Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
BATCH - Supplemental - 0040 IDX Drive (3)
. � TM AIV HEALTHCARE INFORMATION SOLUTIONS April 10, 2001 Ray Belair Planning & Zoning City of South Burlington 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 Re: IDX Systems Corporation Transportation Demand Management Plan Update Dear Ray: Enclosed is our April update to the Transportation Demand Management Plan. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me -- 864-1758 x 4018. Sincerely, ��- l� f Lynne A. Berry Facilities & Administration Enclosure Brad Carter, Kessel/Duff Corporation Peter Plumeau, Chittenden Metropolitan Planning Organization CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS 1400 Shelburne Road I P.O. Box 1070 1 Burlington, VT 05402-1070 1 [8021 862-1022 1 www.idx.com IDX SYSTEMS CORPORATION TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT PLAN APRIL 2001 UPDATE • Facilities Database Our database holds information regarding the local CCTA information on the Ride Share program, as well as a direct link to the CCTA website. Communication about the CCTA website and link to the website was sent to all Burlington employees. • New Hire Orientation Package Information regarding the CCTA programs is provided to new hires to IDX. • Flexible Hours Policy Our flexible hours policy is standard. We previously presented you with a copy of this policy. • Completed Construction of IDX Drive The road connecting to Green Mountain Drive was completed and IDX employees are currently utilizing this road to travel between IDX buildings on IDX Drive and Green Mountain Drive. • IDX Participation in CCMPO Survey IDX responded to Resource Systems Group's request to administer access to Chittenden County Metropolitan Planning Organization's "Help Shape Chittenden County's Transportation" survey in November -December 2000. IDX employees were able to access the online survey and provide input on improvements to the transportation systems in Chittenden County. • Champlain Flyer With the train service from Charlotte/Shelburne during weekdays, the Champlain Flyer is another alternative commuting plan available to many IDX employees. • On -Site Meetings Informative lunchtime presentations on -site have been delayed until the lunchroom construction is completed. When available, this room will easily accommodate Burlington employees and representatives from the CCTA and the Vermont Public Transportation Association (VPTA). The goal of these meetings is to present transportation alternatives to employees, answer questions, and match possible carpool/vanpool groups together. At the present time we are anticipating these meetings to take place during 2Q2001. MEMORANDUM To: South Burlington Planning Commission From: William J. Szymanski, South Burlington City Engineer Re: May 27, 1997 Agenda Items Date: May 22, 1997 J.W.J. REALTY INC. & MCLEAN HOLDING CORPORATION - SHELBURNE ROAD 1. Site plans including boundary adjustment dated April 1997 prepared by Wiemann- Lamphere and Civil Engineering Associates are acceptable. 2. Sidewalk should be continous across the driveway. HOLIDAY INN PAVILION - SHELBURNE ROAD The site plan showing the proposed pavilion prepared by Gregory Rabideau Architect dated 4 / 23 / 97 is acceptable. GOLF COURSE (THE HIGHLANDS 17TH HOLE CONDOS) - HOMESTEAD DESIGN GOLF COURSE ROAD 1. Lot 110 the single driveway serving this lot may be to close to the intersection and be subject to additional snow being pushed into it. Snow plows push snow to the right. As they make a right turn at an intersection the extra intersection snow will be pushed into the driveway if it is to close to the intersection. 2. The condo site plan prepared by Homestead Design dated April 29, 1997. AQUATEC, INC. - 75 GREEN MOUNTAIN DRIVE Plan prepared by Wiemann-Lamphere Architects last revised 5/16/97 is acceptable. IDX - PHASE II - SHELBURNE ROAD Building elevation plans prepared by Kessell-Duff dated 3/24/97 are acceptable. MOTION5/27/97 OF • • • • KESSEUDUFF CORPORATION I move the South Burlington Planning Commission approve the site plan application of Kessel/Duff Corporation to amend a previously approved plan for a 120,000 square foot general office building. The amendment is to raise a portion of the roof to a height of 43 feet, 1400 Shelburne Road, as depicted on a two ( 2 ) page set of plans, page two (2) entitled, "Elevations IDX - Phase II So. Burlington Vermont," prepared by Kessel/Duff Corporation, dated 3/24/97, with the following stipulations: 1. All previous approvals and stipulations which are not superseded by this approval shall remain in effect. 2. Pursuant to Section 26.105(a) of the zoning regulations, the Planning Commission grants a $1500 credit for existing trees on the property. 3. Pursuant to Section 25.113(c) of the zoning regulations, the Planning Commission approves an eight (8) foot height waiver for the proposed roof modification. 4. For the purpose of calculating road impact fees under the South Burlington Impact Fee Ordinance, the Planning Commission estimates that the proposed roof modification will generate zero (0) additional vehicle trip ends during the P.M. peak hour. 5. The applicant shall obtain a zoning permit within six (6) months pursuant to Section 27.302 of the zoning regulations or this approval is null and void. 6. The applicant shall obtain a Certificate of Occupancy/Compliance from the Administrative Officer prior to occupancy of the modified roof area. 7. Any change to the site plan shall require approval by the South Burlington Planning Commission. M E M O R A N D U M To: Joe Weith, South Burlington City Planner From: South Burlington Fire Department Re: Plans Reviewed for May 27, 1997 agenda Date: May 19, 1997 1. J.W.J. Realty 1095 Shelburne Road Acceptable 2. John Larkin 1720 Shelburne Road There should be a minimum 12 foot clearance under the pavilion 3. EZP GOLFCO, INC. Dorset Street Duplex project is acceptable 4. Aquatec, Inc. 75 Green Mountain Drive Acceptable 5. IDX 1400 Shelburne Road Acceptable Dated 4/22/97 Dated 4/24/97 Dated 5/12/97 Dated 5/16/97 Dated 5/16/97 Memorandum - Planning May 27, 1997 agenda items May 23, 1997 Page 6 5) KESSEL/DUFF CORPC RATION - ROOF MODIFICATION - SITE PLAN This project consists of amending a site plan previously approved on December 15, 1987 (minutes enclosed) for a 120,000 square foot general office building. The amendment is to raise a portion of the roof to a height of 43 feet. This property located at 1400 Shelburne Road lies within the C2 District and the Bartlett Brook Watershed Protection Overlay District. It is bounded on the south by an office building, on the north by a shopping center and undeveloped property, on the east by Green Mountain Drive, and on the west by Shelburne Road. Setbacks: The additional setbacks required under Section 25.113 (d) of the zoning regulations for a taller structure are being met. Landscaping: The minimum landscaping requirement based on building costs, is $1500 which is not being met. The applicant is requesting a $1500 credit for existing landscaping. Staff supports granting the credit. Building height: The 12/15/87 approval granted a 45 foot height limit for the atrium. The portion of the roof proposed to be raised to 43 feet was not covered under the previous approval. Pursuant to Section 25.113(c) of the zoning regulations, the Planning Commission may approve a non-residential structure with a height in excess of the 35 foot limitation provided the Commission determines that a taller structure: (i) will not affect adversely the essential character of the neighborhood or district in which the property is located; (ii) will not detract from important scenic views from adjacent public roadways and other public rights -of -way. Staff recommends approval of this project. 6) WIEMANN-LAMPHERE ARCHITECTS - LANDSCAPING CREDIT - SITE PLAN This project consists of amending a site plan just recently approved on May 13, 1997 (minutes enclosed) to convert 12,000 square feet of a 20,000 square foot research and testing laboratory to an educational facility and construct a 36 square foot addition for the educational facility. The amendment consists of eliminating the $750 worth of landscaping required under the May 13, 1997 approval. City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 FAX 658-4748 PLANNER 658-7955 May 23, 1997 John Caulo Kessel/Duff Corporation P.O. Box 788 Williston, Vermont 05495 Re: Roof Modification, 1400 Shelburne Road Dear Mr. Caulo: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Enclosed is the agenda for next Tuesday's Planning Commission meeting and comments from City Engineer Bill Szymanski, the Fire Department and myself. Please be sure someone is present on Tuesday, May 27, 1997 at 7:30 P.M. to represent your request. If you have any questions, please give me a call. cerel , .,,, (1517 l`� V eiWeith, y Planner JW/mcp Encls PLANNING COMMISSION 27 May 1997 page 2 Mr. Duff said they need the additional space for a meeting room. He gave members photos supporting their belief that the additional height will have virtually no impact. No issues were raised. Mr. Crow_ moved _the Planning Commission _approve _the �site_plan aoolicatiion �of�Kessel/Duff__Corpooration�to amend a previously approved planfora�12_0,000_sgv ft. general_ office_ building. The amendment_ is to raise a portion of_the _roof _to_a_height of 43�� feet, 1400�Shelburne Road, as depicted �on�a two _page _set of plans, age_two _entitled �"Elevations IDX - Phase II So. Bur- lington, Vermont," repaared�by KesselKDufff Corporation, dated 3� 24/97. with the following stipulations: 1. All previous approvals and stipulations which are not super- seded_by_this approval �shall _remain in effect_ _ �- 2. Pursuant to Section 26.105(a)-of the Zoning Regulations, the Planning Commission a $1500�credit7for_exi._,_�ostinttrees on t h e _Pr ° ee r t y-� .�.__ 3. Pursuant to- Section -25.113(c) of the zoninsrequlations,-the_ Planning Commissionapproves_an eight7foot �height_waiver for the proposedroof modification. 4. For theourpose of calcul_ating�road_imoact fees _under _the South Burlington Impact Fee Ordinance, the PlannineCommission estimates that theproeosed roof modification_ will generate�ze_r_o_ additional vehicle _trip -ends _ during_the _P.MM �peak hour.� 5. The applicant -shall obtain pursuant to Section�27.302 of approval-is_null and void 6. The applicant shall obtain pliance from the_Administrati modified roof area. a_zonin ermit within six months theZoning Regulations-or_this rtificate_of Occupancy Co_m- ficer�Drior to�occupancv of th 7. Any change _to�the site plan _-shall _re. uire�aproval_bv the South Burlington_Planning Commission. Mr. O'Rourke_ seconded.Motion_ ap ssed_unanimouslY,_ 5. Site plan application of Wiemann-Lamphere Architects to amend a recently approved plan to convert 12,000 sq. ft. of a 20,000 sq. ft. research and testing laboratory to an educational facility and construct a 36 sq. ft. addition for the educational facility. The amendment consists of eliminating the $750 worth of landscaping required under the previous approval, 75 Green PLANNING COMMISSION 27 MAY 1997 The South Burlington Planning Commission a held a meeting on Tuesday, 27 May 1997, at 7:30 pm, in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset St. Members Present: William Burgess, Chair; Marcel Beaudin, Dan O'Rourke, Mark Crow, Mac Teeson, Gayle Barone Also Present: Joe Weith, City Planner; Roger Farley, The Other Paper; George Starbuck, Dean Economou, Dean Zoecklein, Bob Marcelino, John Larkin, Dennis Webster, Bob Walback, Tim Duff 1. Other Business: Mr. Teeson noted the clear cutting right to the road in the Pines project and the Farrell St. project and said the Com- mission will have to be more careful in reviewing plans so this doesn't happen elsewhere. 2. Review Minutes of 13 May 1997: Mr. Teeson moved the Minutes of 13 May be approved as written. Ms. Barone seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 3. Consent Agenda: a) Site plan application of Shelburne Plastics to reapprove the construction of an 18,000 sq. ft. addition to an existing 15,840 sq. ft. light manufacturing facility, 8 Harbor View Road. b) Site plan application of Brad Rabinowitz to amend a previously approved plan for an 11,250 sq. ft. warehouse. The amendment consists of adding 1,,000 sq. ft. of mezzanine space for storage, 45 Commerce Avenue. Mr. Burgess asked if any member of the Commission or of the audience wanted a full hearing on either of the consent agenda items. No such requests were made. Mr. Teeson_ moved__ to approve the two items_ on the Consent_A2enda subject_ to the _stipulations �in the staff memorandum of May 23., 1997. Ms. Baroneseon �cde_dMotion passed unanimously. 4. Site plan application of Kessel/Duff Corporation to amend a previously approved plan for a 120,000 sq. ft. general office building. The amendment is to raise a portion of the roof to a height of 43 feet, 1400 Shelburne Road: Q Q Q y T 4 4 Q 4 II 7 113 c� 11 ,o :U : U I I I I I I I EAST ELEVATION SCALt, NORTH ELEVATION {CALK,-I/4'-1'-0' KNVED MAY 1 6 1997 City of So. Burlington NO. I DATE REVISION ELEVATIONS DRMN: AN,BO CNND: IDX - PHASE II DATE: 3/44/97 SO. BURLINGTON VERNONT JOB NO. KL6ffiiOtl' C,ORIaORATK^ ---I POSr Ln 8'w 8" WATER Posr `� Posr cb ` 17 ' _�_ Pos t HOLM � ,�,._____ _ 8 GREEN ASH S" CAL. co .. •...jig .,w.': r` r o..-t .'s..✓ Fm - k:s Yi3• ..a,. r. e _ . - 10 FLOWERING CRABAPPLES - 3=3 1/2" CAL. \' 3 HONEYLOC - — OLING TOWER . = 1 7'.9 \r .� = 82.91 S" CAL. —_ . 4 AUSTRIAN PI N�: /- ts'PyC 12,14' T. yY - e =vc. I NDICAP RAMWING P �( .. t_ ``� • �: L LIGHT• BtD .` �� r� 182. 8 .� 78.9 / �e8( SIDEWALKS AT � ' �' � � - � R, ECE. " "D N BELT CROSSING TYP DEC •41997 LLARD ( / )/ SIGN LIGFjj City off' So. Bur, = 182. 77 CON PT: -17 .17 CREATE A ORCHARD OF PLANTING WHICH SCREENS THE / COOLING TOWER, RATHER THAN CLUSTERING PLANTS AT 1 THE BASE -WHICH OFTEN DRAWS ATTENTION.TO THE TOWER. SCALE 1 "=30' TITLE PROPOSED PLANTING LAVADSCAVE DATE 11.1.97 CONCEPTS AT L 1 JOB# v COOLING TOWER L„w00,o S. BurlingtCn, ermont 1 CPLANNING COMMISSION 16 DECEMBER 1997 The South Burlington Planning Commission a held a meeting on Tuesday, 16 December 1997, at 7:30 pm, in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset St. Members Present: William Burgess, Chair; John Dinklage, Gayle Barone, Marcel Beaudin, Mac Teeson, Dan O'Rourke, Mark Crow Also Present: Joe Weith, City Planner; Charles Hafter, City Manager; Patrice Stratmann, Gene Forbes, Mike Goldfield, Andy Rowe, John Belter, Joe Eddy 1. Other Business: a. Mr. Weith reported that the Judge of the Environmental Court has upheld the Commission's denial on the 40 lots behind Ledge Knoll. b. Mr. Weith also advised that the city did not receive a planning grant award this year. Cc. The site visit at Lime Kiln Bridge will be on Saturday at 9:30 a.m. d. The CD-3 Zoning Committee would like to present its report to the Commission and City Council. Mr. Hafter suggested a meeting at the end of January. 2. Consent Agenda: a) Site plan application of IDX Systems Corporation to amend a previously approved plan for a 120,000 sq. ft. general office building. The amendment is to 1) construct 120 lineal feet of sidewalk and 2) install a cooling tower with associated land- scaping, 1400 Shelburne Road: Mr. Burgess asked if there were any comments or questions relating to the consent agenda. No comments were forthcoming. Mr. Crow then moved to approve the Consent Agenda as warned jec to the stipulations contained_ in the City Planner's memorandum of 12 December 1997. Mr. Teeson seconded. Motion passed unanimously ------------------ ---------------------- 3. Site plan application of the City of South Burlington to ex- pand the flow capacity of the Bartlett Bay Wastewater Treatment C Facility from 800,000 gpd to 1,250,000 gpd. This expansion will include new tanks, buildings and outfall and renovation of ex- isting tanks and buildings, 15 Bartlett Bay Road: 9KESSEUDUFF CORPORATION ► , DESIGN • CONSTRUCTION • MANAGEMENT 4 December 1997 Mr. Joe Weith, City Planner City of South Burlington 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, Vermont 05403 RE: IDX Systems Corporation Modifications to Landscape Plan Dear Joe: In response to Dick Ward's correspondence dated 10/24/97 regarding changes to site and landscape plans approved by the South Burlington Planning Commission in 1986, specifically the installation of approximately 1201f of sidewalk with handrail and cooling tower along the north end of the IDX expansion, I offer the following information for your review: 1. Three (3) copies of a landscape plan prepared by The Office of H. Keith Wagner showing proposed additional plantings along Holmes Road and northerly side of the IDX building; 2. Completed South Burlington Planning Commission application form and $25.00 fee. At this time, the enclosed plan reflects the only changes to the record drawings on file at the City of South Burlington. Further, IDX acknowledges that subsequent changes to the approved plans will require review and approval of the Planning Commission. Thank you for your continued assistance in facilitating the growth of IDX Systems Corporation in South Burlington. If additional information is required, please advise. 4Si ere Jo Caulo Vice President cc. Shelly Russo, IDX Systems Corporation Ron Roberts, BDP Realty Dick Ward, South Burlington Zoning Administrator P.O. BOX 788, WILLISTON, VERMONT05495 (802) 879-2966 FAX: 879-2967 DEC 04 '97 10:12 CITY Or c, BURLINGTON P.1114 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 Planning Commission. 'I) OWNER OF RECORD (Name as shown on deed, mailing address, phone and fax #} BDP Realty,1400 Shelburne Rd., So. Burlington VT 05403 802/862-1022 ---- 2) APPLICANT (Name, mailing address, phone and fax #) IDX Systems Corg9ra ion, 1400 Shelburne Rd., So. Burlington, VT 05403 802/862-1022 3) CONTACT PERSON (Name, mailing address, phone and fax #) John Caulo Kessel/Duff Corp., Williston VT 802/879-2966 F AX:802/879-2967 4) PROJECT STREET ADDRESS: 1400 Shelburne Road, South Burlier on, VT ,403 5) TAX MAP NUMBER (can be obtained at Assessor's Office) 6) PROJECT DESCRIPTION a) Existing Uses on Property (including description and size of each separate use) Office -- - b) Proposed Uses (include description and size of each new use and existing uses to remain) l�lo Chan e c) Total building square footage (proposed buildings and existing buildings to remain) No change -- d) Height of building & number of floors (proposed buildings and existing buildings to remain, specify if basement and mezzanine) No change e) Number of residential units (if applicable, new units and existing units to remain) Not applicable f) Number of employees (existing and proposed): No change Post -it` Fax Note 7671 Dace 1 4 9 P °a9eb� To C Aye Q Co loop( From L1�� CO- Phone # Phone M Fax DEC 04 '97 10:12 CITY OF - BURLINGTON I P.2.'4 g) Other (list any other information pertinent to this application not specifically requested above): Installation of additional landscaping along HAmes Road --- as per attached plan. 7) LOT COVERAGE a) Building: Existing % Proposed % b) Overall (building, parking, outside storage, etc) Existing % Proposed c) Front yard (along each street) Existing % Proposed % 8) COST ESTIMATES a) Building: $ b) Landscaping: $ 10,000.00 c) Other site improvements (please list with cost): 9) ESTIMATED TRAFFIC a) Average daily traffic (in and out): n/a n/a b) A.M. Peak hour (in and out): --.- c) P.M. Peak hour (In and out): n/a 10) PEAK HOURS OF OPERATION: n/a 11) PEAK DAYS OF OPERATION: n/a 12) ESTIMATED PROJECT COMPLETION DATE: 6-15-98 13) SITE PLAN AND FEE (see attached) A site plan shall be submitted which shows the information listed on Exhibit A attached. Five (5) regular size copies and one reduced copy 0 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). EC 04 '97 10:13 CITY OF S BURLINGTON F. 3/4 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. !G URE PLIC T SIGNATURE OF CO -APPLICANT Do not write below this line DAT E OF SUBMISSION: L V/ - REVIEW AUTHORITY: ❑ Planning Commission ❑ City Planner I have reviewed this site plan application and find it to be: ❑' Complete City (Apfrmsp) ner or Designee Incomplete Y Lz Date � is/y/s� 9 4L) C7) el1 - 6 S5�e Imm11?41 Ll I 1.2 'M1T► . m OT- City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 FAX 658-4748 PLANNER 658-7955 June 19, 1997 John Caulo Kessel/Duff Corporation P.O. Box 788 Williston, Vermont 05495 Re: Roof Modification, 1400 Shelburne Road Dear Mr. Caulo: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Enclosed is a copy of the Findings of Fact and Decision on the above referenced project approved by the Planning Commission on May 27, 1997 (effective June 17, 1997). Please note the conditions of approval including the requirement that a zoning permit be obtained within six (6) months or this approval is null and void. If you have any questions, please giv me a call. ir cerel , L Joe Weith, City Planner JW/mcp 1 Encl City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 FAX 658-4748 PLANNER 658-7955 June 18, 1997 John Caulo Kessel/Duff Corporation P.O. Box 788 Williston, Vermont 05495 Re: Roof Modification, 1400 Shelburne Road Dear Mr. Caulo: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Enclosed is a copy of the May 27, 1997 Planning Commission meeting minutes. Please note the conditions of approval including the requirement that a zoning permit be obtained within six (6) months or this approval is null and void. If you have any questions, JW/mcp 1 Encl please give me a call. i cer y L J e Weith, City Planner KESSEL/DUFF CORPORATION ► , DESIGN • CONSTRUCTION • MANAGEMENT 16 May 1997 Mr. Joseph Weith, City Planner City of South Burlington 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, Vermont 05403 RE: Request to Modify Existing Roof Plan IDX Corporation - Phase 1, 1400 Shelburne Road South Burlington Planning Commission Approval dated 12-15-87 Dear Joe: As per our recent discussions and site visit, I am applying on behalf of IDX to modify the existing Phase I roof plan as per the attached architectural elevation drawing (sheet A3.1) and roof plan sketch prepared by K/D for the proposed change. Specifically, IDX requires approximately 2,500 square feet of clear -span area for assembly purposes, including a finish ceiling height of 12 feet. After discussing several prospective locations within the building, the desired location for the assembly space is on the 3rd floor, at the rear (east) side of the building. Accordingly, the 36-foot typical roof height in the affected area needs to be increased by seven feet to a revised height of 43'0" in order to accommodate the room design criteria. Please note the revised roof height is still two feet lower than the 45-foot height approved by the Planning Commission for the atrium at the primary building entry along the west elevation of the building. As discussed at your site visit, the affected roof area represents approximately 8% of the total roof area and includes a shallow, bow -string truss design to minimize the vertical projection from the existing roof plane. The roof will be finished with a mechanically adhered membrane roof in a dark gray color. Given its location at the rear of the building, coupled with site grades around the project site, the modified roof will not be visible to motorists traveling on Shelburne Road. I enclose some photographs taken from different vantage points around the project that illustrate the minimal visual impact the change will have. Thank you for your continued assistance in facilitating the expansion of IDX Corporation in South Burlington, Vermont. If additional information is required, please advise. Sindere Jo Caulo Vice President enclosures CC. Ron Roberts, BDP Realty Partnership P.O. BOX 788, WILLISTON, VERMONT 05495 (802) 879-2966 FAX: 879-2967 I PLANNING COMMISSION 15 DECEMBER 1987 PAGE 3 / a- / 5--f- , ) Holmes Rd. She felt some security was needed that IDX will do a share of Holmes Rd. An agreement exists between IDX and Blodgett, but the Planning Commission cannot enforce that agreement. She felt there should be a stipulation to give the city security that IDX will do their share of the road. The City Manager recommended it be for the length of the property line. Mr. Blodgett noted he will incur the entire cost of the last portion of Holmes Rd., and IDX will share in the cost of the portion they need. Mr. Burgess said all the Commission must do is require the road be built and that somebody bond for it. It doesn't matter who pays for the bond. Mr. Posey asked what is the estimate for the phasing time. It was estimated that Phase I will be built in 1989 and Phase II would begin 3 to 4 years from now . Ms. Pugh moved the Planning Commission approve the site plan application of BDP Realty Associates for IDX for construction of a 120,000 sq. ft. office building in two phases on 10.1 acres as depicted on an eight page set of plans entitled IDS, Interpretive Data Systems, South Burlington, Vermont, Master Plan" prepared by Horton-Ptaszvnski, Architects, last revised 3/2/87 with the following stipulations: 1. A $30,000 landscaping bond for Phase I and $9000 for Phase II shall be posted prior to permit. `' (r ! .J , ��� 2. The applicant shall bond for the entire cost of Holmes Rd. Exttension as far as the westerly driveway for Phase I and for the entire cost of Holmes Rd. Extension as far as the v'- easterly -most driveway for Phase II. Easements shall be obtained from the adjacent owner to construct Holmes Rd. Ex- _ension. The amount of the bond for each phase shall be determined by the City Engineer. 3. Holmes Road shall be constructed to City standards (32 01�.feet width, curb and —sidewalks) . Sidewalks shall be continuous across grade without breaks. 4. An offer of dedication and deed for the road in an 80 foot right-of-way shall be submitted to the City Attorney for ap- proval prior to permit. 5. The Planning Commission grants approval of 407 parking spaces and 73 designated for future parking if determined the Planning Commission or the applicant to be needed; 210 shall be constructed in Phase I. r� PLANNING COMMISSION 15 DECEMBER 1987 f PAGE 4 _ 6. A sidewal shall be constructed along the Route 7 frontage. It shall be concrete and continuous across the driveway. A bond shall be posted rior to permit in an amount determined 12y the City Engineer. 7. A $6983 contribution toward the Shelburne Road inter- Chi section improvement fund shall be aid prior to permit base 3�ria� on the 272 trip ends generated 12y this development. 8. A complete erosion control, storm water runoff study Heindel & No se shall be submitted to the City Engineer for approval prior to permit. The recommendations for storm water runoff and erosion control shall be followed by the ap- plicant. 9. The fire hydrant location and relocation shall be reviewed and approved 12y the South Burlington Fire Chief. 10. The abondoned service road and driveway shall be removed and the area top soiled and seeded. Concrete curbing shall be installed at this abandoned access. 11. The Planning Commission grants approval of 45 feet in height for the atrium. The Commission has determined that the taller structure: a. utilizes topography and relates to other existing_ and proposed structures so as to be aesthetically compatible with the neighborhood; b. doesn't detract from scenic views of adjacent properties or public streets and walkways; and c. allows retention of additional green space that enhances the appearance of the developed property. 12..A sewer allocation of 7650 gpd (3825 gpd perphase) is r granted by the Planning Commission. The applicant shall Pay $2.50 per gal prior to permit. 1113. The parking plan shall be revised so that Phase I includes access to Holmes Road Extension. 14. The proposed sewer manhole shall be within paved areas such as driveways and parking areas. 15. Storm sewer pipe shall be concrete or pvc, not metal or aluminum_ — — 16. The buildin permit shall be obtained within 6 months or this approval is null and void Mrs. Maher seconded. Motion passed unanimously. MAY 16 ' 97 1-4: 23 C : ? r )SS BURL 11`+GTQN P CITY OF SOUTH BVRLINGTON SITE PLAN APPLICATION t) OWNER O!' RECORD ( name, address, phone 4)L�- AtT 2) APPLICANT ( name, address, phone 3) CONTACT PERSON (name, address, phone 2).__ 4) PROJECT STREET ADDR23S : 5) LOT NUMBER (if applicable) 6) PROPOSED USE (S) `..._. 7) SIZE OF PROJECT (i.e. total bulldins vgQure footage, s units, m��a.�xjji��mum height and 4 floors, aquar�e�T°e+c"_ p-err floor) rg4t� 8) NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES 9) LOT COVEF.AGE; building AaG, land?$-AYed a e s A % building, parktGg, outside at0rU3r,% 10) COST ESTIMATES: Buildings g-5t� �_ i.aac��Capittg E � Other Site Improvements (please ? is4 with cost) $ _ 11) ESTIMATED PROJECT COMPLETION DA :'R : - r—/A --__. 12) ESTIMATED AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC (ir, oral out) Estimated trip ends (in and out) du;•i.ng th4 va, luring hours: Monday through Friday 11-12 noon 12-lp.m. -- _ 1--2 p.�.; 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: f .._ 14) PEAK DAYS OF OPERATION: 150'• *? DATE OF SUBMISSION SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT DATE OF HEARING �e ■ C O R P O R A T I O N 1500 Shelburne Road EO. Box C-1070 Burlington, VT 05402-1070 802-862-1022 State of Vermont Environmental Board District Environmental Commission #4 111 West Street Essex Jct., VT 05452 Gentlemen: �8T j'r?eA� \Us � SOX \500S�-bw�.wc� February 15, 1988 The enclosed documentation has been provided to support our request for an Act 250 Permit Amendment. our original application to the Environmental Commission was submitted in December 1986, and a permit was issued in March 1987. That permit contains a stipulation regarding the widening of Shelburne Road that we feel imposed additional project expenses that were unnecessary. The alternative to widening Shelburne Road was to construct Holmes Road Extention and control all employee traffic onto Shelburne Road at a signalized intersection. Because of co -ownership of the property designated for Holmes Road, we were barred from construction. This complicated situation resulted in the cancellation of our project for the 1987 building season. Additionally, the loss of space posed a serious impact on company growth originally slated for the Burlington location. New product development projects and, consequently, a number of quality jobs were offered to both existing and new employees in our Boston location. over the last couple of months we have been able to reach an agreement with our adjoining property owner for the construction of Holmes Road. We have submitted our plans to the Agency of Transportation and received approval for both access onto Shelburne Road and for the development of Holmes Road Extention. A copy of their letter of approval is included with our documentation. We are now under a great deal of pressure to get this project underway. Our company continues to grow at a very rapid pace. Serious space constraints have made it necessary to accelerate our building project so that at least a portion of our new facility will be ready for occupancy Burlington • Boston • Chicago • Dallas • San Francisco in October 1988, and the balance in January 1989. This all points to the need to begin construction on or about March 1. At this time, we would like to request that the Commission view the addition of Holmes Road as a vast improvement to our original plans. In so doing, please consider our proposal as a minor amendment to our permit, and grant your approval as soon as possible without proceeding through the entire process a second time. I will be available to answer any questions that you may have, and can be reached during the day at 862-1022, and evenings at 862-7921. Sincerely, Michelle A. Myers Administrative Mana err MAM/plm Enclosure cc: Richard E. Tarrant President, IDX C 0 A P 0 P A T 1 0 N C O R P O R A T I O N February 18, 1988 1500 Shelburne Road P.O. Box C-1070 Burlington, VT 05402-1070 802-862-1022 MR. Geoffrey Green Assistant District Coordinator District #4 Environmental Commission 111 West Street Essex Jct., VT 05452 Re: Land use permit # 4CO391-6 SDP Realty Associates So. Burlington, VT 05403 Dear Geoffrey, Please find enclosed a copy of our amendment application for the above reference permit. As we discussed during our meeting of last week, we have reconsidered the phasing of the Holmes Road extension construction and have decided to make the construction of approximately 250 feet of the roadway part of our Phase I construction program. The intent of our application is to request an amendment approving the following changes: 1. Allow construction of approximately 250 feet of Holmes Road in accordance with our drawing SP-3, a copy of which is enclosed with our application. The final alignment and geometry of the intersection of Holmes Road and Shelburne Road to be approved by the Vermont Agency of Transportation. 2. Allow the construction of the Driveway access to the property from Shelburne Road. This driveway to be limited to left and right turn entering traffic only. The final alignment and geometry of the driveway to be approved by the Vermont Agency of Transportation. 3. Remove condition 11, the construction of a left turn lane on the " southbound lane of Shelburne Road, from the permit. In evaluating this application, we request that you consider the following information which serves to summarize the developments to the project plans since the original permit was issued: 1. Holmes Road - In the findings of fact of the original permit, the Commission considered the Holmes Road extention to be the most desirable access to the site. At the time of the original permit, the land required for the Holmes Road right of way was not completely in the control of BDP realty, and therefore IDX could not include the road construction in their development plan. Burlington • Boston • Chicago • Dallas • San Francisco Since that time an agreement has been executed with Dennis Blodgett regarding the construction of Holmes Road. This agreement, a copy of which is attached, requires that as the development of the Blodgett and BDP properties advances along the Holmes Road R.O.W. from Shelburne Road to a point approximately 350 feet from Shelburne Road, the developer of the property will construct the road and share the expense with the other developer. From the 350 foot point on the construction of Holmes Road to it's connection with Green Mountain Drive the road construction will be handled entirely by Blodgett. The agreement was structured in this manner because of the ease of having the contractor who is responsible for the construction associated with the development of the property assume responsibility for the road construction. It should be noted that Dennis Blodgett is a co -applicant on this amendment due to his present ownership of a portion of the right of way. This plan has received City of South Burlington approval with the condition that the road be constructed to City standards. Additionally, the plan has been reviewed by the Agency of Transportation and they have issued a temporary highway access permit. We have included a copy of the permit and a follow-up clarification letter regarding same with our application. 2. Driveway access - With the construction of Holmes Road, the driveway access on Shelburne Road will become a secondary access to the site. IDX will restrict the use of the driveway to entering traffic only and for visitors only. All of the IDX employee traffic will utilize the Holmes Road Access. IDX estimates that the traffic using this access will be in the range of 6- 10 trips per week. As with Holmes Road, this plan has also been reviewed and approved by the City of South Burlington and the Vermont Agency of Transportation. Their comments are to be found with the correspondence included for the Holmes Road construction. 3. Condition 11, left turn lane - With the limited access usage of the IDX driveway a left turn lane will not be required. It should be noted that the ability to make a left turn onto the site from the southbound lane of Shelburne Road is a temporary condition as when the upgrading of route 7 is performed, a median will be constructed on the road which will make a left turn onto the site impossible. In the highway access permit, the Agency of Transportation has permitted the left turn access until such time as the Shelburne road median is constructed. At your request, in preparing our amendment application we addressed the following Act 250 criteria: Criterion 5, Transportation - The intersection plan, including traffic volumes and signal timing study, for Holmes Road and Shelburne Road is included with our application and shown on our Drawing No. SP-3. Also included is our Drawing No. SP-1, which shows the details of our ■ covvvoanr �oN Shelburne Road driveway access. The supporting data and Agency permits referenced above are also submitted for evaluation under this criteria. Criterion 7, Municipal Services - Upon completion of its construction, Holmes Road will become a City owned road. After its acceptance, the maintenance for the Road will become the responsibility of the City of South Burlington. With this exception the proposed amendment does not alter any of the evidence originally provided for the existing permit. Criterion 9, Conformance with the Capability and Development Plan, 9(a), Impact on growth - The proposed amendment does not alter any of the evidence originally provided for the existing permit. 9(k), Development Affecting Public Investments - The construction of the proposed access plan will represent an improvement over the traffic conditions created by the existing permitted plan. The traffic study submitted under criterion 5 provides evidence to this effect. Criterion 10, Conformance with Local Plan - We have included in our application a letter from the City of South Burlington Planning and Zoning office indicating their acceptance of our plan and its conformance to the South Burlington City plan. As we discussed, we would appreciate any effort the Commission could put forth in expediting the review of this application. We are hopeful that this application may be considered as a minor material change. If you feel that there is any additional information that we should provide to further clarify this application, please contact us at once. We thank you for your efforts to date regarding the preparation of our application. incerely, ichelle A. Myers Administrative Malt er MAM/plm cc: Richard E. Tarrant LN`: coraroAarioN APPLICATION FOR LAND USE PERMIT AMENDMENT `ITRUCTIONS: Apspethin form lications forrminor Land Use permit transfersPareitoebencompletednbyuthegpermit trtransfers. ansferreen SECTION 1 - FOR OFFICE USE ONLY Filing Dater Application No.: Laws Involved: Deemed Completed By: Fee: SECTION II - TO BE COMPLETED BY THE APPLICANT 1. APPLICANT: BDP Realty Associates 1500 Shelburne Rd Sn.BiitLngtnn,- VT nS4n1 862-1022 (Name) (Addressr' (Phone No.) 2. PROPERTY OWNER: Same as 1 (Name) (Address) (Phone No.) 3. PERSON TO BE CONTACTED ABOUT THIS APPLICATION (Complete only if different than #1) Michelle Myers (Same as applicant) H2-1027 (Name) (Address) (Phone No.) 4. WHAT IS YOUR LEGAL INTEREST IN THIS PROPERTY? Owner 5. IF YOU ARE NOT FILING THIS APPLICATION AS AN INDIVIDUAL, COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING: BDP Realtv Associates 11/16/78 VT 11/16/78 (Legal Entity) (Date Formed) (State) (Date registered in VT) 6. WHAT IS THE NATURE OF THIS REQUEST TO AMEND THE LAND USE PERMIT: Construct a portion of Holmes Road under Phase 1 of the rrnnjprt As a result of the Hnlmps Rnad construction remove, the requirpmnnt fnr Canditinn 11 frnm the permit_ 7. DESCRIBE ANY CHANGES IN THE FOLLOWING ITEMS FROM INFORMATION IN THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION a. Acreage in the entire tract of land None b. Acreage in this project None C. Date the project will be started March 1988 (Phase I) d. Date the project will be completed September 1995 (Phase II) e. Funding or bonding of this project None f. Municipal services to be used stone g. Estimated construction cost $5 400,000.00 SECTION III - ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REQUIRED ON PERMIT TRANSFERS 8. TRANSFERREE: I hereby.agree to complete this project as set forth in the application, Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and the Land Use Permit # , and as amended above: (Transferree) 9. TRANSFERROR: I he agree to the transfer of Land Use Permit # as set forth above: (Transferror) SECTION IV - NOTICE TO PARTIES - TO BE COMPLETED BY ALL APPLICANTS FOR ACT 250 PROJECTS 10 This application must be signed by the applicant and landowner. By -signing this application, the applicant assumes responsibility for the information provided and, when the amendment involves Act 250, confirms that the town selectmen, planning commission, and regional planning commission were given a copy of the application as required. (signature o landownera e PLANNER 658.7955 City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 December 29, 1987 " ;x1p/rf ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658.7958 Shelly Myers IDX P.O. Box 1070 Burlington, Vermont 05401 Re: IDX, 1400 Shelburne Road Dear Ms. Myers: Enclosed are the minutes of the December 15, 1987 Planning Commission meeting regarding your new site plan approval. Please be sure to obtain your building permit from Dick Ward, Zoning Administrator before the 6 month approval expires. Sincerely, Jane B. Lafleur, City Planner JBL/mcp 1 Encl cc: Brad Carter l PLANNING COMMISSION 15 DECEMBER 1987 The South Burlington Planning Commission held a regular meeting on Tuesday, 15 December 1987, at 7:30 pm, in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset Street. Members Present William Burgess, Acting Chairman; Mary -Barbara Maher, John Belter, Judith Hurd, Catherine Peacock, Ann Pugh, Also Present Jane Lafleur, City Planner; Dennis Blodgett, Terry Krinski, Brad Carter, Veronica Lambert, R. Posey, David DuBrul; Sid Poger, The Other Paper, Shelly Myers 1. Minutes of 12/8/87 Mrs. Maher moved the Minutes of 12/8/87 be approved as written. Ms. Peacock seconded. Motion passed unanimously, 2. Consider motion to table Public Hearing: Final Plat ap-- lication of Hospitality Inns for construction of 90, 615 sq. ft (footprint) addition to the Sheraton, 870 Williston Road Mrs. Maher moved to table the Public Hearing of the Final Plat application of Hospitality Inns until 5 January 1988. Mr. Belter seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 3. Site Plan application ofr'IDX,'for construction of 120,000 sq. feet of office space in'_2"phases, 1400 Shelburne Rd. Mrs. Lafleur noted that approval had been received for this site plan many months ago, but the applicant never got a building permit primarily due to Act 250 tie-ups. They must, therefore, begin again. There are not many changes from the original plan. The new plan now shows the phasing of the project and the entrance for Phase I on Holmes Rd. Extension instead of Shelburne Rd. Mr. Krinski said that Phase I construction would begin with 250 ft. of the Holmes Rd. Extension and the road will be to city specifications. There will be an access driveway at the end of that section of road. There will also be a temporary driveway connecting the back of the lot to the Holmes Road extension. Employees will be encouraged to use the Holmes Rd. access. Mrs. Lafleur noted that Phase II will have another curb cut on Holmes Rd. She said she and the City Manager feel there should be only one driveway off Holmes Rd. and would prefer it to be further east or to align directly with the access to the Blodgett property, about 50 to 100 feet east of where it is shown now. For this to happen, parking would have to be redesigned. PLANNING COMMISSION 15 DECEMBER 1987 PAGE 2 Mr. Belter said he thought cars might come in off Shelburne Rd. if the lower access on Holmes Rd. were closed. Mrs. Lafleur said Holmes Rd. Extension will be a major connector between Shelburne Rd. and Spear St. and she and Mr. Szymanski felt the more limited the accesses, the better. Ms. Peacock said she has always favored only one access. Mr. Belter said if this were a new plan, he would agree, but the applicant drew the plans the way the Commission approved then the last time, and they already have an Act 250 permit.' He felt it would be too big a change to ask now. Mrs. Maher said she agreed with both Ms. -Peacock and Mr. Belter and couldn't see asking them to redesign the whole project. Mr. Burgess agreed. Mr. Krinski said there are reasons for the locations of the curb cuts. This is a large scale project, and with 400 cars entering and leaving the site, they felt it made more sense to split the traffic. When Holmes Rd. Extension is finished, it will go to Spear St., and he felt it made sense to keep the upper curb cut for traffic going in that direction. He also felt it would be wrong to ask people to enter a project of this size from the rear door. The Shelburne Rd. entrance is for their very important clients and for the image of the corporation. People who never enter the site will still look up from that access to the building and this has been planned for visual impact. The Shelburne Rd. access is not a 90 degree one and is not designed for high traffic flow. Mrs. Maher asked if Act 250 wants a deceleration lane. Mrs. Lafleur said the deceleration lane is shown. Act 250 originally wanted a left turn lane. Mr. Carter said they are in the process of negotiating with the Highway Dept. so there will, be no left turn or deceleration lane on Shelburne Rd. Mr. Burgess asked how they plan to enforce the use of Holmes Rd. for employees. Ms. Myers said it will be a company directive, and she felt employees will go where there is a traffic light. The company will also provide signage. Mr. Belter asked about truck traffic. It was noted there is a loading dock, and truck traffic will use Holmes Rd. Ext. Ms. Peacock asked if the curb cut could be aligned with the Blodgett curb cut. Mr. Krinski said it would then not line up for their internal circulation. Mrs. Lafleur noted the curbe cuts will be 18 feet from lining up. Mr. Blodgett noted they have an agreement on building Holmes Rd.'Ext. The second access for the back of his project is still flexible and could possibly line up with IDX's second curb cut. Mr. Burgess did not feel the applicant should be asked to go back and reconstruct their parking lots at this time. Mrs. Lafleur said the final issue is the cost -sharing on PLANNING COMMISSION 15 DECEMBER 1987 PAGE 3 Holmes Rd. She felt some security was needed that IDX will do a share of Holmes Rd. An agreement exists between IDX and Blodgett, but the Planning Commission cannot enforce that agreement. She felt there should be a stipulation to give the city security that IDX will do their share of the road. The City Manager recommended it be for the length of the property line. Mr. Blodgett noted he will incur the entire cost of the last portion of Holmes Rd., and IDX will share in the cost of the portion they need. Mr. Burgess said all the Commission must do is require the road be built and that somebody bond for it. It doesn't matter who pays for the bond. Mr. Posey asked what is the estimate for the phasing time. It was estimated that Phase I will be built in 1989 and Phase II would begin 3 to 4 years from now . Ms. Pugh moved the Planning Commission a prove the site plan application of BDP Realty Associates for IDX for construction of a 120,000 sq. ft. office building in two phases on 10.1 acres as depicted on an eight page set of plans entitled IDS, Interpretive Data Systems, South Burlington, Vermont, Master Plan" prepared Py Horton-Ptaszynski, Architects, last revised 3/2/87 with the following stipulations: 1. A $30,000 landscaping bond for Phase I and $9000 for Phase II shall be posted prior to permit. 2. The applicant shall bond for the entire cost of Holmes Rd. Exttension as far as the westerly driveway for Phase I and for the entire cost of Holmes Rd. Extension as far as the easterly -most driveway for Phase II. Easements shall be obtained from the adjacent owner to construct Holmes Rd. Ex- ension. The amount of the bond for each phase shall be determined t�y the City Engineer, 3. Holmes Road shall be constructed to City standards (32 feet width, curb,and sidewalks). Sidewalks shall be continuous across grade without breaks. 4. An offer of dedication and deed for the road in an 80 foot right-of-way shall be submitted to the City Attorney for ap- proval prior to permit. 5. The Planning Commission grants approval of 407 parking spaces and 73 designated_ for future parking if determined the Planning Commission or the applicant to be needed; 210 shall be constructed in Phase I. PLANNING COMMISSION 15 DECEMBER 1987 PAGE 4 6. A sidewalk shall be constructed along the Route 7 frontage. It shall be concrete and continuous across the driveway. A bond shall be posted prior to permit in an amount determined �2y the City Engineer. 7. A $6983 contribution toward the Shelburne Road inter- section improvement fund shall be paid prior to permit based on the 272 trip ends generated by this development. 8. A complete erosion control, storm water runoff study Heindel & Noyse shall be submitted to the City Engineer for approval prior to permit. The recommendations for storm water runoff and erosion control shall be followed 12y the ap- plicant. 9. The fire hydrant location and relocation shall be reviewed and approved by the South Burlington Fire Chief. 10. The abondoned service road and driveway shall be removed and the area top soiled and seeded. Concrete curbing shall be installed at this abandoned access. 11. The Planning Commission grants approval of 45 feet in height for the atrium. The Commission has determined that the taller structure: a. utilizes topography and relates to other existing and proposed structures so as to be aesthetically compatible with the neighborhood; b. doesn't detract from scenic views of adjacent properties or public streets and walkways; and c. allows retention of additional green space that enhances the appearance of the developed property. 12. A sewer allocation of 7650 gpd (3825 gpd per phase) is granted by the Planning Commission. The applicant shall pay $2.50 per gal prior to permit. 13. The parking plan shall be revised so that Phase I includes access to Holmes Road Extension. 14. The proposed sewer manhole shall be within paved areas such as driveways and parking areas. 15. Storm sewer pipe shall be concrete or pvc, not metal or aluminum. 16. The building permit shall be obtained within 6 months or this approval is null and void Mrs. Maher seconded. Motion passed unanimously._ ONj AGt STATE OF VERMONT AGENCY OF TRANSPORTATION j 133 State Street, Adrninistration Building Montpelier, Vermont 05602 ,A'P9� \O SPOR�P February 8, 1988 Michelle A. Myers Administrative Manager 1500 Shelburne Road P.O. Box C-1070 Burlington, VT 05402-1070 RE: Shelburne Road, IDX Permit Dear Ms. Myers: In response to our joint meeting of January 28, 1988 and your letter of February 3, 1988, I an informing you at this time a system of two access points will eventually be approved for your complex on Shelburne Road. Due to engineering and traffic related items which require further study this letter will for now serve as a temporary permit. Agency policy prohibits work in the highway right of way before April 15th, however, final plan reviews will be completed in time for your sumn-er construction schedule. Again I report, you will be able to use your current access point (at Nordic Ford) until such time as the two other areas are adjusted, based upon geometric design and updated traffic information and approved. It will be necessary to close and regrade the area (at Nordic Ford) as a condition of the final permit. The Holmes Road Extension access will be approximately as shown on the project plans (F-EGC-F 019-4(19) supplied on the 28th. The right turn only access, approximately 600 feet southerly, will be slightly modified due to drainage conflicts and design geometrics based upon your anticipated minimal weekly traffic usage. I expect to be in contact shortly with your design consultant to have the design modifications completed as soon as tiara and scheduling permits. Sincerely, VOL ",.I (91�u William O. Fisk Utilities Engineer WOF:dd cc: Tyler dart, Trudell Engineering Chief Engineer Kelley Geoff Green, Environmental Comnission Bill Sz�Tnanski, South Burlington Manager i'; 1 RF'q TRUDELL CONSULTING ENGINEERS, Inc. February 18, 1988 Mr. William Fisk, Utilities Engineer Vermont Agency of Transportation 133 State Street, Administration Building Montpelier, Vermont 05602 RE: IDS Office Building Temporary Highway Access Permit Dear Mr. Fisk: In accordance with our telephone conversation of February 15, 1988, the following will serve to confirm the clarification you have issued regarding the above referenced access permit: 1. The intent of your letter of February 8, 1988 was to grant approval to the IDX plan of having two points of access to their site from Shelburne Road. This approval is to be considered "schematic", as the final design of the Shelburne Road upgrade, currently in progress by VAOT may dictate some geometry changes to IDX's driveway access on Shelburne Road as well as the portion of Holmes Road that will be constructed as part of IDX's building program. VAOT's design work will be completed in a time frame that will allow coordination with IDX's design and construction of its access points. 2. IDX may continue to use its present driveway for access to its site. When the new driveway access on Shelburne Road and the portion of Holmes Road Extension to be constructed by IDX is completed, the existing driveway will be closed and IDX will be required to regrade and landscape the area. 3. For the immediate future, access to the new driveway on Shelburne Road will be limited to left and right entering turns. When, between now and 1993, the Agency of Transportation constructs the upgrade project referred to in your letter, a median will be installed on Shelburne Road. Due to the nature of this physical barrier, IDX's driveway will become a right turn entering only access at that time. 4. IDX's participation in the Holmes Road intersection improvements is limited to the design and construction of the portion of Holmes Road shown on their plans and the performance of a signal timing study for the light at the intersection. Any improvements required within the Shelburne Road right-of-way with the exception of the signal faces for the traffic light will be designed and constructed by the Vermont Agency of Transportation. 14 BLAIR PARK ROAD BOX308, WILLISTON, VERMONT 05495 (802) 879-6331 Page 2 We thank you for taking the time to meet with us and provide these clarifications. We intend to continue to work closely with yourself and the Agency in finalizing the design of the project and its eventual construction. Very truly yours, TRUDELL CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC. TZ)H'P.E. JTH/jlv AGREEMENT This Agreement is by and between IDX Corporation with a place of business in South Burlington, Vermont, (hereinafter IDX) and Dennis Blodgett of South Burlington, Vermont. W I T N E S S E T If WHEREAS, IDX and Blodgett own certain real property adjacent to each other on Shelburne Road; and WHEREAS, IDX and Blodgett desire to develop each of their parcels; and WHEREAS, as a condition of their permits Holmes Road Extension must be built on a parcel requiring the deeding by both parties to the City of South Burlington certain lands owned by each as specified in the final plat approvals of each parcel; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and agreement herein contained, the parties agree as follows: 1. Both parties will dedicate, to the City of South Burlington, the land necessary for the construction of Holmes Road Extension, from Shelburne Road to Green Mountain Drive. 2. This dedication and road construction shall take place at a time requested by either party. 3. Each party agrees to share pro-rata in the cost of construction of Holmes Road to their easternmost access point on Holmes Road Extension. The cost of construction shall include all items required for the completion of the road, including but not limited to finance expenses, engineering, design, legal and accounting expenses. Dennis Blodgett shall have the responsibility to construct the road and IDX shall have the right to review all costs and contracts, if they so desire, prior to the commencement of construction. For the purposes of this agreement Blodgett's easternmost access shall be Green Mountain Drive. 4. IDX shall pay their pro-rata share upon the completion of the project. 5. In the event IDX moves its easternmost access point further east, it shall then reimburse Blodgett for the additional pro-rata share of the cost of Holmes Road Extension as in paragraph 3. This agreement shall be binding upon the parties hereto, and their heirs, executors or assigns. In the presence of: IDX Corporation By Its Du Authorized Agent y Date i i- Dennis Blodgett Date L IDS ANALYSIS OF HYDROLOGIC IMPACT H WAGNER, HEINDEL, AND NOYES, INC. CONSULTING GEOLOGISTS BURLINGTON VERMONT H VN Wagner, Helndel, and Noyes, InC. consulting geologic s P.O. Box 1629 Burlington, Vermont 05402-1629 802-658-0820 ANALYSIS OF HYDROLOGIC IMPACT IDS NORTH BROOK WATERSHED Prepared by: 4vuv� (A Jeffrey A. Nelson Geologist Revi wed and Approved by: evri y.. ffr y . Noyes P i cipa Date: November 5, 1986 Summary, Recommendations, and Conclusions 1. A hydrologic analysis has been performed for the proposed IDS expansion. The site is located within the North Brook watershed adjacent to Bartlett Brook. 2. The analysis indicates that the peak discharge at the base of the site for the design storm would increase from 31.79 cfs for the pre -development to 45.45 cfs for the proposed development without retention. 3. A stormwater retention basin with elevation/volume/discharge relationships as detailed within this report should be provided to reduce the peak discharge from the site, and provide for no increase in peak discharge in North Brook. 4. The project engineer should complete a final design for the basin to include a proposed grading plan, and outlet works including emergency spillway. A final site plan showing the sizes, slopes, lengths, and locations of all culverts on site should also be completed. This will enable verification that all runoff from the site will in fact be directed toward stormwater retention basins. i Analysis of Hydrologic Impact IDS North Brook Watershed Introduction This report presents the results of hydrologic computations and analyses performed by Wagner, Heindel, and Noyes, Inc. to assess the impact of the proposed IDS expansion. The site is located within the North Brook watershed, which is immediately to the north of Bartlett Brook watershed, draining into Bartlett Bay (see Appendix, pg. 1). The specific project location is within subwatersheds 4, 5, and 7 of the North Brook watershed (see Appendix, pg. 2). Site Characteristics The IDS site is underlain by soils of the following S.C.S. groups: Enosburg & Whately (hydrologic group D) Belgrade (hydrologic group C) Adams (hydrologic group A) Covington (hydrologic group D) a The current condition of the site, in addition to the existing building and parking area, consists of mixed pasture, and scrub woodland. The total area of the site is 15.0 acres. In addition to the site itself, runoff from two separate areas to the northeast and east of the site must be considered. The total upslope area which will drain on to the site is 13.3 acres. These areas are comprised of both hydrologic group A and hydrologic group D soils, in pasture and wooded conditions. All runoff from the site will converge at the western boundary of the site, at the location of a 3.5 foot diameter corrugated metal pipe culvert which crosses U. S. Route 7. Hydrologic Analysis The IDS site and the watershed area upgradient from it have been Ianalyzed for the pre -development and proposed development Iconditions. The majority of the site is located in subwatershed 5, although revisions were also required for subwatershed 4. ISmall portions of the site lie in subwatersheds 3 and 7. However, these portions of the site will not be impacted by the Iproposed development, so the characteristics of these watersheds have not been altered. For the portion of the site lying within subwatershed 5, the pre -development curve number is computed to 3 be 81, and the time of concentration .223 hours (see Appendix, pg. 3). As a result of the proposed development, the curve number is increased to 85, and the time of concentration decreased to 0.0955 hours. The marked decrease in time of concentration for the postdevelopment condition is due to the occurrence of sheet flow across large paved areas as opposed to overland flow, with much lower velocities. A summary of the revisions made to subwatershed characteristics is provided on page 5 of the Appendix. The design storm used in the analysis was a 25-year 24-hour storm, or 4.0 inches in 24 hours. Average antecedent moisture conditions have been assumed (AMC=2). Results The revised TR-20 data file for the North Brook watershed is included on pages 7 through 12 of the Appendix. This data file reflects the changes discussed above for the post -development condition. As a result of the proposed development, the peak discharge from the site for the design storm is increased from 31.79 cfs in the pre -development condition to 45.45 cfs (see Appendix, pgs. 13, 15). To provide for no increase to the North Brook as a result of the proposed development, it will be 4 necessary for the applicant to provide stormwater retention. The site plans prepared by Trudell Consulting Engineers show a pond located on the western limit of the site, adjacent to Shelburne Road. We understand that it is desirable that this pond contain water at all times, for aesthetic purposes. In addition, the allowance for water level fluctuation in the pond will provide stormwater retention and therefore reduction of peak discharge. A suggested schematic design has been determined via trial and error solution. The schematic design is illustrated in cross-section on page 17 of the Appendix. In plan view, the basin is assumed to be circular, with a basal radius of 26 feet, and side slopes of 1 vertical to 3 horizontal. A riser pipe of 24 inch diameter and 2.0 feet high will serve as the principle spillway for the basin. Since it is desired to maintain water in the pond at all times, no dewatering hole is specified at the base of the riser, as would typically be done in stormwater retention basins. Therefore, no outflow from the pond would occur until the water surface rose above the top of the riser pipe. The proposed volume/elevation relationship is included on page 18 of the Appendix. Since the maximum water surface elevation attained in the pond during the design storm is 166.26 feet, this should serve as the maximum pond elevation prior to outflow through an emergency spillway. The emergency spillway should be designed by the project engineer. At the maximum design water surface elevation, a pond r volume of approximately 0.6 acre feet, or 195,000 gallons is specified. The outflow/elevation curve for the 24 inch vertical riser pipe is computed on pages 19-20 of the Appendix. It should be noted that as the water surface in the pond initially rises above the top of the pipe, the riser performs as a circular weir. At greater depths, control of flow is shifted to the conduit pipe conveying the water. The result of the proposed stormwater retention structure is a reduction to 23.63 cfs of the peak discharge from the site. For the North Brook watershed as a whole, the peak discharge is maintained at its existing level (153.09 cfs existing, 153.04 cfs proposed, with retention). In order to enable more detailed inspection of the results, the tabulated discharge hydrographs have been included for the following locations within the TR-20 data file for the postdevelopment condition (see Appendix, pgs. 21-24). SECT/STRC OPERATION LOCATION STRC 07 RUNOFF Runoff from I.D.S. Site STRC 07 RESVOR Retention Basin Outflow SECT 012 ADDHYD Culvert at Rte. 7 SECT 008 ADDHYD culvert crossing railroad embankment SECT 010 ADDHYD Base of watershed at Lake Champlain No Text Tank "=•BM • , • ; ,��y I rook DBM 186 Si Quarry,. -» Qum "Cit _ Aft 1�l PROJECT LOCATION ' j J • I . , . •• _•. r` \ VJ i i • m I �• rl r' l orrv,;� The os alter Park, /+ i i, 1 lzX i' •... ,•. !- ' �+ CRY 1 1 II \ '.. �143. • it / V i j , j U INs i _N � u07 , • 1 -° i µme. � - � • NATURAL FLOW PATTERN DISTURBD BY DEVELOPMENT / 1 9" 27' C20 2x C19 27" 20' x 4�4 8" x C19A 30% 75 Y f .. C23 24 x 40 C 25 18 /0 W ■ , � N C25 16 x 85, t . WEIR t t � � M �l I H I WVN Wagner, Heindel, and Noyes, Inc Consulting Geologists Burlington, Vermon' �12�pF.UEI.v?,�1ENC' Gutv�jlTluN:.� ICE COAJD1T WtJ 1 c N G Cr') _ 0 il P PAGE OF age No. PROJECT: DATE: Iv• �1 b� FA- �2. eP�>Tua-E./JZ-Am c L--- A.4F C' C" C Q • A-rLon OP►�i ac. 401 It(i LA 1'•O �' ��ao. Cm V (ajLuP L' ; D L • T%ME c>R �.� NCR'C'CN— 5$ tJPSWPE Po(GTw,Q ; uJLQ.LANC✓ o\ La,,/ 9 'J' L L= �D-O� S= G„3"�. V= 1, 13 C T/� = O, ►�� vt �2- L �J .5 D.3 �> J V = I,$U iY/S � = o'0'i (' VI'L kxC- -1utAd- -LC o, 3 "K i H WVN Wagner, Heindel, and Noyes, Inc onsulting Geologists Burlington, Vermon- L-)i-vN L� PNL-c-N-vGuPvt�\-,-I,, NS A72.F_ a, 0 P PAGE OF age No. PROJECT. 1' L)' DATE: l u/z LI-1to ' Gv2VL @JUNK -aL S 1T2. C" N'6 ca C,v Aricq A Pasty R�►�c� Lh 0-9y A L1G. t G A,cc W-0Dl> a� 1.03 ,3 9-6 C�onti�os tT� G1J Ia.�. S _ Is. O VJe, s ►ram C. a..sss fj> a. �- ►�. L=$o'j 5= g,� i� J V= 1.3'-t'�-V/s' t=0.0k"n2 PAVkD fl(uQZ WAe11 L-5z;0' S = !im ./, j V = W, 4 (-1 / J ) L- /1 J t = O, 03og vtrz SIT&i T�tA1. 4- = O.00AS� ►t�L H WVN dNagner, Heindel, and Noyes, Inc ,onsulting Geologists Burlington, Vermon 4 P PAGE OF age No. PROJECT: ' - DATE: L, Sub A(4-A' Cr) t� -V-NJT!� I- N 0,0 014a CMA.Q(,%.. - N C), C) ��=� o, l Cl �j -►� O. oo3C• g3 O. 1S AkaEA:- ODUcI2r> 0.Oa03 St O. l a1c y- N !`�. �Nv� O, O 1 `1 S r l, b,- O.0 1rA`6 li;5. O, C)ck VV.11' 4,Q1E,WkN , (o�tFntti I� 0,00� `I qN Nor ctc. II -N (OUT Fnt�:G.O �� � 11%L1 (3, 15 A�I►J i O. c) Q) 9 `1 t kS L ,J `L o,�Z ooj o.o b eA"k.'i -* 1bCZ l.o'e., H WVN Wagner, Heindel, and Noyes, Inc, Consulting Geologists Burlington, Vermonl Ell Page No. PAGE OF PROJECT: 1 • DATE: 1 0 ' z1' �b SEv�, dla ( l ou -, s; rz '— q� \) Ny(Lst;vt P, I,t_ l C Ar-V w NJ . C- v L v (b rU Po ti", t - � . N� �z,tti� v � I�blt p l C, l C,�Lc`�SIa/L. U .S. I l =" \o o .. F2�Lt log/ Ly N iYto 15`65 0,5 pr 0,-4 <<'Z' C-f a.31 i o 15h.5 lS 3.`iy ro 5 �p lb3.o 5,0 �•G3 50 LIST OF INPUT DATA FOR TR-20 HYDROLOGY*-----io JOB TR-20 NOPLOTS I TITLE 002 NORTH BROOK REUISED 9-17-85, 10-24-86 //POSTDEUELOPMENT W/BASIN 2 XSECTN 001 1.0 171.5 8 170. 0.0 0.0 8 170.15 0.24 0.09 I 8 170.45 2.17 0.48 8 170.90 5.69 0.88 8 171.05 9.53 1.33 8 I 171.2 11.17 1.52 8 171.35 12.07 1.68 8 171.5 12.08 1.77 I 9 ENDTBL 2 XSECTN 002 1.0 146.5 8 145. 0.0 0.0 8 145.15 0.24 0.09 I 8 145.45 2.17 0.48 8 145.90 5.69 0.88 8 146.05 9.53 1.33 I8 146.2 11.17 1.52 $ 146.35 12.07 1.68 8 146.5 12.08 1.77 I 9 ENDTBL 2 XSECTN 003 1.0 160.0 8 158. 0.0 0.0 8 158.2 0.36 0.16 I 8 158.6 3.30 .85 8 159.0 8.66 1.57 8 159.4 14.54 2.36 8 I 159.6 17.00 2.70 8 159.8 18.36 2.98 8 160.0 18.37 3.14 I 9 ENDTBL 2 XSECTN 004 1.0 157. 8 155. 0.0 0.0 8 155.5 4.00 1.58 I3 8 156. 25.18 6.25 8 156.5 74.04 14.03 8 157. 161.84 25.30 1 9 ENDTBL 2 XSECTN 005 1.0 147. 8 145. 0.0 0.0 8 145.5 4.00 1.58 8 146. 25.18 6.25 8 146.5 74.04 14.03 8 147. 161.84 25.30 I 9 ENDTBL l .i LIST OF INPUT DATA (CONTINUED)********************y 3 STRUCT 01 I 9 ENDTBL 2 XSECTN 006 1.0 149.8 8 147.8 0.0 0.0 8 148.0 0.51 0.16 I 8 148.4 4.67 .85 8 148.6 12.25 1.57 8 149.2 20.56 2.36 8 I 149.4 24.04 2.70 8 149.6 25.96 2.98 8 149.8 25.97 3.14 I 9 ENDTBL 2 XSECTN 007 1.0 150.1 8 147.4 0.0 0.0 8 147.7 0.92 0.25 I 8 148.3 8.45 1.33 8 148.9 22.23 2.46 8 149.5 37.13 3.68 I 8 149.8 43.54 4.22 8 150.1 47.02 4.66 9 ENDTBL 2 XSECTN 008 1.0 121.25 I 8 119. 0.0 0.0 8 119.25 3.94 2.00 8 119.50 12.00 4.00 8 I 119.75 22.71 6.00 8 120.0 35.39 8.00 8 120.25 49.64 10.00 8 120.5 65.64 12.00 8 121.0 98.69 16.75 8 121.25 114.93 19.50 9 ENDTBL 3 STRUCT 02 8 120. 0.0 0.0 8 120.4 2.74 0.00006 8 121.2 25.63 0.001 8 122. 67.58 0.006 8 122.8 113.26 0.015 8 123.2 132.81 0.022 8 123.6 143.47 0.023 9 ENDTBL 2 XSECTN 009 1.0 119.0 8 113. 0.0 0.0 8 113.5 0.51 0.25 8 113.75 1.50 0.56 8 114. 3.23 1.00 1) i 0 LIST OF INPUT DATA(COhITINUED)********************40 8 114.5 9.49 2.25 8 115.0 20.39 4.000 I 8 116.0 56.96 9.00 8 117.0 128.89 16.00 118.0 233.0 25.00 18 8 119.0 378.0 36.00 9 ENDTBL 3 STRUCT 03 ' 8 113. 0.0 0.0 8 113.35 1.93 0.00003 8 114.05 18.00 0.005 8 114.75 47.48 0.165 8 115.45 75.97 0.308 8 115.80 93.30 0.503 8 116.15 100.79 0.7000 8 116.50 100.80 0.896 9 ENDTBL 2 XSECTN 010 1.0 104. 8 100. 0. 0 0. 0 8 100.5 7.80 3.20 8 101. 24.33 6.75 8 101.5 47.33 10.58 I 8 102. 75.96 14.70 8 102.5 110.20 19.13 8 103. 150.57 24.00 8 I 103.5 231.30 34.00 8 104. 393.99 54.00 9 ENDTBL 3 STRUCT 04 8 147.0 0.0 0.0 8 150.0 8.7 0.033 8 151.0 10.1 0.07 8 152.0 11.3 0.14 8 152.2 100.0 0.19 9 ENDTBL 3 STRUCT 05 8 167.0 0.0 0.0 8 168.0 5.0 0.0023 8 169.0 7.1 0.0138 8 170.0 8.7 0.0600 8 171.0 10.1 0.2743 8 171.5 50.0 0.2744 9 ENDTBL 3 STRUCT 06 8 175.0 0.0 0.0 8 176.0 5.0 0.0137 I LIST OF INPUT DATA(CONTIPJUED)********************� 8 178.0 8.7 0.1013 8 180.0 11.3 0.2515 8 180.5 11.8 0.2986 8 181.0 50.0 0.2987 9 ENDTBL 2 XSECTN 011 1.0 168. 8 166. 0.0 0.0 8 166.5 4.49 2.10 8 167. 15.53 5.00 8 167.5 32.27 8.40 8 168. 61.46 13.80 9 ENDTBL 2 XSECTN 012 1.0 163. 8 158. 0.0 0.0 8 158.5 29.0 0.77 8 159. 40.0 2.31 8 159.5 50.0 3.94 8 160.0 57.0 5.68 8 160.5 64.0 7.31 8 161. 70.0 8.85 8 162. 81.0 9.62 8 163. 90.0 9.63 9 ENDTBL 3 STRUCT 09 8 160.0 0.0 0.0 8 161.0 0.01 0.0628 8 162.0 0.02 0.1390 8 163.0 9.9 0.2300 8 164.0 15.6 0.3369 8 164.5 18.5 0.3968 8 165.0 21.2 0.4612 8 166.0 23.0 0.6041 8 166.5 24.2 0.6829 8 167.0 25.1 0.7669 9 ENDTBL 3 STRUCT 07 8 160.0 0.0 0.0 8 161.0 0.01 0.0546 8 162.0 0.02 0.1217 8 163.0 9.90 0.2027 8 164.0 15.6 0.2989 8 164.5 18.5 0.3530 N 8 165.0 21.2 0.4115 8 166.0 23.0 0.5418 8 166.5 24.2 0.6140 8 167.0 25.1 0.6911 14 V, "I"-. Vu%vN�t - ,,� / LIST OF INPUT DATA (CONTINUED)********************., 9 ENDTBL 6 RUNOFF 1 001 6 0.0390 79. 6 REACH 3 005 6 5 1100. 6 RUNOFF 1 002 7 0.0183 89. 6 ADDHYD 4 005 5 7 6 6 RUNOFF 1 003 5 0.0033 81. 6 REACH 3 004 5 4 400. 6 RUNOFF 1 004 5 0.0051 83. 6 ADDHYD 4 004 5 4 7 6 REACH 3 005 7 4 250. 6 ADDHYD 4 005 6 4 7 6 RUNOFF 1 005 5 0.0203 49. 6 RUNOFF 1 07 4 0.0198 85. 6 RESVOR 2 07 4 3 162.0 6 ADDHYD 4 012 5 3 6 6 ADDHYD 4 012 6 7 5 6 REACH 3 008 5 4 1300. 6 RUNOFF 1 008 7 0.0407 88. 6 ADDHYD 4 003 4 7 6 6 RUNOFF 1 006 2 0.0456 71. 6 RUNOFF 1 06 3 0.0032 94. 6 RESVOR 2 06 3 4 175.0 6 RUNOFF 1 05 7 0.0019 94. 6 ADDHYD 4 05 4 7 5 6 RESVOR 2 05 5 4 167.0 6 RUNOFF 1 007 3 0.0115 94. 6 ADDHYD 4 007 3 4 7 6 ADDHYD 4 04 7 2 4 6 RESVOR 2 04 4 2 147.0 6 RUNOFF 1 007 3 0.0064 94. 6 ADDHYD 4 007 2 3 4 6 RUNOFF 1 011 2 0.0066 67. 6 REACH 3 007 2 5 300. 6 RUNOFF 1 007 3 0.0095 69. 6 ADDHYD 4 007 5 3 2 6 ADDHYD 4 007 2 4 7 6 REACH 3 008 7 4 700. 6 ADDHYD 4 008 4 6 7 6 RESVOR 2 02 7 6 120.0 6 REACH 3 009 6 5 400.0 6 RESVOR 2 03 5 4 113.0 6 REACH 3 010 4 6 600.0 6 RUNOFF 1 010 2 0.0593 77. 6 ADDHYD 4 010 2 6 5 ENDATA 7 BASFLO 5 0.01 0.42 a: 1 1 0.19 1 1 0. 15 ZTZ 1 1 0.32 1 1 1 1 0.278 S1 u1'se. Fes. 1 0. 0955:v- cos ��s�U 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 . 56 1 0. 8 0 0.06 1 1 1 1 0.06 NCR DlL � L 0.15 N,ILD(c, 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.063 1 1 1 OI,TPkLt, �ft \ 1 1 1 0. 072 _UnL_ 1 1 0.488 -0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.30 tip( 1 1 I-2 LIST OF INPUT DATA (CONTINUED)********************.m 7 I NCP.EM h 0.10 7 COMPUT 7 001 010 4.0 1.0 2 2 01 01 ENDCMP 1 ENDJOB 2 e (Z- C13 EN culprA E hi - t . . TR20 XEQ NORTH BROOK REVISED 9-17-85 // JOB 1 SUMMARY REV 05/02/83 PAGE 12 SUMMARY TABLE 1 - SELECTED RESULTS OF STANDARD AND EXECUTIVE CONTROL INSTRUCTIONS IN THE ORDER PERFORMED r' (A STAR(-) AFTER THE PEAK DISCHARGE TIME AND RATE (CFS) VALUES INDICATES A FLAT TOP HYDROGRAPH A QUESTION MARK(?) INDICATES A HYDROGRAPH WITH PEAK AS LAST POINT.) SECTION/ STANDARD RAIN ANTEC MAIN PRECIPITATION PEAK DISCHARGE STRUCTURE CONTROL DRAINAGE TABLE MOIST TIME ------------------------- RUNOFF -------------------------------------- ID OPERATION AREA # COND INCREM BEGIN AMOUNT DURATION AMOUNT ELEVATION TIME RATE RATE (SQ MI) (HR) (HR) (IN) (HR) (IN) (FT) (HR) (CFS) (CSM) ALTERNATE XSECTION 1 STORM 1 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 1.96 .88- 12.15 44.53 1141.9 1 RUNOFF .039 XSECTION 5 REACH .039 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 1.96 146.20 12.25 44.54 1142.1 XSECTION 2 RUNOFF .018 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 2.83 .68- 12.01 40.05 2188.3 XSECTION 5 ADDHYD .057 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 2.24 146.40 12.10 64.48 1125.3 XSECTION 3 RUNOFF .003 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 2.12 .89- 11.99 6.00 1818.8 XSECTION 4 REACH .003 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 2.11 155.55 12.09 6.00 1818.7 (_ XSECTION 4 RUNOFF .005 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 2.28 .98- 12.09 7.81 1530.8 XSECTION 4 ADDHYD .008 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 2.21 155.73 12.09 13.81 1643.9 XSECTION 5 REACH .008 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 2.22 145.73 12.19 13.81 1643.9 i XSECTION 5 ADDHYD .066 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 2.24 146.51 12.13 76.23 1160.3 XSECTION 5 RUNOFF .020 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 .66 .98- 12.11 7.70 379.5 t► STRUCTURE 9 RUNOFF .020 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 2.13 .98- 12.04 31.79 1605.4 l•o.S,sra XSECTION 12 ADDHYD .040 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 1.39 158.94 12.06 38.67 964.4 XSECTION 12 ADDHYD .106 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 1.91 165.58 12.09 113.20 1069.9 - XSECTION 8 REACH .106 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 1.91 121.22 12.19 113.19 1069.9 XSECTION 8 RUNOFF .041 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 2.73 .88- 12.22 54.18 1331.2 XSECTION 8 ADDHYD .147 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 2.14 122.05 12.20 167.08 1140.5 ` XSECTION 6 RUNOFF .046 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 1.39 .88- 12.41 23.31 511.1 STRUCTURE 6 RUNOFF .003 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 3.28 .88- 11.95 9.48 2961.9 STRUCTURE 6 RESVOR .003 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 3.32 126.86 12.02 6.59 2058.7 STRUCTURE 5 RUNOFF .002 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 3.28 .88- 11.95 5.63 2961.9 STRUCTURE 5 ADDHYD .005 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 3.31 171.02 11.97 12.01 2354.7 STRUCTURE 5 RESVOR .005 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 3.50 170.05 12.07 8.76 1718.4 XSECTION 7 RUNOFF .011 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 3.33 .88- 11.98 30.19 2625.6 XSECTION 7 ADDHYD .017 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 3.38 149.57 11.98 38.71 2331.8 STRUCTURE 4 ADDHYD .062 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 1.92 152.08 12.01 46.97 755.2 STRUCTURE 4 RESVOR .062 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 1.94 152.08 11.95 46.60 749.1 XSECTION 7 RUNOFF .006 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 3.28 .88- 11.95 18.88 2950.7 XSECTION 7 ADDHYD .069 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 2.06 151.59 11.95 64.26 936.7 XSECTION 11 RUNOFF .007 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 1.13 .88- 11.97 7.66 1160.7 XSECTION 7 REACH .007 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 1.17 148.24 12.07 7.66 1160.6 XSECTION 7 RUNOFF .010 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 1.27 .88- 12.21 6.01 632.8 �- L TR20 XEQ NORTH BROOK REVISED 9-17-85 // JOB 1 SUMMARY ( REV 05/02/83 PAGE 13 SUMMARY TABLE 1 - SELECTED RESULTS OF STANDARD AND EXECUTIVE CONTROL INSTRUCTIONS IN THE ORDER PERFORMED (A STAR(•) AFTER THE PEAK DISCHARGE TIME AND RATE (CFS) VALUES INDICATES A FLAT TOP HYDROGRAPH A QUESTION MARK(?) INDICATES A HYDROGRAPH WITH PEAK AS LAST POINT.) SECTION/ STANDARD RAIN ANTEC MAIN PRECIPITATION PEAK DISCHARGE STRUCTURE CONTROL DRAINAGE TABLE MOIST TIME ------------------------- RUNOFF -------------------------------------- ID OPERATION AREA # COND INCREM BEGIN AMOUNT DURATION AMOUNT ELEVATION TIME RATE RATE (SQ MI) (HR) (HR) (IN) (HR) (IN) (FT) (HR) (CFS) (CSM) ALTERNATE XSECTION 1 STORM 1 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 1.23 148.48 12.09 12.66 786.3 7 ADDHYD .016 XSECTION 7 ADDHYD .085 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 1.91 151.92 11.99 68.08 803.8 XSECTION 8 REACH .085 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 1.87 120.54 12.09 68.08 803.8 XSECTION 8 ADDHYD .231 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 2.04 123.04 12.17 231.02 999.2 STRUCTURE 2 RESVOR .231 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 2.06 126.82 12.12 229.20 991.3 XSECTION 9 REACH .231 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 2.04 117.96 12.27 229.20 991.3 STRUCTURE 3 RESVOR .231 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 2.05 122.65 12.71 100.98 436.7 XSECTION 10 REACH .231 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 2.04 102.37 12.81 100.98 436.7 XSECTION 10 RUNOFF .059 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 1.81 .68- 12.09 74.35 1253.8 XSECTION 10 ADDHYD .291 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 2.00 103.02 12.20 153.09 527.0 TR20 XED NORTH BROOK REVISED 9-17-85, 10-24-86 //POSTDEVELOPMENT W/BASIN JOB 1 SUMMARY REV 05/02/83 PAGE 14 SUMMARY TABLE 1 - SELECTED RESULTS OF STANDARD AND EXECUTIVE CONTROL INSTRUCTIONS IN THE ORDER PERFORMED (A STAR(•) AFTER THE PEAK DISCHARGE TIME AND RATE (CFS) VALUES INDICATES A FLAT TOP HYDROGRAPH A QUESTION MARK(7) INDICATES A HYDROGRAPH WITH PEAK AS LAST POINT.) SECTION/ STANDARD RAIN ANTEC MAIN PRECIPITATION PEAK DISCHARGE STRUCTURE CONTROL DRAINAGE TABLE MOIST TIME ------------------------- RUNOFF -------------------------------------- ID OPERATION AREA # CONO INCREM BEGIN AMOUNT DURATION AMOUNT ELEVATION TIME RATE RATE (' (SQ MI) (HR) (HR) (IN) (HR) (IN) (FT) (HR) (CFS) (CSM) ALTERNATE 1 STORM 1 XSECTION 1 RUNOFF .039 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 1.96 .88- 12.15 44.53 1141.9 XSECTION 5 REACH .039 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 1.96 146.20 12.25 44.54 1142.1 XSECTION 2 RUNOFF .018 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 2.83 .88- 12.01 40.05 2188.3 XSECTION 5 ADDHYD .057 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 2.24 146.40 12.10 64.48 1125.3 XSECTION 3 RUNOFF 003 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 2.12 .89- 11.99 6.00 1818.8 i XSECTION 4 REACH .003 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 2.11 155.55 12.09 6.00 1818.7 XSECTION 4 RUNOFF .005 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 2.28 .88- 12.09 7.81 1530.8 XSECTION 4 ADDHYD .008 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 2.21 155.73 12.09 13.81 1643.9 XSECTION 5 REACH .008 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 2.22 145.73 12.19 13.81 1643.9 XSECTION 5 ADDHYD .066 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 2.24 146.51 12.13 76.23 1160.3 XSECTION 5 RUNOFF .020 2 2 .10 0 4.00 24.00 .30 .98- 12.18 1.69 83.2 STRUCTURE 7 RUNOFF 020 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 2.42 .8A- 11.96 45.45 2295.4 STRUCTURE 7 RESVOR 020 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 2.46 166.26 12.09 23.63 1193.4 STD XSECTIONHY .04 2 .1 .0 4.00 24.00 1.37 158.43 12.11 25.16 627.5 XSECTION 12 ADDHYD .106 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 1.91 164.26 12.12 101.36 958.1 XSECTION 8 REACH .106 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 1.90 121.04 12.22 101.36 958.1 XSECTION 8 RUNOFF .041 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 2.73 .88- 12.22 54.18 1331.2 XSECTION 8 ADDHYD .142 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 2.13 121.86 12.22 155.54 1061.7 XSECTION 6 RUNOFF .046 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 1.39 .99- 12.41 23.31 511.1 STRUCTURE 6 RUNOFF .003 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 3.28 .88- 11.95 9.48 2961.9 STRUCTURE 6 RESVOR 003 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 3.32 176.86 12.02 6.59 2058.7 STRUCTURE 5 RUNOFF 002 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 3.28 .88- 11.95 5.63 2961.9 STRUCTURE 5 ADDHYD .005 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 3.31 121.02 11.97 12.01 2354.7 STRUCTURE 5 RESVOR .005 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 3.50 170.05 12.07 8.76 1718.4 XSECTION 7 RUNOFF .011 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 3.33 .86- 11.98 30.19 2625.6 F XSECTION 7 ADDHYD .017 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 3.38 149.57 11.98 38.71 2331.8 STRUCTURE 4 ADDHYD .062 2 2 .10 .0 4.06 24.00 1.92 152.08 12.01 46.97 755.2 STRUCTURE 4 RESVOR .062 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 1.94 152.08 11.95 46.60 749.1 XSECTION 7 RUNOFF .006 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 3.28 b8- 11.95 18.88 2950.-7 XSECTION 7 ADDHYD .069 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 2.06 151.59 11.95 64.26 936.7 L XSECTION 11 RUNOFF .007 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 1.13 .88- 11.97 7.66 1160.7 XSECTION 7 REACH .007 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 1.17 148.24 12.07 7.66 1160.E TR20 XEQ REV 05/02/83 NORTH BROOK REVISED 9-17-85, 10-24-86 //POSTDEVELOPMENT W/BASIN JOB 1 SUMMARY PAGE 15 SUMMARY TABLE 1 - SELECTED RESULTS OF STANDARD AND EXECUTIVE CONTROL INSTRUCTIONS IN THE ORDER PERFORMED (A STAR(•) AFTER THE PEAK DISCHARGE TIME AND RATE (CFS) VALUES INDICATES A FLAT TOP HYDROGRAPH A QUESTION MARK(?) INDICATES A HYDROGRAPH WITH PEAK AS LAST POINT.) SECTION/ STANDARD RAIN ANTEC MAIN PRECIPITATION PEAK DISCHARGE STRUCTURE CONTROL DRAINAGE TABLE MOIST TIME ------------------------- RUNOFF -------------------------------------- ID OPERATION AREA ♦ COND INCREM BEGIN AMOUNT DURATION AMOUNT ELEVATION TIME RATE RATE (SQ MI) (HR) (HR) (IN) (HR) (IN) (FT) (HR) (CFS) (CSM) ALTERNATE 1 STORM 1 XSECTION 7 RUNOFF .010 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 1.27 .88- 12.21 6.01 632.8 XSECTION 7 ADDHYD .016 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 1.23 148.48 12.09 12.66 786.3 XSECTION 7 ADDHYD .085 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 1.91 151.92 11.99 68.08 803.8 XSECTION 8 REACH .085 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 1.87 120.54 12.09 68.08 803.8 XSECTION 8 ADDHYD .231 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 2.03 122.83 12.18 217.62 941.2 STRUCTURE 2 RESVOR .231 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 2.05 126.31 12.18 215.65 932.7 XSECTION 9 REACH .231 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 2.04 117.83 12.28 215.65 932.7 STRUCTURE 3 RESUOR .231 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 2.05 122.50 12.72 100.97 436.7 XSECTION 10 REACH .231 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 2.04 102.37 12.62 100.97 436.7 XSECTION 10 RUNOFF .059 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 1.81 .88- 12.09 74.35 1253.8 XSECTION 10 ADDHYD .291 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 1.99 103.02 12.19 153.04 526.8 H WVN Nagner, Heindel, and Noyes, Inc ;onsulting Geologists Burlington, Vermor S C-.VL E M A-r l C- YL.�\�' 1 1 i 1 tr J CAP 2VSEq �4�� 17lAAl, 4• o !1 ®PRIN 6"�Uw-6- Pazov GwMCuTfU ON Pr1tK 1 N FWW b-1'5 FYZ'/Cc:•) TO PROVIDE. :Ep �h�F-aT A-� loN VF F,,NP- SPu cD Oil P PAGE OF age No. PROJECT: o `� DATE. 10. n1.T J �1.�1�1'•'Z Iu N V� m0Z,L(,FAiCr{ '�Y�llWti"1 a4� GONDU%— PIPE,I 3%• S�bPE [T4Y) � Mix, �.kNar�l H WVN Wagner, Heindel, and Noyes, Inc ;onsulting Geologists Burlington, Vermon ti vQ L'U A4. p @ ►6o,��i ab' S, �►i7 39.5 10,0 �tM %,0 LIi,O SO[ Page No. PAGE OF PROJECT: -`�- DATE: Iy1lb J H L}3(F� L-I I l v (00� ti A39 6.5'1 l`.. 314, Ci,lal ltu � 0.60 (�9M p 33bo 0 • (4 t 1 1 C� L-' . -.4 c.-. H WVN Wagner, Heindel, and Noyes, Inc. Consulting Geologists Burlington, Vermont . o PAGE OF Page No. PROJECT: DATE: b•to4rc' s LA" p.RHF✓Z V4f C �o OAR. L Et. , 1 % o` �j C►kiT T-o " us�� I> Ve, IGMi a rtrt P1 f E a- \" V t A AlVA' E-a— � G� EMkQ,GZN(,`I SPtLLW" NI)T vsED 'V2w4, ��S1G.N 5 ;� CLM L til.�tac.Z �R tS�C4, TQ CAE SPEC M u 4&.t,. o V -\ Ft,, ow F2 u nn it. "�', t r% Cr L . Pt L. E P'r DEPM Q o. S F� o.3s GrrS a.o 0,b5 5 O,-4fs (a,0 1.aa v E4Z--�- 1c A'(-, F-,t,., P fe I�r— P�czFM.-S- R5 ct�LCvLwL, l•.G�2, G o a� tZs� k"k 3 H WVN Wagner, Heindel, and Noyes, Inc. Consulting Geologists Burlington, Vermont G PAGE OF Page No. PROJECT: 1 O'L" DATE: 1 O L A' I r 1 o N o/2S C �. o. �' .5� 3.►�5 �, lSs C4-� I, a 1• t `I 1.% 'A-.cl d I -� I��1 ►,w la.la 1,S 5(0 4ss ��•4� 3,p 3.43 o'LIj Li 3 T L fv11*-- - 0 E.f-% A5 t Co N Nt.o L v F'� Ww S �t ► F+ TZ) wNJ JV Cr- Pt pE K- sU r-l; ; S "= 3 7. 1'1 P� Utz �Fa.�c rw�v v 2v�� sue; i L= So KQ, =o.S NV G1 SP1U_Vj #,A-t - N4'c ����DUj_J& . T'�t�i�1 11,0.5 O.3S o O 35 l b l 0. `t`I o o. K9 Ibl,� o, bo I d o•�� tea, 01 L-q o C.09 Iba.S 01 L, 1 % 1�3, p•g� � �j .� o to,�5 Ito3,S 0lot lc.y,5 I,o�l I Is,y-t- ►�t.si I(olo, I•a� ��,o �4.ao 1. J�1 ICJ' t 1 OPERATION RUNOFF STRUCTURE 7 V W P M E A/T PEAK TIME(HRS) PEAK DISCHARGE(CFS) PEAK ELEVATION(FEET) 11.96 45.45 (RUNOFF) TIME(HRS) FIRST HYDROGRAPH POINT .00 HOURS TIME INCREMENT - .10 HOURS DRAINAGE AREA - .02 SQ.MI. 6.00 DISCHG .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .01 .02 .03 .04 7.00 DISCHG .05 .05 .06 .07 .08 .09 .10 .10 .11 .12 8.00 DISCHG .13 .16 .17 .19 .23 .24 .25 .27 .28 .29 9.00 DISCHG .31 .36 .38 .40 .41 .43 .49 .52 .54 .55 10.00 DISCHG .57 .64 .67 .73 .85 .89 1.09 1.18 1.30 1.51 11.00 DISCHG 1.57 1.84 1.96 2.17 2.57 2.71 9.59 12.35 20.28 38.69 12.00 DISCHG 43.42 15.79 7.98 6.64 4.91 4.77 4.12 3.96 3.70 3.16 13.00 DISCHG 3.11 2.71 2.61 2.51 2.28 2.27 2.00 1.93 1.87 1.76 14.00 DISCHG 1.75 1.62 1.59 1.53 1.42 1.41 1.28 1.24 1.24 1.24 15;00 DISCHG 1.24 1.24 1.24 1.19 1.08 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 16.00 DISCHG 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 .93 .90 .89 .89 17.00 DISCHG .90 .90 .90 .90 .90 .90 .90 .90 .85 .73 18.00 DISCHG .72 .72 .72 .72 .72 .72 .72 .72 .72 .72 19.00 DISCHG .72 .72 .72 .72 .72 .72 .72 .72 .67 .55 20.00 DISCHG .54 .54 .54 .54 .54 .54 .54 .94 .54 .54 21.00 DISCHG .54 .54 .54 .54 .54 .54 .54 .54 .55 .55 22.00 DISCHG .55 .55 .55 .55 .55 .55 .55 .55 .55 .55 23.00 DISCHG .55 .55 .55 .55 .55 .55 .55 .55 .49 .38 24.00 DISCHG .37 .08 .01 .00 OPERATION RESVOR STRUCTURE 7 v v P W w F rm (tS- <EN T LQ AJ 13+0s 1 ..) C> A) PEAK TIME(HRS) PEAK DISCHARGE(CFS) PEAK ELEVATION(FEET) 12.09 23.63 166.26 TIME(HRS) FIRST HYOROGRAPH POINT - .00 HOURS TIME INCREMENT - .10 HOURS DRAINAGE AREA - .02 SQ.M1. .00 DISCHG .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 1.00 DISCHG .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 2.00 DISCHG .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 3.00 DISCHG .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 4.00 DISCHG .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 5.00 DISCHG .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 6.00 DISCHG .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 7.00 DISCHG .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 8.00 DISCHG .02 .02 .02 .02 .07 .18 .23 .25 .27 .28 9.00 DISCHG .29 .32 .35 .38 .40 .41 .44 .48 .51 .53 10.00 DISCHG .55 .59 .63 .68 .76 .83 .94 1.07 1.18 1.33 11.00 DISCHG 1.47 1.63 1.81 1.99 2.24 2.51 4.95 8.98 12.25 18.73 12.00 DISCHG 22.78 23.61 22.25 19.52 14.59 10.76 7.13 5.06 4.23 3.69 13.00 DISCHG 3.32 3.05 2.79 2.63 2.47 2.34 2.20 2.04 1.95 1.86 14.00 DISCHG 1.79 1.72 1.64 1.59 1.51 1.45 1.39 1.30 1.26 1.24 15.00 DISCHG 1.24 1.24 1.24 1.22 1.16 1.10 1.08 1.07 1.07 1.07 16.00 DISCHG 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.02 1.07 1.07 1.02 .95 .91 .90 17.00 DISCHG .90 .90 .90 .90 .90 .90 .90 .90 .88 .82 18.00 DISCHG .76 .73 .72 .72 .72 .72 .72 .72 .72 .72 19.00 DISCHG .72 .22 .72 .72 .72 .72 .72 .72 .71 .64 20.00 DISCHG .58 .56 .55 .54 .54 .54 .54 .54 .54 .54 21.00 DISCHG .54 .54 .54 .54 .54 .54 .54 .54 .54 .55 22.00 DISCHG .55 .55 .55 .55 .55 .55 .55 .55 .55 .55 23.00 DISCHG .55 .55 .55 .55 .55 .55 .55 .55 .53 .47 24.00 DISCHG .40 .28 .12 .04 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 25.00 DISCHG .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 26.00 DISCHG .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 27.00 DISCHG .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 28.00 DISCHG .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 29.00 DISCHG .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 z PEAK TIME(HRS) PEAK DISCHARGE(CFS) PEAK ELEVATION(FEET) 12.11 25.16 158.43 TIME(HRS) FIRST HYDROGRAPH POINT - .00 HOURS TIME INCREMENT = .10 HOURS DRAINAGE AREA = .04 SQ.MI. .00 DISCHG .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 1.00 DISCHG .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 2.00 DISCHG .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 3.00 DISCHG .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 4.00 DISCHG .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 5.00 DISCHG .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 6.00 DISCHG .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 7.00 DISCHG .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 8.00 DISCHG .02 .02 .02 .02 .07 .18 .23 .25 .27 .28 9.00 DISCHG .29 .32 .35 .38 .40 .41 .44 .48 .51 .53 10.00 DISCHG .55 .59 .63 .68 .76 .83 .94 1.07 1.18 1.33 11.00 DISCHG 1.47 1.63 1.81 1.98 2.24 2.51 4.95 8.98 12.25 18.74 12.00 DISCHG 23.22 25.14 23.93 20.36 15.71 11.70 7.99 5.86 5.00 4.41 13.00 DISCHG 3.98 3.68 3.38 3.20 3.02 2.86 2.70 2.51 2.40 2.30 14.00 DISCHG 2.21 2.13 2.04 1.97 1.88 1.80 1.72 1.62 1.57 1.96 15.00 DISCHG 1.55 1.55 1.56 1.54 1.47 1.39 1.36 1.35 1.35 1.35 16.00 DISCHG 1.35 1.35 1.36 1.36 1.36 1.36 1.31 1.22 1.17 1.15 171.00 DISCHG 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.14 1.06 18.00 DISCHG .98 .95 .94 .93 .93 .93 .93 .93 .93 .93 19.00 DISCHG .94 .94 .94 .94 .94 .94 .94 .94 .92 .85 20.00 DISCHG .76 .73 .72 .71 .71 .71 .71 .71 .71 .71 21.00 DISCHG .71 .71 .71 .71 .72 .72 .72 .72 .72 .72 22.00 DISCHG .72 .72 .72 .72 .72 .72 .72 .72 .72 .72 23.00 DISCHG, .72 .72 .72 .72 .72 .73 .73 .73 .71 .63 24.00 DISCHG .54 .39 .19 .07 .03 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 25.00 DISCHG .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 26.00 DISCHG .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 27.00 DISCHG .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 y 28.00 DISCHG .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 29.00 DISCHG .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 r OPERATION ADDHYD CROSS SECTION 12 PEAK TIME(HRS) PEAK DISCHARGE(CFS) PEAK ELEVATION(FEET) 12.12 101.36 164.26 23.65 2.47 158.04 TItlE(HRS) FIRST HYDROGRAPH POINT .00 HOURS TIME INCREMENT - .10 HOURS DRAINAGE AREA = .11 SQ.MI. .00 DISCHG .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 1.00 DISCHG .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 2.00 DISCHG .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 3.00 DISCHG .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 4.00 DISCHG .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 5.00 DISCHG .03 .04 .04 .05 .06 .07 .07 .08 .09 .09 6.00 DISCHG .10 .11 .13 .14 .16 .17 .17 .18 .19 .20 7.00 DISCHG .21 .22 .23 .24 .25 .25 .26 .27 .28 .29 8.00 DISCHG .30 .33 .37 .39 .49 .64 .71 .76 .79 .84 9.00 DISCHG .88 .97 1.07 1.16 1.23 1.30 1.41 1.54 1.65 1.74 10.00 DISCHG 1.82 1.95 2.10 2.25 2.51 2.75 3.10 3.52 3.90 4.43 11.00 DISCHG 4.91 5.47 6.11 6.70 7.62 8.49 14.46 25.00 35.98 63.01 12.00 DISCHG 88.13 100.87 96.36 83.69 62.13 45.35 33.19 25.82 21.74 18.74 13.00 DISCHG 16.68 15.02 13.62 12.62 11.67 10.97 10.31 9.64 9.14 8.64 14.00 DISCHG 8.27 7.91 7.57 7.30 6.96 6.68 6.38 6.06 5.82 5.66 , 15.00 DISCHG 5.55 5.51 5.48 5.44 5.27 5.09 4.94 4.83 4.77 4.75 16.00 DISCHG 4.73 4.73 4.73 4.73 4.73 4.73 4.63 4.44 4.28 4.15 17.00 DISCHG 4.06 4.02 4.00 3.99 3.99 3.98 3.99 3.99 3.96 3.79 18.00 DISCHG 3.61 3.45 3.34 3.28 3.25 3.23 3.22 3.22 3.22 3.22 19.00 DISCHG 3.22 3.22 3.22 3.22 3.23 3.23 3.23 3.23 3.20 3.03 20.00 DISCHG 2.84 2.68 2.57 2.51 2.47 2.46 2.45 2.44 2.44 2.44 21.00 DISCHG 2.44 2.44 2.44 2.44 2.44 2.45 2.45 2.45 2.45 2.45 22.00 DISCHG 2.45 2.45 2.45 2.45 2.45 2.45 2.46 2.46 2.46 2.46 23.00 DISCHG 2.46 2.46 2.46 2.46 2.46 2.46 2.46 2.47 2.43 2.26 24.00 DISCHG 2.07 1.69 1.16 .75 .45 .25 .15 .09 .06 .05 25.00 DISCHG .04 .03 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 ` 26.00 DISCHG .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 27.00 DISCHG .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 28.00 C)ISrHG. .02 .C2 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 1 TP20 XEO NORTH BROOK REVISED 9-17-85, 10-24-86 //POSTDEVELOPMENT W.'BASIN JOB 1 PASS 1 REV 05/02/83 PAGE 5 OPERATION ADOHYD CROSS SECTION 8 GU 1. VVL-T' C "is- iN 6- a-R. q_A,� p A Al V- && W AJ-V PEAK TIME(HP.S) PEAK DISCHARGE(CFS) PEAK ELEVATION(FEET) 12.18 217.62 122.83 19.71 7.36 119.36 23.69 5.60 119.30 TIr1E(HRS) FIRST HYDROGRAPH POINT - .00 HOURS TIME INCREMENT - .10 HOURS DRAINAGE AREA - .23 SO.MI. .00 DISCHG .01 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 1.00 DISCHG .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 2.00 DISCHG .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 3.00 DISCHG, .03 .04 .05 .06 .07 .08 .09 .10 .11 .13 4.00 DISCHG .15 .17 .19 .20 .22 .23 .24 .26 .27 .28 5.00 DISCHG .29 .31 .32 .34 .36 .38 .40 .43 .45 .48 6.00 OISG_HG .51 .54 .62 .71 .77 .82 .87 .91 .95 1.00 7.00 DISCHG 1.04 1.08 1.12 1.15 1.19 1.23 1.27 1.30 1.34 1.38 9.00 DISCHG 1.41 1.45 1.57 1.71 1.85 2.08 2.33 2.43 2.59 2.68 9.00 DISCHG 2.77 2.87 3.08 3.32 3.50 3.65 3.78 4.04 4.31 4.53 10.00 DISCHG 4.70 4.86 5.15 5.46 5.84 6.40 6.92 7.75 8.64 9.53 11.00 DISCHG 10.64 11.65 12.92 14.24 15.70 17.70 20.23 36.49 55.52 83.45 12.00 DISCHG 162.23 204.02 217.02 190.30 171.73 128.19 106.26 31.87 68.64 57.40 13.00 DISCHG 49.48 43.88 38.70 35.27 33.22 31.25 29.62 27.97 26.13 24.44 14.00 DISCHG 21.17 19.97 18.99 18.11 17.32 16.51 15.79 15.04 14.29 13.75 15.00 DISCHG 13.35 13.07 12.88 12.75 12.56 12.16 11.77 11.47 11.25 11.09 16.00 DISCHG 10.99 10.93 10.88 10.86 10.84 10.83 10.82 10.57 10.17 9.86 17.00 DISCHG 9.62 9.44 9.33 9.25 9.19 9.16 9.14 9.13 9.11 9.00 18.00 DISCHG 8.65 8.28 8.00 7.78 7.64 7.54 7.47 7.43 7.40 7.38 19.00 DISCHG 7.36 7.36 7.35 7.35 7.35 7.35 7.35 7.36 7.35 7.24 20.00 DISCHG 6.89 6.53 6.24 6.02 5.87 5.77 5.70 5.65 5.62 5.60 21.00 DISCHG 5.59 5.58 5.57 5.57 5.57 5.57 5.57 5.57 5.57 5.57 22.00 DISCHG 5.57 5.57 5.57 5.53 5.58 5.58 5.58 5.58 5.59 5.59 23.00 DISCHG 5.59 5.59 5.59 5.60 5.60 5.60 5.60 5.60 5.60 5.49 24.00 DISCHG 5.13 4.73 3.93 2.88 2.07 1.46 1.01 .71 .50 .35 25.00 DISCHG .25 .18 .14 .09 .07 .05 .04 .04 .03 .03 26.00 DISCHG .03 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 27.00 DISCHG .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 28.00 DISCHG .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 29.00 DISCHG .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 1 N ^� OPERATION AODHYD CROSS SECTION 10 B Aar dF W �EQSK i PEAK TIME(HRS) PEAK DISCHARGE(CFS) 12.19 153.04 15.55 15.58 16.75 13.36 17.78 11.51 19.78 9.26 23.76 7.05 TIME(HRS) FIRST HYDROGRAPH POINT - .00 HOURS TIME INCF .00 DISCHG .01 .01 .02 .03 .0: 1.00 DISCHG .03 .03 .03 .03 .0: 2.00 DISCHG .03 .03 .03 .03 .0: 3.00 DISCHG 03 .03 .03 .03 .0� 4.00 DISCHG .11 .12 .15 .17 .V 5.00 DISCHG .27 .28 .30 .30 .3' 6.00 DISCHG .45 .48 .51 .54 .6'. 7.00 DISCHG .96 .99 1.04 1.07 1.1: 8.00 DISCHG 1.34 1.37 1.41 1.45 1.5E 9.00 DISCHG 2.59 2.68 2.77 2.88 3.11 10.00 DISCHG 4.62 4.90 5.14 5.37 5.7, 11.00 DISCHG 10.31 11.43 12.86 14.21 15.8E 12.00 DISCHG 106.05 140.44 152.97 136.34 124.8' 13.00 DISCHG 109.57 108.91 108.25 197.75 107.31 14.00 DISCHG 32.53 30.10 27.48 25.03 23.6: 15.00 DISCHG 17.7l 16.72 16.71 16.04 16.M 16.00 DISCHG 14.09 13.73 13.83 13.57 13.7: 17.00 DISCHG 12.57 12.11 12.00 11.68 11.7( 18.00 DISCHG 11.20 10.88 10.61 10.11 9.9: 19.00 DISCHG 9.31 9.20 9.29 9.18 9.2� " 20.00 DISCHG 8.98 8.70 8.39 7.93 7.7( 21.00 DISCHG 7.07 6.99 7.03 6.96 7.01, 22.00 DISCHG 7.01 6.97 7.02 6.97 7.0: 23.00 DISCHG 7.03 7.00 7.04 7.00 7.0� 24.00 DISCHG 6.75 6.41 5.73 4.99 4.1( 25.00 DISCHG .53 .32 .28 .15 .1; 26.00 DISCHG .13 .01 .13 .01 .1: 27.00 DISCHG .12 .01 .12 .01 .11 29.00 DISCHG .12 .01 .12 .01 .1S 29.00 DISr_HG .11 .01 .11 .01 .11 J Qk LAA&P- I"KkM PLI.11/.1 PEAK ELEVATION(FEET) 103.02 100.74 100.67 100.61 100.54 100.45 =MENT - .10 HOURS DRAINAGE AREA - .29 SO.MI. .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .05 .07 .08 .09 .10 .20 .22 .23 .25 .25 .34 .36 .37 .40 .42 .71 .78 .82 .87 .91 1.15 1.19 1.22 1.27 1.29 1.71 1.85 2.06 2.33 2.48 3.39 3.61 3.81 4.00 4.30 6.17 6.67 7.41 8.12 9.14 17.78 21.22 29.07 38.20 63.80 118.42 114.94 112.89 111.58 110.52 106.90 106.57 106.16 71.94 37.95 22.46 21.30 19.65 19.35 19.02 15.49 15.50 14.80 14.64 14.09 13.51 13.62 13.29 13.30 12.86 11.49 11.57 11.41 11.50 11.26 9.60 9.55 9.35 9.38 9.24 9.19 9.26 9.19 9.25 9.07 7.41 7.32 7.15 7.15 1.04 6.96 7.01 6.96 7.01 6.96 6.98 7.02 6.98 7.03 6.99 7.01 7.04 7.01 7.04 6.89 2.95 2.14 1.44 1.04 .68 .06 .13 .02 .13 .01 .01 .13 .01 .13 .01 .01 .12 .01 .12 .01 .01 .12 .01 .12 .01 .01 .11 .01 .11 .01 u 1 6YN (Te ff tow coo oz� WA Ner� J-A�� ou+ eurvw o H 1\1N Wagner, Heindel, and Noyes, Inc, consulting geologists P.O. Box 1629 Burlington, Vermont 05402-1629 802-658-0820 November 5, 1986 Jane Lefleur Planning Office Municipal Building Dorset St. South Burlington, VT 05403 Dear Jane: Enclosed please find our analysis performed for the IDS site located within the North Brook watershed. In order to prevent an increase in peak discharge in the brook, a retention pond of approximately 195,000 gallons is specified, at the location indicated on the site plans prepared by Trudell Consulting Engineers. Please contact me if you have any questions. Sincerely, V Je frey ANelson, Geologist Wagner, Heindel, and Noyes, Inc. JAN:tac cc: Shelley Smullen, IDS Terry Krinsky, Trudell IDS ANALYSIS OF HYDROLOGIC IMPACT H WAGNER, HEINDEL, AND NOYES, INC. CONSULTING GEOLOGISTS BURLINGTON VERMONT H VN Wagner, Helndel, and Noyes, Inc. consulting geologists P.O. Box 1629 Burlington, Vermont 05402-1629 802-658-0820 ANALYSIS OF HYDROLOGIC IMPACT IDS NORTH BROOK WATERSHED Prepared by: Jeffrey A. Nelson Geologist Revi wed and Approved by: Ji J ffr y Noyes P i cipa Date: November 5, 1986 Summary} Recommendations, and Conclusions 1. A hydrologic analysis has been performed for the proposed IDS expansion. The site is located within the North Brook watershed adjacent to Bartlett Brook. 2. The analysis indicates that the peak discharge at the base of the site for the design storm would increase from 31.79 cfs for the pre -development to 45.45 cfs for the proposed development without retention. 3. A stormwater retention basin with Ielevation/volume/discharge relationships as detailed within this report should be provided to reduce the Ipeak discharge from the site, and provide for no increase in peak discharge in North Brook. 4. The project engineer should complete a final design for the basin to include a proposed grading plan, and outlet works including emergency spillway. A final site plan showing the sizes, slopes, lengths, and locations of all culverts on site should also be completed. This will enable verification that all runoff from the site will in fact be directed toward stormwater retention basins. i Analysis of Hydrologic Impact IDS North Brook Watershed Introduction This report presents the results of hydrologic computations and analyses performed by Wagner, Heindel, and Noyes, Inc. to assess the impact of the proposed IDS expansion. The site is located within the North Brook watershed, which is immediately to the north of Bartlett Brook watershed, draining into Bartlett Bay (see Appendix, pg. 1). The specific project location is within subwatersheds 4, 5, and 7 of the North Brook watershed (see Appendix, pg. 2). Site Characteristics The IDS site is underlain by soils of the following S.C.S. groups: Enosburg & Whately (hydrologic group D) Belgrade (hydrologic group C) Adams (hydrologic group A) Covington (hydrologic group D) 2 The current condition of the site, in addition to the existing building and parking area, consists of mixed pasture, and scrub woodland. The total area of the site is 15.0 acres. In addition to the site itself, runoff from two separate areas to the northeast and east of the site must be considered. The total upslope area which will drain on to the site is 13.3 acres. These areas are comprised of both hydrologic group A and hydrologic group D soils, in pasture and wooded conditions. All runoff from the site will converge at the western boundary of the site, at the location of a 3.5 foot diameter corrugated metal pipe culvert which crosses U. S. Route 7. Hydrologic Analysis The IDS site and the watershed area upgradient from it have been analyzed for the pre -development and proposed development conditions. The majority of the site is located in subwatershed 5, although revisions were also required for subwatershed 4. Small portions of the site lie in subwatersheds 3 and 7. However, these portions of the site will not be impacted by the proposed development, so the characteristics of these watersheds have not been altered. For the portion of the site lying within subwatershed 5, the pre -development curve number is computed to 3 be 81, and the time of concentration .223 hours (see Appendix, Ipg. 3). As a result of the proposed development, the curve number is increased to 85, and the time of concentration Idecreased to 0.0955 hours. The marked decrease in time of concentration for the postdevelopment condition is due to the Ioccurrence of sheet flow across large paved areas as opposed to overland flow, with much lower velocities. A summary of the revisions made to subwatershed characteristics is provided on page 5 of the Appendix. The design storm used in the analysis was a 25-year 24-hour storm, or 4.0 inches in 24 hours. Average antecedent moisture conditions have been assumed (AMC-2). Results The revised TR-20 data file for the North Brook watershed is included on pages 7 through 12 of the Appendix. This data file reflects the changes discussed above for the post -development condition. As a result of the proposed development, the peak discharge from the site for the design storm is increased from 31.79 cfs in the pre -development condition to 45.45 cfs (see Appendix, pgs. 13, 15). To provide for no increase to the North Brook as a result of the proposed development, it will be 4 necessary for the applicant to provide stormwater retention. The site plans prepared by Trudell Consulting Engineers show a pond located on the western limit of the site, adjacent to Shelburne Road. We understand that it is desirable that this pond contain water at all times, for aesthetic purposes. In addition, the allowance for water level fluctuation in the pond will provide stormwater retention and therefore reduction of peak discharge. A suggested schematic design has been determined via trial and error solution. The schematic design is illustrated in cross-section on page 17 of the Appendix. In plan view, the basin is assumed to be circular, with a basal radius of 26 feet, and side slopes of 1 vertical to 3 horizontal. A riser pipe of 24 inch diameter and 2.0 feet high will serve as the principle spillway for the basin. Since it is desired to maintain water in the pond at all times, no dewatering hole is specified at the base of the riser, as would typically be done in stormwater retention basins. Therefore, no outflow from the pond would occur until the water surface rose above the top of the riser pipe. The proposed volume/elevation relationship is included on page 18 of the Appendix. Since the maximum water surface elevation attained in the pond during the design storm is 166.26 feet, this should serve as the maximum pond elevation prior to outflow through an emergency spillway. The emergency spillway should be designed by the project engineer. At the maximum design water surface elevation, a pond 5 volume of approximately 0.6 acre feet, or 195,000 gallons is specified. The outflow/elevation curve for the 24 inch vertical riser pipe is computed on pages 19-20 of the Appendix. It should be noted that as the water surface in the pond initially rises above the top of the pipe, the riser performs as a circular weir. At greater depths, control of flow is shifted to the conduit pipe conveying the water. The result of the proposed stormwater retention structure is a I reduction to 23.63 cfs of the peak discharge from the site. For the North Brook watershed as a whole, the peak discharge is maintained at its existing level (153.09 cfs existing, 153.04 cfs proposed, with retention). In order to enable more detailed Iinspection of the results, the tabulated discharge hydrographs have been included for the following locations within the TR-20 Idata file for the postdevelopment condition (see Appendix, pgs. 21-24). ISECT/STRC OPERATION LOCATION STRC 07 RUNOFF Runoff from I.D.S. Site STRC 07 RESVOR Retention Basin Outflow SECT 012 ADDHYD Culvert at Rte. 7 SECT 008 ADDHYD culvert crossing railroad embankment SECT 010 ADDHYD Base of watershed at Lake Champlain APPENDIX •,.` 1 �� 14 I •, © ,r, _ ' 1 .• ; l l� `1 rooNOR il. .ate• r � A � � • Imo✓ r � I 'Si�Quarry�. — I � • � ` 1 '� � J` ) 1 ,\t'1 1 ., � r% -/�r� J/ice :_ "..��i •r i� \ l `'��� ,��1. 1 j • -�-1. 1�� i • y � i � / . ,� � /,i O PROJECT LOCATION NAM fj I 1 ,_ T � ,• , is ,,\ • ` + // Driv� lin �I • 1 t ` �� 1 1, The �,. •� i �A oa ,4 _..� ailer Park• �7\ ' 1 �X M.4 � .'•j' •�. 1 �l `�� fry ��� Wit• .=• � 1 � ••�•� � � 1� �� �� �� ��� i ( 43� • �r / ( L/ �� .•, I I �' ice`„' �- ,00 '/ 448 x? .• zm moo MOOD 1 1 r. T NATURAL FLOW PATTERN ./ DISTURSD BY DEVELOPMENT / / C20 WEIR i "I I Wagner, Heindel , and Noyes, Inc, Consulting Geologists Burlington, Vermoni t'i2£ly?anENT CQN)S>tTt�NE> • G U(ZUF_ �_h) P�r�.fL a,4to 3 PAGE OF PROJECT: DATE: lu•at� FA-%(L ► L c-pe. A C AJ C. J • A-(LF-A. AL AL `to� � G y 1`L,0 12 E. C. -vvl e" .. v-VE. C. cJ Pc (PkSiVYl4., 10.0 D PPsSTvrlw� �.�1 �`t Tt ME C E N Ta-At'tc, ) UfSWf'E. PU(L.t"to,�J oJ£.Q.t^AN� Z�.,ciW L 7.4-0, i S?. k ) v' -& = C7, V-0 <-- --= o•oLI(')he `� trE.. TuTAn..• �-c � O, a-a.3 �tr� 0 Page No. H WVN Wagner, Heindel, and Noyes, Inc. Consulting Geologists Burlington, Vermont Pol-rL'�fVEI.vPNtIv--I\1Y C"n,0\—Rvr. A0- 4t'0V E. Gvr2 V E- NU Nk i!' V-14- SIiC 0 PAGE OF Page No. PROJECT: l S DATE: '_ ��u C.Y, ►l�ATMENT C1U R«£ray CND Arica H PAryT�+z(ZANGE �4°1 0'9`t f1c. ►1U 1 C, 1.03 9-6 (50— -45 /4 C cWE2) Lunn w? 1 ate, C1j _ C j = 4, 5, UPSkjPE P, t ; t - 0,-Af5 K(L ScT� L: $0') V= t,3`t��sJ Pa1/RA 'bCLkQE,WA,-j 0\I 4LA-N,D euow C-V'— 4: = 0,03og vt2 '>1�i. H WVN Wagner, Heindel, and Noyes, Inc :onsulting Geologists Burlington, Vermon 4 P PAGE OF age No. PROJECT:-S DAT E : L • (Lq-Q ti S 1p N :y 't'C:;, N Ci a-k-y —.' v r9bW k \ t. (t- ed U I-- Subw AAA, co tC C.OnMZ-NTa O, O 39 o vti Z -4c1 0. LI ;L tt rL N'� Ctl A V L E, -N o.o SO1 o,tq 1ZI-N v.00 IS me-IrEND'1`� ajF - 0. 0 0 3 G g3 O. I S k aEA- aiD I/ cEb rj oao3 7Y -N (.siv) 0,-3 1`6 8�, b.��- PrtaOFv�wPMgNr O. k 1CI1�1 -6S. O, C)ci Pu�.tO¢.uf,wFnti N ML- N 0.0 ti i5 1, 1-1 o,4so (01TfW&I, 1) o,oOL.-t CI LA o,ab3 i4IL -N (0a':ALL si) CJ.CIIS °lit 0�15 ttASl►,1 '� l 0,06 ISASW `*Z -k V-Z� 1 G cz - H WVN Wagner, Heindel, and Noyes, Inc, Consulting Geologists Burlington, Vermoni 0 Page No. PAGE OF PROJECT: DATE: +y :2..z n ( QR�F—V l ov a a G- 0 `"') N%,2�cvL P, C, V 1. VFr- 4IX M N Z- O. !Up f ti-' 0 U 151665 0,5 F' 0, IT V-V� -A'1 Cf 15j•0 1•0 a•31 i o \51.5 t•5 3.`lI I-,' 5 LIST OF INPUT DATA FOR TR-20 HYDROLOGY***************** JOB TR-20 NOPLOTS TITLE 002 NORTH BROOK REVISED 9-17-85, 10-24-86 //POSTDEVELOPMENT W/BASIN 2 XSECTN 001 1.0 171.5 8 170. 0.0 0.0 8 170.15 0.24 0.09 I 8 170.45 2.17 0.48 8 170.90 5.69 0.88 8 171.05 9.53 1.33 8 I 171.2 11.17 1.52 8 171.35 12.07 1.68 8 171.5 12.08 1.77 I 9 ENDTBL 2 XSECTN 002 1.0 146.5 8 145. 0.0 0.0 8 145.15 0.24 0.09 I 8 145.45 2.17 0.43 8 145.90 5.69 0.88 8 146.05 9.53 1.33 I8 146.2 11.17 1.52 8 146.35 12.07 1.68 8 146.5 12.08 1.77 I 9 ENDTBL 2 XSECTN 003 1.0 160.0 8 158. 0.0 0.0 8 158.2 0.36 0.16 I 8 158.6 3.30 .85 8 159.0 8.66 1.57 8 159.4 14.54 2.36 8 I 159.6 17.00 2.70 8 159.8 18.36 2.98 8 160.0 18.37 3.14 I 9 ENDTBL 2 XSECTN 004 1.0 157. 8 155. 0.0 0.0 8 155.5 4.00 1.58 I.3 8 156. 25.18 6.25 8 156.5 74.04 14.03 8 157. 161.84 25.30 I I 9 ENDTBL 2 XSECTN 005 1.0 147. 8 145. 0.0 0.0 8 145.5 4.00 1.58 I 8 146. 25.18 6.25 8 146.5 74.04 14.03 8 147. 161.84 25.30 9 ENDTBL J LIST OF INPUT DATA (CONTINUED)********************* 3 STRUCT 01 I 9 ENDTBL 2 XSECTN 006 1.0 149.8 8 147.8 0.0 0.0 8 148.0 0.51 0.16 8 I 148.4 4.67 .85 8 148.8 12.25 1.57 8 149.2 20.56 2.36 8 149.4 24.04 2.70 8 149.6 25.96 2.98 8 149.8 25.97 3.14 9 ENDTBL 2 XSECTN 007 1.0 150.1 8 147.4 0.0 0.0 8 147.7 0.92 0.25 I 8 148.3 8.45 1.33 8 148.9 22.23 2.46 8 149.5 37.13 3.68 I 8 14§.8 43.54 4.22 8 150.1 47.02 4.66 9 ENDTBL 2 XSECTN 008 1:0 121.25 I 8 119. 0.0 0.0 8 119.25 3.94 2.00 8 119.50 12.00 4.00 8 119.75 22.71 6.00 8 120.0 35.39 8.00 8 120.25 49.64 10.00 8 120.5 65.64 12.00 8 121.0 98.69 16.75 8 121.25 114.93 19.50 9 ENDTBL I 3 STRUCT 02 8 120. 0.0 0.0 8 120.4 2.74 0.00006 �_- 8 121.2 25.63 0.001 8 122. 67.58 0.006 8 122.8 113.26 0.015 8 123.2 132.81 0.022 8 123.6 143.47 0.023 9 ENDTBL 2 XSECTN 009 1.0 119.0 8 113. 0.0 0.0 8 113.5 0.51 0.25 8 113.75 1.50 0.56 I 8 114. 3.23 1.00 i 0 LIST OF INPUT DATA (CONTINUED)********************,o 8 114.5 9.49 2.25 8 115.0 20.39 4.000 8 116.0 56.96 9.00 8 117.0 128.89 16.00 8 118.0 233.0 25.00 8 I 119.0 378.0 36.00 9 ENDTBL 3 STRUCT 03 8 113. 0.0 0.0 8 113.35 1.93 0.00003 8 114.05 18.00 0.005 8 114.75 47.48 0.165 I 8 115.45 75.97 0.308 8 115.80 93.30 0.503 8 116.15 100.79 0.7000 8 116.50 100.80 0.896 9 ENDTBL 2 XSECTN 010 1.0 104. 8 100. 0.0 0.0 ! 8 100.5 7.80 3.20 8 101. 24.33 6.75 8 101.5 47.33 10.58 I 8 102. 75.96 14.70 8 102.5 110.20 19.13 8 103. 150.57 24.00 8 I 103.5 231.30 34.00 8 104. 393.99 54.00 9 ENDTBL 3 STRUCT 04 I 8 I 147.0 0.0 0.0 8 150.0 8.7 0.033 8 151.0 10.1 0.07 I 8 152.0 11.3 0.14 8 152.2 100.0 0.19 9 ENDTBL 3 STRUCT 05 8 167.0 0.0 0.0 8 168.0 5.0 0.0023 I 8 169.0 7.1 0.0138 8 170.0 8.7 0.0600 8 171.0 10.1 0.2743 8 171.5 50.0 0.2744 9 I ENDTBL 3 STRUCT 06 8 175.0 0.0 0.0 8 I 176.0 5.0 0.0137 i I LIST OF INPUT DATA (CONTINUED)********************t 8 178.0 8.7 0.1013 8 180.0 11.3 0.2515 8 180.5 11.8 0.2986 8 181.0 50.0 0.2987 9 ENDTBL 2 XSECTN 011 1.0 168. 8 166. 0.0 0.0 8 166.5 4.49 2.10 8 167. 15.53 5.00 8 167.5 32.27 8.40 8 168. 61.46 13.80 9 ENDTBL 2 XSECTN 012 1.0 163. 8 158. 0.0 0.0 8 158.5 29.0 0.77 8 159. 40.0 2.31 8 159.5 50.0 3.94 8 160.0 57.0 5.68 8 160.5 64.0 7.31 8 161. 70.0 8.85 8 162. 81.0 9.62 8 163. 90.0 9.63 9 ENDTBL 3 STRUCT 09 8 160.0 0.0 0.0 8 161.0 0.01 0.0623 8 162.0 0.02 0.1390 8 163.0 9.9 0.2300 8 164.0 15.6 0.3369 8 164.5 18.5 0.3968 8 165.0 21.2 0.4612 8 166.0 23.0 0.6041 8 166.5 24.2 0.6829 8 167.0 25.1 0.7669 9 ENDTBL 3 STRUCT 07 6 160.0 0.0 0.0 8 161.0 0.01 0.0546 8 162.0 0.02 0.1217 8 163.0 9.90 0.2027 8 164.0 15.6 0.2989 8 164.5 18.5 0.3530 j, o,t) N 8 165.0 21.2 0.4115 8 166.0 23.0 0.5418 8 166.5 24.2 0.6140 8 167.0 25.1 0.6911 t , 111 LIST OF INPUT DATA (CONTINUED)********************-�1 9 ENDTBL 6 RUNOFF 1 001 6 0.0390 79. 6 REACH 3 005 6 5 1100. 6 RUNOFF 1 002 7 0.0183 89. 6 ADDHYD 4 005 5 7 6 6 RUNOFF 1 003 5 0.0033 81. 6 REACH 3 004 5 4 400. 6 RUNOFF 1 004 5 0.0051 83. 6 ADDHYD 4 004 5 4 7 6 REACH 3 005 7 4 250. 6 ADDHYD 4 005 6 4 7 6 RUNOFF 1 005 5 0.0203 49. 6 RUNOFF 1 07 4 0.0198 85. 6 RESVOR 2 07 4 3 162.0 6 ADDHYD 4 012 5 3 6 C c aT „ti,r y6 6 ADDHYD 4 012 6 7 5 6 REACH 3 008 5 4 1300. 6 RUNOFF 1 008 7 0.0407 Be. 6 ADDHYD 4 003 4 7 6 6 RUNOFF 1 006 2 0.0456 71. 6 RUNOFF 1 06 3 0.0032 94. 6 RESVOR 2 06 3 4 175.0 6 RUNOFF 1 05 7 0.0019 94. 6 ADDHYD 4 05 4 7 5 6 RESVOR 2 05 5 4 167.0 6 RUNOFF 1 007 3 0.0115 94. 6 ADDHYD 4 007 3 4 7 6 ADDHYD 4 04 7 2 4 6 RESVOR 2 04 4 2 147.0 6 RU14OFF 1 007 3 0.0064 94. 6 ADDHYD 4 007 2 3 4 6 RUNOFF 1 011 2 0.0066 67. 6 REACH 3 007 2 5 300. 6 RUNOFF 1 007 3 0.0095 69. 6 ADDHYD 4 007 5 3 2 6 ADDHYD 4 007 2 4 7 6 REACH 3 008 7 4 700. 6 ADDHYD 4 008 4 6 7 6 RESVOR 2 02 7 6 120.0 6 REACH 3 009 6 5 400.0 6 RESVOR 2 03 5 4 113.0 6 REACH 3 010 4 6 600.0 6 RUNOFF 1 010 2 0.0593 77. 6 ADDHYD 4 010 2 6 5 ENDATA 7 BASFLO 5 0.01 0.42 S 1 1 0.19 1 1 0.15 1iz 1 1 0.32 1 1 1 1 0.278 SI 0fswe£. 1 0. 0955.Z k Ds oFs�►J 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 .56 1 0 . 8 0 0. 06 Nwco�c, 8P� iN3 1 1 1 1 1 0.06 �Z 0. 15 N,a oic. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.063 1 1 1 0. 072 aML 1 1 0.488 Yt 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.30 1k 1 1 i LIST OF INPUT DATA (CONTINUED)********************* 7 I NCP,EM h 0.10 7 COMPUT 7 001 010 4.0 1.0 2 2 01 01 ENDCMP 1 ENDJOB 2 TR20 XEQ NORTH BROOK REVISED 9-17-85 REV 05/02/83 P2E,'EVCA,�PMEto - 1.O,S, JOB 1 SUMMARY PAGE 12 SUMMARY TABLE 1 - SELECTED RESULTS OF STANDARD AND EXECUTIVE CONTROL INSTRUCTIONS IN THE ORDER PERFORMED (A STAR(-) AFTER THE PEAK DISCHARGE TIME AND RATE (CFS) VALUES INDICATES A FLAT TOP HYDROGRAPH A QUESTION MARK(?) INDICATES A HYDROGRAPH WITH PEAK AS LAST POINT.) SECTION/ STANDARD RAIN ANTEC MAIN PRECIPITATION PEAK DISCHARGE STRUCTURE CONTROL DRAINAGE TABLE MOIST TIME ------------------------- RUNOFF -------------------------------------- ID OPERATION AREA # COND INCREM BEGIN AMOUNT DURATION AMOUNT ELEVATION TIME RATE RATE (SQ M1) (HR) (HR) (IN) (HR) (IN) (FT) (HR) (CFS) (CSM) ALTERNATE XSECTION 1 STORM 1 .039 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 1.96 .88- 12.15 44.53 1141.9 1 RUNOFF XSECTION 5 REACH .039 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 1.96 146.20 12.25 44.54 1142.1 XSECTION 2 RUNOFF .018 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 2.83 .88- 12.01 40.05 2188.3 XSECTION 5 ADDHYD .057 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 2.24 146.40 12.10 64.48 1125.3 XSECTION 3 RUNOFF .003 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 2.12 .89- 11.99 6.00 1818.8 XSECTION 4 REACH .003 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 2.11 155.55 12.09 6.00 1818.7 XSECTION 4 RUNOFF .005 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 2.28 .98- 12.09 7.81 1530.8 XSECTION 4 ADDHYD .008 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 2.21 155.73 12.09 13.81 1643.9 XSECTION 5 REACH .008 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 2.22 145.73 12.19 13.81 1643.9 XSECTION 5 ADDHYD .066 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 2.24 146.51 12.13 76.23 1160.3 XSECTION 5 RUNOFF .020 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 .66 .88- 12.11 7.70 379.5 STRUCTURE 9 RUNOFF .020 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 2.13 .98- 12.04 31.79 1605.4 1,06. flM XSECTION 12 ADDHYD .040 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 1.39 158.94 12.06 38.67 964.4 XSECTION 12 ADDHYD .106 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 1.91 165.58 12.09 113.20 1069.9 XSECTION 8 REACH .106 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 1.91 121.22 12.19 113.19 1069.9 XSECTION 8 RUNOFF .041 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 2.73 .09- 12.22 54.18 1331.2 XSECTION 8 ADDHYD .147 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 2.14 122.05 12.20 167.08 1140.5 XSECTION 6 RUNOFF .046 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 1.39 .88- 12.41 23.31 511.1 STRUCTURE 6 RUNOFF .003 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 3.28 .88- 11.95 9.48 2961.9 STRUCTURE 6 RESVOR .003 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 3.32 176.86 12.02 6.59 2058.7 STRUCTURE 5 RUNOFF .002 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 3.28 b8- 11.95 5.63 2961.9 STRUCTURE 5 ADDHYD .005 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 3.31 171.02 11.97 12.01 2354.7 STRUCTURE 5 RESVOR .005 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 3.50 170.05 12.07 8.76 1718.4 XSECTION 7 RUNOFF .011 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 3.33 .88- 11.98 30.19 2625.6 XSECTION 7 ADDHYD .017 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 3.38 149.57 11.98 38.71 2331.8 STRUCTURE 4 ADDHYD .062 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 1.92 152.08 12.01 46.97 755.2 STRUCTURE 4 RESVOR .062 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 1.94 152.08 11.95 46.60 749.1 XSECTION 7 RUNOFF .006 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 3.28 .88- 11.95 18.88 2950:7 XSECTION 7 ADDHYD .069 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 2.06 151.59 11.99 64.26 936.7 XSECTION 11 RUNOFF .007 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 1.13 .88- 11.97 7.66 1160.7 XSECTION 7 REACH .007 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 1.17 148.24 12.07 7.66 1160.6 XSECTION 7 RUNOFF .010 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 1.27 .88- 12.21 6.01 632.8 m 51 'i L 0i TR20 XEQ ( REV 05/02/83 NORTH BROOK REVISED 9-17-85 // JOB 1 SUMMARY PAGE 13 SUMMARY TABLE 1 - SELECTED RESULTS OF STANDARD AND EXECUTIVE CONTROL INSTRUCTIONS IN THE ORDER PERFORMED (A STAR(•) AFTER THE PEAK DISCHARGE TIME AND RATE (CFS) VALUES INDICATES A FLAT TOP HYDROGRAPH A QUESTION MARK(?) INDICATES A HYDROGRAPH WITH PEAK AS LAST POINT.) SECTION/ STANDARD RAIN ANTEC MAIN PRECIPITATION PEAK DISCHARGE STRUCTURE CONTROL DRAINAGE TABLE MOIST TIME ------------------------- RUNOFF -------------------------------------- ID OPERATION AREA # COND INCREM BEGIN AMOUNT DURATION AMOUNT ELEVATION TIME RATE RATE (SQ MI) (HR) (HR) (IN) (HR) (IN) (FT) (HR) (CFS) (CSM) ALTERNATE XSECTION 1 STORM 1 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 1.23 148.48 12.09 12.66 786.3 7 ADDHYD .016 XSECTION 7 ADDHYD .085 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 1.91 151.92 11.99 68.08 803.8 XSECTION 8 REACH .085 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 1.87 120.54 12.09 68.08 803.8 XSECTION 8 ADDHYD .231 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 2.04 123.04 12.17 231.02 999.2 STRUCTURE 2 RESVOR .231 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 2.06 126.82 12.17 229.20 991.3 XSECTION 9 REACH .231 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 2.04 117.96 12.27 229.20 991.3 STRUCTURE 3 RESVOR .231 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 2.05 122.65 12.71 100.98 436.7 XSECTION 10 REACH .231 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 2.04 102.37 12.81 100.98 436.7 XSECTION 10 RUNOFF .059 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 1.81 .88- 12.09 74.35 1253.8 XSECTION 10 ADDHYD .291 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 2.00 103.02 12.20 153.09 527.0 TR20 XEQ REV 05/02/83 NORTH BROOK REVISED 9-17-85, 10-24-86 //POSTDEVELOPMENT W/BASIN JOB 1 SUMMARY PAGE 14 SUMMARY TABLE 1 - SELECTED RESULTS OF STANDARD AND EXECUTIVE CONTROL INSTRUCTIONS IN THE ORDER PERFORMED (A STAR(-) AFTER THE PEAK DISCHARGE TIME AND RATE (CFS) VALUES INDICATES A FLAT TOP HYDROGRAPH A QUESTION MARK(?) INDICATES A HYDROGRAPH WITH PEAK AS LAST POINT.) SECTION/ STANDARD RAIN ANTEC MAIN PRECIPITATION PEAK DISCHARGE STRUCTURE CONTROL DRAINAGE TABLE MOIST TIME ------------------------- RUNOFF -------------------------------------- ID OPERATION AREA # CONO INCREM BEGIN AMOUNT DURATION AMOUNT ELEVATION TIME RATE RATE (SQ MI) (HR) (HR) (IN) (HR) (IN) (FT) (HR) (CFS) (CSM) ALTERNATE 1 STORM 1 XSECTION 1 RUNOFF .039 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 1.96 .99- 12.15 44.53 1141.9 XSECTION 5 REACH .039 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 1.96 146.20 12.25 44.54 1142.1 XSECTION 2 RUNOFF .018 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 2.83 .99- 12.01 40.05 2188.3 XSECTION 5 ADDHYD .057 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 2.24 146.40 12.10 64.48 1125.3 XSECTION 3 RUNOFF .003 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 2.12 .99- 11.99 6.00 1818.8 XSECTION 4 REACH .003 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 2.11 155.55 12.09 6.00 1818.7 XSECTION 4 RUNOFF .005 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 2.28 .98- 12.09 7.81 1530.8 XSECTION 4 ADDHYD .008 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 2.21 155.73 12.09 13.81 1643.9 XSECTION 5 REACH .008 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 2.22 145.73 12.19 13.81 1643.9 XSECTION 5 ADDHYD .066 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 2.24 146.51 12.13 76.23 1160.3 XSECTION 5 RUNOFF .020 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 .30 .99- 12.16 1.69 83.2 STRUCTURE 7 RUNOFF .020 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 2.42 .99- 11.96 45.45 2295.4 STRUCTURE 7 RESUOR .020 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 2.46 166.26 12.09 23.63 1193.4 ( ADDHYD.04 2 2 . 10 .0 4.00 24.00 1.37 158.43 12.11 25.16 sty 622.5 XSECTION 12 ADDHYD .106 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 1.91 164.26 12.12 101.36 958.1 XSECTION 8 REACH .106 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 1.90 121.04 12.22 101.36 958.1 XSECTION 8 RUNOFF .041 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 2.73 .99- 12.22 54.18 1331.2 XSECTION 8 ADDHYD .147 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 2.13 121.88 12.22 155.54 1061.7 XSECTION 6 RUNOFF .046 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 1.39 .99- 12.41 23.31 511.1 STRUCTURE 6 RUNOFF .003 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 3.28 .89- 11.95 9.48 2961.9 STRUCTURE 6 RESVOR .003 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 3.32 176.86 12.02 6.59 2058.7 STRUCTURE 5 RUNOFF .002 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 3.28 .99- 11.95 5.63 2961.9 STRUCTURE 5 ADDHYD .005 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 3.31 171.02 11.97 12.01 2354.7 STRUCTURE 5 RESVOR .005 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 3.50 170.05 12.07 8.76 1718.4 XSECTION 7 RUNOFF .011 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 3.33 .99- 11.98 30.19 2625.6 XSECTION 7 ADDHYD .017 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 3.38 149.57 11.98 38.71 2331.8 STRUCTURE 4 ADDHYD .062 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 1.92 152.08 12.01 46.97 755.2 STRUCTURE 4 RESVOR .062 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 1.94 152.08 11.95 46.60 749.1 XSECTION 7 RUNOFF .006 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 3.28 .99- 11.95 18.88 2950.7 XSECTION 7 ADDHYD .069 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 2.06 151.59 11.95 64.26 936.7 XSECTION 11 RUNOFF .007 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 1.13 .99- 11.97 7.66 1160.7 XSECTION 7 REACH .007 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 1.17 148.24 12.07 7.66 1160.6 TR20 XEQ REV 05/02/83 NORTH BROOK REVISED 9-17-65, 10-24-86 //POSTDEVELOPMENT W/BASIN JOB 1 SUMMARY PAGE 15 SUMMARY TABLE 1 - SELECTED RESULTS OF STANDARD AND EXECUTIVE CONTROL INSTRUCTIONS IN THE ORDER PERFORMED (A STAR(•) AFTER THE PEAK DISCHARGE TIME AND RATE (CFS) VALUES INDICATES A FLAT TOP HYDROGRAPH A QUESTION MARK(?) INDICATES A HYDROGRAPH WITH PEAK AS LAST POINT.) SECTION/ STANDARD RAIN ANTEC MAIN PRECIPITATION PEAK DISCHARGE STRUCTURE CONTROL DRAINAGE TABLE MOIST TIME ------------------------- RUNOFF -------------------------------------- ID OPERATION AREA # COND INCREM BEGIN AMOUNT DURATION AMOUNT ELEVATION TIME RATE RATE (SQ MI) (HR) (HR) (IN) (HR) (IN) (FT) (HR) (CFS) (CSM) ALTERNATE 1 STORM 1 XSECTION 7 RUNOFF .010 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 1.27 .88- 12.21 6.01 632.8 XSECTION 7 ADDHYD .016 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 1.23 148.48 12.09 12.66 786.3 XSECTION 7 ADDHYD .085 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 1.91 151.92 11.99 68.08 803.8 XSECTION 8 REACH .085 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 1.87 120.54 12.09 68.08 803.8 XSECTION 8 ADDHYD .231 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 2.03 122.83 12.18 217.62 941.2 STRUCTURE 2 RESVOR .231 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 2.05 126.31 12.18 215.65 932.7 XSECTION 9 REACH .231 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 2.04 117.83 12.28 215.65 932.7 STRUCTURE 3 RESUOR .231 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 2.05 122.50 12.72 100.97 436.7 XSECTION 10 REACH .231 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 2.04 102.37 12.82 100.97 436.7 XSECTION 10 RUNOFF .099 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 1.81 .80- 12.09 74.35 1253.8 XSECTION 10 ADDHYD .291 2 2 .10 .0 4.00 24.00 1.99 103.02 12.19 153.04 526.8 No Text H WVN Wagner, Heindel, and Noyes, Inc. Consulting Geologists Burlington, Vermont Page No. PAGE OF PROJECT: L y , 5 DATE: 19, 7A S LVL'E/\^ A-r I c, ci L-X�' r.i -�-- N �' A V-, t N G (I.oh i S .vc t r./ J CMP 24SER t.o 4. o� a �a' CFI ti � V 6p.44 '6('UM4C- ARZAw Gi�MCVT£D ON t'ChK INFWW (I'ASFCzTL F(zrj � iEil Ih4F-N� h4 lonl VF FtNZ SPND feP, t LF_� �lF ✓ht ��. N GaF ' WA GOti/DU1— PiP6. b� bPG LT40 1 0—hy t,.FNarq H WVN Wagner, Heindel, and Noyes, Inc consulting Geologists Burlington, Vermon gop��►Q VQLU A-C-- 3 P PAGE OF age No. PROJECT: -`�- DATE: p @ ►60,�� alp' a��.-�t Fr _ o � ti,5 39,5 4goa- a�`"I o,353v y,o yl SZ�S l �s+5 0• y Lk 44 A39 0,-54 v� 0.(al�u %• 0 L1i3O 0 LA 33(00 0 , �"A 1 l H WN Wagner, Heindel, and Noyes, Inc. Consulting Geologists Burlington, Vermont Page No. PAGE OF PROJECT: %, '�• `� DATE: -2_Lt , S (,�_ $ pl-k 1 U v i' FLLs vJ Q� 7�ts1 q/ZT�,CC, IN (i. VIO LF„ : y•• (7\AN E-`� �l� C IE.ASI N Fw oft.. L EL . 1 (v�Ckks T- Mr- usaa�) L� VF;rL`+ ►G/V\i &%.-. c �l ('E ?-\� OVA Mti%Erb G� �r� R.r..rNL"► SP �LI_wA•`1 rVo s' L/ v2.wG. ��S►G.N S (W� L a'LT►s'riC& ro C3Q �,PEL� F�i.p 6�1 Pi2hit 2 , M��fc,v OV�FI.oW F2on1 f3�S\1� a�wq�&euuc �tvL� %CV Q= C ►�� J a� �. WN Ems; Z RZ= MiA vF v�C.l�c.F rti'r�= lrC=�iJ 0.08+ Or L C = p �SCtAk2LE C:u EFP � G \ F-ti►T = Q.�-O l = W"AV, AC-C. 3 1.1 f-r/ S SLe F�� C:i 0.35 CPS o. 60 a5 o.�a ,tip 4.0 o,q S ,A,,,) I 1 u`1 t2.LS Q-<— P t P F- INtT%Mt,I (I -MS A5 Ct(L.CvLkA— �-K 1 AS- fL- o. s ems' H W�N Wagner, Heindel, and Noyes, Inc. Consulting Geologists Burlington, Vermont PAGE OF PROJECT: DATE: a-`+ W o Ho/2S CU ` 3.►is (" I$,ti"4- 3 0 3.43 'ZoliLi3, i>� G 1��ti4lYc R. OE'�% v\S I CUNNL.OL, uF- C=Ww �� �� ► F� ip CuniDV tT Pi (-v AQ.SUME, ; S = is JAPE. i L= So =o.s 3, u y. C. G� E ME Q-6 EU C.K P i t_t_w *r'1 u M E-1,C-- Tug k(i 11-1 V 1 fLk4 W ALE V, Q OEwAXL2 QX.� �cr �toz O. 3S 0 o S Ibl, o, `►°I o 0.Kq bu I a o•too i(aa, 0.105 0 W09 Iba.S o, r' 1% (1,gG IDS, Oft- 14`15 Loy ICI SI G Page No. 1 OPERATION RUNOFF STRUCTURE 7 S %Tf- Qp s'rfl E.,v rr- w P µ E M r PEAK TIME(HRS) PEAK OISCHARGE(CFS) PEAK ELEVATION(FEET) 11.96 45.45 (RUNOFF) TIME(HRS) FIRST HYDROGRAPH POINT - .00 HOURS TIME INCREMENT - .10 HOURS DRAINAGE AREA - .02 SO.MI. 6.00 DISCHG .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .01 .02 .03 .04 7.00 DISCHG .05 .05 .06 .07 .08 .09 .10 .10 .11 .12 8.00 DISCHG .13 .16 .17 .19 .23 .24 .25 .27 .28 .29 9.00 DISCHG .31 .36 .38 .40 .41 .43 .49 .52 .54 .55 10.00 DISCHG .57 .64 .67 .73 .85 .89 1.09 1.18 1.30 1.51 11.00 DISCHG 1.57 1.84 1.96 2.17 2.57 2.71 9.59 12.35 20.28 38.69 12.00 DISCHG 43.42 15.79 7.98 6.64 4.91 4.77 4.12 3.96 3.70 3.16 13.00 DISCHG 3.11 2.71 2.61 2.51 2.28 2.27 2.00 1.93 1.87 1.76 14.00 DISCHG 1.75 1.62 1.59 1.53 1.42 1.41 1.28 1.24 1.24 1.24 15:00 DISCHG 1.24 1.24 1.24 1.19 1.08 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 16.00 DISCHG 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 .93 .90 .89 .89 17.00 DISCHG .90 .90 .90 .90 .90 .90 .90 .90 .85 .73 18.00 DISCHG .72 .72 .72 .72 .72 .72 .72 .72 .72 .72 19.00 DISCHG .72 .72 .72 .72 .72 .72 .72 .72 .67 .55 20.00 DISCHG .54 .54 .54 .54 .54 .54 .54 .54 .54 .54 21.00 DISCHG .54 .54 .54 .54 .54 .54 .54 .54 .55 .55 22.00 DISCHG .55 .55 .55 .55 .55 .55 .55 .55 .55 .55 23.00 DISCHG .55 .55 .55 .55 .55 .59 .55 .55 .49 .38 24.00 DISCHG .37 .08 .01 .00 OPERATION RESVOR STRUCTURE 7 v vTF W w F�m N% (LE. TEN T Lo & J 4N,.Ys % ..j Zia_ PEAK TIME(HRS) PEAK DISCHARGE(CFS) PEAK ELEVATION(FEET) 12.09 23.63 166.26 TIME(HRS) FIRST HYDROGRAPH POINT - .00 HOURS TIME INCREMENT - .10 HOURS DRAINAGE AREA - .02 SO.MI. .00 DISCHG .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 1.00 DISCHG .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 2.00 DISCHG .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 3.00 DISCHG .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 4.00 DISCHG .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 5.00 DISCHG .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 6.00 DISCHG .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 7.00 DISCHG .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 8.00 DISCHG .02 .02 .02 .02 .07 .18 .23 .25 .27 .28 9.00 DISCHG .29 .32 .35 .38 .40 .41 .44 .48 .51 .53 10.00 DISCHG .55 .59 .63 .68 .76 .83 .94 1.07 1.18 1.33 11.00 DISCHG 1.47 1.63 1.81 1.98 2.24 2.51 4.95 8.98 12.25 18.73 12.00 DISCHG 22.78 23.61 22.25 19.52 14.59 10.76 7.13 5.06 4.23 3.69 13.00 DISCHG 3.32 3.05 2.79 2.63 2.47 2.34 2.20 2.04 1.95 1.86 14.00 DISCHG 1.79 1.72 1.64 1.59 1.51 1.45 1.38 1.30 1.26 1.24 15.00 DISCHG 1.24 1.24 1.24 1.22 1.16 1.10 1.08 1.07 1.07 1.07 16.00 DISCHG 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.02 .95 .91 .90 17.00 DISCHG .90 .90 .90 .90 .90 .90 .90 .90 .88 .82 18.00 DISCHG .76 .73 .72 .72 .72 .72 .72 .72 .72 .72 19.00 DISCHG .72 .72 .72 .72 .72 .72 .72 .72 .71 .64 20.00 DISCHG .58 .56 .55 .54 .54 .54 .54 .54 .54 .54 21.00 DISCHG .54 .54 .54 .54 .54 .54 .54 .54 .54 .55 22.00 DISCHG .55 .55 .55 .55 .55 .55 .55 .55 .55 .55 23.00 DISCHG .55 .55 .55 .55 .55 .55 .55 .55 .53 .47 24.00 DISCHG .40 .28 .12 .04 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 25.00 DISCHG .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 26.00 DISCHG .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 27.00 DISCHG .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 28.00 DISCHG .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 29.00 DISCHG .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 rkt7ti vtH0 G2J4> S.acT-(Vn/ I Z PEAK TIME(HRS) PEAK DISCHARGE(CFS) PEAK ELEVATION(FEET) 12.11 25.16 158.43 TIME(HRS) FIRST HYDROGRAPH POINT - .00 HOURS TIME INCREMENT - .10 HOURS DRAINAGE AREA - .04 SO.MI. .00 DISCHG .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 1.00 DISCHG .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 2.00 DISCHG .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 3.00 DISCHG .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 4.00 DISCHG .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 5.00 DISCHG .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 6.00 DISCHG .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 7.00 DISCHG .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 8.00 DISCHG .02 .02 .02 .02 .07 .18 .23 .25 .27 .28 9.00 DISCHG .29 .32 .35 .38 .40 .41 .44 .48 .51 .53 10.00 DISCHG .55 .59 .63 .68 .76 .83 .94 1.07 1.18 1.33 11.00 DISCHG 1.47 1.63 1.81 1.98 2.24 2.51 4.95 8.98 12.25 18.74 12.00 DISCHG 23.22 25.14 23.93 20.86 15.71 11.70 7.99 5.86 5.00 4.41 13.00 DISCHG 3.98 3.68 3.38 3.20 3.02 2.86 2.70 2.51 2.40 2.30 14.00 DISCHG 2.21 2.13 2.04 1.97 1.88 1.80 1.72 1.62 1.57 1.56 15.00 DISCHG 1.59 1.55 1.56 1.54 1.47 1.39 1.36 1.35 1.35 1.35 16.00 DISCHG 1.35 1.35 1.36 1.36 1.36 1.36 1.31 1.22 1.17 1.15 121.00 DISCHG 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.14 1.06 18.00 DISCHG .98 .95 .94 .93 .93 .93 .93 .93 .93 .93 19.00 DISCHG .94 .94 .94 .94 .94 .94 .94 .94 .92 .85 20.00 DISCHG .76 .73 .72 .71 .71 .71 .71 .71 .71 .71 21.00 DISCHG .71 .71 .71 .71 .72 .72 .72 .72 .72 .72 22.00 DISCHG .72 .72 .72 .72 .72 .72 .72 .72 .72 .72 23.00 DISCHG .72 .72 .72 .72 .72 .73 .73 .73 .71 .63 24.00 DISCHG .54 .39 .19 .07 .03 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 25.00 DISCHG .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 26.00 DISCHG .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 27.00 DISCHG .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 28.00 DISCHG .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 29.00 DISCHG .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 r OPERATION ADDHYD CROSS SECTION 12 ♦ PEAK TIME(HRS) PEAK DISCHARGE(CFS) PEAK ELEVATION(FEET) 12.12 101.36 164.26 23.65 2.47 158.04 TIME(HRS) FIRST HYDROGRAPH POINT - .00 HOURS TIME INCREMENT - .10 HOURS DRAINAGE AREA - .11 SO.MI. .00 DISCHG .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 1.00 DISCHG .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 2.00 DISCHG .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 3.00 DISCHG .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 - _ 4.00 DISCHG .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 5.00 DISCHG .03 .04 .04 .05 .06 .07 .07 .08 .09 .09 6.00 DISCHG .10 .11 .13 .14 .16 .17 .17 .18 .19 .20 7.00 DISCHG .21 .22 .23 .24 .25 .25 .26 .27 .28 .29 8.00 DISCHG .30 .33 .37 .39 .49 .64 .71 .76 .79 .84 9.00 DISCHG .88 .97 1.07 1.16 1.23 1.30 1.41 1.54 1.65 1.74 10.00 DISCHG 1.82 1.95 2.10 2.25 2.51 2.75 3.10 3.52 3.90 4.43 11.00 DISCHG 4.91 5.47 6.11 6.70 7.62 8.49 14.46 25.00 35.98 63.01 12.00 DISCHG 88.13 100.87 96.36 83.65 62.13 45.35 33.19 25.82 21.74 18.74 13.00 DISCHG 16.68 15.02 13.62 12.62 11.67 10.97 10.31 9.64 9.14 8.64 14.00 DISCHG 8.27 7.91 7.57 7.30 6.96 6.68 6.38 6.06 5.82 5.66 15.00 DISCHG 5.55 5.51 5.48 5.44 5.27 5.09 4.94 4.83 4.77 4.75 16.00 DISCHG 4.73 4.73 4.73 4.73 4.73 4.73 4.63 4.44 4.28 4.15 17.00 DISCHG 4.06 4.02 4.00 3.99 3.99 3.98 3.99 3.99 3.96 3.79 18.00 DISCHG 3.61 3.45 3.34 3.29 3.25 3.23 3.22 3.22 3.22 3.22 19.00 DISCHG 3.22 3.22 3.22 3.22 3.23 3.23 3.23 3.23 3.20 3.03 20.00 DISCHG 2.84 2.68 2.57 2.51 2.47 2.46 2.45 2.44 2.44 2.44 21.00 DISCHG 2.44 2.44 2.44 2.44 2.44 2.45 2.45 2.45 2.45 2.45 22.00 DISCHG 2.45 2.45 2.45 2.45 2.45 2.45 2.46 2.46 2.46 2.46 23.00 DISCHG 2.46 2.46 2.46 2.46 2.46 2.46 2.46 2.47 2.43 2.26 24.00 DISCHG 2.07 1.69 1.16 .75 .45 .25 .15 .09 .06 .05 25.00 DISCHG .04 .03 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 ` 26.00 DISCHG .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 27.00 DISCHG .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 28.00 DISCHG .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 I C4 1 TP20 XEO NORTH BROOK REVISED 9-17-85, 10-24-86 //POSTDEVELOPMENT W:BASIN JOB 1 PASS 1 REV 05/02/93 PAGE 5 OPEPATION ADOHYD CROSS SECTION 8 GUl,VF1t-T GtwiL(A/% 22 EM6%iwl<MQN� PEAK TIME(HRS) PEAK DISCHARGE(CFS) PEAK ELEVATION(FEET) 12.18 217.62 122.93 19.71 7.36 119.36 23.69 5.60 119.30 TIME(HRS) FIPST HYDROGRAPH POINT .00 HOURS TIME INCREMENT - .10 HOURS DRAINAGE AREA - .23 SO.MI. .00 OISCHG .01 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 1.00 DISCHG .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 2.00 DISCHG .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 " 3.00 DISCHG. .03 .04 .05 .06 .07 .08 .09 .10 .11 .13 4.00 DISCHG .15 .17 .19 .20 .22 .23 .24 .26 .27 .28 5.00 DISCHG .29 .31 .32 .34 .36 .38 .40 .43 .45 .48 6.00 DISG_HG .51 .54 .62 .71 .77 .82 .87 .91 .95 1.00 7.00 DISCHG 1.04 1.08 1.12 1.15 1.19 1.23 1.27 1.30 1.34 1.38 8.00 DISCHG 1.41 1.45 1.57 1.71 1.85 2.08 2.33 2.43 2.59 2.68 ' 9.00 DISCHG, 2.77 2.87 3.08 3.32 3.50 3.65 3.78 4.04 4.31 4.53 10.00 DISCHG 4.70 4.86 5.15 5.46 5.84 6.40 6.92 7.75 8.64 9.53 11.00 DISCHG 10.64 11.65 12.92 14.24 15.70 17.70 20.23 36.49 55.52 83.45 12.00 DISCHG, 162.23 204.02 217.02 190.30 171.73 128.19 106.26 91.87 68.64 57.40 13.00 DISCHG 49.48 43.88 38.70 35.27 33.22 31.25 29.62 27.97 26.13 24.44 14.00 DISCHG 21.17 19.97 18.99 18.11 17.32 16.51 15.79 15.04 14.29 13.75 15.00 DISCHG 13.35 13.07 12.88 12.25 12.56 12.16 11.77 11.47 11.25 11.09 16.00 DISCHG 10.99 10.93 10.88 10.86 10.84 10.83 10.32 10.57 10.17 9.86 17.00 DISCHG 9.62 9.44 9.33 9.25 9.19 9.16 9.14 9.13 9.11 9.00 18.00 DISCHG 8.65 8.28 8.00 7.78 7.64 7.54 7.47 7.43 7.40 7.38 19.00 DISCHG 7.36 7.36 7.35 7.35 7.35 7.35 7.35 7.36 7.35 7.24 20.00 DISCHG 6.89 6.53 6.24 6.02 5.87 5.77 5.70 5.65 5.62 5.60 21.00 DISCHG 5.59 5.58 5.57 5.57 5.57 5.57 5.57 5.57 5.57 5.57 22.00 DISCHG 5.57 5.57 5.57 5.53 5.58 5.98 5.58 5.58 5.59 5.59 23.00 DISCHG 5.59 5.59 5.59 5.60 5.60 5.60 5.60 5.60 5.60 5.49 24.00 DISCHG 5.13 4.73 3.93 2.88 2.07 1.46 1.01 .71 .50 .35 25.00 DISCHG .25 .18 .14 .09 .07 .05 .04 .04 .03 .03 26.00 DISCHG .03 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 27.00 DISCHG .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 28.00 DISCHG .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 29.00 DISCHG .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 9 OPERATION ADDHYD CROSS SECTION 10 Q Aar, OF W kTEK5K�4i! L AN.E PEAK TIME(HRS) PEAK DISCHARGE(CFS) PEAK ELEVATION(FEET) 12.19 153.04 103.02 15.55 15.58 100.74 16.75 13.36 100.67 17.78 11.51 100.61 19.78 9.26 100.54 23.76 7.05 100.45 TIME(HRS) FIRST HYDROGRAPH POINT .00 HOURS TIME INCREMENT - .10 HOURS DRAINAGE AREA - .29 SO.MI. .00 DISCHG .01 .01 .02 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 1.00 DISCHG .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 2.00 DISCHG .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 .03 3.00 DISCHG .03 .03 .03 .03 .05 .05 .07 .08 .09 .10 4.00 DISCHG .11 .12 .15 .17 .19 .20 .22 .23 .25 .25 5.00 DISCHG .27 .29 .30 .30 .33 .34 .36 .37 .40 .42 6.00 DISCHG .45 .48 .51 .54 .63 .71 .78 .82 .87 .91 7.00 DISCHG .96 .99 1.04 1.07 1.12 1.15 1.19 1.22 1.27 1.29 8.00 DISCHG 1.34 1.37 1.41 1.45 1.58 1.71 1.85 2.06 2.33 2.48 9.00 DISCHG 2.59 2.68 2.77 2.88 3.11 3.39 3.61 3.81 4.00 4.30 10.00 DISCHG 4.62 4.90 5.14 5.37 5.74 6.17 6.67 7.41 8.12 9.14 11.00 DISCHG 10.31 11.43 12.86 14.21 15.88 17.78 21.22 29.07 38.20 63.80 12.00 DISCHG 106.05 140.44 152.97 136.34 124.89 118.42 114.94 112.89 111.58 110.52 13.00 DISCHG 109.57 108.91 108.25 107.75 107.31 106.90 106.57 106.16 71.94 37.95 14.00 DISCHG 32.53 30.10 27.48 25.03 23.63 22.46 21.30 19.65 19.35 18.02 15.00 DISCHG 17.71 16.72 16.71 16.04 16.09 15.49 15.50 14.80 14.64 14.09 16.00 DISCHG 14.09 13.73 13.83 13.57 13.71 13.51 13.62 13.29 13.30 12.86 17.00 DISCHG 12.57 12.11 12.00 11.68 11.70 11.49 11.57 11.41 11.50 11.26 18.00 DISCHG 11.20 10.88 10.61 10.11 9.93 9.60 9.55 9.35 9.38 9.24 i9.00 DISCHG 9.31 9.20 9.29 9.18 9.26 9.18 9.26 9.19 9.25 9.07 " 20.00 DISCHG 8.98 8.70 6.39 7.93 7.70 7.41 7.32 7.15 7.15 7.04 21.00 DISCHG 7.07 6.99 7.03 6.96 7.02 6.96 7.01 6.96 7.01 6.96 22.00 DISCHG 7.01 6.97 7.02 6.97 7.02 6.98 7.02 6.98 7.03 6.99 23.00 DISCHG 7.03 7.00 7.04 7.00 7.04 7.01 7.04 7.01 7.04 6.89 24.00 DISCHG 6.75 6.41 5.73 4.99 4.10 2.95 2.14 1.44 1.04 .68 25.00 DISCHG .53 .32 .28 .15 .17 .06 .13 .02 .13 .01 26.00 DISCHG .13 .01 .13 .01 .13 .01 .13 .01 .13 .01 27.00 DISCHG .12 .01 .12 .01 .12 .01 .12 .01 .12 .01 28.00 DISCHG .12 .01 .12 .01 .12 .01 .12 .01 .12 .01 29.00 DISCHG .11 .01 .11 .01 .11 .01 .11 .01 .11 .01 l N PLANNING COMMISSION 28 November 1989 page 2 Ms. Peacock moved to_renew __the permit for 306.5 Williston Rd. for six months. Mr. Belter seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 3. Site plan application of Linda Larow for construction of a 1200 sq. ft. addition for storage in conjunction with an existing retail use, 1245 Airport Parkway Mr. Shoemaker said this will be a shell building for storage. They will add some parking and landscaping and will be able to bring a truck around to the back for delivery of large and fragile items. Mrs. Maher said the Commission is concerned with waste material stored on the back of the lot. Mr. Shoemaker said this will be covered and will be removed by the time the building is done. Ms. Peacock asked if the motion could stipulate no outside storage when the addition is done and no trailers for storage. Ms. Larrow said this was OK. Members also wanted the dumpster screened. Ms. Peacock moved the Planninq Commission approve the site plan application of Linda Larow for construction -of a 1,200 sq. ft. addition for storage purposes to a 3,318 sq. ft. commercial building as depicted on a plan entitled "Leisure World, Inc._1245 Airport Parkway, South Burlington, ____ Vermo_nt,_"_and dated October 31, 1989 with the following stipulations: 1. The plan shall be revised prior to permit to show _the location of the dumpster. The dumpster shall be adequately screened. 2. The debris (i.e. pallets, pool material, tank, etc) at the back of the site shall be removed. Based on the expressed rep- resentation of the applicant, there shall be no outside storage or trailers used for storage. 3. The building permit shall be obtained within 6_months or this approval is null and void. A revised plan addressing the stip- ulations above shall be submitted to the Planner for approval prior to permit. Mr. Belter seconded. Motion passed unanimously_. 4. Revised site plan application of IDX Corporation for construction of a 120,000 sq. ft. office space in 2 phases, 1400 Shelburne Rd. Mr. Llewellyn said he is actually representing the Mery Brown property across Holmes Rd. Ext. Mr. Brown is asking that some of PLANNING COMMISSION 28 November 1989 page 3 the heavy growth in front of IDX be removed for visibility of his shopping center. IDX approves as long as the area is put back into an attractive state. Mr. Llewellyn said any trees over 2" caliper will be left along with other attractive trees. He noted they will have to go back to Act 250 for this request as well. Mrs. Maher agreed with the need for visibility and also that the area needs cleaning up. Ms. Peacock felt they were removing too much. Mr. Llewellyn introduced Shelby Giannoni, landscape archi- teck who explained what will be done. She said there is a lot of dead stuff in the area and some good vegetation that is being choked out by vines. It is the stand of sumac that mostly blocks the view and this will be removed. She noted that IDX has agreed to maintain the area when the work is done. Mr. Weith said he felt there should be some pines in the background to screen IDX. Mr. Llewellyn said this was OK except in the northernmost area. Ms. Peacock moved the Planning Commission approve the revised site plan applicatin of IDX Corporation to change the landscainq as depicted on a 2 page set of plans entitled "Holmes Road Commercial, Tree Location Survey," prepared by Fitzpatrick - Llewellyn, Incorporated and dated September, 1989 with the fol- lowing stipulations: 1. A revised landscape plan shall be submitted to and approved by the City Planner. The applicant shall post a landscaping bond in the amount of $2,160 prior to the removal of any vegetation. Mr. Burgess seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 5. Sketch plan application of Dennis Blodgett for resubdivision of a 30,OOU sq, ft. lot from a 39 acre parcel, Allen Road Mr. Blodgett said he is hoping to purchase the lot from Frank Irish. Since it is not an approved lot, it has to go through sub- division. He noted a gravel drive now serves Dewey Irish's home. There are 2 lower lots approved which have already been sold but not built on yet. Mr. Blodgett wanted to know if he could go with the existing road or if a city road would have to be built. Mr. Jacob said it would have to be a city road, paved, etc, as this would be the 5th lot in a subdivision and the rules are very specific. Mr. Weith noted there is also the question of a recreation fee. The City Attorney said the city missed out on the other 3 lots, and if the city wants to get 15% set aside some day for a park, the approval motion should say that the city wants 15% and that this lot is included in that assessment. Vol. 261 Page�125 AGREEMENT by and between BDP REALTY ASSOCIATES, a Vermont general partnership, hereinafter referred to as ( "Owner" and the CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT, hereinafter referred to as "Municipality". W I T N E S S E T H: WHEREAS, the Municipality's Planning Commission has approved a final subdivision plat entitled "Boundary and Location Survey, BDP Realty Associates, 1500 Shelburne Road" dated August 1986 and prepared by Krebs and Lansing Consulting Engineers, Inc.; and C WHEREAS, the final approval of the Planning Commission contains a condition that Owner convey to Municipality the lands depicted on the above referenced plat as "BDP Realty Associates to City of South Burlington, Area - 0.875 acres" for a portion of a city street; and WHEREAS, the above described lands and/or interest therein are to be dedicated to Municipality free and clear of all encumbrances, pursuant to said final approval and final plat; and WHEREAS, the Owner has delivered to the Municipality appropriate deeds of conveyance for the above described lands and/or interest therein; and WHEREAS, Municipality has agreed to convey to Owner the lands depicted on the above referenced plat as "City of South Syr � 1e5_✓y.1 � fig6 L1 � ��' �. .. ��` :`3'. .k .�k " "Vr'a i�Yi., l•. �"'i i�%���+�Sri' M.k.. :��'"iw . r? nF, ...j �' �t ,�._ Vol. 261 ' P ige126 Burlington to BDP Realty Associates, Area - 0.481 acres". NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the final approval of the Municipality's Planning Commission, conveyance of certain lands from Municipality to Owner as set forth above, and for other good and valuable consideration, it is covenanted and agreed as follows: 1. The Owner herewith delivers to the Municipality a deed of conveyance, an unexecuted copy of which is attached as Exhibit A, said delivery constituting a formal offer of dedication to the Municipality to be held by the Municipality until the acceptance or rejection of such offer of dedication by the legislative body of the Municipality. 2. The Owner agrees that said formal offer of dedication is irrevocable and can be accepted by the Municipality at any time. 3. This irrevocable offer of dedication shall run with the land and shall be binding upon all assigns, grantees, successors and/or heirs of the Owner. Dated this G day of April, 1988. IN 'HE PRESENCE OF: BDP REA4,TY ASSOCIATES By: mac' Its Duly Author zed' Agent CITY .OF SOU T RLI o. .rl— By: 10-CQ--L Its Duly Mthprrlzed Agent STATE OF VERMONT CHITTENDEN COUNTY, on. i • I J 1 �•' � + ��,T, �+ �r ; f f 1 �.� � �+;k���S �,r�r ( r itie� '��' �� %�t l i IL y�.... ���`�������� .w .�". '.sue c•���r'��"' � �. + Vol. 261 PaL�- 127 r h At South Burlington, in said Cognty, this J day of April, 1988, personally appeared and he acknowledged the within instrument, by him signed, to be his free act and deed, and the free act and deed of BDP Realty Associates. Before me G/ lX-�i . � { . 1-&0 11L tary Public j STATE OF VERMONT it CHITTENDEN COUNTY, ss. At South Burlington, in said Cqu ty, th � da of A April, 1988, personally appeared !�/�-u► ••+.�-..e� duly authorized agent of the City of South 13urlington, Vermont, and he acknowledged the within instrument, byihip, signed, to be his free act and deed and the free act apd A of the Municipality. , i t Before me C Notary Public ' /cbg Dedication Vol. 261 Page z128 -Tom & NttINK rt At'WWn AT is P.O. Ba 906 w Vommir Pus 86 LAn ST= ai4nm.1T Ow KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: That BDP REALTY ASSOCIATES, a Vermont general partnership with a place of business in South Burlington, County of Chittenden and State of Vermont, GRANTOR, in consideration of Ten And More Dollars paid to its full satisfaction by the CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON, a municipal corporation located in the County of Chittenden, State of Vermont, GRANTEE, by these presents does freely GIVE, GRANT, SELL, CONVEY AND CONFIRM unto the said Grantee, the CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON, and its successors and assigns forever, a certain piece of land in South Burlington in the County of Chittenden in the State of Vermont, described as follows, viz: A parcel of land located on the westerly side of U.S. Route 7, which parcel is shown on "Boundary and Location Survey, BDP Realty Associates, 1500 Shelburne Road, South Burlington, Vermont," dated August, 1986, last revised February 13, 1987, by Krebs and Lansing Consulting Engineers, Inc., Winooski, Vermont, recorded at Volume _ Pages of the Land Records of the City of South Burlington. This parcel is depicted on the above -referenced survey as follows: Commencing at a point, which point is located S72021'26"E a distance of 39.52 feet from the concrete monument which marks the northwestern corner of the lands conveyed to the City of South Burlington byy Warranty Deed of National Life Insurance Company dated Janusry 6, 1976 and recorded at Volume 126, Pages 289-291 of the Land Records of the City of South Burlington; thence proceeding S72021'26"E for a distance of 819.64 feet, more or less, to a point marked by a stake found; thence deflecting to the right and proceeding S18000'50"W for a distance of 67.00 feet, more or less, to a point; thence deflecting to the right and proceeding N69029'34"W for it distance of 820.41 feet, more or less, to a point; thence deflecting to the right and proceeding N18002'47"E for a distance of 26.00 feet, more or less, to the point or place of beginning, containing appro)dmately 0.875 acres. These lands are more particularly described as being all the land conveyed to BDP Realty Associates by Quit -Claim of I-latco Associates dated July 5, 1979 and recorded at Volume 141, Pages 233-235 of the Land Records of the City of South Burlington which are located northerly of the following described line: Commencing at a point, which point is located S69029'34"E a distance of 40.04 feet, more or less, from the point located S18002'47"W a distance of 24.00 feet, more or less, from the northwest corner of the lands conveyed to the City of South Burlington by Warranty Deed of National Life Insurance Company, dated January 6-, 1976 and recorded at Volume 126, Pages 289-291 of said Land Records; thence proceeding S69029'34"E for a distance of 820.41 feet, more or less, to a point located S18000'50"W a distance of 67.00 feet from the northeastern corner of the lands conveyed herein. Reference is hereby made to the above referenced documents and the references therein in further aid of this description. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD said granted premises, with all the Privileges and appurtenances thereof, to the said Grantee the CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON, and its successors and assigns, to their own use and behoof forever; and the said Grantor BDP REALTY ASSOCIATES, for itself and its successors and assigns, does covenant with the said Grantee the CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON, and its successors and assigns, that until the ensealing of these presents it is the sole owner of the premises, and has good right and title to convey the same in manner aforesaid, that it is FREE FROM EVERY ENCUMBRANCE; except as aforesaid; and does hereby engage to WARRANT AND DEFEND the same against all lawful claims whatever, except as set forth herein. •f w) d No Text L No Text No Text -,Z' log, 14 No Text w �I F-W No Text No Text 0 LTA. PARADIS, COOMOS & fIT71RATRICK AT ,17NLVS AI 1.AW 34 PEARL S I RLIF l P O. W,)X 174 L!;''J_X JUNCTION. VEJ11MONT 05453 WARRANTY DEED KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS THAT DENNIS L. BLODGETT and GERALD C. MILOT, a Vermont general partnership of South Burlington, County of Chittenden and State of Vermont, GRANTOR, in the consideration of TEN AND MORE DOLLARS paid to its full satisfaction by the CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON, a municipal corporation of South Burlington, County of Chittenden and State of Vermont, GRANTEE, by these presents, do freely GIVE, GRANT, SELL, CONVEY AND CONFIRM unto the said GRANTEE, the CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON, and its successors and assigns forever, a certain piece of land in South Burlington, County of Chittenden and State of Vermont, described as follows, viz: A parcel of land located on the easterly side of U.S. Route 7, also known as Shelburne Road, and as shown as HOLMES ROAD EXTENTION on a Plan entitled "Composite Survey For Blodgett Property Development" prepared by Fitzpatrick -Llewellyn, Inc., dated September, 1988, revised November 4, 1988, and to be recorded in the Land Records of the City of South Burlington. The parcel herein conveyed is more particularly described on said Plan as follows: Beginning at a point on the easterly sideline of said U.S. Route 7, said point being the southwesterly corner of the herein conveyed parcel; thence traveling S 71 degrees 26131" E a distance of 0.45 feet, more or less, to a point; thence continuing S 71 degrees 24120" E a distance of 946.31 feet, more or less, to a point depicted on said Plan as "B"; thence continuing S 70 degrees 41139" E a distance of 197.23 feet, more or less, to a point; thence deflecting to the left and traveling N 68 degrees 09150" W a distance of 197.09 feet, more or less, to a point; thence continuing N 68 degrees 32128" W a distance of 948.02 feet, more or less, to a point lying on said easterly sideline of U.S. Route 7; thence deflecting to the left and traveling S 18 degrees 51140" W a distance of 56.08 feet, more or less, to the point or place of beginning. Being a portion of the lands and premises conveyed to the Grantors herein by Warranty Deed of Dennis L. Blodgett dated December 18, 1987 and of record at Volume 256, Page 269 of said Land Records. The property herein conveyed is subject to a 20 foot wide storm water easement traveling from other lands of the Grantors, under said Holmes Road Extention, and leading to an existing storm water retention pond on lands owned by BDP Realty Associates. Reference is hereby Trade to the above mentioned deeds and records, and to the deeds and records contained therein, in further aid of this description. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD all said granted premises, with all the privileges and appurtenances thereof, to the said GRANTEE, the CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON, and its successors and assigns, to its own use and behoof forever; And the said GRANTOR, DENNIS L. BLODGETT and GERALD C. MILOT, a Vermont general partnership, for its successors and assigns, does covenant with the said GRANTEE, the CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON, its successors and assigns, that until the ensealing of these presents, It is the sole owner of the premises, and has good right and title to convey the same in manner aforesaid, that they are FREE FROM EVERY ENCUMBRANCE, except as aforesaid; and It does hereby engage to WARRANT AND DEFEND the same against all lawful claims whatever, except as aforesaid. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, We hereunto set out hands and seals this ) y day of �J OOCmr )p (- , A.D. 1988. IN THE PRESENCE OF: DENNIS L. BLODGETT-GERALD C. MILOT A Partnership 0.< BY: General Partner and Duly Authorized j Agent !!STATE OF VERMONT �iCHITTENDEN COUNTY, SS. At 255-t;;;x �cT this I (Y_ day of tioJPrn(o,er , A.D. 1988, DENNIS L. BLODGETT, a General Partner and Duly jAuthorized Agent of Dennis L. Blodgett -Gerald C. Milot, a Vermont 'lGeneral Partnership, personally appeared and he acknowledged this 'jinstrument, by him sealed and subscribed to be his free act and jdeed, and the free act and deed of Dennis L. Blodgett -Gerald C. 'Milot, a Vermont General Partnership. v - 2 A 2-a �' -, 4 � NOTARY'' UBLIC PAHADIS. C(X)MFj`_; fr fTiZPATf21CK A' f 1 IWO V'; A l I A W .34 f'F.AHL 'Ali M. f. T 1�l f3�JX 1l4 -'�1- X AIM, f II, IN, V! 14MONT 054b3 NORTH COUNTRY LANDSCAPE & GARDEN CENTER 39 TALCOTT ROAD WILLISTON, VT05495 (802) 878-7272 November 13, 1991 Kessel/Duff Construction Co. Talcott Road Williston, Vt 05495 Landscape Project - IDS Fall 1992 PLANT LIST: 7 Austrian Pine 5-6' 21 Hawthorn 2-2.5" 31 Marshalls Ash 2-2.5" 27 Floribunda Crabs 1.5" 5 Norway Spruce 7-8' 100 Sea Green Junipers 24-30" Total Plant Cost OTHER CHARGES: $20,385.00 1) Fine grade, seed and mulch a $ .07/sq ft 2) Center Island plantings - the area on the print is approximately 14,400 sq. ft.. If this area is to be bark mulched it will require 130 cu. yds of mulch which will not be a part of our base bid. 3) Also pictured are 11 street trees but size and variety are not specified. For a budget figure you can count on approx. $230.00/2-2.5" tree installed (for varieties of Ash, Maple or Locust) PF , 1 1 , R. J. Colton Company, 20 ShunpikeRoad, P.O. Box 818, Williston, Vermont 05495 (802) 865.4900 November 13. 1991 Mr. Tim Duff •'a Ressel/Duff Construction of .,er" t Inc. ;s. 51 Talcott Road •`s Williston, Vermont 05495 ; Re. IDX Phase Dear Tim, As per your request T hhve'Calculatod the value of the work for the proposed Holmes Road Ext�ns ori• The value of the work is $ 50,000.00 A pevings of $ 23,500.00:could,,bo',realized if:the modifications described in,' 6e scope of work you prek ntbd to us;, no,ted on o'ur base proposal as Alternate number 1 is' chosen.' X,, you requ�ix'e ,any further' information pfeaae contact me. ,,• Sincerely; ' R. `co To C MPANY, INC. A' Randy Lafr&mboise 1 project.Manager I l 1 THANK YOU CUSTOMER'S COPY City of South Burlington South Burlington, Vermont Receipt # U � 4871 Received From Total Total V 2 0,1e1J Cash g Checkss /2� S , / L �D//< Account Number Date / Description (� Received By Treasurer i THANK Yr 1 Received From j ` 1 66f 1 dr'r U CT� 1"DX City of South Bt ��ton South Burlington, vermont Receipt # 012 0 9 E Account Number Amount a3 i0 Date 3 � � �Y Description Dolla Received By 17 Treasurer THANK YOU Received From Mlx CUSTOMER'S COPY City of South Burlington South Burlington, Vermont Account Number �V<C Receipt # 0120,98 Amount Date 3fO-)aF - uona, Description l Received By THANK YOU Received From \--0 k CUSTOMER'S COPY City of South Burlington South Burlington, Vermont Account Number Treasurer Receipt # 0 12 0 i Received By Treasurer Amount Date 31 a;)-i I I r '1. 6 � • 1st. Copy CODE OFFICER 2nd. Copy CITY ENGINEER 3rd. Copy CITY ASSESSOR 4th Copy APPLICANT CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON I PERMIT NO A_ ILICATION FOR ZONING PhAMIT Zone........ Date ... !1161 �rlo� .... /. ...... 19 . � The undersigned hereby applies for permission to make certain building improvements as described below. (Plans to be submitted if required by Building Inspector.) All construction to be completed in accordance with the Zoning Laws and Building Regulations of the City of South Burlington and the State of Vermont, and con- form to the Regulations of the National Board of Fire Underwriters and any and all Federal Regulations now in effect. CONSTRUCTION LOT SIZE: Frontage Depth Lot No. • ■�■■■®OWNER BUILDER CIG Apart ent WATER SUPPLY: Publid Private E] SEWAGE DISPOSAL: Public ,Q, Septic Tank El Permit # ■ '®■®S®ROAD • ' •layout) ELEC. WIRING: Underground Overhead El Permit # ■INTERIOR FINISH OEM Plot to scale Lot and Building Improvements, showing width of Front, Side and Rear yards. Mark N at Compass point indicating North. ■■ ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ ■■■■■■ ■■■■■■■■■■■■■M!EMO ■M®III® • .. ... .....�C...�CC.........■■■■FJ.�:EQG 7 or Stone ME mom -in ■■■■ ■ ■■■■■■■■■iiEr:r■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■Brick ■■■■■■■■= ■ ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■�Ilillilliiirii■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■� EMEMEMMEMS!Recreat. Room ■ ■ ■ ■■■ ■■■■■■■■■■■��■I1■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■� ■C■C..■C■■■■■■■■■■■■■...■■..■■.._..■■■....■.� MEN MEN ■ ■ ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■6■6■■�■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■yY■w.•■�•�W ■■■� EXTERIOR WALLS •- ::::::©:::::W::W�WWWW::i M No Sheathing Forced Air Furn. Wood Shingles Stearn- " ,C IA'•• Asbes. Shingles Hot Wat. or Vapor Stucco on Frame No Heating Stucco on Tile Electric Brick Veneer Gas Burner Brick on Tile Oil Burner Solid Brick Solar Panels Stone Veneer PLUMBING Conc. or Cind. BI. Bathroom . Toilet Room Terra Cotta Water Closet Vitrolite Kitchen Sink Plate Glass Std. Wat. Heat Insulation A- Auto. Wat. Heat Weatherstrip /;..4.,. Wat. Syst. _Elect. Laundry Tubs ROOFING Asph. Shingles No Plumbing Wood Shingles TILING Asbes. Shingles Bath FI. & Wcot. Slate Toilet Fl. & Wcot. Tile LIGHTING Metal Electric " Composition No Lighting Roll Roofing NO. OF ROOMS Bsmt 2nd. 1st. 3rd. PROPERTY LINE Remarks ❑ Demolition ❑ Utilities closed ❑ &trrd Estimated Cost , x" f'•;, FEE COMPUTATION $ i SIGNATURE of OWNER or BUILDER APPLICATION: iREJECTED ❑ QA�P—PROVED ISSUED TO / �rn "ricAL t/t Date 19 Plans received Yes ❑ No ❑ ADDRESS of OWNER xv SIGN TUBE OF CODE OFFICER PERMIT VALID FOR SIX MONTHS PERMIT SUBJECT TO APPEAL WITHIN 15 DAYS FROM DATE ISSUED CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON ZONINGmBUILDING PERMIT PERMIT NUMBER DATE TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION IS r ll ele-�05 / d1r 0 e0 LOCATION OWNER "' �',��x'�'� BUILDER l! — ,�a loe�4-4.� SIGNATURE OF CODE OFFICER This permit issued in accordance with rules and regulations of the City of South Burlington. Post this card on construction site in full view. Permit valid for six months. I-Hip('-1i'LHik wH I tK August 2, 1991 ILL 1-OVG-:.JV -/ v-i ✓� - - - - City of South Burlington WATER DEPARTMENT 403 QUEEN CITY PARK ROAD SOUTH SURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 TEL, 864-4361 Mr. John Caulo, Project Manager Kessel-Duff, Inc. 57 Talcott Road Williston, VT 05495 RE: Act 250 Review: IDX Phase II Expansion, 1500 Shelburne Road, South Burlington, Vermont Dear Mr. Caulo; In response to your request for information regarding the South Burlington Water Department's capability to supply water to the above referenced proposed project I submit the following: 1. Your estimated demand of 7,500 total gallons per day (Phase I and Phase II) for this proposed project can be met by the existing Water 6y';to-m t;ithou: restricting or encumbering its present users. if you have any further questions or need further information please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely, SOUTH BURLINGTON WATER DEPARTMENT Robert L. Gardner Superintendent cc: J. Fay J . Weith ,� KESSEL/DUFF CONSTRUCTION OF VERMONT INC. DESIGN • CONSTRUCTION • MANAGEMENT 30 July 1991 Mr. Joseph Weith, City Planner City.of South Burlington 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, Vermont 05403 RE: IDX Corporation - Phase II Expansion Dear Joe: As discussed, I enclose a draft copy of letter to the Act 250 District 4 Commission regarding the upcoming application by IDX for the above -referenced project. I tried to keep the letter as factual as possible, however, feel free to edit where needed. Regarding Condition 1 - Landscaping, I agree with your suggestion that the $9,000 Phase II landscape bond be increased to reflect the deficient material excluded from the actual Phase I planting to date. In addition, I would appreciate your following up on Condition 9 and Chief Gaudette regarding his desire for an additional fire hydrant. Our understanding is that the existing hydrant locations are the result of the Planning Commission approval process, including the Chief's input. Thank you for your attention to this matter, Joe. After you and Chuck Hafter have approved and executed a draft of the letter, please contact me for pick-up so it can be included in our application. We are hoping to submit the appl-ication by the end of this week. You s t ly,, John Caulo Project Manager cc. Michelle Myers, IDX 57 TALCOTT ROAD, PO. BOX 788, WILLISTON, VERMONT 05495 (802) 879-2966 FAX: 879-2967 DRAFT 31 July 1991 Mr. Craig DiGiammarino, District Coordinator Vermont Environmental Board District 4 Environmental Commission 111 West Street Essex Junction, Vermont 05452 RE: IDX Headquarters - Phase Il Expansion 1500 Shelburne Road, South Burlington, Vermont Dear Mr. DiGiammarino: It has come to our attention that IDX Corporation is making application to Act 250 to expand its corporate headquarters along Shelburne Road in South Burlington. In general, Phase II expansion will be identical to Phase I in size and appearance, and contain approximately 60,000 square feet of office space. Please be advised that the City of South Burlington approved both Phase I and Phase II of this project on December 15, 1987. The approval contained sixteen conditions, all of which have either been met or are in the process of being met by IDX. In particular, the Planning Commission approval included a sewer allocation of 71650 gpd for the entire project (3,825 gpd per phase) IDX has been an asset to our community, both as an major employer and corporate property owner along Shelburne Road. We are proud of the role we played in the planning of the IDX Headquarters, and look forward to the completion of the project in the near future. Yours truly, Charles Hafter Joseph Weith City Manager City Planner City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 TEL (802) 658-7953 FAX (802) 6584748 OFFICE OF CITY MANAGER CHARLES E. HAFTER July 31, 1991 Mr. Lou Borie, District Coordinator Vermont Environmental Board District 4 Environmental Commission 111 West. Street Essex Junction, Vermont. 05452 Re: IDX Headquarters - Phase II Expansion 1500 Shelburne Road, South Burlington, Vermont. Dear Mr. Borie: It has come to our attention that IDX Corporation is making application to Act 250 to expand its corporate headquarters along Shelburne Road in South Burlington, In general, Phase II expan- sion will be identical to Phase I in size and appearance, and contain approximately 60,000 square feet of office space. Please be advised that the City of South Burlington approved both Phase I and Phase II of this project on December 15, 1987. The approval contained sixteen conditions, all of which have either 1-1-eer. met or are in the process of being met by IDX. In lar, the Planning Commission approval included a sewer allocation of 7,650 gpd for the entire project (3,825 gpd per phase). IDX has been an asset. to our community, both as an major employer and corporate property owner along Shelburne Road. We are proud of the role we played in the planning of the IDX Headquarters, and look forward to the completion of the project in the near future. Sincerely, Charles Hatter City Manager CH/mcp llnle-_ Joe Weith City Planner "r tate of Vermont WATER SUPPLY AND WASTEWATER DISPOSAL PERMIT LAWS/REGULATIONS INVOLVED CASE NO. WW-4-0442 Environmental Protection Rules APPLICANT B.D.P. Realty Assoc. Chapter 4, Public Buildings ADDRESS 1500 Shelburne Road South Burlington, VT 05403 This project, consisting of constructing a 60,000 square foot office addition to house 255 employees to the office building previously approved in Public Building Permit PB-4-1255 located off U.S. Route 7 in the City of South Burlington, Vermont is hereby approved under the requirements of the regulations named above, subject to the following conditions. This Permit does not constitute Act 250 approval under Case Number 4CO391-6. GENERAL (1) This permit does not relieve the permittee from obtaining all other approvals and permits as may be required from the Act 250 District Environmental Commission, the Department of Labor and Industry (phone 828-2106), the Vermont Department of Health (phone 863-7220), and local officials PRIOR to proceeding with this project. (2) The project shall be completed as shown on the plans Job #86076 Sheet SP-2 "Site Plan (West)" dated 2/10/87 and Sheet SP-3 "Site Plan (East)" dated 2/10//87 stamped by Richard P. Trudell, P.E. and which have been stamped "approved" by the Division of Protection. The project shall not deviate from the approved plans without prior written approval from the Division of Protection. (3) No alterations to the existing building other than those indicated on the approved plan or Water Supply and Wastewater Disposal Permit, which would change or affect the exterior water supply or wastewater disposal or the approved use of the building shall be allowed without prior review and approval from the Agency of Natural Resources. (4) In the event of a transfer of ownership (partial or whole) of this project, the transferee shall become permittee and be subject to compliance with the terms and conditions of this permit. (5) By acceptance of this permit, the permittee agrees to allow representatives of the State of Vermont access to the property covered by the permit, at reasonable times, for the purpose of ascertaining compliance with Vermont environmental/health statutes and regulations, with this permit. (6) The Vermont Department of Health is to be contacted in regard to any regulations and/or licenses required by their Department. (They may be reached at 60 Main Street, Burlington, Vermont, or by phoning 804-863-7220). (7) All conditions set forth in Public Building Permit #PB-4- 1255 dated April 1,1987 shall remain in effect except as modified or amended herein. Water Supply and Wastewater Disposal Permit WW-4-0442, B.D.P. Realty Assoc. Page 2 WATER SUPPLY (8) The project is approved for water supply by construction and utilization of the municipal water service depicted on the approved plans. No other means of obtaining potable water shall be allowed without prior review and approval by the Division of Protection. SEWAGE DISPOSAL (9) The project is approved for connection to the South Burlington's Bartlett Bay wastewater treatment facility for a maximum of 3825 gallons of sewage per day. Dated at Essex Jct., Vermont this 26th day of September, 1991. Reginald A. LaRosa, Acting Commissioner Department of Environmental Conservation By t Ernest P. Christianson Regional Engineer cc: Donald Robisky City of South Burlington Louis Borie Department of Labor and Industry Department of Health Richard P. Trudell Kessell/Duff Construction of Vermont, Inc. STATE OF VERMONT AGENCY OF TRANSPORTATION 133 State Street, Administration Building Montpelier, Vermont 05633 August 20, 1991 Michelle A. Meyers Administrative Asst. IDX Corporation P.O. Box C-1070 Burlington, Vermont 05402-1070 Re: South Burlington, US 7, L.S. 45+80 Rt. Dear Mr. Meyers: We have completed a review of the traffic impact study for the proposed Phase II expansion of IDX Corporation and offer the following comments. Your proposal was submitted almost simultaneously with a proposal for expanding the Lakewood Commons development. Since the two projects are opposite one another and traffic impacts on US 7 overlap, we have analyzed the two projects together. In addition to a traffic report done by Resource Systems Group, the Lakewood Commons applicant also submitted a Master Site Plan prepared by Trudell Consulting Engineers which shows conceptual improvements to US 7 from a point just south of the Holmes Road intersection, extending approximately 1,000 feet to the north. Since Trudell Consulting Engineers is acting as your consultant, as well as Lakewood Commons, we assume you are aware of this proposal. Our analysis of these two projects has been ?one with the knowledge that US 7 will be reconstructed in the future, includ- ing both geometric and signal improvements. Our schedule shows this project being completed in the fall of 1997 at the earliest. Improvements will include a protected left -turn for northbound and southbound US 7 traffic. The cycle length will probably be 110 seconds and will be coordinated with other signals on US 7. The existing traffic signal at the US 7/Holmes Road inter- section is coordinated with other signals on US 7. This coordi- nation is based on a cycle length of 80 seconds for PM peak hour conditions and 70 seconds for AM peak and off peak conditions. Our analysis was based on these cycle lengths, which limits the degree of retiming that can be accomplished while maintaining the proper coordination. Vermont is an Equal Opportunity Employer. Michelle A. Meyers Administrative Asst. IDX Corporation August 20, 1991 Page Two In regard to the Lakewood Commons expansion, the traffic generated by this project will not have a significant impact on the US 7/Holmes Road intersection. However, the Holmes Road approach will operate at LOS F for 1996 DHV build conditions if it remains a single lane approach. The addition of an exclusive left -turn lane should allow this approach to operate at LOS D. We agree with the consultant's proposal to construct a northbound left -turn lane on US 7. The consultant's conceptual plans shows this lane to have approximately 40 feet of storage length. This may be adequate based on the Highway Capacity Manual procedures, however, you cannot realistically store 1.6 vehicles. Therefore, we recommend that this lane be long enough (50 feet) to store at least 2 vehicles. We also feel that this intersection can accommodate the additional traffic to be generated by the proposed IDX expansion, provided that the applicant construct an exclusive left -turn lane on the southbound US 7 approach. Our preliminary estimates indicate that the storage length for this lane should be approxi- mately 435 feet. This estimate is based on 1996 AM peak hour conditions with minor retiming of the existing signal. The cycle length for the AM peak hour must remain at 70 seconds in order to maintain proper signal coordination. Regarding Lakewood Commons north access, we feel that the storage length for the left -turn lane on US 7 northbound, as shown on the conceptual plan, is adequate. We would also recommend that both applicants join the Shel- burne Road Corridor Transportation Management Association, which is to be funded by L&M Park. Participation in this association would help to reduce travel demand during peak hours. We feel it would be more efficient, both from a cost stand- point and to minimize disruption to the traveling public, if these improvements were to be done at one time. It appears the cost of designing the improvements could be easily shared since you are both using the same consultant. We would recommend you treat the construction phase as a single project and agree to equitably share the costs with the Lakewood Commons project. Michelle A. Meyers Administrative Asst. IDX Corporation August 20, 1991 Page Three At this time, detailed construction plans should be de- veloped and submitted for approval. If your consultant wishes to meet with us to go over design parameters, I would encourage them to do so. Sincerely, Donald L. Allen Project Supervisor Utilities Section DLA:mw cc: Louis Borie, District Environmental Coordinator #4 Chuck Hafter, City of South Burlington CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 Charles E. Hafter City Manager PHONE NUMBER: (802) 658-7953 FAX NUMBER: (802) 658-4748 PLEASE DELIVER THE FOLLOWING PAGES(S) TO: NAME: 571 2y- L FIRM: TELECOPIER NO: Q �j DATE: ��/ / / (TIME: �. ` O TOTAL NUMBER OF PAGES (including cover sheet): FROM: RA &4 A I K IF YOU DO NOT RECIEVE ALL THE PAGES, PLEASE CALL-(-802) 658-7953. TRANSMITTED B��Y//:O COMMENTS: dYe: A rn < 04e ►,D��Qor D E 1,14 s4)I.DX 4pA4,o4& C I TX COUNCIL 3 NOVEMBER 1986 page 5 Mr. Farrar said the City should make some decision in the next 6-8 months in order to get planning done. Consider a land -swap on former National Life Land off Shelburne Rd. Mr. Szymanski explained that originally National Life had lots off Green Mountain Drive and Shelburne Rd. In order to serve the lots off Shelburne Rd, they were required by the Planning Commission to build a service road. IDS (a data company) is now expanding through the whole area, so there will be no need for a service road. In laying out the proposed Holmes Rd. extension, a need has been demonstrated for a portion of the National Life land. Mrs. Lafleur said the city doesn't need the strip in fronyhow. For the IDS project one curb cut will be closed on Shelburne Rd. and the one that remains will serve mostly northbound Shelburne Rd. traffic. Other traffic will use the signalized intersection at Holmes Rd. Following a brief discussion Mr. Murraymoved that the Council ag2rove the land swap as presented. Mrs. Lambert secon,,Ie an the motion passed unanimously. Review and discuss inter -municipal dog control proposal Following a brief discussion, Mrs. Lambert moved that the Council approve the concept of the dog proves ons as presented. Mr. Mona - seconded and the motion passea unanimously. Mr. Szymanski will check whether the Ordinance has to be reworded. Review Zoning Board Agenda No issues were raised. Mrs. Lambert commented on the last Planning Commission meeting at which 3 new curb cuts were approved on Shelburne Rd. Mr. Mona said the 2 given to Lash were already existing. Mrs. Lambert stressed that an access management plan is essential and asked that the Council recommend to the Planning Commission that it do what is necessary to get such a plan. Mr. Farrar suggested having the Commission come in and discuss the matter with the Council. Sign:Disbursement Orders Disbursement Orders were signed. Old Business Mr. Murray presented a resolution regarding State work on Rt. 7. He enumerated the City's concerns including pedestrian/bike safety, vehicle safety, aesthetics, drainage and requested the State Board of Transportation to ask that the following be done: a)sidewalks WARRANTY DEED KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: That BDP REALTY ASSOCIATES, a Vermont general partnership with a place of business in South Burlington, County of Chittenden and State of Vermont, GRANTOR, in consideration of Ten And More Dollars paid to its full satisfaction by the CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON, a municipal corporation located in the County of Chittenden, State of Vermont, GRANTEE, by these presents does freely GIVE, GRANT, SELL, CONVEY AND CONFIRM unto the said Grantee, the CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON, and its successors and assigns forever, a certain piece of land in South Burlington in the County of Chittenden in the State of Vermont, described as follows, viz: A parcel of land located on the westerly side of U.S. Route 7, which parcel is shown on "BQu._ndary and Location Survey, BDP Realty Associates, 1500 Shelburne Roai1;-S-(5 - ' Burlington, Vermont," dated August, 1986, last revised February 13, 1987, by Krebs and Lansing Consulting Engineers, Inc., Winooski, Vermont, recorded at Volume Pages of the Land Records of the City of South Burlington. i This parcel is depicted on the above -referenced survey as follows: Commencing at a point, which point is located S72021'26"E a distance of 39.52 feet from the concrete monument which marks the northwestern corner of the lands conveyed to the City of South Burlington by Warranty Deed of National Life Insurance Company dated January 6, 1976 and recorded at Volume 126, Pages 289-291 of the Land Records of the City of South Burlington; thence proceeding S72021'26"E for a distance of 819.64 feet, more or less, to a point marked by a stake found; thence deflecting to the right and proceeding S18000'50"W for a distance of 67.00 feet, more or less, to a point; thence deflecting to the right and proceeding N69029'34"W for a distance of 820.41 feet, more or less, to a point; thence deflecting to the right and proceeding N18002'47"E for a distance of 26.00 feet, more or less, to the point or place of beginning, containing approximately 0.875 acres. These lands are more particularly described as being all the land conveyed to BDP Realty Associates b Quit -Claim of Hatco Associates rjaterl 1„lv S 1070 --A ------ 3 x � ,_ , I. _. - - - - - - IN WITNESS WHEREOF, BDP REALTY ASSOCIATES, by it duly auth rized agent, has caused its hand and seal to be set this 'V- day of 1988. In Presence Of: BDP �EALTY SOCI�S r Its6Duly Authorized Agent STATE OF VERMONT COUNTY OF CHITTENDEN, SS. AAj4v�11,--dulv "t'this day of C �- 1988, authorized agent of BDP REAI Y persona y appeared and acknowledged this instrument, by him sealed and subscribed, to be his free act and deed and the free act and deed of BDP REALTY ASSOCIATES. Before me',Ti�Z�. otary Public N:RE2/bdp.wd Re: Findings of construction of Shelburne Rd. FINDINGS OF FACT STATE OF VERMONT COUNTY OF CHITTENDEN CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON Fact, application of IDX Corporation for a 120,000 sq. ft. office space in 2 phases, 1400 On the 28th of November, 1989 the South Burlington Planning Commission approved the request of IDX Corporation for revised site plan review under Section 19.10 of the South Burlington Zoning Regulations based on the following findings: 1. TRAFFIC ACCESS: Access is from Shelburne Road and Holmes Road. The Shelburne Road access will be entrance only. 2. LANDSCAPING & SCREENING: A revised landscape plan shall be submitted to and approved by the City Planner. The applicant shall post a landscaping bond in the amount of $2,160 prior to the removal of any vegetation. --------------------------------------- Chairman or Clerk South Burlington Planning Commission PLANNER 658-7955 City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 April 4, 1990 Mr. Joe Myers Larkin Realty 410 Shelburne Road South Burlington, Vermont 05403 Re: IDX Day Care Facility, Shelburne Road Dear Joe: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 The Planning Commission approved your request for a 6 month extension in which to obtain a building permit for the above referenced project. The request was approved at the 4/3/90 Planning Commission meeting. The building permit must be obtained by 10/10/90 or this approval is null and void. If you have any questions or if I can be of further assistance please do not hesitate to contact me. Si rely, Joe Weith, City Planner JW/mcp FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED Engineering and Planning Services One Wentworth Drive • Williston • Vermont * 05495 • (802) 878-3000 18 December 1989 City of South Burlington 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 RE: IDX Corporation, Act 250 Permit Amendment Application FILE: 88124 Please find enclosed two copies of Act 250 Permit Amendment Application for your review. Also enclosed is the revised proposed landscape plan, reflecting additional plant material, as stipulated by the South Burlington Planning Commission at the time of approval. If you have any questions or comments please don't hesitate to contact us at your earliest convenience. Sincerely, FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED Shelby L. Giannone SLG/kal LN:88124-1 Design • Inspection • Studies • Permitting • Surveying FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED Engineering and Planning Services One Wentworth Drive • Williston * Vermont • 05495 • (802) 878-3000 15 December 1989 Mr. Lou Borie, Coordinator District 4 Environmental Commission 111 West Street Essex Junction, VT 05452 RE: Amendment Application, L.U.P #4C0391-6 IDX Corporation, Richard Terrant, South Burlington, VT 05403 FILE: BB124 Dear Mr. Borie, On behalf of Richard Terrant we are applying to the District Environmental Commission to amend the above referenced Land Use Permit. IDX wishes to enhance the aesthetic quality of the area immediately to the east of Route 7 by selectively thinning the dense vegetation. Presently dense undergrowth and tangled vines cover the northwest corner of the property. Our goal is to clear those damaging species and some of the weaker trees to allow for the remaining trees to grow uninhibited and to achieve their natural size and shape. Removal of the dead brush and climbing vines will allow better air circulation and increased light penetration, creating a more healthy growing environment. In addition, all stumps and large roots will be removed from the cleared area. Two inches of topsoil will be added and a seed mixture of 40% Creeping Red Fescue, 40% Fiesta Perennial Bluegrass, and 20% Kentucky Bluegrass at a rate of 4 Lbs. per 1000 square feet will be applied. During the local review process, the South Burlington Planning Commission stipulated that nine evergreen trees and fifteen shrubs be added to compensate for the removed vegetation. We have specified Austrian Pines (Pines nigra) and Redtwig Dogwoods (Cornus sericea). These additional plants will be installed when the seeding is done. Design • Inspection • Studies • Permitting • Surveying Mr. Lou Borie, Coordinator FILE: 88124 6 December 1989 Page Two The sequence of work can begin this winter with the removal of the specified vegetation. The removal of stumps and large roots can take place in the spring when the ground thaws. Topsoil, seed straw mulch and the new plant material can be installed in early May when ground temperatures begin to rise. Erosion control methods will be the responsibility of the contractor. For the winter, the remaining stumps and roots will hold the soil. Once those are removed, the area will be seeded and mulched with straw, leaving the time the gound is exposed to erosion as minimal as possible. Based on our experience on similar projects, the total job time will be approximately four weeks. To assist the Commission in their review, we have enclosed six sets of site plans and proposed landscape plan, six copies of the completed application and a check for the fee of $25.00. Should you have any questions or need additional information please don't hesitate to contact us. Sincerely, FITZPATRICK-ILEWELLYN INCORPORATED Shelby L. Giannone cc: Richard Terrant Mery Brown Regional Planning Commission City of South Burlington SLG/kal FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED Engineering and Planning Services ° Planning File Data for Computer Input \. Ori�inu1 Property Uwoer���_ - 2. Developer's Name '---------------------'- - - --'-' '- ' ---�----'---- 3. Name of Development. 4' Address of Development or Project 5. Type of' Project.. �9 '~~�' ~ � ^ Minor Subdivision (M]) ' ' Major Subdivision (MS) Site Plan (BP) 6. Zoning District l 7' Zoning District 2 H. Zoning Board Approval date if Required Q. Date of Planning Commission Heariuge/Meetioga Site Plan Date Z, r A f v- or Sketch Plan Date \ . -'___-'-'----_---_--__-_--~' 10. Preliminary Plat date l l ' Final Plat Date 12, Revised Final Plat Date l (if applicable) ]], Revised Final Plat Date 2 (if applicable) __ _ 14 . Acreage of Total Project } Use of Laud l \o[ Land % ^[ Land j - — [ |.a/ld 1 19. Nombor of' Lots r ot, 5/nxl, I.'w.I|! (o/I� 21. Nomk,r ..[ Mo|ti-[omi|7 [oi�s 2"'.. /[ lit) i|'Ii/'x _ 23. Size of Building ( Square footage) 24. Streets S _ City Street CS Private Street PS 25. Date of Acceptance of streets by City- _ I# by 26. Bond -Landscaping 2, / 27. Bond -Streets 28. Bond -Sewer _ 29. Bond -Water 30. Bond -Other 31. Date Mylar Due (90 days after approval)' 32. Date Recorded - 33. Expiration date of Approval 34. Date of First Building Permit 34 . Tax Map Number 1?1_/ _/ 36. Map File Location 1 37. Map File Location 2 38. Map File Location 3 Other fees ('Type and amount) Preparers Name:__ Date: __ /(��•�j_ ��s `J' --- Posted in Computer ( Name, Date) I 11/27/B9 JW MOTION OF APPROVAL I move the South Burlington Planning Commission approve the revised site plan application of IDX Corporation to change the landscaping as depicted on a 2 page set of plans entitled "Holmes Road Commercial, Tree Location Survey," prepared by Fitzpatrick - Llewellyn, Incorporated and dated September, 1989 with the following stipulation`: 1. The planrshall be revised to show a,m'r+'m"m Alve 6 to 8 -ter— ���eteh The applicant shall post a landscaping bond in the amount of $2,160 prior to the removal of any vegetation. NOTES lox PARKVVG LOT 03 \\ k \�� I SH£LBURNE ROAD ROUTE 7 PLANTLIST LCUCIVU QO(Lu�11L,a1. r4Y.G LOr�ro.J rurE 1aGG ourCfti< GLER P�LY'f')DH fJGCNA. '( I'dPLG W4Ct i.w� 1 LOWLL17 YI1L(J. �i� OT�VRO iO FYLL/! SfGLICh GQGE..�+I.G � JN 4J+„e phi P%"mpkA KII{G wPL�GC • Sb n Pgfec" pp pf%XLA OU,VVM pau+K wan CtYa7Etv1 pPa1( /-�- i—l% ALZ& 91, qumr VLL-cw �} u+f a H- v 1-1 4 hftw I04 w :A eXn a-L41 w nnecrsu� Ern S��Tc�l-1 r4 .Kwor�r/iE , 1L.11 . M HOLMES ROAD COMMERCIAL �y PROPOSED LANDSCAPE PLAN J� WKlIfiOY rr __ Y{.YM. f � Z CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON S I TF. PI,AN API'f. I CAT ION I) OWNER OJ k!:('Ofll) (nfime , add rests , phone 2) APPLICANT ( name, address, phone i t �-On `�-F ,i .� o>?.,►.) � 4� �, �O ��[. I Din ., �U tZJ _ I�.)C�ntiT I_. 3) CONTACT PERSON (name, address, phone ONE WEr IgWOZTH 01C- 1 4) . PROJECT STREET ADDRESS: �LI{� �74-I FJI�>,►2-1�1F[7 ---_ .-- _ _ 5) LOT NUMBER (if applicable) I1� 6) PROPOSED USE (S 1 7) SIZE OF PROJECT (i.e. total building square footage, # units, maximum height and # floors, square feet per floor) s✓J,Scto -n 8) NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES 9).LOT COVERAGE: building %; landscaped areas % building, parking, outside storage % 10) COST ESTIMATES: Buildings E , Landscaping $ 5 3IDO-.— 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 3-4 p.m._ 4-5 p.m. 5-6 p.m. 6-7 p.m. 13) PEAK HOURS OF OPERATION: )J ILA___ 14) PEAK DAYS OF OPERATION: B DATE OS(! V'S / 1IS. TON � IGNATURE Of' A) PLICANT DA E OP HEARING f I l PLEASE SUBMIT FIVE COPIES AND ONE REDUCED COPY (8 1 /2 X 11 OR 8 1/2 X 14) 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 curbcuts, 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 separate 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. -2- Memorandum - November 28, November 22, Page 2 Planning 1989 agenda items 1989 4) IDX. REVISED LANDSCAPING PLAN, SHELBURNE ROAD IDX is propos.in;; to revise the landscaping plan at 1400 Shelburne Road by significantly thinning out the wooded area located in the northwest corner of the parcel at the Shelburne Road/Holmes Road intersection. It is proposed to remove areas of dense sumac vines and underbrush and replace it with lawn. The existing trees larger than _� inches in diameter would remain. The primary purpose is to improve visibility to the new retail/office build- ing owned by Mery Brown. The proposal would improve the quality of the wooded area, howev- er, it would significantly reduce its present screening ability. I feel this wo,_dec': area is important to the aesthetics of Shel- burne Road. This wooded area is one of only a few uses along Shelburne Road which breaks up the increasingly unappealing strip development ch�ract.er of the roadway. I recommended that this application be approved but that addi- tional pine chimp.-, be planted in those areas indicated on sketch A to maintain tjie present screening ability of the stand. 5) RESUBDIVISTON. IRISH PROPERTY, ALLEN ROAD Dennis Blodgett. ,_-2_-oposes to subdivide a 29,577 square foot lot (0.679 acres) from the 39 acre Irish farm on Allen Road. The property is zoned Residential 2. It is located at the end of Harbor Ridge Road directly north of the CWD water tank. This application is considered a resubdivision of the original 42 acre parcel since three other lots have been subdivided from the original parcel in the last few years. A 1.15 acre parcel was subdivided off in 9/86 while two 0.51 acre parcels were subdivid- ed off in 7/°'/ (minutes from both meetings enclosed). It is important to treat this application as a resubdivision for sever- al reasons including: 1) this subdivision would be the Sth lot, therefore it is considered a major subdivision, and 2) when and if the City decides to accept 15% of the land for recreation purposes, the 15% will be assessed against the original 42 acres. Lot size/frontage: The new parcel meets the minimum lot size and frontage requirements of the district. M E M O R A N D U M To: South Burlington Planning Commission From: William J. Szymanski, City Engineer Re: November 28, 1989 agenda items Date November 22, 1989 2) GREER'S DRY CLEANING. SHELBURNE ROAD Plan titled Greer's Dry Cleaner site plan dated November, 1987, Sheet. SP-1 prepared by Civil Engineering Associate, Inc. is acceptable. 3) LEISURE WORLD, INC. AIRPORT PARKWAY Plan dated 10/31/89 is acceptable. 4) HOLMES ROAD COMMERCIAL. SHELBURNE ROAD Plan titled Holmes Road Commercial, tree location survey, dated September 1989 prepared by Fitzpatrick -Llewellyn, Inc. is accept- able. ) IRISH FARM._ALLEN ROAD 1. Harbor Ridge Road should be extended to serve the four lots and a temporary turn around built at the end. This road should be built to City standards including a side walk on the south side. The existing Harbor Ridge turnaround shall be removed. Plans for these improvements shall be submitted for review and approval. FA PPLjc.A-n01j C O R P O R A T I O N 1500 Shelburne Road P.O. Box C-1070 Burlington, VT 05402-1070 802-862-1022 9 November 1999 Joe Weith South Burlington City Planner 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, Vermont 05403 RE: IDX Corporation Property FILE: eelP4 Dear Mr. Weith: We are submitting six copies of a two page plan entitled "Tree Location Survey" and "Proposed Landscape Plan" for your review. IDX wishes to enhance the aesthetic quality of the area immediately to the east of Route 7 by selectively thinning the dense vegetation. Presently dense undergrowth and tangled vines cover the northwest corner of the property. Our goal is to clear those damaging species and some of the weaker trees to allow for the remaining trees to grow uninhibited and to achieve their natural size and shape. Removal of the dead brush and climbing vines will allow better air circulation and increased light penetration, creating a more healthy growing environment. We would like to amend our permit to reflect this work. We are planning to attend the December 5 meeting. Should you have any questions or comments, please feel free to call. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, IDX CORPORATION c— J Richard E. Tarrant President SG/RET/mam Burlington • Boston • Chicago • Dallas • San Francisco � JOBLLL FITZPATR|CK'LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED SHEET NO. or ^ One Wentworth Drive VV/LL|ST0NL VER��ONT 05495 CALCULATED By o^rs (802) 878-2000 CHECKED BY DATE uo^Ls �� -- PROO=2041 Need Inc.. G,OW. Mm O1471 f 1985 HCM: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS SUMMARY REPORT ************************************************************************** INTERSECTION..8EARS/FACTORY OUTLET/SHELBURNE ROAD AREA TYPE ..... OTHER ANALYST ....... RJD DATE .......... 10-31-89 TIME .......... P.M. PEAK HOUR COMMENT ....... __________________________________________________________________________ W/ 19.5 K PROJECT, MODIFIED PHASING & NO E-W RIGHT TURNS VOLUMES : GEOMETRY EB WB NB SB : EB WB NB SB LT 245 230 144 10 : L 12.0 L 11.0 L 11.0 L 11.0 TH 45 25 1450 1200 : T 12.0 T 11.0 T 11.0 T 11.0 RT 0 0 280 175 : 10.0 10.0 T 11.0 T 11.0 RR 0 0 0 0 : 12.0 12.0 R 11.0 R 11.0 : 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 __________________________________________________________________________ : 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 ADJUSTMENT FACTORS GRADE HV ADJ PKG BUSES PHF PEDS PED. BUT. ARR. TYPE (%) (%) Y/N Nm Nb Y/N min T EB 0.00 1.00 N 0 0 0.90 20 N 24.6 3 WB 0.00 1.00 N 0 0 0.90 20 N 24.6 3 NB 0.00 4.00 N 0 2 0.95 20 N ' 14.1 4 SB 0.00 4.00 N 0 2 0.95 20 N 14.1 4 __________________________________________________________________________ SIGNAL SETTINGS CYCLE LENGTH = 80.0 PH-1 PH-2 PH-3 PH-4 PH-1 PH-2 PH-3 PH-4 EB LT X NB LT X TH X TH X X RT RT X X PD X PD X WB LT X SB LT X TH X TH X X RT RT X X PD X PD X GREEN 20.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 GREEN 8.0 24.0 10.0 0.0 YELLOW 4.0 __________________________________________________________________________ 0.0 0.0 0.0 YELLOW 4.0 5.0 5.0 0.0 LEVEL OF SERVICE LANE GRP. V/C G/C DELAY LOS APP. DELAY APP. LOS EB L 0.630 0.262 21.9 C 21.1 C T 0.106 0.262 17.0 E.'- WE" L 0.637 0.262 22.2 C 21.7 C T 0.061 0.262 16.8 C NB L 0.622 0.150 27.6 D 15.9 C T 0.914 0.512 17.3 C R 0.278 0.737 1.9 A SB L 0.058 0.112 24.1 C 13.0 B T 0.816 0.475 14.5 B R 0.183 0.700 2.3 A __________________________________________________________________________ INTERSECTION: Delay = 15.6 (sec/veh) V/C = 0.730 LOS = C Mr. Philip I`1eh l er FILE: 88173 November 22, 1999 Page Two this proposed revision by the Vermont Agency of Transportation. Should you have any questions or if additional information is desired, please feel free to contact us. Sincerely FITZPATRICK-LLEW LLYpN INCORPORATED Rogr J( Dickinson, P.E. 9 cc. w/ enclosures Phillip Mehler Lynne Alden „ VAOT Joe Weith �/ Craig Leiner FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED Engineering and Planning Services FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED Engineering and Planning Services One Wentworth Drive • Williston 0 Vermont • 05495 • (802) 878-3000 November 22, 1989 Mr. Don Morley, Traffic Engineer City of Burlington Public Works Department 7 Kilburn Street Burlington, Vermont 05401 RE: Shelburne Road/Sears/Factory Outlet Traffic Signal Burlington, Vermont FILE: 88173 Dear Mr. Morley: The City of South Burlington Planning Commission recently (August 29, 1989) required revisions to the phasing of the above -referenced traffic signal as part of their approval of the Factory Outlet expansion. This requirement, which was also recommended by Craig Leiner of the Regional Planning Commission, is to split the Shelburne Road left -turns into a lead -lag phasing which would run concurrently with the non -conflicting through movement. Enclosed please find the results of a capacity analysis which illustrates the proposed phasing. Its primary benefit will be to allow an additional two seconds of green time for the northbound left -turn into Sears with a minimum of impact on through traffic flow. The results of previous capacity analyses at this intersection indicate that the present 8 seconds green time of the Shelburne Road left -turn phase is inadequate. Also enclosed are the results of a comparative analysis with respect to the progression and signal coordination of the Shelburne Road system. These results indicate that the revised phasing will not adversely impact the existing progression along Shelburne Road. On behalf of our client, Mr. Philip Mehler, owner of the Factory Outlet, we request your approval to implement the proposed phasing change. By copy of this letter, we are also requesting the review of Design 0 Inspection 9 Studies 0 Permitting 0 Surveying 'Read PLANNING COMMISSION 14 OCTOBER 1986 PAGE 7 Company - Site Plan, 35 Joy Drive" prepared 12y Donald L. Hamlin, dated 11/15/85 with the following stipulations 1. The Planning Commission approves the seventy-five parking spaces proposed by the applicant. Seventeen are waived. 2. A $19,450 landscaping bond shall be posted prior to permit 3. The sidewalk shall continue across the entire frontage. A bond shall be posted for this prior to permit in an amount determined jy-- the City Engineer. It shall be depressed con- crete and continuous across the driveway. 4. A fire hydrant shall be installed at the main driveway as specified 12y the South Burlington Fire Chief. 5. A sewer allocation of 975 gallons per day is granted. The $2.50 per gallon fee shall be paid prior to permit. 6. The size of the discharge pipe shall be restricted as specified by the City Engineer. 7. The building permit shall be obtained within 6 months or this approval is null and void. Mr. Belter seconded, and the motion passed unanimously. 8. Site plan application of BDP Realty for IDS for construction of a 120,000 sq• ft. office building on 10.1 acres at 1400 Shelburne Rd. Shelly Smullens explained that IDS is now at 1500 Shelburne Rd. They specialize in health care industry software. They now have 20,000 sq. ft, housing 4 of their 6 divisions. They feel they will need much more in the next few years as they are growing rapidly. Mr. Ptaszynski, architect, said the lot is 10.2 acres and they propose 44% coverage consisting of 40,000 sq. ft. on each of 3 floors. The building will be turned to follow the contours of the land. Half of the parking will be in front, half in the rear. The main access will be from Shelburne Rd. The present curb cut will be moved for a direct access (the present one is shared by Nordic Ford, but BDP owns the land). They propose to remove the frontage road required in the original subdivision approval. They have learned that Holmes Rd. will be extended through to Spear St. and they anticipate a traffic light there soon. They thus propose to connect the front parking lot to Holmes Rd extension, but would still like to keep the Shelburne Rd. curb cut, though they would PLANNING COMMISSION 14 OCTOBER 1986 PAGE $ anticipate using it less. Mrs. Lafleur said the plan will have to be redesigned to show required setbacks from Holmes Rd. extension and parking removed from the right-of-way. The Commission may want to designate an entrance only on Shelburne Rd. - Regarding drainage, they are required to have a filtration pone for the site. Water will be filtered and released to a culvert under Shelburne Rd. They are using only 75% of their present parking and will ask for a reduction in the parking requirement. There will be a tenant on one floor to start with. They will leave room to expand parking if necessary. The traffic standard is met as they suggest only 272 trips will be produced and 538 are allowed. Erosion control will be dealt with at the 10/28 meeting. The building is 3 floors, 36 ft. high. They want to break the top line of the building with an atrium greenhouse which would be 45 ft. high. Members agreed this would be OK. Mrs. Maher asked about the sidewalk. Mrs. Lafleur said they are trying to get the state to put in the sidewalk; if this cannot be achieved, the applicant will bond for the sidewalk Mrs. Maher said she would hope for some evergreen trees to be included. Mr. Ptaszinsky said they are thinking about screening between their lot and Nordic Ford and may use evergreens. Mrs. Hurd moved that the item be continued until October 28. Mrs. Maher seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 9. Site plan application of Alan Palmer for construction of a 9600 sq. ft. addition to the existing building, 20 Kimball Avenue. Mr. Palmer said Phase I and II are now built. They propose a buiding northeast of the existing building, 2 stories high, raised above the parking lot to the same height as the present building. They will donate what can't be used for landscaping to the city for recreation or park acquisition use. Mrs. Hurd moved that the Planning Commission approve the site plan application of Palmer Company for a 9600 sq. ft. addi- tion to the existing building at 30 Kimball Ave. as depicted 10/27/86 JBL MOTION OF APPROVAL That the South Burlington Planning Commission approve the site plan application of B.D.P. Realty for construction of a 120,000 square foot office building on the 10.98 acre lot at 1400 Shelburne Road as depicted on a plan entitled "Site Plan - Interpretive Data Systems" prepared by Trudell Consulting Engineers, dated 10/6/86 with the following stipulations: 1) Legal documents for the dedication of land for Holmes Road extension shall be submitted to the City Attorney for approval within 30 days or prior to permit, whichever is first. 2) The Commission grants approval for 407 parking spaces and 73 designated fppr fut re parking if needed. / 3) A $37,500 landscaping bond shall be post�rior to permit. 4) A sidewalk shall be constructed along the Shelburne Road frontage in a location that conforms to the widened Route 7. All sidewalks shall be concrete and continuous across driveways. A bond shall be posted in an amount determined by the City Engineer or money shall be placed in escrow for use in a different Shelburne Road location if this is covered by the State's widening plan. 5) A $6,983 fee for the Shelburne Road intersection improvements fund shall be paid prior to permit based on the 272 trip ends generated by this development. ----- 6) A complete erosion control study prepared by Wagner, Heindel & Noyse shall be submitted to the City Engineer for approval prior to permit. The applicant shall implement the recommendations of W.H. & N to retain the runoff on -site to maintain pre -development conditions. 7) The existing fire hydrants shall be relocated and a third hydrant shall be installed behind the new building in locations approved by the Fire Chief. 8) The abandoned service road and driveway shall be removed and the area top soiled and seeded. Curbing shall be installed at the abandoned Shelburne Road access. `15 9) The Planning Commission grants approval of ,4< feet in height. The Commission has determined that the taller structure: 1. utilizes topography and relates to other existing and proposed structures so as to be aesthetically compatible with the neighborhood; 1 08 "I3'\D `fi)s \&n&S Cq v3,C)o 3 `i3q,ts-OL) 6s t S 1 011 'to �' 14 \q fed out 6@0. LA 3 H� crx -j, -V O 6,0- j y a1d'1 $ � Q►na. �Oq'. yo log IL-A)Ju^f a5,yo yo C , �� s, a-��l 6 \ZC> i 1 40 Ll,a crr4 10,30 BAZ It 10/14/86 JBL MOTION OF APPROVAL That the South Burlington Planning Commission approve the site plan application of B.D.P. Realty for construction of a 120,000 square foot office building on the 10.98 acre lot at 1400 Shelburne Road as depicted on a plan entitled "Site Plan - Interpretive Data Systems" prepared by Trudell Consulting Engineers, dated 10/6/86 with the following stipulations: 1) The plan shall be revised to show a strip 24 feet wide at Shelburne Road and 67 feet wide at Green Mountain Drive reserved for Holmes Road extension. No building, parking, pavement or landscaping shall be shown in this strip. It shall be deeded to the City for the future construction of Holmes Road extension. 2) The service road approved in the original National Life Sudivision along the western Shelburne Road boundary shall be used in this development. It shall goose -neck at the northern end before tieing into Holmes Road extension. The final design shall be approved by the City Engineer. 3) The Commission grants approval for 413 parking spaces and 50 designated for future parking if needed. Seventeen spaces are waived. Parking numbers shall be corrected on the plans prior to permit. 4) A $37,500 landscaping bond shall be posted prior to permit. 5) A sidewalk shall be constructed along the Shelburne Road frontage in a location that conforms to the widened Route 7. A bond shall be posted in an amount determined by the City Engineer. 6) A $6,983 fee for the Shelburne Road intersection improvement fund shall be paid prior to permit based on the 272 trip ends generated by this development. 7) A complete erosion control study prepared by Wagner, Heindel & Noyse shall. be submitted to the City Engineer for approval prior to permit. The applicant shall implement the recommendations of W,H & N to retain the runoff on -site to maintain pre -development conditions. 8) The fire hydrants shall be relocated and a third hydrant shall be installed behind the new building in locations approved by the Fire Chief. 9) The Planning Commission grants approval of 36 feet in height. The Commission has determined that the taller structure: 1. utilizes topography and related to other existing and proposed structures so as to be aesthetically compatible with the neighborhood; 2. does not detract from scenic views of adjacent properties or public streets and walkways; and 3. allows retention of additional green space that enhances the appearance of the developed property. Zoning Board approval is required for any part exceeding 45 feet in height. 10) A sewer allocation of 3825 gallons per day is granted in accordance with the South Burlington Sewer Policy. The $2.50 per gallon fee shall be paid prior to permit. 11) Parking may be phased for the two phase construction plan upon approval of the City Planner. 12) The building permit shall be obtained within 6 months or this approval is null and void. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON SITE PLAN APPLICATION 1) OWNER OF RECORD (name, address, phone #) : B.D.P. RFAT,�Y ASSOCIATES --15.99_Bl9ZBUBN1.I AD-,SD_-BLIRLINGMN., -VT-_.a6--1022---- 2) APPLICANT (name, address, phone #) : B.D.P. RF,ALTYASSQCXMEB, 94 _SIi�L,BLi81 R48I2,_ SQ �IJI2I,II4Q'DD1 VT _862--1Q22 ------------- - 3) CONTACT PERSON ( name, address, phone #) : -SB1U,Ly b1YF ,,J3-D.P. REALTY A55,9QQ1AMS,- -3.5.Q Q -SI UMBLOM- BOAR, _ SQ- BUILTNG TC)N ,, - AU- _B622-102 2 4) PROJECT STREET ADDRESS : lhO0_SIjELBI RNF_gDBDI.-SD.__BURT,INGTCN,-VZ 5) LOT NUMBER (if applicable) : _IA1/233__-_ ------------------- 6) PROPOSED USE (S) : _BJSINE.SS_=_QFFI=........................ 7) SIZE OF PROJECT (i.e. total building square footage, # units, maximum height and # floors, square feet per f 100r) : _12D,0.00-%f;_ 45-Et-high;-3..-%t4)ryT-La,QQO_Sf/floor-. b1li1 -- -------- in Awci-ecp ia1-phases -------------------------------- Lot B Lot A 8) NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES: ____ Phase I:_255 _100_Lgxdgtingj_-_ Phase II:_255 9) LOT COVERAGE: building _ 8.4__%; landscaped areas __5L__%; building, parking, outside storage _44... % 10) COST ESTIMATES: Buildings _',]����0_Q ........ Landscaping $_ Z„ 09________. Other Site Improvements (please list .with cost) _P8('_& i1TTLI=_21a2,5(10_______________ Phase I -Fall 1988 1 1 ) EST I MAI ED PROJECT COMPLET 1014 DATE: _ Phase II_- Fall_1991 -__ 12) EST I MA FED AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC (in and out) 1700_= 1900_-_ Estimated trip ends (in and out) during the following hours: Monday through Friday 11-12 noon 43_; 12-1 p.m. _A3; 1-2 p.m. _43_; 2-3 p.m. 4a- 3-4 p.m._43_; 4-5 p.m. _43; 5-6 p.m. 272_; 6-7 p.m. 41- 13) PEAK HOURS OF OPERATION:_ 14) PEAK DAYS OF OPERATION: -- __ Nbnday_=�_FrE�iday-------� --�-a----=---f------- DecembrSUBMISSION8------ DATE OFIATURE- O APPU ANT !a - Jp1----------------- ,,, DA �F7 HEARING Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission 66 PEARL STREET P.O. BOX 108 ESSEX JUNCTION, VERMONT 05452 802 658.3004 March 31, 1988 John Ewing, Chairman District Environmental Commission #4 111 West Street Essex Junction, Vermont 05452 RE: #4CO391-6B BDP Realty Associates Dear John: This project, Road would provide represents an impo Chittenden County. related issues, an effort to mitigate the site. for the construction of a portion of Holmes access to the IDX site. The IDX expansion rtant contribution to economic development in We are, however, concerned with traffic d offer the following comments in a responsible off -site traffic impacts and improve access to First, it seems prudent for any traffic analysis of the US7/Holmes Road intersection to be based on realistic development conditions. This suggests that traffic from the entire IDX expansion should be included in any operational analysis. For example, an additional 60,000 square feet of office space in Phase II could be expected to generate up to 129 additional P.M. peak hour trips, and approximately 900 daily trip ends. Second, it appears that with Phase I alone, the southbound left turn volume at the Holmes Road/US 7 intersection is sufficient to justify a left turn lane. The volume for this movement, in evidence as stated by the applicant's traffic engineer, is approximately 150 vph in the morning peak hour; 170 vph with Blodgett's traffic. Since the need for the left turn lane is a consequence of site development east of US 7, some fair mechanism should be established for the timely construction of warranted improvements. To defer this improvement would adversely impact the public investment in US 7. It is useful to note that only right-of-way funds have been identified ($158,000 in 1989); no construction funds have yet been programmed (see attachment 1, p. G-41, VAOT 1988 5 year program). Thus, no improvement for US 7 is envisioned for at least 5 years. .. Serving the Municipalities of .. . B01to" Burington Charlotte Colchester Essex Ju-ction Essex Town Hne5t, ,cj Huntington Je, rp R.,.„nord c.. p...�:....,..., i,.....� .. .n,; an., 'Nin, �. John Ewing, DEC #4 -2- March 31, 1988 The third issue is the relocated driveway on US 7. The evidence at the hearing was that the driveway is needed for aesthetic purposes and infrequent service to out-of-town visitors. The public investment in US 7 is better served by accessing this development from Holmes Road. This will help preserve the functional integrity of US 7. This is particularly important since traffic volumes on US 7 have grown at an annual rate,of 4.9% from 1980 to 1988, exceeding the state average. If the District Environmental Commission #4 decides to allow the driveway, we suggest that a condition be attached requiring installation of an automatic or card controlled gate that would physically prevent use of the driveway during peak periods. We recommend unrestricted use of the driveway only during off-peak hours, say 9:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. In conclusion, our overall goal is to ensure safe and efficient site access. By doing this, we believe that both public and private interests are best served. Through traffic would not be impeded; and access to and from the IDX site would be improved, consistent with the firm's desire for a high quality operation. We hope you find these comments useful in arriving at a decision. Sincerely, ARTHUR R. HOGAN, JR. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ARH:bf Enclosure Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission 66 PEARL STREET P.O. BOX 108 ESSEX JUNCTION, VERMONT 05452 802 658.3004 RE: 4CO391-6B CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on April 1, 1988, I, Arthur R. Hogan, Jr., Executive Director of the Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission, sent a copy of the foregoing by United States mail first class postage prepaid, to each of the following: Dennis Blodgett Blodgett Insurance Co. 1000 Shelburne Road South Burlington, VT 05403 Shelley Meyers IDX Corporation 1500 Shelburne Road South Burlington, VT 05403 City of South Burlington Planning Commission 575 Dorset St. South Burlington, Vt 05403 City of South Burlington City Council 575 Dorset St. South Burlington, VT 05403 Dated at Essex Junction, Vermont in the County of Chittenden and State of Vermont, this 1st day of April, 1988. CHITTENDEN COUNTY REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION by ARTHUR R. HOGAN; JR. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ARH:bf . Serving the Municipalities of Bolton Burlington Chorlotte Colchester Essex Junct.on Essex Town Hinesburg Huntington Jencho W!on Richmond Sr -Orgr, cl: i.-..r c: R..".- , .. .!_: io.. 1, ...i S., 11 1... ;n; 1,L. City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 FAX 658-4748 PLANNER 658-7955 February 21, 1997 John Caulo Kessell Duff Corporation 57 Talcott Road P.O. Box 788 Williston, Vermont 05495 Re: IDX Expansion, Shelburne Road Dear John: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 This letter is intended to summarize the primary issues we discussed at our meeting on February 12, 1997. As I understand it, IDX is interested in constructing approximately 60,000 square feet of additional office space in a campus style format at their present site on Shelburne Road. This project would involve the combination of three existing adjoining parcels - 1400 and 1500 Shelburne Road and the 4.2 acre parcel located to the east of Talbott's. There are two primary issues which need to be addressed. The first issue is the zoning of the parcels. The 1400 and 1500 Shelburne Road parcels are zoned Commercial 2 which allow office use at an overall maximum coverage of 70%. The 4.2 acre parcel located to the east of Talbott's is zoned Residential 4, which allows only residential use at a maximum overall coverage of 60%. Even if the lots were to be combined, the zoning designations would not change. Therefore, regardless of the property lines, only those uses and densities which are allowed in the R4 district could occur in the R4 zoned portion of the property. Similarly, only those uses and densities which are allowed in the C2 portion of the property can occur in the C2 zoned portion of the property. The R4 portion of the site, therefore, cannot be used to transfer density to the C2 portion of the site in order to create a development which exceeds the normal density (i.e., coverage) limitations in the C2 portion of the project. John Caulo IDX Expansion February 21, 1997 Page 2 The only way to allow the transfer of such density to the C2 portion of the site is to amend the zoning regulations to allow such transfer. One way to do this is to change the zoning designation of the 4.2 acre parcel to C2. This would require an amendment to the zoning regulations which requires approval by both the Planning Commission and City Council. The other issue which needs to be addressed is sewer allocation. The City's Bartlett Bay treatment facility is currently over capacity in terms of actual and approved flows. The City has started a waiting list for sewer capacity. As of today there is 15,000 gpd allocation on the waiting list. The City is currently in the process of designing and permitting an upgrade to the sewage treatment facility. We hope to have it on-line by 1999. Until then, it is impossible to tell if the City will gain capacity back due to drier weather and/or less flow than originally anticipated from recently approved development. I hope this letter is helpful. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions. qi cerely Weith, y Planner JW/mcp cc: Chuck Hafter Richard Ward Ray Belair KESSEUDUFF CORPORATION DESIGN • CONSTRUCTION • MANAGEMENT 8 October 1992 Mr. Richard Ward, Zoning Administrator City of South Burlington 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, Vermont 05403 RE: IDX Corporation: Parking Lot Expansion Dear Dick: This is to confirm our conversation today about the above -referenced matter. As I indicated to you, IDX is intending to expand its front parking lot in accordance with the dimensions of the master plan approved by the City of South Burlington Planning Commission 15 December 1987. Based on our conversation, it is my understanding no building permit is required for the parking lot expansion. In addition, a temporary extension of Holmes Road will be constructed as part of this work to provide secondary access to the rear parking lot. The extension, which will be 17-feet wide and be constructed of gravel, will ultimately be constructed to City specifications once construction of Phase II of the IDX headquarters is underway. Based on our conversation, a performance bond for Holmes Road extension (to City specifications) will not be required until the construction of Phase II. Construction will begin Tuesday, October 13th and is expected to be completed within 3-4 weeks, weather ry.. � LL G 1 �. k f �r st ce i t r.Crml t�t.iili, . Dive, L..laiai� i7u - y:t:,..L a�au L t.aii...... n U is matter. If additional information is required, please advise. You s i Ca o Vice Vice President `' < cc. Ms. Shelly\Myers,\' IDX Corporation MEW P.O. BOX 788, WILLISTON, VERMONT05495 (802) 879-2966 FAX: 879-2967 City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 FAX 658-4748 PLANNER ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7955 a 658-7958 October 14, 1992 Mr. John Caulo Kessel/Duff Corporation P.O. Box 788 Williston, Vermont 05495 Re: IDX Corporation, expansion of front parking lot Dear John: This letter will confirm that no permit is required to construct a parking lot for Phase II of the IDX building. Regarding your proposal to extend Holmes Road as a secondary access to the rear parking lot. Be advised that prior to construction of any building Holmes Road must be constructed to City standards, which may result in the removal of the temporary access road. As you are aware, the maintenance of the road in question is not the responsibility of the City. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to call me. Very truly, Richard Ward, Zoning Administrative Officer RW/mcp City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 FAX 658-4748 PLANNER 658-7955 October 29, 1996 Mr. John Caulo Kessel/Duff Corporation P.O. Box 788 Williston, Vermont 05495 Re: Phase II I.D.X. Addition Dear John: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Upon review of my records relating to the 120,000 square foot addition to IDX Corporation office building, be advised that the following fees and performance bonds are required prior to the issuance of a building permit for the construction of Phase II. \Q a) Sewer Impact fee 3825 g. p . d. x $2. 50 = $9, 562. 00. V b) Traffic Impact Fee (Shelburne Road intersection improvements) $3,000 \ paid on March 22, 1988, balance due $3,983.00 V c) Installation of fire hydrant, (reviewed and approved by the Fire Chief. d) Performance bond $9,000 for Phase II landscaping (this is a three year bond) . The building permit fees for the Phase II addition (60,000 square feet) is $5.00 per thousand dollars on the estimated cost of the project. If you have any questions, please give me a call. Very truly, Richard Ward, Zoning Administrative Officer RW/mcp cc: Ms. Shelly Russo �_l - J 0-- ��A 802.862.1022 FAX 802.862.6848 October 24, 1996 Mr. Dick Ward Zoning Administrator City of So. Burlington Dorset Street So. Burlington, VT 05403 Dear Dick: As you may remember, in 1988 when IDX built our Headquarters building on Shelburne Road, we presented that project as half of the building that would ultimately occupy our site. We are now ready to complete the entire building by adding the remaining 60,000 square feet to the north end of our existing building. For each of the past six years, we have had on -going discussions within our company regarding when our growth was going to necessitate new construction. In an effort to remain prepared for that project, we have paid the required impact fees for sidewalks, curbs, etc.; we enlarged the parking lot; we have extended our Act 250 permit on several occasions to ensure that it was up to date. We have resumed work with Kessel/Duff on the interior planning of this project. Several years ago they completed the construction documents that would be necessary for expansion. At that time we decided to put the project on hold until our business dictated we needed more space. We will be asking K/D to review the construction documents to ensure that we are including any newly available energy/money-saving technology. However, the base -building and site plan, as originally designed, has not changed at all. We will begin conversations with the City shortly. We appreciate your assistance through the permit process on our original project. We look forward to working with you, Joe Weith and Chuck Hafter on this project and in the future as our company continues to grow. r ly, Si7L__� Richard E. Tarrant Chief Executive Officer mar M E M O R A N D U M To: Joe Weith, South Burlington City Planner From: Wallace Possich, South Burlington Fire Chief V Re: IDX - Phase II Date: October 30, 1996 I have met with John Caulo of Kessel/Duff Corporation regarding the 60,000 square foot expansion of IDX (Phase II). The plans regarding the location number of hydrants are acceptable as indicated on the site plan. cc: John Caulo TAX MAP #: 91-1-1 GRAND LIST #: 1540-01400-C FILE #: LOCATION: 1400 SHELBURNE ROAD DATE 11-23-71 10-10-72 1-23-73 10-28-86 12-15-87 11-28-89 APPLICATION PP RPP FP SP SP SP PURPOSE 12 LOT SUBDIVISION 18 fv " if it OFFICES if if FILE NAME: NATIONAL LIFE INS. CO. II 11 11 if if if BDP REALTY ASSOC. Motion of approval October 27, 1986 Page 2 2. does not detract from scenic views of adjacent properties or public streets and walkways; and. 3. allows retention of additional green space that enhances the appearance of the developed property. 10) A sewer allocation of 3825 gallons per day is granted in accordance with the South Burlington Sewer Policy. The $2.50 per gallon fee shall be paid prior to permit. 11) Parking may be phased for the two phase construction plan upon approval of the City "r�Ebnno4L.. 1�3 _IQ- The building permit shall be obtained within 6 months or this approval is null and void. K H� --�YWVzes (kit cl�VL — (A� ao � L % __ e 0 rota- S �\-G�_ -to L,,-) �o k (Zt �x ('�� - tk_o�_,) v\ /L&� iol�y � Z'DS &K 10,�S aCAJA 140 ,00D N cat Co cD 0 �-47 � � �a �� �� I�� �. ' L 1" ,� ��1. r ��e c.�t�.� 0Y\ V�� YYu�-�o � e9 �QSC� w1 �IC.�Cc� c lam. ��m. �,� � . r� ��� /� � �� C��/ �\ 11� w�p �/ ! No Cc�� c� . '� �uwt bav�9 -�eti e�v�� `C�� -try e�- PLANTING SCHEDULE )UANTITY COMMON NAME BOTANIC NAME SIZE CONDITION -'RASE 1 PHASE 2 16',� 0 RED OAK Quercus rubra 3" - 3 1/2" CAL B & B 19 0' 24 MARSHALL'S SEEDLESS ASH Fraxinus pennsylvania lance4ata 2" - 2 1/2" CAL B & B -27 0 00 'TOBA HAWTHORN Crataegus oxycantha toba -(C' 2" - 2 1/2" CAL B & B 7 `E`> . 0 AUSTRIAN PINE ft ies nigra 5' - 6' B & B 3 5 Ct5 NORWAY SPRUCE Picea abies 7' B & B 100 (� 3� 0 S$AGREEN JUNIPER Juniperus chinessi.s seagreen 24" - 30" B & B 80 t�.)G 0 RUGOSA ROSE Rosa rugosa 2' - 3'' BARE ROOT 50 ,ou 0 SPREADING CONTONEASTER Contoneaster divaricatus 18" - 24" B & B 17 '1j 25 � iFLOWERING CRABAPPLE Malus floribunda ., 1 1/2"- 2" CAL B & B 100 q ;• `OSIER.DOGWOOD Cornus stolonifera 2' - 3' BARE ROOT 73 �'�.''J 4"�� ANDORRA JUNIPER Juniperus depressa plumosa 18" - 24" CONTAINER 56 0�4 0BIRD'S NEST SPRUCE Picea abies nidiformis 18" - 24" CONTAINER 400 ��� 0 P'ER Vinca minor 2 year POT +a04-1.15 k a,S S EX/S T. M. H. LOT A SOIL HSC AREA EwA D 4.88 Acre EwB D IMPERVIOUS: BLD 22,150 SF PAVED 39,426 SF TOTAL 61,576 SF = 1.41 Acre Mlwtri Iw RCN: AGREEMENT This Agreement is by and between IDX Corporation with a place of business in South Burlington, Vermont, (hereinafter IDX) and Dennis Blodgett of South Burlington, Vermont. W I T N E S S E T 11 WHEREAS, IDX and Blodgett own certain real property adjacent to each other on Shelburne Road; and WHEREAS, IDX and Blodgett desire to develop each of their parcels; and WHEREAS, as a condition of their permits Holmes Road Extension must be built on a parcel requiring the deeding by both parties to the City of South Burlington certain lands owned by each as specified in the final plat approvals of each parcel; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and agreement herein contained, the parties agree as follows: 1. Both parties will dedicate, to the City of South Burlington, the land necessary for the construction of Holmes Road Extension, from Shelburne Road to Green Mountain Drive. 2. This dedication and road construction shall take place at a time requested by either party. 3. Each party agrees to share pro-rata in the cost of construction of Holmes Road to their easternmost access point on Holmes Road Extension. The cost of construction shall include all items required for the completion of the road, including but not limited to finance expenses, engineering, design, legal and accounting expenses. Dennis Blodgett shall have the responsibility to construct the road and IDX shall have the right to review all costs and contracts, if they so desire, orior to the rnmmPnrPmAni- of rnncfr„nF;..r. "-- L4_-__--- ___ _ M E M 0 R A N D U M To: South Burlington Planning Commission From: Jane B. Lafleur, City Planner Re: December 15, 1987 agenda items Date: December 11, 1987 2) HOSPITALITY INNS, 870 WILLISTON ROAD The applicant has asked for this public hearing to be tabled to a meeting in January since the plans were incomplete. 3) IDX, 1400 SHELBURNE ROAD IDX allowed their site plan to expire without obtaining the necessary building permits. The plans show no major changes. However, the Planning Commission should re-evaluate the phasing of the project and what parking facilities will be constructed between Phase I and II as well as the Holmes Road extension situation. Enclosed are the minutes from the previous approval. Phasing: The phasing plan provides an adequate number of parking spaces in phase one. A 60,000 square foot office building will be constructed in Phase I. This requires 240 parking spaces. The applicant proposes 210 in Phase I that are located in the front and the back of the proposed building. In that the Planning Commission waived 73 total spaces for the entire project, 210 should be adequate. All of Phase I will be served by Shelburne Road. I believe Phase One should be served by the future Holmes Road as well to better manage the traffic in this area. Phase II shows two Holmes Road curb cuts. I think this is excessive and the plan should eliminate the driveway closest to Shelburne Road. Holmes Road: As you know, Holmes Road extension is to be located on land owned by IDX and Dennis Blodgett. I believe we have unfairly assumed Mr. Blodgett should construct the entire road. Two of IDX's parking lots for Phase II. will be served by this road. The most equitable condition would be for the Planning Commission to require the first applicant for a building permit, to put up cash for their share of the road and the second applicant to build the road with these funds as well as their own. 'Phis requirement seems even more reasonable when we consider that the majority of Holmes Road extension is taken from the IDX property as one goes easterly and two enormous parking .lots feed into this road. See Bill Szymanski's and Jim Goddette's comments. 1 M E M O R A N D U M To: South Burlington Planning Commission From: William J. Szymanski, City Manager Re: December 15, 1987 agenda items Date: December 11, 1987 3) IDX BUILDING, SHELBURNE ROAD 1. Proposed sewer .manholes should be within paved areas such as driveways and parking areas. 2. Storm sewer pipe shall be concrete or p.b.c. not metal or aluminum. 3. Access to Holmes Road extension should be limited to one preferably the easterly one. If the other is granted it shall be opposite the drive planned for the development across Holmes Road Extension. (Blodgett's). 4. Holmes Road Extension shall be constructed to City standards (32' width, curbs and sidewalks). Sidewalks shall be constructed across driveways at a continuous grade without breaks and dips. Holmes Road Extension should be constructed to the easterly lot line with cost shared by adjacent property owners. 5. There should be a sidewalk along Shelburne Road frontage. 4) VERMONT GAS SYSTEMS, SWIFT STREET 1. Swift Street work in the area will extend to the east limits of this property. Widening and curbs are planned. This work should be coordinated with the site work planned along Swift Street. A sidewalk should be included in this site plan work. The sidewalk should be constructed at least 5 feet from the proposed curb, this may require an easement from this property. 5) EFFEL PROPERTY, BARBER 'TERRACE 1. This type of subdivision should be discouraged. It. deteriorates the neighborhood. Services will require street excavation. The new building will require site grading which affects the adjacent owners. Long driveways are expensive to maintain. M E M O R A N D U M To: South Burlington Planning Commission From: James Goddette, Fire Chief Re: December 15, 1987 agenda items Date: December 11, 1987 2) SHERATON INN, 870 WILLISTON ROAD Plans reviewed and at this time no less than 4 hydrants and a loop water system should be installed. I feel because of the size of the the complex, the water system should be looked at by an engineer to prove, in writing, that there is adequate water supply to serve this facility. 3) IDX, 1400 WILLISTON ROAD Plans reviewed by this department and only problem I see at this time is that the hydrant system should be installed to meet the needs for fire protection. Relocated hydrants are not in the proper location. Four hydrants are needed. 5) VERMONT GAS COMPANY BUILDING, 31 SWIFT STREET Being an existing building I do not see a problem at this time for the use. If there should be a use change then it should be looked at, at a later date. 1 M l: M 0 R A N O U M TO: South Burlington Planning Commission FROM: William J. Szymanski., City Manager HE: October 28, 1986 Agenda DATE: October 24, 1986 3) TOWN & COUNTRY FURNITURE, SHELBURNE ROAD 1. The drainage swale is located just north of this project and the expansion will not interfere with it. 4) INTERPRET.IVE DATA SYSTEMb, SIIELBURNE ROAD 1. Plan has been modified to provide for the extension of Holmes Road and is acceptable. 2. Any sidewalk construction shall. be continuous across driveways with a 8 inch thickness. 3. Abandoned service road and driveway shall be removed and the area top soiled and seeded. 4. Curbi-ng shall be installed at abandoned Shelburne Road access. 5. Existing sidewalk along Shelburne Road should be extended northerly to proposed Holmes Road. However, since this area will be reconstructed, the cost should be placed in escrow for instal- lation in the future. 5) D.B.I. INDUSTRIES, ALLEN ROAD 1. This site is not served by the municipal sewage collection systems. The system ends at the Pepsi entrance. (3) L.D.B. DEVELOPMENT, H I N•ES BUR(:, ROAD 1. Street corner of corner Jots shall have a radius corner concentric with the curb radius. The overall site plan shows this but not, the detail plans. Example, lot 92. 2. Utility easement shall be centered over pipes. Some show very little room on one side. 3. Water mains shall be at, least 5 feet from any lot Line or 1 IMEMORANDUM TO: South Burlington Pl.annin,g Commission FROM: Jane B. Lafleur, City Planner RE: October 28, 1986 DATE: October. 24, 1986 2) CLIRTH, 1805,Sheiburne Road Harry Curth requests an extension to the site plan approval. for his car wash on Shelburne Road. (See enclosed letter) 3) LASH, 1515 Shelburne Road Mr. Lash has submitted new plans that show a 5,061 square foot addition to the existing building. This is 4 square feet less, than previous plans. Total lot coverage is now 70.1%. Circulation: A 30 foot wide access drive is shown around the rear of the building as requested by Chief Goddette and the Planning Commission. Access: Access is shown from the existing southern curb cut and a relocated cut at the northern end of the property. Parking: Twelve paved parking spaces are shown. Landscaping: The plan shows approximately $4000 in new landscaping. The plans require $19,450. A 5 foot buffer is shown along the northern property line with 23 white pine planted in it. Other: See Chief Goddette's and Bill Szymanski's comments. 4) kBDP REALTY, IDS, 1400 Shelburne Road The applicant's revised pLan shows the revisions requested by the Planning Commission. Access: Access is shown as a shared driveway for the new and existing IDS buildings. T'o new curb cuts are shown on to Holmes Road extension. Circulation: The circulation is improved with a more direct access to Holmes Road extension from the existing building. Parking: The new building requires 480 spaces; the plans show 407 with room for, 73 additional if needed. Landscaping: The plans meet t'he $37,500 .landscaping requirement. Additional e-vergreen are included. See Bill Szymanski's comments. 1 MEMO-JBL 10/10/86 A sewer allocation of 825 gallons per day at $2.50 per gallon shall be paid prior to permit. See Jim Goddette's and Bill Szymanski's comments. 8 BDP REALTY( IDS, 1400 SHELBURNE ROAD BDP 'Realty proposes to construct a 120,000 square foot office building on the 10.98 acre lot north of the existing IDS build- ing. The foot print is 60,000 square feet. The area is zoned Commercial-2 and this is a permitted use. Access: Access is shown from a relocated curb cut north of the existing driveway to IDS. The original National Life Subdivision required a frontage road parallel to Route 7 to serve this property and connect to Holmes Road extension. This would encourage people to enter the new development from Holmes Road extension, a future signalized intersection, rather than mid - block on Shelburne Road. This plan removes the frontage road. This should be discussed. Holmes Road extension is planned for the northern part of this property. It begins at Shelburne Road and continues eastward to the UVM property and is angled in a southeasterly direction. It therefore requires some of this property. See Bill Szymanski's comments regarding this. The parking lot must be revised to provide room for this road. A right of way to Holmes Road extension from the northeast corner of the parking lot would help to alleviate traffic directly onto Route 7 and place it at a future signalized intersection. Circulation: Circulation is shown completely around the building Parking: The 120,000 square foot building requires 480 spaces. I have counted 413 spaces and 50 designated for future parking if ��� the need arises. Perhaps two rows of the front parking spaces be rQLU-LAM designated for future parking. Since the building will be phased, the parking lot should be phased as well. Landscaping: A $37,500 landscaping bond is required. The plan shows this amount. Traffic: This is in traffic property allows 538 trip ends data, an office of this size peak (2.03/1000 gfa); the evening peak. A full traffic next meeting, ri y!:;)�o ,ono overlay zone 5. This 10.98 acre during the peak hour. Based on ITE produces 244 trip ends during the applicant projects 272 during the analysis will be available at the 190,0000 The Shelburne Road intersection improvement fee shall be paid 4 t MEMO-JBL 10/10/86 prior to permit. The amount will be available at the meeting. Other: A complete erosion control study should be available at the October 28 meeting. The Commission can postpone decision on this application until then unless it is satisfactory to make the study a condition of approval. W'q _. _ 1S L-�Z. p _ Height: This building is three stori high as allowed under thed Co fission approval. The height ordinance with -special Planning of the finished floor area is 3 feet. However, a peak with a glassed atrium measures 52 fe .A Zoning Board of Adjustment variance will be request for this. The setbacks have been increased according to the ordinance to meet the 52 feet if granted. The Planning Commission may approve the height of 36 feet if it determines that a taller structure: 1) Will utilize topography and will relate to other existing and proposed structures so as to be aesthetically compatible with the neighborhood; 2) Will not detract from scenic views of adjacent properties or public streets and walkways; and 3) Will allow retention of additional green space that will enhance the appearance of the developed property. These items will be addressed by the applicant. I recommend that any approval be conditional upon ZBA approval of the height. If denied by the ZBA, a modification to the footprint would require a new Planning Commission approval. Sewer allocation: Phase one will have 255 employees and requires a sewer allocation of3825 gallons per day. Phase two also has 255 employees and requires this amount. The $2.50 per gallon fee shall be paid prior to permit. \� ,ham_ -gas d JL 3s6 as 9) PALMER, 20 KIMBALL AVENUE Ito5 0 Alan Palmer proposes to construct a 9,600 square foot addition (4,800 square feet on two floors) to the existing building. The existing building is 26,100 square feet. The addition will be on the eastern side of the building. It will.be the same height as the existing building and parking will be allowed below the raised structure. Access: Access will remain from the existing curb cut and frontage road/driveway on Kimball Avenue. Circulation: Circulation does not change because the building will be raised for parking below it. 5 MEMO-WJS 10/10/86 8 BDP REA Y INTERPRETIVE DATA SYSTEMS, SHELBURNE ROAD 1. is lot is part of the original National Life subdivision approved by the City Planning Commission. This plan called for a service road along Shelburne Road, part of which has been built, tieing into Holmes Road extension. The intersection of Holmes Road with Shelburne Road will be signalized. This will improve access and exiting for this development. 2. A strip along the north boundary, 24 feet at Shelburne Road and 67 feet at Green Mountain Drive should be reserved for Holmes Road extension. 2 4. LAKEWOOD DEVELOPMENT SHELI3URNE ROAD Plans reviewed and at this time I do not see a problem for the department. S. Interpretive Data System Shelburne Road Plans reviewed by this office and the following must be corrected, A. The Existing hydrants must be relocated becaust the are to far off the road way. B. A third hydrant is required and should be located in the back area of the new building. 3 6 173.7 o 17 x 6 _ (,A o� Ar., 10.5 ACRES { / /7 172.4 8 64 g f 570' — I o I _ 6 Iv./0 . /.. 2 o 1.3 ACRE$. r r 570'; c� {� N FAIRVIEW OTORS25 4' EXISTING 70'! R 0 W" T — — — O�rt �— 6007 30-I 1 ACCGMP P A 0 I !1 tSl I I \ ) Q� NORDIC FORD d l I 8" RCP . �,,( 7 1.6 o T I,� � � �--�—;�-- _ll � r7 a j�151'�� pax -�- ,m -�- - L f=�i -----,, �,�rnu-o 12� '�-� r t i�(Q -- �(� -. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON SITE PLAN APPLICATION 1)eAlej JmA6,,S 1) OWNER OF RECORD ( name, address, phone #) 15D.P REA&;t ' ASS0CJATE:Y ISO0 SH•- 510P- F, RD-I S.BO1-L-tNCt-(-p►J� VT 8C2 -(022 2) APPLICANT (name, address, phone #) Fi-0QT0►�4-' pTAtSZYNSKI AIZC" L 3) CONTACT PERSON (name, address, phone # ) j0 i 1�► Gam°` �2 T Z too iR.TO N- h S (TE A 2. ALSO V E- PI�1400 4) PROJECT STREET ADDRESS: 15-e* SOV-6V(�I� e-� •��uNC�Tt?N' 5) LOT NUMBER (if applicable) 14 t 1z33 6 ) PROPOSED USE (S) _ 16U St NFS$ - Owl C eS _7) SIZE OF PROJECT (i.e. total building square footage, # units, maximum height and # floors, square feet per floor) ISO, 000 S':.; 51 FT WO) 3 SMP-Y j (5,01000 5fIFL i boltT IN Two ePvA4- 1.0T (,.oT P 0+h*SES 8) NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES P�1A�'s� L55 1 O O CEX( STD Nt�� P1+A5t]l ; 9) LOT COVERAGE: building 8-4 %;" landscaped areas 6 & % building, parking, outside storage_}e_-% 10) COST ESTIMATES: Bui ldings $ 21700 r0 yi) , Landscaping $ 37 5rfi0 Other Site Improvements (please list with cost) $ ,P*JlNq # UTRATIF-S : $ 1.620sO0. PtfASE _ %9 8 7 11) ESTIMATED PROJECT COMPLETION DATE: ej+& SE IT EAU- 11 90 12) ESTIMATED AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC (in and out) 1700 70 000 Estimated trip ends (in and out) during the following hours: Monday through Friday 11-12 noon 4 3; 12-1p.m. 4 1-2 p.m. 3 2-3 p.m. 4 3 3-4 p.m.4_; 4-5 p.m. 4-1 5-6 p.m. 27Z 6-7 p.m.4s_ 13) PEAK HOURS OF OPERATION:— 4j P M - & P M 14) PEAK DAYS OF OPERATION: OC.T 7 198 Co DATE OF SUBMISSION DATE OFHEA N 0 N -: F R- GNATURE OF APPLICANT i��i;tc►�i City Of S011th 13ur1 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05401 PLANNER 658-7955 January 4, 1988 Shelly Myers IDX P.O. Box 1070 Burlington, Vermont 05401 Dear Ms. Myers: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658.7958 Enclosed please find your copy of Findings of Fact. If you f)ave any questions please call me. Sincerely, j�B . 4A� Jane B . Lafleur, City Planner JBL/mcp 1 Encl r ., . , i'_t•:".1 ra i�..1 'i'/� �— _ 7i-16 ii City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 PLANNER 658-7955 December 29, 1987 Shelly Myers IDX P.O. Box 1070 Burlington, Vermont 05401 Re: IDX, 1400 Shelburne Road Dear Ms. Myers: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Enclosed are the minutes of the December 15, 1987 Planning Commission meeting regarding your new site plan approval. Please be sure to obtain ,your building permit from Dick Ward, Zoning Administrator before the 6 month approval expires. Sincerely, Jane B. Lafleur, City Planner JBL/mcp 1 Encl cc: Brad Carter f PLANNER 658-7955 City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 December 11, 1987 Michelle Myers BDP Realty Associates 1500 Shelburne Road South Burlington, Vermont 05403 Re: IDX, 1400 Shelburne Road Dear Mrs. Myers: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Enclosed are the agenda and my memo to the Planning Commission. Also enclosed are Bill Szymanski's and Chief Goddette's comments. Please be sure someone is present on Tuesday, December 15, 1987 to represent your application. You will be heard at 7:30 P.M. sharp due to the tabling of the first applicant. RW/mcp Encls cc: Brad Carter Sincerely, Jane B. Lafleur, City Planner ■ ■ ORM C O R P O R A T I O N 1500 Shelburne Road P.O. Box C-1070 Burlington, VT 05402-1070 802-658-2664 800-468-4411 December 14, 1987 South Burlington Planning Commission 575 Dorset Street So. Burlington, VT 05403 Gentlemen: This letter is to clarify that IDX has an agreement with Mr. Dennis Blodgett and Mr. Gerald Milot to assist with the expense for the installation of Holmes Road for Phase I of our project. Our intent is to have all IDX employees enter and exit our new facility via Holmes Road. We do plan to construct a new entrance from Shelburne Road for use only by clients. As we have discussed at previous meetings, our client visits are fewer than once a week and pose no problem with traffic. If you have any further questions or concerns, please let me know. MAM/plm Sincerely, Michelle A. Myer Administrative Manage Burlington • Boston • Chicago • Dallas • San Francisco City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05401 PLANNER 658.7955 February 17, 1987. Geoffrey Green AEC 111 West Street Essex Junction, Vermont 05452 Re: BDP, IDS, 1400 Shelburne Road Dear Mr. Green: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 I would like to clarify the position of the City South Burlington in regard to the above application. The Planning Commission approved the site plan for construction of the 120,000 square foot office building in two phases. In doing so, the Commission fully realized that the best access would be from Holmes Road extension which is a future signalized intersection. In that most of the land on which the future 80 foot r.o.w. is located i.s owned by Mr. Blodgett to the north, the Commission could not mandate that access be located over someone else's property. They did require however, that if and when that r.o.w. is opened up, BDP shall use that access and the Shelburne Road driveway shall be for entering vehicles only. Secondly, the South Burlington Zoning Ordinance has two traffic impact requirements. A large planned commercial development (PCD) such as Lakewood Commons was required to go through the major subdivision process. This process requires a traffic impact analysis with a complete capacity analysis. The L,aleewood developers completed a detailed and satisfactory study. Many additional traffic mi.ti.gation techniques were required i.ncludin-"' the signal and a decel.eratiorl lane. We will also collect funds for widening the radius on some of the side streets. r Mr. Geoffrey Green February 17, 1987 Page 2 The BDP development came under a difference set: of criteria. As a single building on a single lot, a site plan review was re- quired. Under this process, all developments must generate fewer t.ripends than the traffic overlay zone allows. The number is based on the size and location of the lot. The 10 + acre BDP office development: clearly met this standard. Although we would have preferred to require a more detailed capacity analysis, we could not. (The Commission has recently considered a revision to the traffic overlay zone since it, clearly has no relation to whether the road can handle the increased traffic). Finally, .1 noticed in Mr. John C. Giebi.nk's letter of February 1987 that they plan to install a 3 way signal. It may be appro- priate for BDP to contribute the cost difference toward making it a a way signal.. Ideally, both BDP and Blodgett would contribute toward the four way signal. However, it is not known at this time if Blodgett's project requires Act 250 revieT,,. 1 hope this clarifies the City's position. Please call me it:' you have any questions. JBI,/mcp Sincerely, i`` � J a..43, Jane B. Lafleur, City PLanner ')e: ID-5 S�) blXnGi"2�am r; Chittenden County Regionzil F'ltinning Commission 66 PEARL STREET P.O. BOX 108 ESSEX JUNCTION, VERMONT 05452 March 6, 1987 802 658-3004 Mr. Geoffrey W. Green Assistant District Coordinator District Environmental Commission #4 111 West Street Essex Junction, Vermont 05452 Dear Mr. Green: I have reviewed the material regarding traffic impacts of the proposed IDS expansion and have the following comments. First, the consultant's trip generation estimates appear quite low. The report estimates 107 AM peak and 77 PM peak hour trips. I believe 150 AM peak and 169 PM peak hours would be more reasonable. My estimate is based on square feet rather than number of employees. Use of square feet provides a better estimate, in that at -place employment can be variable. Second, the historical growth rate used in the report (3% per year) appears low. A recent study performed for CCRPC estimates 1990 peak hour volumes to be 18 percent and 15 percent higher than 1986 AM and PM peak hour values. These equate to average annual rates of growth of 4.5% AM and 3.75% PM. Third, the issue of access is of enormous importance. The Agency of Transportation (AOT) is planning to widen US 7 from the LaPlatte River in Shelburne to Imperial Drive. In the course of design hearings on this widening, local officials expressed concerns over uncontrolled access on US 7. The communities and the AOT are currently working to see how this problem can be addressed. Moreover, CCRPC has prepared a draft report on long range transportation improvements for the US 7 corridor. A major recommendation of the CCRPC study is that an aggressive access management program be instituted the length of the corridor. The goal of access control is to preserve the arterial function of US 7. Controlled access arterials exhibit lower accident rates and reduced delay. One of the principles of access control is to consolidate driveways at well planned, high capacity locations. 20 Years of Service to the Municipalities of ... AR ; , Bolton Burlington Charlotte Colchester Essex Junction Essex Town" iJ� 9 87 Hinesburg Huntington Jericho Milton Richmond St. George Shelburne So. Burlington Underhill Westford Williston Winooski Geoffrey Green -2- March 6, 1987 Accordingly, I strongly recommend that the sole IDS access point be via Holmes Road, at the time the Holmes Road extension is complete. Phase I IDS will generate 169 PM peak hour trips beyond what they currently generate. This is clearly enough traffic to make the Holmes Road access the preferred access point. At the time of connection to Holmes Road, the existing US 7 access should be terminated. I believe this approach can best preserve the functional integrity of US 7. I hope you find the above comments useful. If you have any questions, please call. Sincerely, CRAIG LEINER TRANS RTATION ENGINEER CTL:bf City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 PLANNER 658-7955 January 21, 1988 Curt Carter Economic Development Department Pavilion Building Montpelier, Vermont 05602 Re: IDX, BDP Realty, 1400 Shelburne Road Dear Mr. Carter: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 This letter serves to confirm that the South Burlington Planning Commission approved the site plan application of BDP Realty for construction of a 120,000 square foot office building in two phases at 1400 Shelburne Road. On December 15, 1987 the Commission approved one driveway on Shelburne Road located slightly north of the driveway that is presently shared with Nordic. The shared driveway will be closed and the curbing replaced. The Commission also approved two curb cuts on Holmes Road Extension. The westerly most cut wil be built during Phase I and the easterly one will be built for Phase II. I have also enclosed the Findings of Fact. Please call me if you have any questions. Sincerely, i Jane B. Lafleur, City Planner JBL/mcp 1 Encl O 171 m O r February 16, 1987 District #4 Environmental Commission Attn: Mr. Geoffrey Green Assistant Coordinator 111 West Street Essex Jct., Vermont 05452 Re: BDP Land Use Permit Application Dear Geoff, Per my letter to the Commission dated February 5, 198.7, enclosed please find a Traffic Impact Study completed by Thomas Adler in regards to the proposed BDP project on Shelburne Road. The conclusion of Mr. Adler's Traffic Study is that the traffic load generated by the BDP project should access Shelburne road via the signalized intersection at Holmes Road. Mr. Adler's analysis shows that the proposed BDP intersection with Shelburne Road, without a Holmes Road access, will generate Service Levels of E and F at the proposed BDP intersection. In fact, P.M. driveway traffic volumes exiting from Phase I of the BDP project are only two vehicles/hour short of the warrant for a traffic signal. It is my understanding from Mr. Tarrant (he spoke with me last week) that he is willing to redesign his project so that he can access Holmes Road and the signalized intersection of Holmes and Shelburne Roads. BDP would retain its entrance off of Shelburne Road because as Mr. Tarrant stated, this entrance is critical to the success of the project. The Holmes Road access would be for entering/exiting employee traffic and available for other exiting traffic from the Project. It is my understanding that Blodgett (property owner to the north of BDP) and Tarrant would share the cost of the Holmes Road extension and that this road would be built at the start of construction on BDP's Phase I. I strongly support Mr. Tarrant's traffic solution with the following recommendations: A PLANNED BUSINESS COMMUNITY bN, Lakewood Associates One klarsett Read, Shelburne, Vermont 05482 (802)985-9421 Mr. Geoffrey Green Page 2 February 16, 1987 1. The direct BDP intersection with Shelburne Road should be an entrance only. All exiting traffic should be directed to Holmes Road and the signalized intersection. 2. To fully protect the entering traffic from Shelburne Road at the BDP entrance, a left turn lane should be constructed on Shelburne Road. This left turn lane should be completed by the end of Phase I construction and either be a part of the upcoming highway reconstruction or constructed by BDP. 3. All employee traffic should enter and exit via Holmes Road and the signalized intersection. If the above recommendations are completed, the traffic impact of the BDP entrance will be minimized. Thus, Mr. Tarrant can retain his site and building plans as presented to the Commission, with the exception of traffic flow. By adding the Holmes Road access, Mr. Tarrant has greatly improved the BDP project. With the changes to the traffic flow, Mr. Tarrant will have a great project which will be an enhancement to all of the surrounding businesses and the City of South Burlington. The project will exemplify good land plannning and give a new direction to development along Shelburne Road. Si*erely, ,y ohn C. Giebink JCG:pao cc: Richard Tarrant Dennis Blodgett Jane Lafleur, City of South Burlington Resource Systems Group PO Box 1104 Route 5 South Norwich, Vermont 05055 802-649-1999 Mr. John Giebink Lakewood Associates One Marsett Rd. Shelburne, Vermont 05452 Dear John: February 11, 1987 Attached, as requested, is a traffic impact review of the proposed Interpretive Data Systems office expansion. As I told you over the phone, there are compelling reasons for a Holmes Rd. access for the project. I hope this report adequately describes those reasons. Please let me know if I can be of further assistance on this matter. TJA/mcw enclosure Best regards, Resource Syste Group Thomas J. Adler, Principal Thomas J. Adler, Colin J. High, Dennis L. Meadows Principals Interpretive Data Systems South Burlington, Vermont Traffic Impact Review Prepared by: Resource Systems Group Norwich, Vermont For: Lakewood Associates Shelburne, Vermont INTRODUCTION The purpose of this review was to evaluate the traffic impacts of the proposed Interpretive Data Systems (IDS) expansion project of traffic flow along Shelburne Rd. The basis of the review is a document titled, "Traffic Design Brief for Interpretive Data Systems," prepared by Trudell Consulting Engineers, dated December 4, 1986. Of specific concern was whether that document, presented to the Act 250 hearing as Exhibit E, adequately justifies a finding of no impact under Criterion 5. The following sections describe the results of the review. PHASE 1 TRAFFIC IMPACTS Phase 1 of the proposed expansion will include construction of a 60,000 s.f. office building. In the current design, this new building plus the existing 20,000 s.f. IDS building will be served by a new driveway located approximately 300 feet north of the current driveway. Trudell Consulting Engineers counted existing traffic levels, projected future Shelburne Rd. traffic, and calculated likely trip rates for the new development. Traffic counts conducted on November 14, 1986 (listed incorrectly as 1987) are shown in Exhibit 1 of Trudell's report. Those counts show AM traffic levels on Shelburne Rd. equally split between northbound and southbound. The PM counts show heavier volumes northbound than southbound (60/40). These results differ from counts conducted by the Vermont Agency of Transportation (VAOT) in 1984 and 1985 which showed AM northbound volumes much higher than southbound volumes (60/40) and PM volumes approximately equally divided. Trudell's Exhibit 3 shows "Phase 1 Traffic IDS 1990". The figures in this exhibit are used to determine the need for a traffic signal and/or a dedicated left turn lane. However, they do not include traffic generated by uses in the existing IDS office building. Unless that building is left vacant, the traffic volumes shown in Exhibit 3 are lower than will actually be expected. The attached Figures 1 and 2 show total IDS driveway volumes and levels -of -service for AM and PM under the 1990 Phase 1 conditions, including traffic from the existing office building, and using Shelburne Rd. traffic as estimated in Trudell's report. The AM traffic levels include 109 vehicles turning left into the IDS driveway. The level -of -service for these turning vehicles is D - long delays. Any traffic attempting to exit the driveway to the south during this period will essentially be blocked; through traffic levels are so high that, without a traffic signal, vehicles will not have adequate opportunites to break into the Shelburne Rd. traffic stream (Figure 1). During the PM peak, left turns off Shelburne Rd, experience even longer delays than in the AM, though the volumes are smaller (Figure 2). Figure 3 shows the result of changing the AM volume distribution on Shelburne Rd. to reflect the VAOT count data. The heavier northbound traffic makes competing left turns even more difficult, reducing the level -of -service to E - very long delays. Trudell's study evaluated the need for a dedicated left turn lane and for a traffic signal at the IDS drive, based only on the traffic from the new building. Even without accounting for traffic from the existing building, a left turn lane on Shelburne Rd. is warranted. If traffic from that building is included, PM peak driveway traffic volumes are only 2 vehicles/hour short of the warrant for a traffic signal (Peak Hour Warrant). Given the uncertainties involved in traffic projections, and given the extraordinarily high volumes on Shelburne Rd., it may be appropriate to require a signal under these conditions. CONCLUSIONS The Trudell study concludes that the proposed use of a Shelburne Rd. access for the expanded IDS office park is acceptable, even without a dedicated left turn lane. It argues that turning volumes can be reduced to acceptable levels "...by simply staggering the work hours by 1/2 hour..." However, counts were apparently taken only over the period 7:15 - 8:15 and counts over a longer period in the morning are not provided to verify that traffic levels in fact fall off substantially after 8:15 or before 7:15. In general, the addition of uncontrolled curb cuts along this section of Shelburne Rd. is undesirable because of the heavy existing through traffic volumes. Additional curb cuts will cause further delays to Shelburne Rd. traffic and will not provide adequate levels -of - service to exiting traffic. The heavy traffic load that will be generated by the IDS expansion is best managed by a high -capacity signalized intersection as will exist at Holmes Rd. We see no compelling reason not to require the use of this intersection by IDS. I Unsignalized "T" Intersection 1985 HCM Analysis vMM2.1 ©Thomas J. Adler, 1985 Intersection: US 7/IDS Drive Analysis Period: AM Peak 1990 Phasel - Applicant's estimates Speed Limit A/B: # of Lanes A/B: Control Type C: Shared Lanes C 35 4 A ---> STOP YES <--- B A: US 7 NB B: US 7 SB C: IDS Drive C Movement: A-thru A -right B-left B-thru C-left C-right Volume: 1179 5 109 1179 8 9 pch: ///////// ///////// 125 ///////// 9 10 Right Turn from IDS Drive Conflicting Flow: Critical Gap: Capacity (Ml ): Reserve Capacity: Service Level: I Left Turn from I Left Turn from US 7 SB Conflicting Flow: Critical Gap: Capacity (M2): Capacity Used: Impedance (P2): Reserve Capacity: Service Level: IDS Drive Conflicting Flow: Critical Gap: Capacity (Mn): Capacity (M3): Reserve Capacity: Service Level: 592 vph 5.7 sec 554 pch #N/A #N/A 1184 vph 5.6 sec 251 pch 50 % 0.59 125 pch D-long delays 2470 vph 7.3 sec -3 pch -2 pch #N/A #N/A (Shared Lane) Capacity (M13): -4 pch Reserve Capacity: -24 pch Service Level: F-extreme delays Figure 1 Unsignalized "T" Intersection 1985 HCM Analysis vMM2.1 ©Thomas J. Adler, 1985 Intersection: US 7/IDS Drive Analysis Period: PM Peak 1990 Phasel - Applicant's estimates Speed Limit A/B: 35 <--- B A: US 7 NB # of Lanes A/B: 4 A ---> B: US 7 SB Control Type C: STOP C: IDS Drive Shared Lanes C YES C Movement: A-thru A -right B-left B-thru C-left C-right Volume: 1949 3 13 1298 3 95 pch: ///////// ///////// 14 ///////// 3 105 Right Turn from IDS Drive Conflicting Flow: Critical Gap: Capacity (M1): Reserve Capacity Service Level: I Left Turn from Left Turn from US 7 SB Conflicting Flow: Critical Gap: Capacity (M2): Capacity Used: Impedance (P2): Reserve Capacity Service Level: IDS Drive Conflicting Flow: Critical Gap: Capacity (Mn): Capacity (M3): Reserve Capacity: Service Level: 976 vph 5.7 sec 337 pch # N/A #N/A 1952 vph 5.6 sec 61 pch 23 % 0.83 47 pch E-very long delays 3262 vph 7.3 sec -205 pch -170 pch #N/A #N/A (Shared Lane) Capacity (M13): 370 pch Reserve Capacity: 263 pch Service Level: C-moderate delays Figure 2 I Unsignalized "T" Intersection 1985 HCM Analysis vMM2.1 ©Thomas J. Adler, 1985 Intersection: US 7/IDS Drive Analysis Period: AM Peak 1990 Phasel - Applicant's estimates Speed Limit A/B: 35 <--- B A: US 7 NB # of Lanes A/B: 4 A ---> B: US 7 SB Control Type C: STOP C: IDS Drive Shared Lanes C YES C Movement: A-thru A -right B-left B-thru C-left C-right Volume: 1415 5 109 943 8 9 pch: ///////// ///////// 125 ///////// 9 10 Right Turn from IDS Drive Conflicting Flow: 710 vph Critical Gap: 5.7 sec Capacity (M1): 478 pch Reserve Capacity: #N/A Service Level: #N/A Left Turn from US 7 SB Conflicting Flow: 1420 vph Critical Gap: 5.6 sec Capacity (M2): 175 pch Capacity Used: 72 % Impedance (P2): 0.37 Reserve Capacity: 50 pch Service Level: E-very long delays Left Turn from IDS Drive Conflicting Flow: 2470 vph Critical Gap: 7.3 sec Capacity (Mn): -3 pch Capacity (M3): -1 pch Reserve Capacity: #N/A Service Level: #N/A (Shared Lane) Capacity (M13): -3 pch Reserve Capacity: -22 pch Service Level: F-extreme delays Figure 3 0 KAUM70p;M ° C rn m ° r February 5, 1987 District 44 Environmental Commission Attn. Mr. Geoffrey Green Assistant Coordinator 111 West Street Essex Jct., Vermont 05452 re: BDP Land Use Permit Application Dear Geoff, I want to take this opportunity to thank the Commission for allowing me to submit a Traffic Impact Study by Thomas Adler on the proposed BDP project. In addition, I would like to clearly state for the record that Lakewood Associates is not requesting any cost sharing from Mr. Tarrant on the three-way Holmes Road traffic signal. We do not expect to obtain any money whatsoever from Mr. Tarrant by having the BDP project use the Holmes Road intersection. We are in favor of the building and site plans of the BDP project with the exception of the traffic plan. We strongly believe that if the BDP project is built as currently designed with only the one entrance/exit on Shelburne Road, there will be a severe negative impact on the already difficult, congested and hazardous Shelburne Road traffic situation. Our traffic study will show that the currently proposed entrance/exit of BDP onto Shelburne Road will have an E or F level of service. There is a solution to the BDP traffic problem. Mr. Tarrant could solve the traffic problem by having an entrance only from Shelburne Road and create an access to the Holmes Road/Shelburne Road intersection. He could therefore retain the entire BDP site plan and mitigate BDP's traffic problems. With such a traffic pattern, all of BDP's employees could access from Holmes Road, a signalized intersection, and all traffic from BDP could exit via Holmes Road to the signalized intersection on Shelburne Road. In addition, it might be prudent to add a left turn lane and a deceleration lane on Shelburne Road for the BDP entrance. With the traffic solution as outlined above, the applicant could retain his existing site plan and therefore A PLANNED BUSINESS COMMUNITY by Lakewood Associates One Marsett Road, Shelburne, Vermont 054 2)985-9421 TEY 9 1987 Mr. Geoffrey Green Page 2 February 5, 1987 not change the building location nor the concept and aesthetics of his entrance of off Shelburne Road. We understand that Mr. Blodgett, the property owner to the north of Mr. Tarrant, is willing to make the necessary land available for, and share the cost of, the installation of a Holmes Road extension. I sincerely believe the Commission needs to address the severe impact of the applicant's current traffic plan and how it adveresely impacts traffic on Shelburne Road. When the South Burlington Planning Commission reviewed the applicant's plans, they requested the applicant to secure an access onto Holmes Road. However, under the Zoning Regulations, they could not mandate such a solution. It is a known fact that traffic in this area of Shelburne Road is very heavy and the subject of constant public comment and scrutiny. The solution, which I outlined above, will benefit both the applicant and the entire community. I urge the Commission to carefully evaluate the evidence and to reach a decision fair to both the community and the applicant. Mr. Adler should have his study complete by February 15, 1987 and I will submit the study at that time. SirXcerely, .�/ /John C. Giebink JCG:pao L7:46 vos City of South Burlington tn 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05401 PLANNER 658-7955 January 28, 1987 Terry Krinsky Trudell Consulting Engineers 14 Blair Park Williston, Vermont 05495 Re: IDS, BDP Realty, 1400 Shelburne Road Dear Terry: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 This serves to clairfy the City's sewer allocation to the above project. Based on State required flow quanities, Phase I of this project requires 3,825 gpd. The Commission approved construction of both Phase I and II but granted a sewer allocation for Phase I only. It is the City policy to grant only that which can be used within a year with a possible extension to this period. In that you do not intend to begin construction on Phase II for several years, we prefer not to tie up capacity for an indefinite period. Prior to construction of Phase II, you should request a new allocation. Sincerely, Jane B. Lafle , City Planner JBL/mcp cc: Katherine Vose Ernie Christiansen Shelly Smullens City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05401 PLANNER 658-7955 November 26. 1986 Andre Ptasz,ynski Horton-Ptaszynski Architects The Trace House Shelburne Road Shelburne, Vermont 05482 Re: BDP Realty, IDS, Shelburne Road Dear Mr. Ptaszynski: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Enclosed are the October 28, 1986 Planning Commission minutes. You may apply for your building permit after posting the appropriate bonds and filing the legal documents with our City Attorney. Please remember to file new plans with me showing the temporary connection between the front and rear parking lots. Sincerely` , r Jane B. Lafleur, City Planner JBL/mcp 1 Encl cc: Shelly Smullens Terry Kinski E City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05401 PLANNER 658-7955 November 14, 1986 Katherine Vose AEC 111 West Street Essex Junction, Vermont 05452 Dear Katherine: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 This serves to confirm that the South Burlington Planning Commission has approved the construction of a 120,000 square foot office building for IDS at 1500 Shelburne Road. This project is in conformance with the South Burlington Comprehensive Plan. Sincerely, -,' I c 0am1 4�L �A- Jane B. Lafleur, City Planner JBL/mcp CC: Fritz Horton City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05401 PLANNER 658-7955 October 24, 1986 Andre Ptaszynski Horton-Ptaszynski Architects The Tracy House Shelburne Road Shelburne, Vermont 05482 Re: BLIP Realty, IDS, 1400 Shelburne Road Dear Andre: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658.7958 Enclosed are the agenda and my memo regarding ,your application. Please be sure someone is present on Tuesday, October 28, 1986 to represent ,your request. Sincerely, Jane B. Lafleur, City Planner JBL/mcp Encls ' cc: Shelly Smullens Bill Duff Terry Krinsk,y- OM qb. A LX J - O GRASS SUT ® 3AkITARY SEWER LOOP -RVO%AD TYPICAL NO KALE C/L O STORM a WATER LIME DRAIN FI UT" E l ROAD SQL pER 'A9/`T. i ,,, l/4' PER FOOT �rr�o.rarr�rs rv�r..s.r+.' • .�♦ s rr,►srriert'rsarJrr�r>;+�.eri..=a.,��rss' �r:.►.resr r M.j. _ '.ONTAGE � � A, �' •Ic 1� PLANNER 658-7955 City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05401 October 23, 1986 ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Mr. Andre Ptaskz,ynski The Tracy House Shelburne, Vermont 05482 Re: BDP Realty, IDS, 1400 Shelburne Road Dear Andre: Enclosed are the minutes of the October 14, 1986 Planning Commission meeting. Your revised plans will be reviewed on October 28, 1986. Sincerely, �ej 4L,1 Jane B. Lafleur, City Planner Encl cc: Shelly Smullins Ri l l Diff ` trry Krinsky City of South Burlirigton 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05401 PLANNER 658.7955 October 10, 1986 Andre Ptaszynski The Tracy House Shelburne, Vermont 05482 Re: IDS, 1400 Shelburne Road Dear Mr. Ptaszynski: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Enclosed are the agenda and my memo to the Planning Commission. Also enclosed are the City Manager/Engineer Bill Szymanski's comments. Please be sure someone is present on Tuesday, October 14, 1986 to represent your application. Sincerely, f Jane B. Lafleur, City Planner JBL/mcp Encls PLANNER 658-7955 City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05401 February 25, 1987 Charles Brush Lakewood Associates One Marsett Road Shelburne, Vermont 05482 Dear Charlie: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 It has come to my attention that you intend to only install a 3 headed signal at the intersection of Holmes Road and Route Seven. The Planning Commission asked me to inform you that this was definitely not their intent and that you should install and will be responsible for a 4 headed signal that controls traffic from all directions. The Commission will gladly discuss this with you further if you wish. JBL/mcp cc: Geoffrey Green Sincerely, "Jm�t). Jane B. Lafleur, City Planner TRUDELL CONSULTING ENGINEERS, Inc. February 20, 1987 Geoff Green, Assistant District Coordinator District Environmental Commission #4 111 West Street Essex Junction, Vermont 05452 RE: BDP Realty Dear Geoff: As requested, the following additional traffic information is submitted: 1. Assuming 350 employees and the trip rates measured at the site, project traffic is estimated as follows: A.M. Enter 98 V.P.H. Exit 0 V.P.H. P.M. Enter 28 V.P.H. Exit 133 V.P.H. 2. Because of the heavy traffic on Shelburne Road even low volumes of traffic from any side road will normally experience long delays during peak hours. 3. In the case of this project, the effect of the traffic control signal at Green Mountain Drive is to create platooning of vehicles and gaps sufficient for turning movements to and from the I.D.S. project. This platooning effect has been observed and measured at the site. Gaps between platoons were measured at up to 25 seconds throughout the peak hour and random gaps within the platoons up to 10 seconds. 4. In order to minimize the delays for left -turn movements into the site in the A.M. peak hour we suggest staggering the work starting times as follows: 7:00 A.M. 120 employees 7:30 A.M. 120 employees 8:00 A.M. 110 employees Any combination of start times with a 33% split in total employees is suitable. All the other turning movements have very low volumes 14 BLAIR PARK ROAD BOX308, WILLISTON, VERMONT 05495 (802) 879-6331 I Page 2 with the exception of P.M. right turns, which normally experience less difficulty entering the single streams of traffic. 5. Please note that our study is based on the following site specific information: a. The Phase I I.D.S. employee level will slowly increase over a four year period as the old building is evacuated and new employees are hired. This will not take place all at once. b. Actual 2 hour traffic counts were taken at the site including Shelburne Road. The highest one hour peak was used along with actual I.D.S. trip rates. C. Platooning of vehicles in the north bound stream is created by the signal at Green Mountain Drive. This accounts for the ability of left -turn A.M. traffic to make the turn with reasonable ease. A discussion of gap distribution and application of procedures for platoon flow in connection with unsignalized intersections is contained in the 1985 Highway Capacity Manual, pages 10-2 and 10-28. 6. Please note that I inadvertently transposed the P.M. traffic split. It should be 60/40 south bound/north bound. The actual A.M. split was measured at 50/50. The critical movement is the A.M. left -turn into the project, which would be unaffected by this error, hence my conclusions do not change. Exhibit 3 shows the corrected estimates. Our field measurements, analysis, and recommended mitigating efforts allow us to conclude, without reservations, that Phase I of the I.D.S. project will not result in unreasonable congestion or unsafe conditions with respect to highways. Very truly yours, TRUDELL CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC. Tyler Hart, P.E. JTH/jlv Encl. cc: Shelley Smullen Fritz Horton t -�tt- 'S4 *1 j - IN d 8+-2t cry I E CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON Subdivision Application - SKETCH PLAN 1) Name, address, and phone number of: a. Owner of record 8019 0-'r- Z7-j/ b. ApplicantA#��e C. Contact person 2Q0f,'r! 41 p4,6S 2) Purpose, location, and nature of subdivision or development, including number of lots, unitsor arcels involved as well as proposed use (s) . Cp�(/��/1 �' , , A,� `2�1Gj,(1 _ S�D2 y �ici-rl� �i�iG.,b�iu�3r�i�--GCC�55�AtzV . -- �! D=,A er 12 3) Applicant's legal interest in the property (fee simple, option, etc) — ©0,1W-t2 4) Namesof owners of record of all contiguous properties W 2,01c /TWO 5) Type of existing or proposed encumbrances on property such as easements, covenants, leases, rights of way, etc. 1/ Y1 1 2 - 6) Proposed extension, relocation, or modification of municipal facilities such as sewerage, water supply, streets, storm drainage, etc. 7) Describe any actions taken by the Zoning Boars of Adjust*nent or previous actions by the South Burlington Planning Co*.-nission, which affect the proposed subdivision anteinclude dues: �L'.4t'SkV/h/G 6) :�tt-ch a sketch plan sho;rinc all information requires; under =� items 2 through 7 on p. 5 0� the Subdivision Regulations. signature 144a-4-61 applicant or contact parson FOR OFFICE USE date - sub-.,ission of application and sketch plan to administrativeate officer - this proposal is classified as a major or minor subdivision - application deem=d co:iplete - proposal tentativel;r sche6ul,�6 for first Planning COM-lission rapeting on ConfirmeG For PLANNING COMMISSION N0EK'd_'R 10. 1981 The South Burlington Planning Commission held a regular meeting on Tuesday, November 10, 1981 at 7:30 pm in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset St. Members Present Sidney roger, Chairman; Robert Walsh, Kirk Woolery, James Ewing, George Nona, Ernest Levesque, Peter Jacob Members Absent none Others Present David Spitz, Planner; Judy Hurd, The Other Paper; Robert Krebs, Jim McNamara, John Larkin, George Martone, William Vanderputten, Loren Palmer, Howard & IMona -`lack, Henri St. Denis, Reggie Ploof, Robert & Bernadette Goodrich, Robert Ryan, John Stoddard, Gordon Woods, Margaret Ryan, Ursula Beauvais, Andy Ryan, Edwin Sanborn, 'William ;;chuele, Lowell Krassner, Ray Unsworth, Jodie Peck, Free Press Minutes of November 3, 19L;1 On page 3, in the penultimate paragraph, the following sentence should be added, "Mr. Spitz said the right of way was 50'." On page 5, the number of map changes at the bottom of the page should be 10. Mr. 'nioolery moved to approve the November 3, 1981 minutes as amended. The motion was seconded by Mr. Jacob and carried unanimously. Sketch plan a2plication BPD Realt Associates for a commercial office complex new buildin s -existing building at 1500 Shelburne Road Mr. Spitz showed a slide of the area. A right of way would have to be left for the Holmes Road Extension. He said two access points were proposed, and he felt that was appropriate for a development of this size. Mr. Woods said the total acreage was 13. He said the developers just wanted to *3how the Commission a concel,t here. They do not want to be tied down to this layout, but they are planning to put out a brochure to test the water, and they want the Commission to have seen a plan before they do that. Mr. Levesque arrived at this time. The plan shows 4 buildings on one side of the lot and the existing one plus an approved one on the other side. Mr. Mona asked why 4 buildings were proposed rather than a larger one or two. The same square footage could be built in fewer buildings. IVir. 1400ds said they could do that. Mr. Poger said access looked adequate. Yr. Spitz said this was a PCD and 3V' lot coverage would be allowed, for about 130,000 sq. ft. He felt personally that this might be a good place to allow a 4 story building and retain some green space. He thought that would have to be looked at carefully. Mr. Woods said storm water would go down a natural swale in the center of the property. Mr. Poger said the applicant would have to see where the water went after it crossed the road when further plans come in. Mr. Ewing asked if they would have one person own the buildings and was told space would be leased. This is not a subdivision. Mr. Woods said the 2. PLANNING COMMISSION NOVEMBER 10, 1981 anticipated use was for high class office space. Mr. Levesque felt it was important to get conceptual agreement now, because 50,; coverage might not be allowed in a few years. Mr. Fiona did not like the building propose Pbe the same size as the existing building, which would be put near Shelburne Road. He wanted as much consolidation as possible to reduce the number of buildings and he wanted the buildings as far from ::helburne Road as possible. Mr. Poger agreed that the buildings should be consolidated. Mr. Woolery said the Commission would probably ask for a sidewalk, a traffic study, and information on storm drainage and fire protection. Preliminary plat application by LTH Associates for an 11 lot subdivision entitled Rebecca Square on 'Williston :oad, Victory Drive and Helen Avenue Mr, roger noted there were memos from the city manager, planner and fire chief. Mr. Poger noted that the tone of the chief's letters was chanfling. He is being more specific. Mr. Poger said that if the chief was saying that the city could not grow any more because he cannot give fire protection, then at some point the city would have to stop (;rowing. Mr. Ewing felt the chief should be asked to explain the letter in person, but Mr. Fiona felt the chief should go to the body which deals with funding. Mr. Ewing felt that before the Commission denied a permit because of inadequate fire protection, they should talk with the chief. Mr. Krebs said the cul-de-sac had been moved to the west to give lot 4 more room. An llth lot has been created so it can be given to the lot with the house on it. Mr. Krebs said test holes had been dug and that the water lines behind lot 9 were half filled with silt, which is why drainage is a problem in the area. The catch -basins along Williston Road are deep enough that this development will be able to run drainage over to them by gravity, which will help the area. Only a small area behind lots 8 and 9 will stay the same. Mr. Krebs said the front lots would be served by a sewer line in that area and the others will go to Helen atreet sewers. Mr. Poger said he thought lot 6 would exit to the cul-de-sac. Mr. Krebs said they would like lots 6, 10 and the one with the existing house to have access to Williston Road. Xr. Spitz felt that would not be a hard- ship. Mr. Poger saw no gainngoing to Williston Road and he did see a problem with it. i^r. Larkin} said that exiting onto the cul-de-sac would mean the drive would come in from the rear of the house. Messrs. Ewing, Mona, Poger and Walsh preferred using the cul-de-sac. Messrs. Jacob and Levesque saw no aroblem with using the existing drive and Mr. Woolery felt it could be left on Williston Road until it was seen what was going to happen there and chanjTed later if desired. Regarding lot 10, Mr. Poger said the Commission was on record as favoring a residential rather than commercial use. Mr. Ewing asked where drainage going into the Williston Road system ended up and was told it was probably down by Gracie's. Mr. Jacob said two lots were under 10,030 sq. ft. and he asked if they could be made larger. Mr. Spitz said they could be approved as is because this is a PUD. Mr. Krebs said they could not give more buildable area to lot 4. :r.r. Spitz asked if the road curve could be started a little earlier for more room. Zr. Mona asked whether lot 11 was part of the proposal and was told it was not. He then asked about the sidewalk. Mr. Poger noted that the Commission had discussed a sidewalk on Helen Avenue going toward White St. Mr. Spitz suggested a sidewalk from the corner of Helen Street and Pine MEMORANDUM To: South Burlington Planning Commission From: David H. Spitz, City Planner Re: Next week's agenda items Date: 11/6/81 2) BDP Office Complex This 20 + acre property is located just north of Nordic Ford and currently contains one office building. Five new office buildings are proposed. Layout consists of one lot with buildings served by internal private streets. This commercial complex should be reviewed as a PCD, and traffic data will have to be submitted. In addition to the one existing curb cut on Shelburne Road (shared with Nordic Ford), there will be one additional curb cut. It will be located directly across from Holmes Road and will begin "Holmes Road Extension", a major future street connection that runs along the entire western boundary of the property. An 80 foot r-o-w must be provided on this boundary along with a 60 foot connection to Green Mountain Drive. , 3) Rebecca Square The number and layout of lots is very similar to the sketch plan proposal. Various utility lines, including drainage systems, are shown; detailed information must be provided for final plat review. There are still 2 lots with access on to Williston Road. One has an existing dwelling and will be expanded by the narrow strip between it and National Cash Register. The second is a new 40,900 square foot lot and is described on the application as being for "proposed commercial use." I would strongly re- commend that all references to commercial use be removed from this application. These two lots should share the one existing curb cut. Also, if the other existing house in the rear_ wishes to retain its current access onto Williston Road, I do not see why this should be a problem even though there will now be new access behind the house onto the cul-de-sac. 4) Ryan, Winding Brook Proposed number of units has been reduced to 72 and layout has been modified according to the fire chief's recommendations. The through road has been improved by addition of several gentle curves and by relocation of all but a few parking spaces. Church of God driveway will be relocated so that only one culvert across the dra.inageway will be needed. The existing culvert will be removed. The applicant should obtain written agreement from the Church or should demon- strato that there are no legal restrictions against relocation of the right- of-way. The sidewalk will be constructed along Hinesburg Road from Kennedy Drive to the new entrance. Total length is more than Ryan's Hinesburg Read front- age and is a sufficient requirement.