Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSP-87-0000 - Decision - 1340 1342 Shelburne Road (3)PLANNING COMMISSION 21 JULY 1987 The South Burlington Planning Commission held a meeting on Tuesday, 21 July 1987, at 7:30 pm, in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset St. Members Present William Burgess, Acting Chairman; Mary -Barbara Maher, Judith Hurd, Catherine Peacock, John Belter Also Present Kathryn Perkins, Acting Planner; Dennis Blodgett, Gary Lavigne, James Lamphete, Frank Murray, Peter Owens, Chip Ward 1. Continue review of site plan application of Dennis Blodgett to construct a 30,000 sq. ft. building for office and retail use as depicted on a plan entitled "Blodgett Development, Shelburne Rd., South Burlington, Vermont," dated June 30 1987 Mr. Ward, attorney for the applicant, explained that by deed dated 12/10/86, the property in question is one lot of 7.3 acres. The applicant has agreed to an offer of dedication of the Holmes Rd. Extension from Shelburne Rd. to Green Mountain Drive. Rich Tarrant will give a right-of-way to Mr. Blodgett for the part of the road needed for access to the development. Mrs. Hurd moved that the Planning Commission approve the site plan application of Dennis Blodgett to construct a 30,000 sq. ft. building for office and retail use as depicted on a plan entitled, "Blodgett Development, Shelburne Road, South Bur- lington, Vermont, dated June 30, 1987, with the following stipulations: 1. The two existing curb cuts on Shelburne Rd. shall be closed. 2. The 4-phase traffic signal shall be in operation at the Holmes Rd./Shelburne Rd. intersection prior to issuance of permit. 3. A revised landscaping plan showing additional landscaping recommended by the Planning Commission shall be submitted to and approved �2y the City Planner, and a landscaping bond of $10,000 shall be posted prior to permit. 4. A sewer allocation of 1650 gpd shall be made and the $2.50 Per_ gallon fee shall be paid prior to permit. 5. The sidewalk along Holmes Road extension shall be con- PLANNING COMMISSION 21 JUNE 1987 PAGE 2 structed one foot off the street right-of-way line. Water main shall be within the grass strip between the curb and sidewalk. Sidewalk shall continue across the entrance drive and terminate where street terminates. 6. Water, Sewer, and drainage lines shall extend beyond the paved road surface and shall be capped. They shall be de- signed so that they can be extended easterly. 7. A gravel surface turnaround shall be constructed at the end of the street.' 8. The new road shall be constructed to City standards to at least the dead end. Road plans and profiles shall be submitted for review. 9. Two hydrants shall be provided by the applicant in a location approved by the Fire Department. 10. A right-of-way shall be dedicated to the City for Holmes Road Extension and shall be shown on the revised plan which shall be submitted to the City Planner prior to permit. The exact location of this right-of-way shall be determined the City Engineer. 11. The building permit shall be obtained within 6 months or this approval is null and void Mrs. Maher seconded, and the motion passed unanimously. 2. Other Business Ms. Perkins advised that the City Manager had asked Peter Owens to look at the Swift St. alignment in connection with the Southsettdevelopment. Mr. Owens said there are several problems with the plans from his point of view. He feels that the park boundary, especially the southern boundary, that appears on the preliminary plat differs significantly from what was recommended in the concept plan. This is a difference of about 6 acres. In addition, the Swift St. ex- tension, which is an important part of the park, should be designed to create a good visual experience. He did not feel the straight road in the plan achieves this. Mr. Murray said he had not reviewed a copy of the contract so he could not comment as to whether there was any deviance from the agreement. Mr. Owens showed 3 possible alternatives with respect to the southern boundary line. #1 assumes the original boundary PLANNING COMMISSION 21 JULY 1987 PAGE 3 and original configuration of the road. This would probably cost the developer 30 units and would mean relocating the road. #2 would be a compromise, assuming a more southerly alignment and would cost about 10 lots. The third alterna- tive would allow for all but 2 of the lots but would mean the road would have to go on the Calkins property which the City does not own. Members felt this third alternative is not workable. Another problem which Mr. Owens felt was important is that the grading plan calls for removal of a whole stand of white pine trees. He felt it should be possible"to leave more of the backyard wilder and thus save most of the trees. Another option would be to move the lots over 35 feet and take out something in the middle of the development. Mr. Owens felt that a park master plan would have precluded these problems. Mr. Murray said that Mr. Milot should be notified as soon as possible that there is a concern about the plan. Mr. Burgess also suggested having the City Attorney review the agreement as soon as possible. Members felt they would like to know what the Commission has obligated itself to do by granting preliminary approval. The City Council will also be notified of the Commission's concerns. Discussion of this item will be on the next agenda. As there was no further business to come before the Com- mission, the meeting adjourned at 8:35 pm. Clerk