proposed 60-Room Motel and Addition to Bonanza Restaurant 792 Shelburne Road, South Burlington Dear Mr. Handy: As requested, we have examined the potential traffic impacts of adding a 60-room motel immediately behind and connected to the existing Bonanza restaurant at 792 Shelburne Road in South Burlington. In performing this evaluation, we have utilized the proposed site plan entitled "New Motel - Addition to Bonanza" by Gordon G. Woods Assoc. Architects, last revised December 27, 1991. The above site plan shows the existing restaurant, the proposed motel, parking and traffic circulation layout. The latter is of particular importance, as we understand a one-way traffic circulation pattern is being propbsed for the Bonanza portion of this' project. That circulation pattern will make the Bonanza's Shelburne Road access an entrance only. All vehicles generated by both the Bonanza and the proposed motel will then exit via a new driveway onto Swift Street. The Swift Street driveway will also serve as a two-way access for those vehicles using the new parking area on the motel parcel. The areas of potential impact, traffic congestion and safety, were evaluated. The following presents the methodology and results of our analyses. TRAFFIC CONGESTION The study area for potential traffic congestion impacts was determined by the City of South Burlington to include the accesses onto Shelburne Road and Swift Street plus Civil & Environmental Engineering • Planning • Land Surveying Mr. Salamin Handy February 20, 1992 Page 2 the intersection of Shelburne Road and Swift Street. Background design hour traffic volumes were calculated from the following traffic counts: 1. Automatic Traffic Recorder Count - Shelburne Road Sta D105, Vermont Agency of Transportation, May 1988. 2. Automatic Traffic Recorder Count - Shelburne Road Sta D105, Vermont Agency of Transportation, May 1990. 3. Automatic Traffic Recorder Count - Shelburne Road Sta D258, Vermont Agency of Transportation, May 1988. 4. Turning Movement Count - Shelburne Road & Swift Street, Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission, June 9, 1990. 5. Trip Generation Count - Bonanza & Pizza Hut Restaurants, Lamoureux & Stone, January 29, 1992. Detailed design hour volume calculations are attached as Appendix A. The volumes and directional patterns of restaurant -generated traffic at the existing Shelburne Road access were determined from (5). This count included both the noon and p.m. peak hour periods. From this count and the motel trip generation rates from "Trip Generation, Institute of Transportation Engineers, 5th Edition", existing and proposed trip generation and corresponding directional assignments were calculated. These calculations are attached as Appendix B. One important conclusion reached from the observed trip generation was that both the Bonanza and Pizza Hut exhibited trip generation characteristics of quality restaurants rather than high -turnover ones. Table 1 illustrates the resulting p.m. peak hour vehicular trip generation estimates for the Bonanza restaurant and proposed motel. Having calculated the background design hour volumes and the additional project - generated traffic, the next step in determining the potential traffic congestion impacts was to perform capacity analyses at the three intersections; Shelburne Road/Existing Access, Shelburne Road/Swift Street and Swift Street/Proposed Access. These analyses were performed using the methodology outlined in "Special Report 209 - Highway Capacity Manual, Transportation Research Board, 1985" for signalized and unsignalized Mr. Salamin Handy February 20, 1992 Page 3 intersections. Detailed capacity calculations for each intersection are attached as Appendices C-E. TABLE 1 P.M. PEAK HOUR VEHICULAR TRIP GENERATION Existing Proposed Bonanza 22 22 Motel 35 ll TOTAL I 22 I 57 The Highway Capacity Manual uses "level of service" to define traffic congestion. There are six levels of service, ranging from A to F. The criteria for each level of service at intersections are outlined below. Typically, the desired minimum level of service for a signalized intersection located in an urban area is D. For unsignalized intersections, particularly those on high -volume roadways, level of service E is often experienced by the minor street left -turn movement. Level of Service Signalized Intersections Average Delay (sec/veh) Unsignalized Intersections Reserve Capacity (pcph) Expected Traffic Delay A <5 >400 Little or no delay B 5-14.99 300-399 Short traffic delays C 15-24.99 200-299 Average traffic delays D 25-39.99 100-199 Long traffic delays E 40-59.99 0-99 V(,ry long traffic delays F >60 <0 Failure - extreme congestion Table 2 presents the level of service and average vehicular delay for each lane groups at the Shelburne Road/Swift Street intersection. It is evident from the this table that the project traffic will not significantly change the level of service and delays at this intersection. I Mr. Salamin Handy February 20, 1992 Page 4 TABLE 2 SHELBURNE ROAD/SWIFT STREET INTERSECTION DHV LEVELS OF SERVICE AND AVERAGE VEHICULAR DELAYS w/oProject w/ Project 1992' 1997 1992 1997 Swift St. WB LT D (30.0) D (33.7) D (30.9) D (35.2) Swift St. WB RT _ ._ .._._ C ---(17 1)- C-- - (18.1) C (17.5) C (18.6) Shelburne Rd. NB TH/RT B (14.3) C (20.7) B (14.2) C (20.3) Shelburne Rd. SB LT D (27.2) D (38.0) D (27.2) D (38.0) Shelburne Rd. SB TH A (2.7) A (3.5) A (2.7) A (3.5) Shelburne Rd. SB RT B (13.0) D (31.3) B (13.0) D (31.3) OVERALL B (12.2) 1 C (19.0) B (12.2) C (18.9) At the existing access onto Shelburne Road, the results of the capacity analyses for background conditions without the proposed motel indicated that the Left -turn movement exiting the -two restaurants experiences level of service E (64 pcph) during both 1992 and 1997 conditions. For the right -turn exiting movement, the level of service equaled B (306 pcph) in 1992 and C (255 pcph) in 1997. With this project and the proposed one-way traffic circulation pattern, the levels of service at the existing access onto Shelburne Road remained the same. Similarly, the reserve capacities of each movement did not experience any significant changes. It should be noted that even with the proposed one-way circulation pattern, vehicles will continue to exit from the Pizza Hut at this access. At the proposed access onto Swift Street, the results of the capacity analyses for projected 1997 DHV conditions with this project indicated that the left -turn exiting movement would experience level of service C (231 pcph). TRAFFIC SAFETY Existing traffic safety conditions were evaluated from the accident experience of Shelburne Road and Swift Street in the immediate vicinity of this project. The accident r Mr. Salamin Handy February 20, 1992 Page 5 experience data was obtained from the VAOT for the most recent available five-year period; 1986-1990. This data was analyzed to determine the accident rate at the intersection of Shelburne Road & Swift Street, on Shelburne Road between Swift Street & Brewer Parkway and on Swift Street between Shelburne Road & Farrell Street. Table 4 presents the results of these calculations. TABLE 3 ACCIDENT RATES LOCATION NUMBER ACCIDENTS ACCIDENT RATE' STATEWIDE AVERAGE RATE CRITICAL ACCIDENT RATE SHELBURNE ROAD & SWIFT STREET 32 0.516 0.504 0.660 SHELBURNE ROAD (BREWER -SWIFT) 70 7.610 3.442 4.503 SWIFT STREET (SHELBURNE-FARRELL) 2 1.044 3.442 5.908 Expressed in units of accidents per million vehicles at intersections and accidents per million vehicle -miles on roadway segments. These results indicate that the accident rate of the portion of Shelburne Road between Swift Street and Brewer Parkway exceeds the critical accident rate. From that, the portion of Shelburne Road in the immediate vicinity of this project would be classified as a high accident location. They also indicate that while the accident rate at the intersection of Shelburne Road & Swift Street exceeds the statewide average rate for similar intersections, it does not exceed the critical rate and thus would not be considered to be a high accident location. The proposed one-way traffic flow pattern into and through the Bonanza site will help to minimize vehicular conflicts at the Shelburne Road access. Since exiting traffic, particularly left -turns, has been found to create the most impact at driveways, reducing the volume of the exiting movements at this location will help to improve traffic safety conditions on Shelburne Road. Along Swift Street, available intersection sight distances were measured from the location of the proposed access. To the west towards Shelburne Road, the available sight distance extends to the Shelburne Road intersection (450 feet ±). To the east, Mr. Salamin Handy February 20, 1992 Page 6 oncoming vehicles are visible as they pass through the Farrell Street intersection, but drop out of sight as they climb the grade towards the project access. The available intersection sight distance to the east was measured from the point at which oncoming westbound traffic again becomes visible. That distance, based on a driver's eye height of 3.5 feet and an oncoming vehicle height of 4.75 feet, equaled 340 feet. In comparison, based on the posted speed limit of 35 mph, the minimum safe stopping sight distance equals 250 feet and the recommended intersection sight distance equals 475 feet. The former is the minimum required to avoid creating unreasonable impacts, while the latter is recommended in order to minimize potential impacts. If the posted speed limit on Swift Street between Shelburne Road_ and Farrell Street were to lowered to 30 mph, the recommended intersection sight distance would be reduced to 375 feet, more in line with the available sight distances from this and other driveways in the immediate area. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the above analyses, it appears that the proposed one-way traffic circulation pattern will effectively mitigate the potential traffic congestion and safety impacts of additional motel -generated traffic. However, in examining the proposed site plan, we have reservations concerning the potential degree of compliance with this proposed circulation pattern. ,,m Our specific concerns and recommendations relate to elements of the site circulation and parking layout which do not strictly enforce the desired one-way traffic flow. In particular, they include: The presence of an interconnection between the Pizza Hut and Bonanza parking lots to the rear of the parcel which will allow exiting Bonanza traffic to circumvent the desired one-way traffic circulation pattern. The installation of channelizing geometry, pavement markings and traffic signs may be an alternative to closing this interconnection. Retaining perpendicular (as opposed to angled) parking in the Bonanza parking lot. Angled parking with a reduced aisle width should be considered in this area. The width of the connector linking the Bonanza parking area to the new parking area in the rear should also be reduced in order to promote one-way flow. Mr. Salamin Handy February 20, 1992 Page 7 • Additional pavement markings and traffic signs will be necessary in the Bonanza portion of the parking area to regulate traffic flow and inform motorists of the proper exit. In summary, our conclusion that additional motel -generated traffic will not create adverse traffic congestion or safety impacts is contingent upon obtaining a high degree of compliance with the proposed one-way traffic circulation pattern. Accordingly, we recommend that the proposed site plan be engineered to improve and reinforce the desired one-way traffic circulation pattern. Additionally, we recommend that the posted speed limit on Swift Street between Shelburne Road and Farrell Street be reduced because of the limited sight distances and numerous driveways in this area. We thank you for this opportunity to be of service. Should you have any questions or if we may be of additional assistance, please feel free to contact us. Sincerely, Rod r ickinson, P.E. cc. Gabe Handy - 9211 hand.rjd --LAMOUREUX & STONE- 14 Morse Drive Consulting Engineers, Inc. Essex Junction, Vermont 05452 (802) 878-4450 April 1, 1992 Mr. Salamin Handy 75 South Winooski Avenue Burlington, Vermont 05401 RE: Proposed Motel and Addition to Bonanza Restaurant 792 Shelburne Road, South Burlington Dear Mr. Handy- 27 High Street St. Albans, Vermont 05478 (802) 524-5245 As requested, we have calculated the revised trip generation of adding an 80-room motel behind and connected to the existing Bonanza restaurant. Our traffic impact evaluation of February 20, 1992, analyzed the impacts of a 60- room motel. The following table presents the original and revised p.m. peak hour vehicular trip generation of this project. Proposed Proposed Existing (60 morn motel) (80-room motel) Bonanza 22 22 22 Motel - 35 46 << TOTAL I 22 I 57 ( 68 )I The increased trip generation of an 80-room motel at this location, compared to that of a 60-room motel, is not large enough to change any of the conclusions or recommendations of the previous traffic impact evaluation for this project. However, we do wish to reiterate that the proposed one-way traffic circulation pattern is vital to preventing any adverse impacts on existing Shelburne Road traffic conditions. " d Environmental & Transportation Engineering - Planning - Land Surveying Mr. Salamin Handy_ - April 1, 1992 Page 2 We thank you for this opportunity to be of service. Should you have any questions or if we may be of additional assistance, please feel free to contact us. - cc:- Gabe Handy r/9211 han2.rjd -0 Sincerely, Rog r Jkinson, P.E. 14 Morse Drive Essex Junction, Vermont 05452 (802) 878-4450 Mr. Salamin Handy 75 South Winooski Avenue Burlington, Vermont 05401 LAMOUREUX & STONE Consulting Engineers, Inc. May 12, 1992 RE: Proposed Motel and Addition to Bonanza Restaurant 792 Shelburne Road, South Burlington Dear Mr. Handy: 27 Iligh Surat St. Albans, Vermont 05478 (802) 524-5245 As requested, we have reviewed the parking requirements and proposed trip generation for the above -referenced project, which is to add an 80-room motel behind and connected to the existing Bonanza restaurant. The required number of parking spaces necessary to adequately serve both the new motel and restaurant was obtained from Joe Weith, City Planner. According to Mr. Weith's calculations, the South Burlington Zoning Regulations require 83 parking spaces for the motel plus 67 spaces for the restaurant, for a total of 150 parking spaces. The combination of certain land -uses can reduce the required number of parking spaces through the use of shared parking. According to the publication "Shared Parking, Urban Land Institute, 1983", when restaurants and motels are combined, the number of parking spaces needed by the restaurant can be reduced by 50%. No other diurnal or seasonal reductions are permitted for the combination of these two land -uses. For this project, shared parking reduces the required number of spaces to 117. Likewise, it can be reasonably expected that there will be some reduction in the trip generation of this project due to the combination of these two land -uses. There are two adjustments which can be made to the trip generation which has been previously estimated for this project. The first would be to treat this project as simply a motel instead of a motel plus a restaurant. In the ITE land -use description for a motel, a motel "often" includes a restaurant. As noted in our letter of April 1, 1992, when treated as two separate land -uses, a motel plus a restaurant, the projected p.m. Civil, Environmental & Transportation Engineering • Planning • Land Surveying Mr. Salamin Handy May 12, 1992 Page 2 peak hour trip generation of this project equals 68 vte/hour. In contrast, if this project were to be treated as an 80-room motel, in which the restaurant is an ancillary facility, its p.m. peak hour trip generation would be estimated to equal 46 vte/hour. Both of the above estimates are based on full occupancy. Since the ITE trip generation data for motels and hotels are also based on 'occupied room", a second adjustment would be to factor in an average occupancy rate. According to information which you have provided, the typical annual average occupancy rate for motels and hotels in this area is less than 60%. Using an average occupancy factor of 60% reduces the average weekday p.m. peak hour trip generation of an 80-room motel with ancillary restaurant to 28 vte/hour. We thank you for this opportunity to be of service. Should you have any questions or if we may be of additional assistance, please feel free to contact us. Sincerely, Rog r Dickinson, P.E. cc. Gabe Handy r/9211 han3.rjd % y---IAMOUREUX & STONr Consulting Engineers, Inc. 14 Morse Drive Essex Junction, Vermont 05452 (802) 878-4450 February 20, 1992 Mr. Salamin Handy 75 South Winooski Avenue Burlington, Vermont 05401 RE: Proposed 60-Room Motel and Addition to Bonanza Restaurant 792 Shelburne Road, South Burlington Dear Mr. Handy: As requested, we have examined the potential traffic impacts of adding a 60-room motel immediately behind and connected to the existing Bonanza restaurant at 792 Shelburne Road in South Burlington. In performing this evaluation, we have utilized the proposed site plan entitled "New Motel - Addition to Bonanza" by Gordon G. Woods Assoc. Architects, last revised December 27, 1991. The above site plan shows the existing restaurant, the proposed motel, parking and traffic circulation layout. The latter is of particular importance, as we understand a one-way traffic circulation pattern is being proposed for the Bonanza portion of this project. That circulation pattern will make the Bonanza's Shelburne Road access an entrance only. All vehicles generated by both the Bonanza and the proposed motel will then exit via a new driveway onto Swift Street. The Swift Street driveway will also serve as a two-way access for those vehicles using the new parking area on the motel parcel. The areas of potential impact, traffic congestion and safety, were evaluated. The following presents the methodology and results of our analyses. TRAFFIC CONGESTION The study area for potential traffic congestion impacts was determined by the City of South Burlington to include the accesses onto Shelburne Road and Swift Street plus Civil & Environmental Engineering • Planning • Land Surveying y Mr. Salamin Handy February 20, 1992 Page 2 the intersection of Shelburne Road and Swift Street. Background design hour traffic volumes were calculated from the following traffic counts: 1. Automatic Traffic Recorder Count - Shelburne Road Sta D105, Vermont } Agency of Transportation, May 1988. 1 2. Automatic Traffic Recorder Count - Shelburne Road Sta D105, Vermont Agency of Transportation, May 1990. �a►�`Y "� 3. Automatic Traffic Recorder Count - Shelburne Road Sta D258, Vermont "i Agency of Transportation, May 1988. 4. Turning Movement Count - Shelburne Road & Swift Street, Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission, June 9, 1990. 5. Trip Generation Count - Bonanza & Pizza Hut Restaurants, Lamoureux & Stone, January 29, 1992. l pNL`r' Detailed design hour volume calculations are attached as Appendix A. The volumes and directional patterns of restaurant -generated traffic at the existing Shelburne Road access were determined from (5). This count included both the noon and p.m. peak hour periods. From this count and the motel trip generation rates from "Trip Generation, Institute of Transportation Engineers, 5th Edition", existing and proposed trip generation and corresponding directional assignments were calculated. These calculations are attached as Appendix B. One important conclusion reached from the observed trip generation was that both the Bonanza and Pizza Hut exhibited trip generation characteristics of quality restaurants rather than high -turnover ones. Table 1 illustrates the resulting p.m. peak hour vehicular trip generation estimates for the Bonanza restaurant and proposed motel. Having calculated the background design hour volumes and the additional project - generated traffic, the next step in determining the potential traffic congestion impacts was to perform capacity analyses at the three intersections; Shelburne Road/Existing Access, Shelburne Road/Swift Street and Swift Street/Proposed Access. These analyses were performed using the methodology outlined in "Special Report 209 - Highway Capacity Manual, Transportation Research Board, 1985" for signalized and unsignalized Mr. Salamin Handy February 20, 1992 Page 3 intersections. Detailed capacity calculations for each intersection are attached as Appendices C-E. TABLE 1 P.M. PEAK HOUR VEHICULAR TRIP GENERATION'` Existing Proposed Bonanza 22 22 Motel - 35 TOTAL 22 57 The Highway Capacity Manual uses 'level of service" to define traffic congestion. There are six levels of service, ranging from A to F. The criteria for each level of service at intersections are outlined below. Typically, the desired minimum level of service for a signalized intersection located in an urban area is D. For unsignalized intersections, particularly those on high -volume roadways, level of service E is often experienced by the minor street left -turn movement. Level of Service Signalized Intersections Average Delay (sec/veh) Unsignalized Intersections Reserve Capacity (pcph) Expected Traffic Delay A <5 >400 Little or no delay B 5-14.99 300-399 Short traffic delays C 15-24.99 200-299 Average traffic delays D 25-39.99 100-199 Long traffic delays E 40-59.99 0-99 Very long traffic delays F >60 <0 Failure - extreme congestion Table 2 presents the level of service and average vehicular delay for each lane groups at the Shelburne Road/Swift Street intersection. It is evident from the this table that the project traffic will not significantly change the level of service and delays at this intersection. Mr. Salamin Handy February 20, 1992 Page 4 TABLE 2 SHELBURNE ROAD/SWIFT STREET INTERSECTION DHV LEVELS OF SERVICE AND AVERAGE VEHICULAR DELAYS w/o Project w/ Project 1992 1997 1992 1997 Swift St. WB LT D (30.0) D (33.7) D (30.9) D (35.2) Swift St. WB RT C (17.1) C (18.1) C (17.5) C (18.6) Shelburne Rd. NB TH/RT B (14.3) C (20.7) B (14.2) C (20.3) Shelburne Rd. SB LT D (27.2) D (38.0) D (27.2) D (38.0) Shelburne Rd. SB TH A (2.7) A (3.5) A (2.7) A (3.5) Shelburne Rd. SB RT B (13.0) D ( 1.3) B (13.0) D (31.3) OVERALL B (12.2) C , (19.0) B (12.2) 1 C (18.9) At the existing access onto Shelburne Road, the results of the capacity analyses for background conditions without the proposed motel indicated that the left -turn movement exiting the two restaurants experiences level of service E 64 pcph) during both 1992 and 1997 conditions. For the right -turn exiting movement, the level of service equaled B (306 pcph) in 1992 and C (255 pcph) in 1997. With thisg,r_oiect and the Dr000sed one-wav traffic circulation Dattern. the levels of \ service at the existin acc onto Shelburne Road.--- p2gLh e., Similarly, the �` 4, reserve cap ci ies of each movement did not experience any significant changes. It should be noted that even with the proposed one-way circulation pattern, vehicles will , continue to exit from the Pizza Hut at this access. G At the proposed access onto Swift Street, the results of the capacity analyses for 1 projected 1997 DHV conditions with this project indicated that the left -turn exiting (r•` movement would experience level of service C (231 pcph). TRAFFIC SAFETY Existing traffic safety conditions were evaluated from the accident experience of Shelburne Road and Swift Street in the immediate vicinity of this project. The accident Mr. Salamin Handy February 20, 1992 Page 5 experience data was obtained from the VAOT for the most recent available five-year period; 1986-1990. This data was analyzed to determine the accident rate at the intersection of Shelburne Road & Swift Street, on Shelburne Road between Swift Street & Brewer Parkway and on Swift Street between Shelburne Road & Farrell Street. Table 4 presents the results of these calculations. TABLE 3 ACCIDENT RATES LOCATION NUMBER ACCIDENTS ACCIDENT RATE' STATEWIDE AVERAGE RATE CRITICAL ACCIDENT RATE SHELBURNE ROAD & SWIFT STREET 32 0.516 0.504 0.660 SHELBURNE ROAD (BREWER -SWIFT) 70 7.610 3.442 4.503 SWIFT STREET (SHELBURNE-FARRELL) 2 1.044 3.442 5.908 Expressed in units of accidents per million vehicles at intersections and accidents per million vehicle -miles on roadway segments. These results indicate that the accident rate of the portion of Shelburne Road between Swift Street and Brewer. Parkwayexceeds the critical accident rate. From that, the portion of Shelburne Road in the immediate vicinity of this project would be classified as a high accident location. They also indicate that while the accident rate at the intersection of Shelburne Road & Swift Street exceeds the statewide average rate for similar intersections, it does not exceed the critical rate and thus would not be considered to be a high accident location. The proposed one-way traffic flow pattern into and through the Bonanza site will help to minimize vehicular conflicts at the Shelburne Road access. Since exiting traffic, particularly left -turns, has been found to create the most impact at driveways, reducing the volume of the exiting movements at this location will help to improve traffic safety conditions on Shelburne Road. Along Swift Street, available intersection sight distances were measured from the location of the proposed access. To the west towards Shelburne Road, the available sight distance extends to the Shelburne Road intersection (450 feet ±). To the east, Mr. Salamin Handy February 20, 1992 Page 6 oncoming vehicles are visible as they pass through the Farrell Street intersection, but drop out of sight as they climb the grade towards the project access. The available intersection sight distance to the east was measured from the point at which oncoming westbound traffic again becomes visible. That distance, based on a driver's eye height of 3.5 feet and an oncoming vehicle height of 4.75 feet, equaled 3.4,Q1.Mt. In comparison, based on the posted speed limit of 35 mph,, tt e�minimum safe stopping sight distance equals 250 feet and the recommended intersection sight distance equals 475 fe t. The former is the minimum required to avoid creating unreasonable impacts, while the latter is recommended in order to minimize potential impacts. If the posted speed limit on Swift Street between Shelburne Road and Farrell Street were to. lowered to 30 mph, the recommended intersection sight distance would be reduced to 375 feet, more in line with the available sight distances from this and other driveways in the immediate are IV10 eo,- CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the above analyses, it appears that the proposed one-way traffic circulation pattern will effectively mitigate the potential traffic congestion and safety impacts of additional motel -generated traffic. However, in examining the proposed site plan, we have reservations concerning the potential degree of compliance with this proposed circulation pattern. Our specific concerns and recommendations relate to elements of the site circulation and parking layout which do not strictly enforce the desired one-way traffic flow. In particular, they include: • The presence of an interconnection between the Pizza Hut and Bonanza parking lots to the rear of the parcel which will allow exiting Bonanza traffic to circumvent the desired one-way traffic circulation pattern. The installation of channelizing geometry, pavement markings and traffic signs may be an alternative to closing this interconnection. • Retaining perpendicular (as opposed to angled) parking in the Bonanza parking lot. Angled parking with a reduced aisle width should be considered in this area.. The width of the connector linking the Bonanza parking area to the new parking area in the rear should also be reduced in order to promote one-way flow. Mr. Salamin Handy February 20, 1992 Page 7 Additional pavement markings and traffic signs will be necessary in the Bonanza portion of the parking area to regulate traffic flow and inform motorists of the proper exit. In summary, our conclusion that additional motel -generated traffic will not create adverse traffic congestion or safety impacts is contingent upon obtaining a high degree of compliance with the proposed one-way traffic circulation pattern. Accordingly, we recommend that the proposed site plan be engineered to improve and reinforce the desired one-way traffic circulation pattern. Additionally, we recommend that the posted speed limit on Swift Street between {0` Shelburne Road and Farrell Street be reduced because of the limited sight distances and t" numerous driveways in this area. We thank you for this opportunity to be of service. Should you have any questions or if we may be of additional assistance, please feel free to contact us. Sincerely, )'C Ro rkinson, P.E. cc. Gabe Handy 9211 hand.rjd APPENDIX A Design Hour Volume Calculations `` JOB -( aC 11 S- LAMOUREUX & - PONE SHEET NO. OF CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC. J�, j��ckirVSu�l 02 14 Morse Drive CALCULATED BY DATE yy, ESSEX JUNCTION, VERMONT 05452 CHECKED BY (0"C. DATE 'y-'�✓"��' (802) 878-4450 SCALE IRODUCT 204 I (Single Snaets1205-I (Paddadl � m 6K.. Gwlon, Mass 01411. Walla PHONE TOLL FREE 1 800 225 63BO LAMOUREUX & , i'ONE CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC. 14 Morse Drive ESSEX JUNCTION, VERMONT 05452 (802) 878-4450 JOB qq /%'yam ANl-A SHEET NO. OF �^ CALCULATEDBY ,,/A•,�7����/N�i�� DATE �/' t' c% CHECKED BY �'l • CS`�y rG(t DATE�— SCALE PROM 1204.1 jSmp Shftlsj 205-11Paddedl RAMS a 10C , 610oa1, Klass. U1471, To Ow PHONE TOLL FREE 1-800-225 690 IN L LAMOUREUX & STONE CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC. 14 MORSE DRIVE ESSEX JUNCTION, VERMONT 05452 (80?.18784460 S/-I E L'13091VE /�LrND N I r---, S N r o33 t' r /VE 1%()AD TOWN, S )t Ci7a �(;� �►��, � i U�U 0 LAMOUREUX & STONE CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC. 14 MORSE DRIVE ESSEX JUNCTION, VERMONT 05452 Y W 878-4460 N S»Et' f FI TOWN] a)u 7_N 8b6 35,50 5v8 = 1.01 o LAMOUREUX & STONE CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC. 14 MORSE DRIVE ESSEX JUNCTION, VERMONT 05452 1802) 8784460 Al SHCLll tAaNc m TOWNS koLiND APPENDIX B Trip Generation and Directional Assignment Calculations LAMOUREUX & JTONE CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC. 14 Morse Drive ESSEX JUNCTION, VERMONT 05452 (802) 878-4450 JOB %X / / P'1r/VANZA SHEET NO. OF / CALCULATED BYM ��� n �' DATE CHECKED BY 1� `• L -VL-' DATE SCALE 06 191 P G) CAI In 0",) air T N. '�-Cj 1 Cl c,� NvvN oon, ()a:yy 1:0� ....:....._.... �o a6 ILI 3 _ l3 �y !e7 p�A rv'2- A �) ZZA GX i -t"26L Torte` 5 j 50 (5: UU - (--). oo e 3 � 0 3 g _ �L4 PRODUCT 204.1(Single Sheets( 205-1 (Padded( ® Inc.. Giotm, Mass. 01471, To Ordei PHONE IOLL FREE 1-800 225-63N .. .... .... ........... .... ............ ........ .... ... ...... . ... ...... ............. .......... * i .. .......... i . .. ........ .......... . . ..... ...... .... - ..... . .... . ........... ...... ........ ......... .. .. .... .... ...... ....... ............. ... ........... . . .. . . . .......... .. ........... ............ .... .... . .......... ....... ..... ............ ............. . . . . . . . . . . . .. .......... ............. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .j. 4 .......... .. ............. .. .. ... ... .............. ....... . ... 4 . .......... ...... ....... ............. 4 .. .... . .... .... ............. . ..... ..... ... .. . ..... ......... . .... . ... .. . ...... ......... . .... .... ... . .. ...... . ...... . .... . .... ... . ......... .............. ............ .... .... .......... .... ........ ...... . .... .. . . . . . . . . . . .............. ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .............. .......... .... ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ............. ............ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . .... . . . . ....... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... ............... . . . . . . . . .. . . . ... ....... . . .... . . .... .... . .... . . . .... ..... . ......... . . ........ . ... ........ ... ...... . . ............ .............. l. ..... .... .. .... ..... ....... .... ....... . - . .... . .. .... ... ........... .............. . ... . .... ... ............ . .. . .. ..... . . .. . ...... .. . ....... ......... .. PRODUCT204 I (SmoSnixtsJ205 01471 To Olde, PHONE LOLL FREE 18*2256380 JOB ►a-1 Nf3N LAMOUREUX % .STONE SHEET NO. j OF 1 CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC. CALCULATED BY 14 Morse Drive DATE ESSEX JUNCTION, VERMONT 05452 CHECKED BY (VI. C_et.,it(i- (802) 878-4450 DATE SCALE C�l�cuc_/�;C. x/�'ri� rG '1�nrJPCJ 7�jP ; CrvC,Q/ai u, %2c,-:.AK l iuu L�r Turl C OAU►TY' ► `7'pUt2/�rJT 170, Sc/o-"� - (M;llLtc/urt/40 r = t� V-1c AK N16N -714-6 02C , RCSTA!LA rQ,q.-,7T r%�� S n *' 1 vrcl � jr, GLlovn I. x �3 79 �.rE f Nye/K t- = l79' VtE/11,q C�tU r� try f_y ► LA Rw l70 sGfin x _a. Vrc//,1r2��ua) _ 3�, vTc/, I►, C;Nv 7- ; .x 11,66 /NP/ K5 y3' Vie/llrL 16ArT49NOVCR RCs—)AtAc2Arvi r , 1 /U �G T a x t�i • r _Vrt-:! ►4, /SCOT. ;. �QU V + �1 /r (. 90,04 : aNe C�C1SS�/vC t'�zzq 1-ItAl- qr-01 f3vwiJ/V,ZA far_zC xi 1► i�nlG ' ► »C. , i>1.1�' we 2.11 i ►rJ J CN/Jta ciCpZl 1-►c s 0/ N 62U/4L(1'' j2EST/�I.f t41\)T H16,14 - 7-" kl (vvlZA Un/G PRWLK;l 20-1(Sogk Sheets) 205 1 (Padded) / � Inc . Giow, Mass 01471. To 01der PHONE TOLL FREE 1 BOO .225 W JOB `71_i 1 '' N A NZA LAMOUREUX & !ONE CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC. 14 Morse Drive ESSEX JUNCTION, VERMONT 05452 (802) 878-4450 1...........s............. ......... ' { i i SHEET NO. OF T CALCULATED BYyh� � 9 ' l�' K) N '. J DATE 1 �� CHECKED BY � DATE SCALE PRODUCT 204-1(Sgie SWsj 205 1 (4j&d) ®,m Inc.. Groton, Mass 01471 T. Oidai PHOW TOLL FREE I-®36 225-53M PRODUCT 2009 (S&n01e Shmts) 205 I (Padded) � x Inc., Gioton, Mass. 014i I. To Ordu PHONE TOLL FREE 1-800225-6W ... t, ... .. ..i....... ..I........ �........t ........ j'• I (.......... i........:............. ......... ..... I i............ ....... .. ... __ ..... i .. t ... ... . i ...........„ .... ............ . ' ., ... ., i.. .,... . t ..,. y ... �.. .. .. ..j.. (.......... .... i... �...... ....... j................. ... .. .. .... ....... .... .1 .... ... .. S Is �.. . I ..d ., !... i.. .. .,.. 1.. .. I. ....� ,. ... '... .... !. �..... i I �. j. I. I ..,.i ..,, .�..... ., l .. ....... ., I,.... �, i ..... .. ... PRODUCT 204 1(Single Sheels) 205 1 (Paddled) = .Inc., Groton, Mass 01471_ To Order PHONE TOLL FREE 1-WO 225.6380 (7) LAMOUREUX 8 STONE CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC. 14 MORSE DRIVE ESSEX JUNCTION, VT. 05452 VEHICULAR TRIP GENERATION ------------------------- ------------------------- PROJECT NAME: BONANZA RESTAURANT DATE: 2-04-92 SHELBURNE ROAD - SOUTH BURLINGTON ANALYST: R. DICKINSON PROJECT #: 9211 SOURCE: "TRIP GENERATION, ITE, 5TH EDITION" LAND -USE ITE AVERAGE -- AM PEAK HOUR -- -- PM PEAK HOUR -- DESCRIPTION ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- L.U.C. SIZE UNITS WEEKDAY ENTER EXIT TOTAL ENTER EXIT TOTAL MOTEL 320 60 ROOMS 569 13 23 36 20 15 35 RESTAURANT - QUALITY 831 5,640 SQ. FT. 554 5 0 5 30 13 43 RESTAURANT - HIGH TURNOVER 832 5,640 SQ. FT. 1,158 45 44 89 50 42 92 VTE/DAY d, Ad VTE/HOUR VTE/HOUR LAMOUREUX & STONE CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC. 14 MORSE DRIVE ESSEX JUNCTION, VERMONT 05452 OW 8784460 SfJCT (4121\)C W0 F A nc L;KUIQ/Vc- TOWNS X�uil� (1r2�iNc l U�� LAMOUREUX & STONE CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC. 14 MORSE DRIVE ESSEX JUNCTION, VERMONT 05452 (802187&4460 Spa L3 u A /\► E- 'R0 n Sivc. cpU►'Ne- wr)T) TOWN, <_ OLA-Tw 13UrZL�,vyTUnl -05 9A R0 APPENDIX C Intersection Capacity Analyses Shelburne Road & Swift Street HC',: 5ignalized Intersection Version 2.1 1 La►ilOtAr"eUX &: Shone 14 Morse Drive Essex Junction, VT 05452-2083 (802) 87E -4450 `, tr�ec t s : (E-W) SWIFT STREET (NLL-$) ` HELBURNE ROAD Analyst: R. DICKINSON File Name: 9211.HC9 Area Tyoe: Other 2--6-1--,2 Comment : 1992 BACKGROUND DHV Traffic and Roadway Conditions i Eas t:bound i Westbound Not- t:hbound Soutl-,bau►-Id L T R L T R L T R L T R No.. Lanes 1 1 71 < : 1 2 1 Volumes 162 269 ; 1895 126 : 241;+ 1.36E 930 PHF or PK15; I0.90 0.90: 0.95 0.95:0.95 0.95 0.95 Lane Width 12. 0 1.2. 0 1.2. 0 ! 12. 0 12. C..► 12, ri Gr-ade -4 1:.1 ; 0 % Heavy, Veh ; 2 2: 2 2 I .' 2 Par-kirig ' (Y/N) N ; (Y/N) N ; (Y/N) N BUS `?tCIPS i i 0: 0 i C► Pe'd.s Q i r 1.1 Fred BUt:ton ;(Y/N) N :(Y/N) N ;(Y/N) N Arr Type 3 3; 4 4; 4 4 4 RTOR Vco1 01, 0: O Si vrial Oper•at i ons Please combination 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Ef, Lef t ; NB Lef t Thru ' Thru Ri��ht Ri.jht Peds i Peds x WB L_eft SB Let >: Thru Thru Right * Right peds Peels t NB Right ;EB Ri_4ht. SB Right WE Ri ►ht t Green 14 A") ' Gr,een 16A 4 5P Yellow/A-R r' 5 ;Yellow/A-R 5 5 Last Time 3. I' :Lost Time 3.0 3.0 Cycle Length. :40 secs, Pha•wr combination order: 141 115 4t, vi Jt. r r. - 1 HCB: Signalized Intersection Version :.1 Streets: (E-W) SWIFT STREET (N-S) SHELBURNE ROAD Analyst: R. DICKINSON File Name: 9211.HC9 Area Type: Other 2-6-92 Comment: 1992 BACKGROUND DHV Volume Adjustment Worksheet Direc- Lane Lane Adj tion/ Mvt AdJ Lane Grp No. Util Growth Grp Prop Pros::, Mvt Vol PHF Vol Grp Vol Ln Fact Fact Vol LT RT ---- ----- EB ---- --__ ____ -___ -___ -- ----- ------ _--- ---- WB. Left 162 0.90 180 L 180 1 1.000 1.000 180 1.00 0.00 Right 269 0.90 299 R 299 1 1.000 1.000 299 0.00 1.00 NB Thru 1895 0.95 1995 TR 2128 3 1..100 1.000 2341 0.00 0.06 Right; 126 0.95 133 SB Left 249 0.95 262 L 262 1 1.000 1.000 262 1.00 0.00 Thru 1366 0.95 1438 T 1.438 2 1.050 1.000 151.0 0.00 0.00 Right ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 930 0.95 979 R q79 1 1.000 1.000 979 0.00 1.00 saturation Flow Adjustment Worksheet Dire.:- Ideal Ad r tion/ Sat No. f f f f f f f f Sat LnGrp Flow Lns W HV G p BB A RT LT Flow ----- ------ EB ---_ --- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- W F.s L 1800 1 1.00 0.99 1.02 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1515 R 1.800 1 1.00 0.99 1.02 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1 54 !-, NB TR 1800 3 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 0295 SB L 1800 1 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1a93 T 1800 2 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 3501. R 1800 1 1.00 0.99 1.00 1..00 1.00 1.00 0.35 1.00 1515 HC5: Sivnalized Intersection Version 2.1 3 S t poet : (E-W) SWIFT STREET (N-S) SHE:LBURNE ROAD Analyst: R. DICKINSON File Name: 921 l . HC'9 Area Type: Other 2-F-92 Comment: 1992 BACKGROUND DHV Capacity Analysis Work sheet Direr- - AdJ Adj Sat Flow Lane Group ti.on/ Flow Rate Flow Rate Ratio Green Ratio Capacity vk LnGrp (v) (s) (v/s) ----- COW ----------- (c) ---------- Raatio ----- ----- EB --------- --------- WE L 180 1545 0.117 0.17a 275 0.655 R 299 154.5 0.194 0.378 584. 0.512 NB TR 2341 5295 0.442 0.522 2765 0.847 SB L 262 1693 0.155 0.200 339 0.774. T 1510 356, 0.424 0.756 2693 0.561 R 979 1515 0.646 0.722 1094 0.895 Cycle Lenvth. C = 90.0 sec. Sum NO) critical = 0.790 Lost -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Time Per Cycle, L = 9.0 sec. X critical = 0.878 Level of Service Worksheet Direc- Delay Lane Delay Lane Lane Delay LO' tion/ v/c V/C Cycle d Group d Frog Grp Grp By By LnGrp Ratio Ratio Len 1 Crap 2 Fact Delay LOS App Apr-- ----- _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ ____ _____ __w_ EB W 6 L 0.66 0.178 90.0 26.2 275 3.8 1.00 30.0 D 21.9CO R 0.51 0.378 90.0 16.4 584 0.6 1.,00 17.1 C NB "T'R 0.85 0.522 90.0 14.0 2765 1.9 0.90 14.3 B 14.3 �: ,•' SB L 0.77 0.200 50.0 25.9 339 7.2 0.82 27.2 D 8,7 F3/ T 0.56 0.756 90.0 3.5 2693 0.2 0.7' 2.7 A R. 0.89 0.722 90.0 7.5 1094 7.0 0.90 13.0 B Intersection Delay - 12.2 (sec/ veh) Intersection LOT- F! ) HCS: Signalized Intersection Version 2.1 1 Lamoureux & Stone 14 Morse Drive Essex Junction, VT 05452-2083 (802) 878-4450 `:streets: (E-W) SWIFT STREET (N-S) SHELBURNE ROAD Anal:,st: R. DICKINSON File Name: 921.1..HC9 Ar-ta Type: Other Comment: 1992 DHV W/ PROJECT Traffic and Roadway Conditions _______________________________________________________________________ Eastbound Westbound Northbound SOUthbound : L. T R : L T R L T R : L T R No. Lanes:, ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- : 1 ---- 1 ---- ---- 3 f ----- --_- ___- : 1 - ---- 1 Volumes 1.68 286: 1.887 1.26: 249 1374 930 PHF (*,)r PK15: :0.90 0.90: 0.95 0.95:0.95 0.95 0.95 Lane Width 1.2.0 12.0: 12.0 :12.0 12.0 1.2.0 i"rade : : -4 : 0 : 0 Heavy Veh: 2 2: 2 2: 2 2 2 Parking : : (Y/N) N : (Y/N) N : (Y/N) N Bus Stops : : 0: 0: Cl Con. Peas : 0: 0: 20: 0 Ped Button : :(Y/N) N :(Y/N) N (Y/N) N Arr^ Type : : 3 3: 4 4: 4 4 RTOR Vols : : 0: 0: 0 Signal Operations ---__.---______________._-__--__-_-__-_____-_____-______-___-__--________ Phase combination 1. 2 3 4: 5 6 7 8 E:?B Left :NB Left Thru : Thru y: Right : Ri5;ht Peds : Peds WB Left * : SB Left Thru : Thru ` Right * : Right * ": Peds : Peds NB Ri.aht : EL Right $B Ri�)ht : WB Right Green 14A :Green 16A 45P Yellow/A-R 5 :Yellow/A-R 5 5 Lost Time 3.0 :Last Time 3.0 3.0 Cycle Length: 90 secs Phase combination order: 41 #5 #r HC : Signalized Intersection Version 2.1 Streets: (E-W) SWIFT STREET (N-S) SHELBURNE ROAD Analyst: R. DICKINSON File Name: 9211.HC9 Area Type: Other 2-6-92 Comment: 1992 DHV W/ PROJECT Volume AdJustment Worksheet C?ire(:;- Lane Lane AdJ t i on/ Mvt Ad i Lane Grp No. Ut i 1 Growth Grp Prop Prc,r.:- Mvt Vol PHF Vol Gru Vol Ln Fact Fact ------ Vol ---- LT ---- RT ---- ----- E: B ---- ---- ---- ----- ---- -- ----- W r-3 Lett 168 0.90 187 L 187 1 1.000 1.000 187 1.00 0.00 Rivht 286 0.90 318 R 318 1 1.000 1..000 318 0.00 1.00 NB Thru 1887 0.95 1986 TR 2119 3 1.100 1.000 2331 0.00 0.06. Right: 126 0.95 133 15 B Left 249 0.95 262 L 262 1 1.000 1.000 262 1.00 0.00 Thru 1374 0.95 144.6 T 1446 2 1.050 1.000 1518 0.00 0.00 Right ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 930 0.95 979 R 979 1 1.000 1.000 979 0.00 1.00 Saturation Flow Ad.;iustment Worksheet Direr- Ideal Ad.j ti(.-)n' Sat No. f f f f f f f f $ a t LnGrp Flow Ln.s W HV G r BE A RT ----- LT ----- Flaw ------- -.----- EB ---- --- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- WB L 1300 1 1.00 0. 99 1. 02 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1 G;,; 5 R 1800 1 1.00 0.99 1.012, 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.54 NB r R 1800 3 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 5�'9:5 SB L 1.800 1 1.00 0. 99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0. 95 16.74 T 1800 2 1.00 0. 99 1.00 1.00 1. 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 35t,4 R 1800 1 1 . q0 D. 99 1 . 00 1. 00 1 . 00 1 . ri0 0. 85 1.00 1.5.15 HC$: Signalized Intersection Version 2.1 Streets: (E-W) SWIFT STREET (N-S) SHELBURNE ROACH Analyst: R. DICKINSON File- Name: 9211.HC9 Area Type: Other, 2-6-92 Comment: 1992 DHV W/ PROJECT Capacity Analysis Worksheet Direc- AM AdJ `gat Flow Lane (croup tion/ Flaw Rate Flow Rate Ratio Green Ratio Capacity v/c LnGrp (v) (1) NO) (sr/C) (c) Ratio ----- --------- EB r________ ----- ___________ __________ ----- W f:•', L 187 1545 0.121 0.178 275 0.681 R 31.8 154.5 0.206 0.371 584 0.54.5 * NB TR 2331 5295 0.440 0.522 2765 0.843 * SB L 262 1693 0.155 0.200 M9 0.774 * T 1518 3564 0.426 0.756 2693 0.504 R 979 1.515 0.646 0.722 1094 0.895 Cycle Lenoth, C = 90.0 sec.. Sum NO) critical = 0.801 Lost Time Per _________-_____________________________________________________________ Cycle, L = 9.0 sec. X critical = 0.890 Level of Service Worksheet D.irec- Delay Lane Delay Lane Lane Delay LOS tion/ v/c q/C Cycle d Group d Prov Grp Grp By By LnGrp _____ Ratio _____ Ratio _____ Len 1 Cap 2 Fact Delay LOS ,gym Apr-, EB _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ ____ _____ ____ WB L 0.68 0.178 90.0 26.3 275 4.6 1.00 30.9 D 22.5 C R 0.54 0.378 90.0 16.7 584 0.8 1.00 1.7.5 C NB "T'R 0.84 0.522 90.0 13.9 2765 1.8 0.90 14.2 B 14.2 B SB L 0.77 0.200 90.0 25.9 339 7.2 0.82 27.2 D 8.7 6 T 0.56 0.756 90.0 3.6 2693 0.2 0.72 2.7 A R 0.89 0.722 90.0 7.5 1094 7.0 0.90 13.0 B Intersection Delay = 12.2 (sec/veh) Intersections LOS = 6 tiC.w , ir�l.i� d Irrt:er�:t::ic;n V L amoure•U x & St one 14 Morse Drive Etisex .junction, VT 05452-2083 (802) 878-4450 'streets: (E-W) SWIFT STREET (N-$) SHELEURNE ROAD Analyst: R. DICKINSON File Name: 921.1.HC9 .i. Area Type: Other 2-6-92 Comment: 1997 BACKGROUND DHV Traffic. and Roadway Conditions Eastbound ; Westbound Northbound ; Southbound I_ T R ! L T R ; L T R ! L T P --__ __-----_ ---- ____ ____---- --__ ____ ---- ____ __-- No. Lanes ; ! 1 1 ; 3 < ; 1 2 1 Volumes ; ; 18.4 306! 2152 144; 283 1551. 1.0c-f PHF or PK15; ;0.90 0.90! 0.95 0.95;0.95 0. �5 0.:j5 Lane Width ; ;12.0 12.0; 1.2.0 ;12.0 12.0 1.2,:.0 Grade -4. 0 O Heavy Veh! ! 2 2! 2 2! 2 2 2 Park.:i.nsi ; (Y/N) N ; (Y/N) N ; (Y/N) N Bus St crr. s 0! 0: Cl (:on. Peds 0! O! 201 n Fed Button ; ;(Y/N) N ;(Y/N) N ;(Y/N) N Arr Type ; ! 3 3; 4 41 4 4. RTOR Vols ; ; 0! 0; C� Si ejnal Operations Ph rse combination 1 2 3 4; 5 6 7 8 1.6 Let t !NB Lef t. Thru ; Thru Ri<..jht ; Ri<Dht r F ds ; Peds WE. L._ef t * ! SB L.ef t : Thru Thru F'eds ! Peas: NP Ri vht ; EB R i,;iht '.B Ri,,jht ; WB Rig;ht Green :1.4A ' Green 16A 45P Yellow/A-R 5 ;Yallow/A-R 5 5 Lo�-•t Time 3.0 :Lost. Tirwtc 3.0 3.0 Cyc:it�: Length: 90 secs Phase combination ordeer: #1 #5 #6 HCS; Sioncalize`.d Intersection Version 2.1 Struts: (E-W) SWIFT STREET (N-S) SHELBURNE ROAD Analyst: R. DICKINSON File Name: 9211,.HC9 Area Type: Other 2-6-92 Comment: 1997 BACKGROUND 0HV Volume Adjustment Worksheet D irec- Lane Lane Ad j tioni Mvt Adi Lane Grp No. Util Growth Grp Pros Prop) Mvt Vol FHF VoI Grp Vol Ln Fact Fact Vol LT RT ----- EB ---- ---- ---- _--- ---- -- ----- ------ ---- ---- ----. W F:i Left 184 0.90 204 L 204 1 1.000 1.000 204 1.00 0.00 Right 306 0.90 340 R 340 1 1..000 1.000 340 0.00 1.00 NB Thru 2152 0.95 2265 TR 2417 3 1.100 1.000 2659 0.00 0.06 Right 144. 0.95 152 SB Left 283 0.95 298 L 29S 1 1.000 1.000 ' 298 1.00 0.00 Thru 1.551 0.95 1633 T 1.633 2 1.050 1..000 1715 0.00 0.00 Right: ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 1056 0.95 1112 R 1112 1 1.000 1.000 1112 0.00 1.00 Saturation Flow Adjustment Worksheet fired- Ideal Adi t i oni Sat No. f f f f f f f f Sat: LnGrp Flow Ln W HV G r~ BB A RT LT F1,>w ------ EB ---- --- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----. W f.X, L 1800 1 1.00 0.99 1.02 1..00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.15 1515 R 1800 1 1.00 0.99 1.02 1.00 1.00 1..00 O.8,t, 1.00 150�, NB TR 1800 3 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 5295 SB L 1800 1 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 i.00 0.05 1693 T 1800 2 1.00 0.99 1..00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 3564 R 1800 1 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 n . S 5 1.00 1515 HC : Sl.an alined Intersection Version 2.1 �. Streets: (B.-W) SWIFT STREET (N-5) SHF LBOPNF ROAD Anal Et: R. DICKINSON File Name: 9211.HC9 Area Type: Other :: --6•-92 C Qmmp: nt ; 1997 BACKCRUUND DHV Capacity Analysis Work.shoet D i.re -. Ad j Adj Sat Flow Lane Grour_, tion/ Flow Rate Flow Rate Ratio Green Ratio Capacity v/c LnGrp (v) (s) NO) 0/0 ----------- (c) ---------- Ratio -----. ----- --------- EB --------- ----- WB L 204 1545 0.1.32 0.175 275 0.743 R 340 154.5 0.220 0.378 584 0.583 NB TR 2659 5295 0.502 0.522 2765 0.962 Se L 298 1693 0.176 0.200 339 0.880 T 1715 3564 0.481 0.756 2693 0.637 R 1112 1515 0.734 0.722 1094 1.016 Cycle Length, C = 90.0 sec. Sum Ms) critical = 0.898 Lost Time Per ----------------------------------------------------_.------------------ Cycle, L - 1.0 sec. X critical = 0.9% evel of Service Worksheet Direc.- Delay Lane Delay Lane Lane Delay LOS tion/ v/c Q/C Cycle d Group d Prot Grp Grp By By LnGrp Ratio Ratio Len 1 Cap 2 Fact Delay LOS Apr AD!-, FB WB L 0.74 0.178 90.0 26.6 275 7.0 1.00 33.7 D 23.9 C R 0.58 0.378 90.0 17.0 584 1..1 1.00 18.1. C NB TR 0.96 0.522 90.0 15.7 2765 7.3 0.90 20.7 C 20.7 C SB L 0.88 0.200 90.0 26.6 339 15.6 0.90 38.0 D 16.7 C T 0.64 0.756 90.0 3.9 2693 0.4 0.82 3.5 A R 1.02 0.722 90.0 9.9 1094 24.9 0.90 31.3 D Inter•secti.on Delay = 19.0 (sec/veh) Intersection LOS = C': HCS: Signalized Intersection Version 2.1. 1 Lamoureux & Stone 14 Morse Drive Essex .junction, VT 05452-2083 (802) 878-4450 Streets; (E--W) SWIFT STREET (N-S) SHELBURNE ROAD Analyst: R. DICKINSON File Name: 9211.HC9 Area Type: ether 2-6-92 Comment:: 1.997 DHV W/ PROJECT Traffic and Roadway Conditions Eastbound Westbound Northbound ; Southbound L T R L T R L T R L T R �____ ____ ___----- ____ ____ ____ ____ ____;____ __-_ ---- No. Lanes 1 1 ? <. 1 2 1. VOILMeS 190 323 2144 144: 283 1559 105E NHF or PK:15 ; ; 0. 90 0. 90 ; 0.95 0. 95 1 0. 95 0.95 0.95 Lane Width :12.0 12.0: 12.0 :1.2.0 12.0 1,.0 Grade -4 0 ' 0 Heavy Veh1 2 2; 2 2; 2 2 _. Parking (Y/N) N ' (Y/N) N ; (Y/N) N Bus Stops O; 0; C� Cron. Peds 0; 0' 20: 0 Ped Button 1(Y/N) N ;(Y/N) N 1(Y/N) N Arr^ Type 1 1 3 3: i+ 4; 4 4 4. RTOR Vols ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 0; 0; O Signal Operations Phase combination 1. 2 3 4; 5 6 7 E; E.B. Left ; N8 Lett Thru Thru Right Right Peds i Peds y' WB L.eft $B Lett Thru Thru Right " Right Peds Peds, NB Right :EB Right. `.,B Ri;jht ; WB Risoht Green 1.4A ' Green 164' 4-5F Ye1.1ow/A-R 5 ! Yttl.low/A-R 5 5 Lost Time 3.0 ;Lost Time 3.0 3.0 Cv(-, I te Lene4th: 90 secs Phase combination order: ##1 #5 46 HCS: Signalized Intersection Version 2.1 Streets: (E-W) SWIFT STREET (N-S) SHELBURNE ROAD Analyst: R. DICKINSON File Name: 9211.HQ-4 Area Tyre: Other 2-6-92 Comment: 1997 DHV W/ PROJECT Volume Adjustment Workshest Direc-- Lane Lane Ad j tion/ Mvt Adj Lane Grp No. Util Growth Grp Prop Pror-i Mvt Vol PHF Vcl Grp Vol Ln Fact Fact Vol LT RT ----- EB _-_- __-- ___- ---- ---- __ ----- ------ ____ _--- ---- WB Left 190 0.90 211 L 211 1 1.000 1.000 211 1.00 0.00 Right. 323 0.90 359 R 359 1 1.000 1.000 359 0.00 1.00 NB Thru 2144 0.95 2257 TR 2409 3 1.100 1.000 2650 0.00 0.06 Right 14.4 0.95 152 se Left 283 0.95 298 L 298 1 1.000 1.000 298 1.00 0.00 Thru 1559 0.95 1.64.1 T 1641 2 1.050 1.000 1723 0.00 0.0c, Right. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1056 0.95 1112 R 1112 1 1.000 1.000 1112 0.00 1.00 Saturation Flow Adjustment Worksheet Dirac- Ideal Ad j Lion/ Sat No. f f f f f f f f w-at: L...nC:r^r:; F I. ow Lns W HV G BB A RT LT F i,�)w EB W 1`3 L 1800 1 1.00 0.99 1.02 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.8.5 1505 R 1800 1 1..00 0.99 1.02 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 154r5 N t3 TR 1800 3 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0. 9G 1.00 5 � 9�. , &B L 1800 1 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1 n ? !-, T 1.800 2 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1..00 1.00 1.00 1.00 3564. R! 1800 1 1.00 0.99 1.00 1-00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1..00 1515 4 HC$: Si.onalized Intersection Version 2.1 Streets: (E.-W) SWIFT STREET (N-0 SHELBURNE ROAD Analyst: R. DICKINSON File Name: 9211.HCI9 Area Type: Other 2-6-94 t.omment: 1997 DHV W/ PROJECT Capacity Analysis Wort-.sheit: ----------------------------------------------------------------------- D irec - Ad i AN Sat Flow Lane Group, tion/ Flow Rate Flow Rate Ratio Green Ratio Capacity VIA' Lni rp (v) (s) (v/s) Q/C) (c) Rat0'., EB WB L 211 1545 0,137 0.171 275 0.7&: R 359 1545 0.232 0.378 584 0.615 � hJB TF 2650 5295 0.500 0.522 2765 0,95a L 298 1693 0.176 0.200 339 0.380 T 1723 3564 0.483 0.756 2693 0.640 R 1112 1515 0.734 0.722 1094 1.016 Cycle Lenoth, C = 90.0 sec. Sum (v/s) critical. = 0.909 Lost Time ______________________________________________________________________.... Per Cycle, L = 9.0 sec. X critical = 1.010 Level of Service Workshast Direc- Delay Lanai Delay Lane Lane Delay LOSS tion/ v/c 9/C Cycle d Group d Prov Grp Grp By 5y L.nGrp Ratio Ratio Len 1 Cap 2 Fact Delay LOS Ar-P A= E F3 WB L 0.77 0.178 90.0 26.8 275 8.4 1.00 35.2 D 24.3 C R 0.62 0.378 90.0 17.2 584 1.„4 1..00 18.6 C NE .T•R 0.96 0.522 90.0 15.6 2765 6.9 0.90 20.3 C_ �•?O , 3 C 5 S. L 0. SS 0.200 90.0 26.6 339 15.6 0.90 38.0 D 16.7 C T 0.64 0.756 90.0 4.0 2693 0.4 0.82 3.5 A R 1.02 0.722 90.0 9.9 1094 24,9 0.90 31.3 D Intersection Delay = 18.9 (sec/veh) Intersection LOS = C.: APPENDIX D Intersection Capacity Analyses Shelburne Road & Bonanza/Pizza Hut 1.985 HCM: UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS F'a,. j- -•:i * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * A * * IDENTIFYING INFORMATION ..--___-------------------------.____-------_-_____--------_ AVERAGE RUNNING SPEED, MAJOR STREET.. 30 PEAK HOUR FACTOR ..................... 1 AREA POPULATION ...................... 150000 NAME OF THE EAST/WEST STREET......... BONANZA/PIZZA HUT NAME OF THE NORTH/SOUTH STREET....... SHELBURNE ROAD NAME OF THE ANALYST .................. R. DICKINSON DATE OF THE ANALYSIS (mm/dd/yy)...... 02-06-1.992 TIME PERIOD ANALYZED ................. 1992 BACKGROUND DHV OTHER INFORMATION.... EXISTING CONDITIONS INTERSECTION -------------------------------------------------------------------------- TYPE AND CONTROL INTFRSECTION TYPE: T-INTERSECTION MAJOR STREET DIRECTION: NORTH/SOUTH ("ONTROL TYPE WESTBOUND: STOP SIGN TRAFFIC VOLUMES ----------------------------------------------------------------------- EB WB NB SB LEFT -- 3 0 2'7' l THRU -- 0 1999 1506 RIGHT -- 22 22 0 NUMBER OF LANES EB WB NB SB LANES -- 2 2 ADJUSTMENT FACTORS ------------------------------------------ PERCENT RIGHT TURN CURB RADIUS (ft) ACCELERATION LANE GRADE ANGLE FOR RIGHT TURNS FOR RIGHT TURNS EASTBOUND --- --- - - _ WE'TBOUND -2.00 90 20 N NORTHBOUND 0.00 90 20 N SOUTHBO ►ND 0.00 90 20 N VEHICLE COMPOSITION ._---------------------------.-----------_---.---------_--------------_._ SU TRUCKS % COMBINATION AND RV'S VEHICLES % MOTORCYCLES EASTBI)LIND ----------- ------------- --- --- -------------. --- WESTBOUND 0 0 0 NORTHBOUND 3 2 0 SOUTHBOUND 3 2 0 CRITICAL GAPS --------------------------------------------------------------------- TABULAR VALUES ADJUSTED SIGHT DIST. FINAL (Table 10-2) VALUE ADJUSTMENT CRITICAL C4AP MINOR RIGHT; WB 5.50 5.50 0.00 5.50 MAJOR LEFTS SB 5.50 5.50 0.00 5.50 MINOR LEFTS WB 7. Cj0 7.00 0.00 7.00 IDENTIFYING INFORMATION NAME. OF THE EAST/WEST STREET...... BONANZA/PIZZA HUT NAME OF THE NORTH/SOUTH STREET.... SHELBURNE ROAD DATA.. AND TIME OF THE ANALYSIS..... 02-06-1992 ; 1.992 BACKGROUND DHV OTHER INFORMATION.... EXI,zTING CONDITIONS CAPACITY AND LEVEL -OF -SERVICE Pa�;4 e-.-:*, ------------------------------------------------------------------------- POTEN-- ACTUAL FLOW- TIAL MOVEMENT SHARED RESEPVE RATE CAPACITY CAPACITY CAPACITY CAPACITY MOVEMENT v (p,.- +h) c (P(. r-h) c (r,cPh) C: ( r,::1:,1) ) _ J:; •- v LCY-i q M SH R SH MINOR STREET WB LEFT 3 75 67 67 RIGHT 20 326 326 326 MAJOR STREET 5B LEFT 23 145 145 145 IDENTIFYING INFORMATION 64 F_' 306 F 12D NAME OF THE EAST/WEST STREET...... BONANZA/PIZZA HUT NAME OF THE NORTH/SOUTH STREET.... SHELBURNE ROAD DATE::: AND TIME OF THE ANAL.YSI.S..... 02-06-1992 ; 1.992 BACKGROUND DHV OTHER INFORMATION.... EXISTING CONDITIONS ,t l 1 ` � 5 HCM. i.INSIGNAL.IZ.E:D INTERSECTIONS '+*************`k******`k******`t**********w*********************** ****;l IDENTIFYING INFORMATION ----._-------------_-------------------------------------------------- AVERAGE RUNNING SPEED, MAJOR STREET.. 30 TEAK HOUR FACTOR ..................... 1 AREA POPULATION ...................... 1.50000 IN.IAME OF THE EAST/WEST STREET......... E!ONANZA/PIZZA HUT NAME OF THE NORTH/SOUTH STREET....... SHELBURNE ROAD NAME_ OF THE ANALYST .................„ R. DICKINSON DATE OF THE ANALYSIS (mm/dd/yy)...... 02-06-1992 TIME PERIOD ANALYZED ................. 1997 BACKGROUND DHV OTHER INFORMATION.... EXISTING CONDITIONS :INTERSECTION --------------------.-----------------------------._------------------._. TYPE AND CONTROL INTERSECTION TYPE: T.-INTERSECTION MAJOR STREET DIRECTION: NORTH/SOUTH CONTROL_ TYPE WESTBOi IND -. STOP SIGN TRAFFIC VOLUMES EB 14B NV,, SEA, LEFT - ? 0 22 THRI_1 - - 0 22 74 1713 RIGHT -- 22 22 0 NUMBED OF LANE= EB wB NET: SP L ANF'S -- "' 2 2 ADJUSTMENT --------------------------------------------------------------------__. FACTORS page-2 PERCENT RIGHT TURN CURB RADIUS Qt) ACCELERATION LANE. GRADE ANGLE FOR RIGHT TURNS FOR RIGHT TURNS EASTBOUND ----------------- W- --- --- ---------------- --- ----------------- WESTBOUND -2.00 90 20 N NORTHBOUND 0.00 90 20 N OUTHBOUND 0.00 90 20 N VEHICLE COMPOSITION -----------------------------------------------------------------_--- % SU TRUCKS % COMBINATION AND RV'S VEHICLES % MOTORCYCLES EA,TBOUND ----------- ------------- --- --- ---------_---_ WESTBOUND 0 0 0 NORTHBOUND 3 2 0 SOUTHBOUND 3 12* 0 CRITICAL GAPS --------------------------------------------------------------------- TABULAR VALUES ADJUSTED SIGHT DIST. FINAL. (Table 10-21 VALUE ADJUSTMENT CRITICAL GAP MINOR RIGHTS, WB 5.50 5.50 0.00 5.50 MAJOR LEFTS s s 5.50 5.50 0.00 5.50 MINOR LEFTS WB 7.00 7.00 0.00 7.00 IDENTIFYING INFORMATION NAME: OF THE EAST/WEST STREET...... BONANZA/PIZZA HUT NAME_ OF THE NORTH/SOUTH STREET.... SHELBURNE ROAD DATE AND TIME OF THE ANALYSIS..... 02-06-1992 ; 1997 BACKGROUND DHV OTHER INFORMATION.... EXISTING CONDITIONS CAPACITY AND L.EVEL-OF-SERVICE Page-:;. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ POTEN- ACTUAL ,.FLOW- TIAL MOVEMENT SHARED.,s RESERVE RATE CAPACITY CAPACITY CAPACITY CAPACITY MOVEMENT v(Pcph) c (pcph) c (pcph) c (pcph) c = c - v LOS p M SH R SH ------------------------------------------------ --- MINOR STREET WB LEFT 3 75 67 67 RIGHT 20 275 275 275 MAJOR STREET `::,B LEFT 23 145 145 145 IDENTIFYING INFORMATION 64 E 255 C 122 Cl NAME OF THE EAST/WEST STREET...... BONANZA/PIZZA HUT NAME OF THE NORTH/SOUTH STREET.... SHELBURNE ROAD DATE. AND TIME OF THE ANALYSIS..... 02-06-1992 ; 1997 BACKGROUND DH%-' OTHER INFORMATION.... EXISTING CONDITIONS 1985 HCM: UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS page-1. :h„k;Kx�:K HK�>K ASK YC�K*7KYf DK Yc yC �k 7k 7k 7K 7K rC]r �t YC Y[)t yC Jk 7K �c�YC*rt**YC YC W. 7K 7C �c ;K 7K 7C YC is Yt Yc Yc 7K ,�C Yc �kK��)t yCkJC�YC :K )K IDENTIFYING INFORMATION AVERAGE. RUNNING SPEED, MAJOR STREET.. 30 PEAK HOUR FACTOR ..................... 1 AREA POPULATION .....................,. 1.50000 NAME OF THE EAST/WEST STREET......... BONANZA/PIZZA HUT NAME OF THE NORTH/SOUTH STREET....... SHELBURNE ROAD NAME OF THE ANALYST .................. R. DICKINSON DATE OF THE ANALYSIS (mm/dd/YY) ...... 02-06-1.992 .TIME PERIOD ANALYZED ................. 1997 DHV OTHER INFORMATION.... WITH MOTEL & ONE-WAY TRAFFIC CIRCULATION INTERSECTION ------------------------------------------------------------------------ TYPE AND CONTROL INTERSECTION TYPE; T-INTERSECTION MAJOR STREET DIRECTION: NORTH/SOUTH CONTROL TYPE WESTBOUND; STOP SIGN TRAFFIC VOLUMES --------------------------------------------------------------------- EB WB NB SB LEFT _ 3 0 30 / THRU -- 0 2274 1713 RIGHT -- 14 34 0 NUMBER OF LANES --------------------------------------------------------------------- EB WB NB SB LAMES -- :? 2 ADJUSTMENT FACTORS Page-2 --------------------------------------------------------------------... PERCENT RIGHT TURN CURB RADIUS (fit) ACCELERATION LANE GRADE ANGLE FOR RIGHT TURNS FOR RIGHT TURNS ___ EASTBOUND ----- ___ _____________ ___ _--_-___________- _ WESTBOUND -2.00 90 20 N NORTHBOUND 0.00 90 20 N SOUTHBOUND 0.00 90 20 N VEHICLE COMPOSITION --------------------------------------------------------------------- % SU TRUCKS % COMBINATION AND RV'S VEHICLES % MOTORCYCLES ----------- ------------- EASTBOUND ---- ---- _-_______-___ --- WESTBOUND 0 0 0 NORTHBOUND 3 C 0 SOUTHBOUND 3 2 0 CRITICAL GAPS _.______________________________________________.__________-_________-- TABULAR VALUES ADJUSTED SIGHT DIST. FINAL (Table 10-2) VALUE ADJUSTMENT CRITICAL GAF ______________ MINOR RIGHTS -------- ----------- __--__-----._. WE 5.50 5.50 0.00 5.50 MAJOR LEFTS SB 5.50 5.50 0.00 5.50 MINOR LEFTS WE 7.00 7.00 0.00 7.00 IDENTIFYING INFORMATION NAME OF THE EAST/WEST STREET...... BONANZA/PIZZA HUT NAME OF THE NORTH/SOUTH STREET.... SHELBURNE ROAD DATE AND TIME OF THE ANALYSIS..... 02-06-1992 ; 1997'DHV OTHER INFORMATION.... WITH MOTEL & ONE-WAY TRAFFIC CIRCULATION CAPACITY AND -------------------------------------------------------------------- LEVEL. -OF --SERVICE Pace- s POTEN- ACTUAL ,+FLOW- TIAL MOVEMENT SHARED,, RESERVE RATE CAPACITY CAPACITY CAPACITY CAPACITY MOVEMENT v(pcph) c (pcph) c (pcph) c (pCph) c = c - v LOS p M SH R SH MINOR STREET W5 LEFT 3 75 64 64 61 E RIGHT 13 272 272 272 260 C', MAJOR STREET SB LEFT 31 145 145 145 114 fl IDENTIFYING INFORMATION NAME OF THE EAST/WEST STREET...... BONANZA/PIZZA HUT NAME OF THE NORTH/SOUTH STREET.... SHELBURNE ROAD DATE AND TIME OF THE ANALYSIS..... 02-06•-1992 ; 1997 DHV OTHER INFORMATION.... WITH MOTEL & ONE-WAY TRAFFIC CIRCULATION APPENDIX E Intersection Capacity Analyses Swift Street/Proposed Access 1955 HCM: UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS Page-1 * * * * * X * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * IDENTIFYING INFORMATION -------------------------------------------------------------------- i, .i. AVERAGE RUNNING SPEED, MAJOR STREET.. 30 PEAK HOUR FACTOR ..................... 1 AREA POPULATION ...................... 1.50000 NAME OF THE EAST/WEST STREET......... :.,WIFT STREET NAME OF THE NORTH/SOUTH STREET....... PROPOSED ACCESS NAME OF THE ANALYST .................. R. DICK:INSON DATE OF THE ANALYSIS (mm/dd/yy)...•.. 02-06-1992 TIME PERIOD ANALYZED ................. 1992 DHV OTHER INFORMATION.... W/ PROJECT INTERSECTION TYPE AND CONTROL ___________________________________________________________________-_.. INTERSECTION TYPE: T-INTERSECTION MAJOR STREET DIRECTION: EAST/WEST CONTROL TYPE NORTHBOUND: STOP SIGN TRAFFIC VOLUMES _____________________----______-_________--_--__________-_ _-____---___ EB WB NB SB LEFT 0 123 _- THRU 315 454 0 _- RIGHT 0 0 0 - NUMBER OF LANEc. EB WB NB SB LANES 1 1. 1 -- 0 ADJUSTMENT --------------------------------------------------------------------_. FACTORS Pe- PERCENT RIGHT TURN CURB RADIUS NO ACCELERATION LANE: GRADE ANGLE FOR RIGHT TURNS FOR RIGHT TURNS EASTBOUND ------- 0.00 ---------- 90 ---------------- 20 ----------------- N WESTBOUND 0.00 90 20 N NORTHBOUND 0.00 90 20 N SOUTHBOUND ----- --- ___ - VEHICLE COMPOSITION _-------------------------------------------------------------------- % SU TRUCKS % COMBINATION AND RV'S VEHICLES N MOTORCYCLES ----------- ------------- _-_-____----_ EASTBOUND 3 2 0 WESTBOUND 3 2 0 1 NORTHBOUND 0 0 0 SOUTHBOUND --- --- --- CRITICAL GAPS ---------------------------------------------------------------------- TABULAR VALUES ADJUSTED SIGHT LIST. FINAL (Table 10-2) VALUE ADJUSTMENT CRITICAL GAP MINOR RIGHTS NB 5.50 5.50 0.00 5.50 MAJOR LEFTS WB 5. rJCi 5.00 0.00 5. 00 MINOR LEFTS NB 6. 50 6.50 0.00 :. , 50 IDENTIFYING INFORMATION NAME OF THE EAST/WEST STREET...... SWIFT STREET NAME OF THE NORTi-iAUUTH STREET:.... i=igOf='OSED ACCESS CRATE AND TIME OF THE ANALYSIS;..... 02--06--199 ; 1992 DHV OTHER INFORMATION..... W/ PROJECT Q CAPACITY AND LEVEL -OF -SERVICE Fvdt;7- ` POTEN_. ACTUAL. `:,FLOW- TIAL MOVEMENT SHAFTED FE�ERVE RATE CAPACITY CAPACITY CAPACITY CAPACITY MOVEMENT v (pcph) c (tDoPh) C (PoPh1) G (pd= pr1) c = C OB, p M $H R SH MINOR STREET NB LEFT 23 298 298 R'I(:HT 0 723 723 MAJOR STREET WE LEFT 0 819 819 IDENTIFYING INFORMATION > .8 > 275 > C > 298 > 275 >C > 723 > 723 > A 819 NAME OF THE EAST/WEST STREET...... SWIFT STREET NAME OF THE NORTH/SOUTH STREET.... PROPOSED ACCESS GATE. AND TIME. OF THE ANALYSIS..... 02-06-1992 ; 1,992 DHV OTHER INFORMATION.... W/ PROJECT 819 A 1 t 1.985 HCM: UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS page-1 *Ah A:*A.**A.*A.*A**W:t***A**A * * * **AA******.*A.*W A:tW t. A***:t:kW ***:t .t*'AAA A:*A*A IDENTIFYING INFORMATION ----------------------------------------------------------------------- AVERAGE RUNNING SPEED, MAJOR STREET.. 30 PEAK: HOUR FACTOR ..................... 1 AREA POPULATION ...................... 150000 I'JAME OF THE EAST/WEST STREET......... SWIFT STREET NAME OF THE NORTH/SOUTH STREET....... PROPOSED ACCESS NAME (.-lF THE ANALYST... , .............. R. DICK:INSON DATE OF THE ANALYSIS (mm/dd/yy)...... 02-06-1.992 TIME: PERIOD ANALYZED ................. 1997 DHV OTHER .INFORMATION.... W/ PROJECT IN TFRSr~r'T ION TYPE AND CONTROL -------------------------------------------------------------------------- INTERSECTION TYPE: T-INTERSECTION MAJOR STREET DIRECTION: EAST/WEST CONTROL TYPE NORTHBOUND. STOP SIGN TRAFFIC VOLUMES EB WB NB SB LEFT 0 0 23 -- 1'HRU 427 513 0 -- RIGHT 0 0 0 -- NUMBER (:)F LANES EB WB NB 1-58, LANES 1 1 1 -- ADJUSTMENT FACTORS Pay -21 PERCENT RIGHT TURN CURB RADIUS (ft) ACCELERATION LANE GRADE ANGLE FOR RIGHT TURNS FOR RIGHT TURNS EASTBOUND ---------- "�0.00 90 ---------------- 20 ----------------- N WESTBOUND 0.00 90 20 N NORTHBOUND 0.00 90 20 N 'aOUTHBOUND ---_- ---- --- - VEHICLE COMPOSITION --------------------------------------------------------------------- SU TRUCKS % COMBINATION AND RV'S VEHICLES MOTORCYCLES EASTBOUND 3 2 0 WESTBOUND 3 2 0 NORTHBOUND 0 0 0 SOUTHBOUND --- --- --- C. RITICAL (.;AP°Z ----------------------------------------------------------------------- TABULAR VALUES ADJUSTED SIGHT DIST. FINAL (Table 10-2) VALUE ADJUSTMENT CRITICAL GAP MINOR RIGHT`:- NB 5 . '30 5.50 0.00 5.50 MAJOR LEFTS WB 5.00 5.00 0.00 5.00 MINOR LEFTS NB 6.50 6.50 0.00 6.50 IDENTIFYING INFORMATION NAME" OF THE EAST/WEST STREE.T...... SWIFT STREET NAME OF THE NORTH/1-501-ITH STREET.... PROPOSED ACCESS DATE AND TIME OF THE ANALY$IS,..... 02-0r)-1992 , 1997 DHV OTHER INFORMATION.... W/ PROJECT v CAPACITY AND LEVEL -OF -SERVICE _------------------------------.------------------------------------__- POTEN- ACTUAL FLOW- TIAL MOVEMENT SHARED RESERVE RATE CAPACITY CAPACITY CAPACITY CAPACITY MOVEMENT v i mooh) r_ (per. h) c ( pay nh) c ( pcph) c = c -- v LOS p M S H R TH MINOR STREET NE LEFT 23 254 254 RIGHT 0 680 680 MAJOR STREET WB LEFT 0 773 773 IDENTIFYING INFORMATION > 254 > 431 > c > 254 > 231 > C' > 680 > 680 > A 773 NAME OF THE EAST/WEST STREET...... SWIFT STREET NAME OF THE NORTH/SOUTH STREE'T.... PROPOSED ACCESS DATE AND TIME OF THE ANALYSIS..... 02-06-1.992 ; 1997 DH\.,P OTHER INFORMATION.... W/ PROJECT 771 A LAMOUREUX & STONE- 14 Morse Drive Consulting Engineers, Inc. Essex Junction, Vermont 05452 (802) 878-4450 April 1, 1992 Mr. Salamin Handy 75 South Winooski Avenue Burlington, Vermont 05401 RE: Proposed Motel and Addition to Bonanza Restaurant 792 Shelburne Road, South Burlington Dear Mr. Handy: 27 High Street St. Albans, Vermont 05478 (802) 524-5245 As requested, we have calculated the revised trip generation of adding an 80-room motel behind and connected to the existing Bonanza restaurant. Our traffic impact evaluation of February 20, 1992, analyzed the impacts of a 60- room motel. The following table presents the original and revised p.m. peak hour vehicular trip generation of this project. II I I Proposed I Proposed II Existing (60-room motel) (80-room motel) Bonanza 22 22 22 Motel - 35 46 ITOTAL 22 57 68 The increased trip generation of an 80-room motel at this location, compared to that of a 60-room motel, is not large enough to change any of the conclusions or recommendations of the previous traffic impact evaluation for this project. However, we do wish to reiterate that the proposed one-way traffic circulation pattern is vital to preventing any adverse impacts on existing Shelburne Road traffic conditions. Civil, Environmental & Transportation Engineering • Planning • Land Surveying Mr. Salamin Handy_ April 1, 1992 Page 2 We thank you for this opportunity to be of service. Should you have any questions or if we may be of additional assistance, please feel free to contact us. Sincerely, Rog r kinson, P.E. cc. Gabe Handy r/9211 han2.rjd Path or Border L fights Primary Applications: Pathways Steps Ground Cover Low Shrubs Straightforward, rugged design and application versatility combine to make this one of the most widely used outdoor fixtures. Locate fixtures in open areas, or surround them with shrubs to create a glare -free landscape lighting system. *Available in energy saving long -life \ compact fluorescent Jl lamp model. C ' ��' - TT r4 4i' Specifications -Hood and Louvers: Die cast aluminum. Husk: Die cast aluminum. Globe: Diffuse -coated glass (EL122, EL121), fluted glass (EL120, EL123) threaded to husk, with neoprene gasket. Stem: 1/2" schedule 40 alum. pipe with 1/2" N.P.T. for mounting. Socket: Porcelain medium base (incand. models), G23D 2-pin base (EL123). Ballast: (EL123) NPF toroidal 25OF. starting. Wiring: No. 18 AWM rated 105°C. Finish: Verde Green or Black TGIC Powder -Coat paint. EL122UH 75W. A-19 Incand., 120 Volt, 15- height, Green EL122BL Same as above, only in Black *EL121GR 75W. A-191ncand., 120 Volt, 15" height, Green EL121 BL Same as above, only in Black EL120GR 100W. A-21 Incand., 120 Volt, 17' height, Green EL120BL Same as above, only in Black *EL123GR 9W. Fluor., 120 Volt, 250F starting, 17" height, Green *EL123BL Same as above, only in Black F9DTT/27K 9W. Double Twin Tube Fluor, lamp for nos. above C2-12 Kim Lighting Suggested Mounting Options: Architectural J-Box, Below Grade Junction Box or Portable Spear. See page C2-25. Lamps by others. Sylvania 9W. fluorescent available from Kim. See left. M Z�_ WEENE no NNE q4lkls 1`E1ILI \ A 6.8 1.3 .45 .18 .10 .08 B 5.3 .85 .30 .12 .08 .05 C 10 2.0 .50 .15 .06 .04 D 2.8 .45 .13 .05 .03 .02 Typical quadrant A = EL122 75W. A-19 I.F. Incand. B = EL121 75W. A-19 I.F. Incand. C = EL120 100W. A-21 I.F. Incand D = EL123 9W. Compact Fluor. M E M O R A N D U M To: South Burlington Planning Commission From: William J. Szymanski, City Engineer Re: May 12, 1992 Preliminary Continents Date: May 1, 1992 SOUTH BURLINGTON CHRYSLER - PIYMOUTH 1. Drainage system pipe shall be plastic or concrete not metal or aluminum. 2. Plan prepared by Civil Engineering Association dated April, 1992 is acceptable. DR. SLACK PROPERTY GILBERT STREET The record plan should show the drainage pipe in the area. If a portion of this pipe crosses the property a drainage easement shall be given to the City. 350 DORSET STREET SALCO BUILDING) 1. The entrance drive shall conform to the Dorset. Street. improvement. plans. 2. The existing gravel area should be top soiled and seeded and maintained as a lawn. :3. The record plan should show the drainage system including the piping and discharge point. BC)t AP1L_A�_SHELBURNE ROAD 1. The drainage plan shall include the underbround pipe system including pipe size and invert. elevations. 2. Large trucks especially those that have equipmeirt. that runs constantly should noit be allowed because of the close proximity t:^ the residential area. City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 FAX 658-4748 PLANNER ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7955 658-7958 May 8, 1992 G-,�rdon Woods 104 Church St:..reet li:,].lnbt.on, Vermont U1;401 Re: llonanza Motel Addition, 793 Shelburne Road Dear M.-�. Woc ! s : Enciosed is the agenda for next. Tuesday's Planning Commission Meeting and c-:,mnient.s from City Engineei Bill 1 zymanski, Fire (.-Jadde?. t.e and P.)-ysel f Piease be s'_lre someone is present ,n 'Tuesday, "^:ty i2, Z9"2 at. 7:010 P.M. '_,_; represent your request. I' you have a:-:y que�, r_ i --,ns , please give me a call. Sin(:e-reiy, ?" c-e— 1) cue' Weith, City P.1 �titZr-'t En;.. _i A �§uutlt j urltngtuu Rare Department f 575 +4urtiet street �nttth iSttrlingtnn. liermunt 05403 (802) 658-7960 TO: SO. BURLINGTON PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: CHIEF GODDETTE RE: TUESDAY MAY 12,1992 AGENDA ITEMS DATE: TUESDAY APRIL 28,1992 1. DR. SLACK GILBERT STREET 2-LOT SUB -DIVISION PLANS WERE REVIEWED BY THE FIRE DEPT AND AT THIS TIME I DO NOT SEE A PROBLEM WITH THIS PROJECT. 2. BONANZA RESTURANT AND HOTEL PROJECT PLANS HAVE BEEN REVIEWED BY THIS DEPARTMENT AND THE FOLLOWING MUST BE CORRECTED IF WE ARE TO GIVE EMERGENCY FIRE PROTECTION: A. AT LEAST 2700 G.P.M. WATER SUPPLY IS REQUIRED. B. TWO HYDRANTS WILL BE REQUIRED ON THE PROPERTY AT A LOCATION APPROVED BY THIS OFFICE. 3. ANNEX TO HANDY PROPERTY FROM KELLY & JENNINGS SHELBURNE ROAD AT THIS TIME I DO NOT SEE A PROBLEM WITH THIS PROJECT. 4. SO. BURLINGTON CHRYSLER PLYMONTH SHELBURNE ROAD PLANS WERE REVIEWED BY THIS DEPARTMENT AND AT THIS TIME THEIR IS NO WAY THE FIRE DEPARTMENT COULD GIVE EMERGENCY PROTECTION IF NEEDED. THERE IS A WATER PROBLEM AND HYDRANT LOCATION PROBLEM AS WELL AS ACCESS FOR EMERGENCY EQUIPMENT TO BOTH BUILDINGS. PLANNING COMMISSION 6 August 1991 page 7 Mr. Rabidea said there are 2 separate proposals. Regarding the lobby connector, they have never needed additional parking and are doing a study to submit with final plat. They want the lobby connector as soon as possible. Ms. Peacock, Mr. Craig and Mr. Austin said they had no objections. Regarding the banquet facility Mr. Rabideau said they would trade some of the previously approved basement meeting space (1600 sq. ft.). They need space for weddings, banquets, etc. The addition would sit back and look like a unit by itself. There would be no kitchen facilities and food would be brought in by What's Your Beef or another caterer. It could be heated on the premises but not prepared there. Mr. Weith noted the sewer allocation issue and said the state would definitely require additional sewer allocation. Ms. Pugh reminded the Commission that the original stipulation said there would be no banquet/food preparation, etc. Mr. Larkin said Howard Johnsons feels they will rent more rooms with such a facility. Mrs. Maher said he biggest problem is Shelburne Rd. Until it is widened, she didn't want to see any more left turns. Mr. Rabideau noted they would also have to have a height allowance to 45 ft. Regarding traffic, Mr. Weith said the original rate presupposed a banquet facility so there would be no change in traffic generation. Mr. Austin said you can't get any traffic through on Shelburne Rd. anyway. Mr. Burges said the real original traffic study probably included a number of vehicles to be generated by the facility but Shelbure Rd. can't stand another car. He would like to say this facility will increase trip ends and the application should stand or not stand on that, but he wasn't sure this was legal. Mr. Burgess also said the applicant would have a tough time probing they were providing more setbacks, etc., to gain the extra height. 7. Discussion with Gabriel Handy regarding proposed boundary line adjustment and construction of a 60-room motel in conjunction with an existing restaurant on the Bonanza property, Shelburne Rd: Mr. Handy said they want to add 3 stories on top of Bonanza. Then they could reduce the size of the proposed motel by half. They will direct traffic off Shelburne Rd. to Swift St. and that Pizza Hut could also use this pattern. They have also designed the bike path around the property. There would be a flower garden PLANNING COMMISSION 6 August 1991 page 8 between this property and the residential neighborhood. Eventually there would be a regular sit-down restaurant, not a fast food place. Ms. Peacock said she couldn't see a 4-story building on Shelburne Rd. Mr. Weith said there is a question of trucks with refrigeration units using the motel and running the trucks all night. Mr. Handy said they have no intention of renting to truckers. Regarding the height question, members agreed that the limit should be 35 ft. Mrs. Maher was pleased with the access to Swift St. Mr. Craig liked the change from fast foot to sit-down restaurant which he felt would compensate for the motel use. Mr. Burgess noted they would be on the waiting list for sewer. Mr. Handy said they propose 2 fences, one put in by the city for the recreation path. As there was no further business to come before the Commission, the meeting adjourned at 11:30 pm. Clerk l 0 U Q J p I U C, i 4 u Is Q U I. l:'.. T_L.G. 4-T 1 M4 LE_7-. I-AJ. e16MTr ._ sa zlL._._ P10UT.. MAT... 1cvo7. 4PN01TIOAl DIA No. -.114 WHIT L, 41VOK THUJ.A 04410tLITML-1- Z-._ 9i1-40IJ CALLtO f CU4166P: 1'/2 -j Q HOLM,( MAPLL- 4e z Ru D2um, 16, S6 6ALLE9 'f 4uRLAp Va 12 15 i A24tAHj Jumve¢ Jo-etri Cg(Heus10 SARJEHTI J It" 1 24" NI ,UX FJRLAP - 51 C- Due,-ACi &0 S14 CU0.4MvA. ALATUI i4" — IjALLCn A FMVA AP _ 14 D L169TIN4 'SVSTOME, IH4 MODEL N.". MUM-A-460-SMH-R d0.°-W Svpla METAL MALIDR• PLAT LAMS. 24ou (u•Il 'AlobrL I SyUs-A INt Mal El LUA AUS A 115 SAA H-F E.sgI..D ITSW 56PCR METAL. HALIpE AtS ltxt (IAT• FIAT LCH4 IzaV AS 4%: - 4 C4 -4111 ALAUL MAfu PAc l�°Cq Ny Roe! V LIAHUM4 VOPCMSIIN4 'p-mus. 42718 c'IWCIN A IICH10 � �S tTOo Q u FM. AR M T x � eu1�DltlG I N I� L -J L,16VII POLES UAM eu7eALlce 17°+r ly d I� _.L A 14 14 Llb t'-"'lf pLMiTlt �. 11 f r u J W I E j 3 T Ic L-. L- T... ALL DIMGWSIONS TO Bt V@RIF,LD • r aso' Al THI= SITI: 84 TNL CONTRACTOR. AN( LRROR OR POINTS IN QuIaSTIOIN MUST 811- RUrU-126tuO ' TO 1HI3.ARC64tTzcT JrOR A L Si 0 ''CI51ON T315FORC- PROCL'L--DIN4 • ' Htw- o WITH THE worK. �54 i IRECE LU 1 APR 51992 e City of So. Burlington ' • � - 4r Q - D tj NOTES: LIhl FSOSANZA LANI)SCAPIPip IS kid I: XISTINA• MDTEL LANDSCAPIW4 IS New. -1 rr,l %eM_uet.bc [„ Q ,v I AE ' •.LIOw ;.4M4M L/II4 PAHce . PerAcr NNA L L Po ENTS0. H c BT L R1: C.. C c *:ZUT HEw L4T•j 10 c.e. Me W.T o "oT aKTAR /1 C D ' __.a kAST.IMG PAIKIIN4A . II 'V! Mew e.A 1", / ❑ 6 64T. ,_ d' �L C..+ UEW P'?', IT 1(.1 4 SI ci p A ; TNE-1AWDSCAPING ` ALONG TH. 51,V E PATH 1NAt L �r q �� �„ry (y Q �V- ADDE,(IGN p012 Ma:T�L ` _3�:L1ANE.)3Y.THEAIiY_OF, ❑ p c „ a — � - '..SQUTH BU¢LINGTDN,VT., e r L e4DL D c D I —AL'iO.. NEW CHAIN LINK FNCE_ E Y I STI Ivc OU4ANI.4 DES TAJ QEl AN C�T'', ` C••L6t.',-.:PFttcluS..1eT11 Ltt z4'w Is' T "► (+ t •A4T, LAMlAV GFN IIDG•4•�itf New tf1 oTlt; 5444Hf A. ItNASt ARINc I5 Ox11TIM4• g t ^ -M -.— L4T MR -_ Y---�IU LIMLL PEMc�e �N W sums '"i 4-14-,i $AC__: —__ • r... REU15E0 4-ID4 1Lz, T H P T DAKi .....ATH Levi ICD II-IY-qa tf nutilsro 1'II.9, \.J rIRU14 cn 1•II -91 ' PEUISCD 6-I-41 S! T E P' L A N L ANID5CAPING aevlxns.sl-91 SCALE: !'.e Zu'- - r, P41AIT .5-B6-yI O MIAWN J.J cNRCM Ro owT■ 5 4PT. 1940 iCALR 1 INGN 20 Fe-T JO■ NO. 40 Y� •NRRr or •�ur� M fil- �mill111,11 �FEE :k a R T �1 E- L E 11 A T I In N MOTES: N ._.ALL DIMZA'S(ONS To BE 1JE¢IFIE� AT T.HC SITE a`f THE CONTRACTOR. Amy L2?G4 O@ P011i IN QUESTION MUIT SE REM?Vlro To THE ARCMIT"T "OIL A OEC:ISIOW tifii PR�CrECINL WITH THE W6tzv-. RECE VEU APR 15 1992 City of So. Burlington V,,r III. I—T.: N. tnn µ. •Ly. y rlw, eIa•wn,*t. M1I.IIM a*•t�n+c� 6M.Cw�0 YQ INCH ew IPno1' SO 27 O\ NO. —P, PR INT 3-IS 9'1, A5NEW v N 1 1 �nttth Nurlingttin i ire Department 575 +J3urtiet Street Knuth '41-4ttrtittutun, 41ermnttt 05-4[13 - s ! TO: SO. BURLINGTON PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: CHIEF GODDETTE RE: TUESDAY MAY 12,1992 AGENDA ITEMS DATE: TUESDAY APRIL 28,1992 1. DR. SLACK GILBERT STREET 2-LOT SUB -DIVISION PLANS WERE REVIEWED BY THE FIRE DEPT AND AT THIS TIME I DO NOT SEE A PROBLEM WITH THIS PROJECT. 2. BONANZA RESTURANT AND HOTEL PROJECT PLANS HAVE BEEN REVIEWED BY THIS DEPARTMENT AND THE FOLLOWING MUST BE CORRECTED IF WE ARE TO GIVE EMERGENCY FIRE PROTECTION: A. AT LEAST 2700 G.P.M. WATER SUPPLY IS REQUIRED. B. TWO HYDRANTS WILL BE REQUIRED ON THE PROPERTY AT A LOCATION APPROVED BY THIS OFFICE. 3. ANNEX TO HANDY PROPERTY FROM KELLY & JENNINGS SHELBURNE ROAD AT THIS TIME I DO NOT SEE A PROBLEM WITH THIS PROJECT. 4. SO. BURLINGTON CHRYSLER PLYMONTH SHELBURNE ROAD Y L (802) 658-7960 PLANS WERE REVIEWED BY THIS DEPARTMENT AND AT THIS TIME THEIR IS NO WAY THE FIRE DEPARTMENT COULD GIVE EMERGENCY PROTECTION IF NEEDED. THERE IS A WATER PROBLEM AND HYDRANT LOCATION PROBLEM AS WELL AS ACCESS FOR EMERGENCY EQUIPMENT TO BOTH BUILDINGS. Preliminary Memo - Planning May 12, 1992 agenda April 28, 1992 Page 2 --- a detailed landscaping plan will.be required at the time of preliminary plat. review. --- indicate type of surface proposed for parking areas, i.e. gravel, pavement, etc. --- curb cut is proposed to be widened to 45 feet, the maximum width allowed is 36 feet unless approved by the Planning Commission due to special circumstances. --- there is a stream along the south property line, plan must. show CO zone limits, note that paving and parking are not allowed within this zone. HANDY MOTEL ADDITION - 792 SHELBURNE ROAD --- this property is in Traffic Overlay Zone 1 which allows this parcel to generate a maximum of 27 vehicle trip ends (vte's) during the P.M. peak hour.. Applicant's traffic con_•,ultant. estimates that the restaurant and proposed motel will generate 68 vte's. This number is arrived at by using trip characteristic's of a quality restaurant when the applicant has informed staff that the restaurant will be a high turnover restaurant. There therefore appears to be an inconsistency with the report. Staff calculates this project will generate 162.6 vt-e's using the high turnover restaurant category. The applicant will be required to contribute to the Shelburne Road Traffic Impact Fund based on the number of additional trips generated. --- this project requires approximately 150 parking spaces and only 94 spaces are being provided. It is staff's understanding that fewer parking spaces are beini7 provided because of anticipated shared parking between the restaurant and motel. It. is suggested that the applicant submit a shared Larking analysis to su_'_-_tiate the reduction in parking. --- the parking aisles serving the double rows of parking scale to be less than the 24 foot width requirement. --- sewer allocation needed for this project is 6000 g,Pd. This allocation is currently available from the City but may not be available from the State. Applicant should contact "t.ate to determine if sewer allocation is available from them. 2 Preliminary memo - Planning May 12, 1992 agenda April 28, 1992 Page 3 --- landscaping requirement for this project is $20,500 and the applicant is proposing only $3767 in landscaping. Staff suggests that some of this shortfall be used to install plantings along the proposed bikepath between the fence and the access drives and parking areas. --- proposed motel building will exceed height limitation by five (5) feet. According to Section 18.112(c) of the zoning regulati,:,n3 the side yard setback must be increased by 2.5 feet for a total side setback of 67.5 feet from the southerly side and 17.5 feet from the northerly side. In order for the Planning Commission to allow the hei-lit. increase, the three (3) criteria under Section 18.112(b) must be satisfied. --- four (4) handicapped parking spaces required under new ADA Accessibility Guidelines and only three (3) are being provided. --- staff suggests that the one-way access drive along the north side of the motel be narrowed to 15 feet to discourage two- way traffic and to provide additional green space. --- applicant has indicated that the restaurant will have a maximum of 178 seats and the plans indicate 198 seats. --- plan must accurately depict existing landscaping, the plan submitted does not. --- the Planning Commission at their 8/6/91 meeting expressed concern with trucks with refrigeration units using the motel and running the trucks all night. The applicant must be prepared to address this issue. HANDY KELLY & JENNINGS - BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT --- the sheds and concrete pads shown as "to be removed" must be removed prior to recording the final plat. --- the existing paved area which is proposed to be converted to green area in order to comply with coverage requirements must be so converted prior to recording the final plat or within 6 months of recording the final plat. --- appropriate legal documents merging the 0.8 acres with the - existing Handy parcel must be submitted to the City Attorney for approval and must be recorded in the South Burlington land records at the same time the plat is recorded. ��a4�, 9G i 4y 48a 0 rrd Preliminary Memo - City Engineer May 12, 1992 agenda items May 1, 1992 Page 2 BONANZA, SHELBURNE ROAD 1. The drainage plan shall include the underground pipe system including pipe size and invert elevations. 2. Large trucks especially those that have equipment that runs constantly_ should not be allowed because of the close-prcaximi-ty - to the residential area. LAND USE: 8' HIGH TURNOVER (SIT-DOWN) RESTAURANT DESCRIPTION AND TRIP CHARACTERISTICS This category of restaurants comprises sit-down eating places where customers generally stay less than one hour. Restaurants in this group are usually moderately priced and frequently belong to chains. These restaurants serve breakfast, lunch, and din- ner and are sometimes open 24 hours per day. AVERAGE WEEKDAY TRANSIT TRIP ENDS No data available. DATA LIMITATION More data needs to be collected in order to draw valid conclusions. SOURCE NUMBERS 2, 4, 5, 72, 126, 173 Trip Generation, September 1987/Institute of Transportation Engineers 1182 LAND USE: 831 QUALITY RESTAURANT DESCRIPTION AND TRIP CHARACTERISTICS This category of restaurant comprises eating estab- lishments of high quality and with turnover rates generally of at least one hour or longer. Generally, a quality restaurant does not serve breakfast and may or may not serve lunch. Separate categories deal with high -turnover restaurant (Code 832) and fast-food restaurants (Code 833). Data were collected from 12 different studies. The restaurants surveyed ranged in size from 4,500 to 15,000 square feet of gross floor area with eating capacities from 13 to 662. The average seating den- sity was one seat per 32 gross square feet.of building area. AVERAGE WEEKDAY TRANSIT TRIP ENDS No data available. DATA LIMITATIONS Data from a variety of locations should be collected in order to make valid conclusions. SOURCE NUMBERS 13, 73, 88, 90, 98, 100, 126, 172 Trip Generation, September 1987/Institute of Transportation Engineers 1163 PLANNER 658-7955 City of South Burlington - 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 FAX 658-4748 April 30, 199 Craig T. Leiner Transportation Director Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission P.O. Box 108 Essex Junction, Vermont. 05453 Re: Motel Addition t..:, Eo nanz._x Fertaurant Dear Craig: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Enclosed please find a copy of a traffic analysis prepared by Roger Dickinson for a proposed 80 room motel. This motel would be added to an existing 178 seat, 5,650 square foot high turnover sit down restaurant. I would greatly appreciate it if you would review this report and provide me with any comments and reeommendat.i.c--.c traffic impaei_F T wotilci app-2:-eeiaLet tr: the May 26, 1992 Plannin Commission meF t.ing . If you have any quf--, } i cjns , please give me call. Sin rely, c. Weith. t:.ity Planner Encls JW/mcp Mr. Gabe Handy 75 South Winooski Ave Burlington,Vt. 05401 South Burlington Planning Comm. Flay 4, 1992 Dorset Street South Burlington, Vermont 05403 He: Proposed Motel and Addition of the bonanza Restaurant, 792 Shelburne Road, South Burlington, Vt 05403 Dear Members: I would like this letter to serve as a statement that the restaurant for the above project shall be a "High Quality Restaurant" type. Thank You. Very truly yours, Gabe Handy Hs/gh C PLANNER 658-7955 City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 FAX 658-4748 Mav 4, 199Z ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Gordon G. Woods, Architect. 104 Church Street Burlington, Vermont 05401 Re: Bonanza Mote.1 Addit.i.an, '792 Shelburne Road Dear Mr. Woods: Enclosed please find some preliminary comments on the above referenced prof ect from City Engineer Bill Szymanski. If you have any questions, please give me a call. Sinc ely, Raymond J. Belair, Zoning and Planning Assistant, 1 Encl RJB/mcp cc: Gabe Handy PLANNER 658-7955 City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 FAX 658-4748 May 1, 1992 Gordon G. Woods, Architect 104 Church Street Burlington, Vermont. 05/;.01 f=.e: Bonanza Motel Addition, 792 Shelburne Road Dear Mr. Wood -- ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Enclosed please find some preliminary comments on the above referenced application form Fire Chief Jim Goddette and myself. Comments from City Engineer Bill Szymanski will be forwarded to you as soon as they are available. Please submit the additional .information requested and/or rvi_:-ed plans no than Tuesday, May 5, 1992. If you have ;=,n- <.,"e.st.ic,:ls , please give me a cal- . Sinceze.1y, Raymond J. Belai.r, Zoning and Planning Assistant Encls RJB/mcp cc: Gabe Har,9y LAMOUREUX & STONE 14 Morse Drive Consulting Engineers, Inc. Essex Junction, Vermont 05452 (802) 878-4450 April 1, 1992 Mr. Salamin Handy 75 South Winooski Avenue Burlington, Vermont 05401 RE: Proposed Motel and Addition to Bonanza Restaurant 792 Shelburne Road, South Burlington Dear Mr. Handy- 27 High Street St. Albans, Vermont 05478 (802) 524-5245 As requested, we have calculated the revised trip generation of adding an 80-room motel behind and connected to the existing Bonanza restaurant. Our traffic impact evaluation of February 20, 1992, analyzed the impacts of a 60- room motel. The following table presents the original and revised p.m. peak hour vehicular trip generation of this project. Proposed Proposed Existing (60-room motel) (80-room motel) Bonanza 22 22 22 Motel - 35 46 IL TOTAL I 22 I 57 I 68 II The increased trip generation of an 80-room motel at this location, compared to that of a 60-room motel, is not large enough to change any of the conclusions or recommendations of the previous traffic impact evaluation for this project. However, we do wish to reiterate that the proposed one-way traffic circulation pattern is vital to preventing any adverse impacts on existing Shelburne Road traffic conditions. Civil, Environmental & Transportation Engineering - Planning • Land Surveying Mr. Salamin Handy April 1, 1992 Page 2 We thank you for this opportunity to be of service. Should you have any questions or if we may be of additional assistance, please feel free to contact us. Sincerely, Rog r kinson, P.E. cc. Gabe Handy r/9211 han2.rjd PLANNER 658-7955 City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 August 22, 1990 Gordon Woods 104 Church Street Burlington, Vermont 05401 Re: Bonanza Addition, Shelburne Road Dear Mr. Woods: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 I have recently reviewed the Bonanza property for compliance with the approved site plan. Besides minor changes made to the land- scaping plan, I found that four (4) deciduous trees which were supposed to be planted between the sign and the new addition have not been planted. The City requests that these trees be planted as approved before the winter season begins. Please contact me once these trees have been planted. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Since;51-1ly, RAym6nd J. Bel.air, Zoning and Planning Assistant. RJB/mcp I PUBLIC HEARING SOUTH BURLINGTON PLANNING COMMISSION The South Burlington Planning; Commission will hold a public hearing at. the South Burlington City Hall, Conference Room, 575 Dorset Street., South Burlington, Vermont on Tuesday, May 12 at 7:30 P.M. to consider the following: 1? Final Plat application of S. Handy, B. Kelly and C. Jennings for a boundary line adjustment. involving two parcels of 2.4 acres and 0.85 acres, thereby creating two .reconfigured parcels of 1.6 acres and 1.45 acres, 45 Swift Street and 792 Shelburne Road. Copies of the application are available for public inspection at the South Burlington City Hall. William Burgess Chairman, South Burlington Planning Commission April 25, 1992 pwvl4".ww I Er ( 3 W I FT S Tltt LT ., L�cATIoLJ MAC _ ue _car S l T E P L A N I C • L W 1 V � 20' ALL AIntLNSIONS TO 5t5 VLeML=D T TI+L 511L 64 TW11 CONTOACTO¢. -14 01MO6 OC POINTS IN ULSTION MV9T 8L IZLFLQ2L0 3 TFIG AeCWITGCT FOe A :CISION 481~17ORIL P20CULLOIN4 ITN TWI W01U, NOTFS: gE W MO LL- 8o ecoMI NE1U MoTal 1'ArkIN6:-WO C'A(75 3E>S4o bINGLeS+4017vUPLFT 1 1215 691)lrht C 'E12A E. KELL`(O. EeWNINCIS LOT, LOT SITE; L8,250 5.F .. 62EEN AREA; 20, 540 5,F PX1L01N4, VAV)NG,eTt.', 47.75O S,F 'PtUCAT 40CLU, sci% Cc,Vr-CtAGC; M0TEL46dKANZA Uld LOT SIZE; 11,814 cneEN AREA: 22, 111 %.f. 5UfLW"4, PAVINlETC.: 49,1015.E PEQCCWT (4trEC-W 52% L'ESrAURAAIT 126 SEATS LOUN4E 75Stn(S QZ 5T PATRON A¢EA 249E IX t I,APLoy L' S; MT4v1?AA T IS _ wre.L S RECEIVE APR 15 1992 City of So. Burlington 2wISe1D A- to-q- &CVISFp D- IS-92 qu,Sc. 12-21-11 -aWlsPo T-21-11 "QEU15e" T- z> fr ¢6Y15Fb T- 11-91 REVI SEn b-1-91 pe Ult, 5-81-v R P¢IKT 5-no-9i OI�YWN Jw CN■CN■O OAT■ sePT- Ig4o ■e ■ I INC1� • 4.o PU■T go21 JG■ NO. •NnI■■T S1 DR O• ■N■■T■ f��,D�/ r�,r�� � y �y-5a dM .o� 96 CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON SITE PLAN APPLICATION 1) OWNER OF RECORD (name, address, phone #) �S �" �-j Al lye; 2) APPLICANT (name, address, phone #) 3) CONTACT PERSON (name, address, phone #) a ` GTE'— 7�6a 4) PROJECT STREET ADDRESS: 5) LOT NUMBER (if applicable) 6) PROPOSED USE (S ) 611g1/� Sir �� ,L % v -%/ro ,` e-7' _/J"/- ) 14d ---- 7) SIZE OF PROJECT (i.e. total building square footage, ## units, maximum height and It floors,. square feet per floor) 8) NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES 9) LOT COVERAGE: building %; landscaped areas building, parking, outside storage % 10) COST ESTIMATES: Buildings Landscaping $ Other Site Improvements (please list with cost) $ 11) ESTIMATED PROJECT COMPLETION DATE: 12) ESTIMATED AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC (in and out)' Estimated trip ends (in and out) during the following hours: Monday through Friday 11-12 noon 12-1p.m. 1-2 p.m. 2-3 p.m. 3-4 p.m. 4-5 p.m. 5-6 p.m. 6-7 p.m. 13) PEAK HOURS OF OPERATION: 14)/PEAK DAYS /OF OPERATION: DATE OF SUB' ISSION S GNATUR F APPLICANT DATE OF HEARING PLEASE SUBMIT FIVE COPIES AND ONE REDUCED COPY (11 X 17) OF THE SITE PLAN WITH THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION: Lot drawn to scale (20 foot scale if possible.) Location of streets, abutting properties, fire hydrants, existing buildings, existing landscaping. Existing and proposed curb cuts, pavement, walkways. Proposed landscaping plan (number, variety and size) equal to of greater than the required amount in the Zoning Regulations. Number and location of Parking Spaces: (9' x 18') with 22 or 24 foot aisles as required. Number and location of compact car spaces. (This requires sepa- rate Planning Commission approval). Number and location of handicapped spaces as required. (13 feet by 20 feet in size, one per every fifty spaces). Location of septic tanks (if applicable). Location of any easements. Lot coverage information: Building footprint, building, parking and outside storage, and landscaped areas. Location of site (Street # and lot U . North arrow Name of person or firm preparing site plan and date. E City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 FAX 658-4748 PLANNER 658-7955 October 9, 1991 Mr. Gordon Woods 104 Church Street Burlington, Vermont 05401 Re: Bonanza Restaurant, Motel Addition Dear Mr. Woods: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Enclosed is a copy of the August 6, 1991 Planning Commission minutes. If you have any questions, please give me a call. Sincerely, Joe Weith, City Planner 1 Encl JW/mcp cc: Gabriel Handy M-Mr IVO I %o G- 1?-t�CQ v t f ly-+ ta h1Tr w t Pr &- -. ?j Lc�- /0 3 2 o s 1,Ac.es 16 C7' C DTF -�O/F7 JT 1,oT /�v I Memorandum - Planning August 6, 1991 agenda items August 2,1991 Page 6 The new banquet facility will require additional parking by standard. Information regarding number of seats must be submit- ted. As part of the last approval (5/23/89), a parking demand study was to be conducted in order to determine if the future 32 spaces were necessary. This study is currently being conducted and should be submitted prior to final plat. The plan should show all parking spaces. Also, the correct footprint of the restaurant building must be shown. Traffic: The I.T.E. category for "Hotel" includes hotels with restaurants, lounges, and meeting and banquet rooms. Therefore, the trip ends generated by the addition would not change from those originally calculated. Other: --- construction costs for both projects should be submitted to determine required landscaping. --- details of exterior lighting should be submitted. --- revised final plat should include full set of plans, including landscaping. --- elevations for the ballroom building must be submitted prior to final plat. --- plan should show existing site conditions, plan submitted shows existing tree line extending into existing building. --- a planting plan and schedule must be submitted with the revised final plat.. 7) BONANZA MOTEL ADDITION - SHELBURNE ROAD This project involves the construction of an addition to the existing Bonanza Restaurant building for use as a 60 unit. motel. The Bonanza restaurant will be converted to a motel restaurant, it will no l.or:ger be a "f=._-;t--food" restaurant— To i,,.c., the 6 Memorandum - Planning August 6, 1991 agenda item August 2, 1991 Page 7 additional amount of land needed, the developer proposes to acquire a 140' x 250' parcel adjacent to his property. The Bonanza building will become 3 stories and the new addition will be 3 stories. The owners of the adjacent property, Robert Kelly and Charles Jennings, will first have to obtain subdivision approval from the Planning Commission for a property line adjustment. The reason this approval is needed is that the lot resulting from the annex- ation will be large enough to be subdivided into two (2) lots. The remaining lot, which fronts on Swift Street, will provide a r.o.w. and egress from the site to Swift Street. As part of the subdivision review process, the Planing Commission will have to examine this remaining lot for compliance with the coverage and other requirements. Site plan review would then be needed to evaluate the new devel- opment. The subdivision review and the site plan review could be handled as separate agenda items with the site plan review being after the subdivision review. A conditional use permit would be needed because of the multiple use of the property. Parking: The plan shows 94 parking spaces for the development. The applicant will need to submit seating information for the restaurant and number of hotel employees. The applicant must also submit information to determine that there will be enough parking for the smaller Swift. Street parcel. Required information includes type of use, square footage per use, square footage of office space, and number of non -office employees and company vehicles. Sewer: The Bartlett Bay sewer plant is at. capacity. Therefore, a building permit cannot be issued until there is sufficient capacity. Traffic: A trip generation assessment should be conducted and submitted to the City. 7 City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 PLANNER 658-7955 August 2, 1991 Mr. Gordon Woods 104 Church Street Burlington, Vermont 05401 Re: Bonanza Motel, 792 Shelburne Road Dear Mr. Woods: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Enclosed is the agenda for next Tuesday's Planning Commission meeting and my comments to the Planning Commission. Also en- closed are Bill S-ymanski's and Chief Goddette's commcf1ts. Please be sure someone is present on Tuesday, August_ e, 19'>1 at 7:30 P.M. to represent your request. S ere y, oe Weith, City Planner Encls JW/mcp cc: Gabriel Handy 7'7'3 71r?rrrt .` troot II r, ._v "17J tr11 �-41 f!t, ilG ti, 4�1i 111 ��x11 i�`bl�_� TO: SO. BURLINGTON PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: CHIEF GODDETTEI RE: TUESDAY OCTOBER 16,1990 AGENDA ITEMS DATE: THURSDAY OCTOBER 11,1990 1 ETHAN ALLEN FARM LOT #42 P&o1ect # 90064 Ptanz have been &eviewed by thin department and at thiA time I do not zee a probt em in given ptcopetc emergency protection i4 needed. 2. WOODLAND COMMON UNIT #14 INDOOR MINI GOLF At thi4 time I do not bee a probtem with .the change o6 u,5e on thin pkoject which would e66ect emergency protection. 3. BONANZA RESTAURANT MOTEL ADDITION SHELBURNE ROAD Ptanz have been tceviewed by thin department and ,the 'ot.towing mu,5t be done ij we are to beabEe to gkve emergency ptcotection i6 needed; A. Two (2) hydrants are needed in a toeation approved by thin o66ice. B. The exit to Swi6t Street mutt be at tea6t 18' wide. To: Joe Weith, City Planner From: William J. Szymanski, City Engineer Re: October 16, 1990 agenda items - Preliminary Comments Date: September 19, 1990 t` �t ETHAN ALLEN FARMS(LOT 42 AIRPORT PARKWAY 1. An easement for sewer construction was given to Colchester in the vicinity of this lot. If it effects this lot, it should be shown on the plan. 2. At the intersection of the access Road with Airport Parkway, the drainage of that side of Airport Parkway is toward the access drive. An inlet should be placed in this area to intercept the drainage and piped to the east. BONANZA RESTAURANT, SHELBURNE ROAD 1. This project will be served by the Bartlett's Bay sewerage treatment. plarit. The reserve capacity of this plant. is all committed. 2. A site drainage plan shall be su mitted. 6G�s 3. The motel and parking area h up to the Lindenwood Drive residential neighborhood. If trucks are allowed to use this motel, especially trucks with refrigeration unit._; that run all night, will create a noise problem, for this neighborhood. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON SITE PLAN APPLICATION 1) OWNER OF RECORD (name, address, phone %�!2 S1�12 2A1C= /?��{p, SOIJt'N QGlNcS7�%/�, Ur DS11 863- z��� 2) APPLICANT (name, address, phone &Ag1Q-11 7 l2 SKfrx RA112xic 2aM){ � vrff dAel-1,047elct',y� o S"Yo.� � - 29 3) CONTACT PERSON (name, address, phone # ) C;if%�OG/�/ �7• GGdS 4 ) PROJECT STREET ADDRESS : / �2 HLZ%QNf �Dr4rJ. JGUt/ f2llN.Gi/J 6�'�3 150141i�l ZA 1,?sTVfWAj'r 5) LOT NUMBER (if applicable) 6 ) PROPOSED USE (S ) NW At KZ-4 77_ &/�-j d&1ra 8e7l./apzA ANa Ark rFiy 09 n A 7`N� lZi=. P �z�/� J �OD2 s lJ�i�z txrsj� &ffiqN 71i) 7) SIZE OF PROJECT (i.e. total building square footage, # units, maximum height and # floors, square feet per floor) ew koem /i%4YFL- 3 `Nr 2 roarzs �/ �3������Z!-� ��o� 147,�v�/swr�r-�s�Rz� = 7©pro sr �D(%C 2�tr) ti9�, /3 �lYU-Zn►/3, yrk,f� 8) NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES TOTR4 ���lt�G `f�i 3wS�F 9) LOT COVERAGE: building _ 6 %; landscaped areas building, parking, outside storage_% 10 ) COST ESTIMATES: Buildings $ / SOU dGp�� Landscaping $ S, pad Other Site Improvements (please list with cost) $ 11 ) ESTIMATED PROJECT COMPLETION DATE: 45 z%Q�c/'4/ 12) ESTIMATED AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC (in and out) Estimated trip ends (in and out) Monday through Friday 11-12 noon ; 12-1p.m._ 3-4 p.m. 4-5 p.m. _ 13) PEAK HOURS OF OPERATION: 14) PEAK DAYS OF OPERATION: DATE OF SUBMISSION DATE OF HEARING during the following hours: ; 1-2 p.m. ; 2-3 p.m. ; 5-6 p.m. 6-7 p.m. ��2�Efj7ll� SIGNTURE OF APPLICANT 7 City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT05403 FAX 658-4748 PLANNER 658-7955 October 12, 1990 Mr.. Gordon Woods 104 Church Street Burlington, Vermont 05401 Re: Motel, 792 Shelburne Road Dear Mr. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Enclosod i tt:c agenda for ne:�a. Tuesday's Planning. Commission meeting and my comments to the Planning Commission. Also en- closed are Bill Szymanski's and Chief Goddette's comments. Please be sure someone is present on Tuesday, October 16, 1990 at 7:30 P.M. to represent your request. i cerel , Joe Weith, City Planner Encls cc: Gabriel Handy JW/mcp q 9gr -= LIB %� .��/ Xh SY . . ................. 1,91��100 7A Z-6-1-' Z-61— xo`y� 7 2�cj Memorandum - Planning October 16, 1990 agenda items October 12, 1990 Page 6 Traffic: This project is not within any Traffic Overlay zone. The applicant estimates the average daily traffic to be 50 - 60 vehicles. The peak days of operation will be Saturday and Sun- day. Other: The Lootprint of the northerly building is different and larger on the plan submitted than on the 1986 plan. The 1986 plan indicates that this building is 47,100 square feet and the new plan indicates that it is 51,200 square feet (it scale off to be 55,860 square feet). There is presently some outside storage on the property. Some of this storage is in the green area behind unit #20 plus some of it is in the paved area to the west of units #6, 8 and 10. Bill Szymanski has reviewed these plans and has no comments. 8) BONANZA MOTEL ADDITION - SHELBURNE ROAD This project involves the continuation of an addition to the existing Bonanza Restaurant building for use as a 60 unit motel, lounge and indoor pool. The Bonanza restaurant will be converted to a motel restaurant, it will no longer be a "fast-food" restau- rant. To provide the additional amount of land needed, the developer proposes to acquire a 140' x 250' parcel adjacent to his property. The owners of the adjacent. property, Robert Kelly and Charles Jennings, will first have to obtain subdivision approval from the Planing Commission for a property line adjustment. The reason this approval is needed is that the lot resulting from the annex- ation will be large enough to be subdivided into two (2) lots. The remaining lot, which fronts on Swift Street, will provide a r.o.w. and egress from the site to Swift Street. As part of the subdivision review process, the Planning Commission will have to examine this remaining lot for compliance with the coverage and other requirements. The owner of this lot will have to submit a detailed site plan in order for the staff to review for compli- ance. Site plan review would then be needed to evaluate the new development.. The subdivision review and the site plan review could be handled as separate agenda items with the site plan review being after the subdivision review. 6 r Memorandum October 16, October 12, Page 7 - Planning 1990 agenda items 1990 In addition to the reviews by the Planning Commission, the Zoning Board will have to grant two (2) variances and a conditional use permit. One variance would be to allow the addition to project 45 feet into the required 65 foot side yard setback. This property abuts the R4 zoneiand a 65 foot side yard setback is required. The addition is proposed to be 20 feet from the side boundary. The other variance needed is to exceed the coverage maximum by 11%. They are proposing an 81% total coverage and 70% is the maximum allowed. A conditional use permit would be needed because of the multiple use of the property. 7 ti O -�I- 0 L 0 c A I 1 0 w m A f, RECEIVED ULO City, of So, Burlington PIZZA Hur m i s T- P S L! 'T Ne[U POCPC&r,( L,flr -Z N 0 T e 5 '. ALL DIMFINS104S TO %L V2.RMLO AT TOG NTL 51 JWG COwTQAC7O%Z AN-j aRROR OR 901WTS IN OULSTkON MUST SU- RL-FERRC-0 10 TjC-. AQC641TL-r-1` FOR A DV--C1510N BUFORV. PQOCILIL01NG VJIT14 Tw;a VJOQr. c� 1-01T NOTES: N r Yv Q v I N r� P.6NAH XN Tj 14EW oc� IN c 14 4, P4,z A q7asrA,;q4-T Tit SqGLAIPVH* lto-- X'. b c. K sc ALIFS t 20, NEW MOTEL -PAP IZIM6 (A CADS y NICW MC-,CL- 0 26CW5 mriv NCtEL- 2 r-L0,02S kt-W MdTIEL-PDX6d 7,040S.F./iST. Ft. L Aim5eAi>iF4r,: flcf-i^mr A - EY1ST1 Ne ....... WE" LOT 't (bOl L -w LOT �SUCc Ss oAT■ IS LAN65CAPIP46- I q P 6 T 4 0 a 7, - z 9-1` 1 (UhLIM4 Zr7(VU'S •—rV15j1r4C TIMCS P.Ow—z I-i4-44fe op •...r. PLANNER 658-7955 City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 September 20, 1990 ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Mr. Gordon Woods 104 Church Street Burlington, Vermont 05401 Re: Motel Addition to Bonanza Restaurant., Shelburne Road Dear Mr. Woods: Enclosed for your review, please find preliminary comments on the above referenced project from myself and Bill `:�ymanski. Should you hive any questions, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, oe Weith, City Planner Encls JW/mcp Memorandum - Project Files October 16, 1990 agenda items September 19, 1990 Page 2 4) BONANZA MOTEL ADDITION - SHELBURNE ROAD This project involves the dontinuation of an addition to the existing Bonanza Restaurant building for use as a 60 unit Motel, Lounge and indoor pool. The Bonanza restaurant will be converted to a motel restaurant, it will no longer be a "fast-food" restau- rant., To provide the additional amount of land needed, the deveoper proposes to acquire a 140' x 250' parcel adjacent to his property. The owners of the adjacent property, Robert Kelly and Charles Jennings, will first have to obtain subdivision approval from the Planning Commission for a property line adjustment. The reason this approval is needed is that the lot resulting from the annex- ation will be large enough to be subdivided into two (2) lots. The remaining Lot., which fronts on Swift. Street, will provide a .o. •�. ar:ci :Jr ss L1_oin .he site to Swift. Street. As part of the subdivision review process, the Planning Commission will have to examine this remaining lot for compliance with the coverage and other requirements. The owner of this lot will have to submit a detailed site plan in order for the staff to review for compli- ance. Site plan review would then be needed to evaluate the new devel- opment. The subdivision review and the site plan review could be h-� filed as separate agenda items with the site plan review being after the subdivision review. In addition to the reviews by the Planning Commission, the Zoning Board will have to grant two (2) variances and a conditional use permit. One variance would be to allow the addition to project 45 feet into the required 65 feet side yard. This property abuts the R-4 zone and a 65 foot side yard setback is required. The addition is proposed to be 20 feet from the side boundary. The other variance needed is to exceed the coverage maximum by 11%. They are proposing an 81`/o total coverage and 70% is the maximum allowed. A conditional use permit would be needed because of the multiple use of the property. To: Joe Weith, City Planner From: William J. Szymanski, City Engineer Re: October 16, 1990 agenda items - Preliminary Comments Date: September 19, 1990 IL ETHAN ALLEN FARMS LOT 42 AIRPORT PARKWAY 1. An easement for sewer construction was given to Colchester in the vicinity of this lot. If it effects this lot, it should be shown on the plan. 2 At the intersection of the access Road with Airport Parkway, the drainage of that side of Airport Parkway is toward the access drive. An inlet should be placed in this area to intercept the drainage and piped to the east. BONANZA RESTAURANT, SHELBURNE ROAD 1. This proiect will be served by the Bartlett's Bay sewerage treatment. plarit. The reserve capacity of this plant is all committed. 2. A site drainage plan shall be submitted. 3. The motel and parking area hooks up to the Lindenwood Drive residential neighborhood. If trucks are allowed to use this motel, especially trucks with refrigeration units that run all night, will create a noise problem, for this neighborhood.