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