HomeMy WebLinkAboutSD-86-0000 - Decision - 1710 Shelburne RoadPLANNING COMMISSION
13 MAY 1986
PAGE 5
Mr. Fissette explained they want to keep their house and
possibly build a multi -family dwelling on the larger lot.
The Zoning Board granted a variance on frontages.
No issues were raised.
6. PUBLIC HEARING: Final Plat application rof John Larkin for
the construction of a 200-unit hotel with the existing
restaurant on 9.8 acres and remaining lot 410 of 7.026 acres
at 1710 Shelburne Rd.
Mrs. Lafleur said the application was correctly reviewed as a
site plan with traffic overlay criteria. She noted that
there was a critique by Craig Leiner of the taffic Study.
Mr. Spitz explained the traffic study. He acknowledged there
will be long delays for left turns out of the hotel, but said
this is a fact of life of Shelburne Rd. He said their anal-
ysis does not show the need for a signal at the hotel
entrance. Peak hours are not the same as for the rest of
Shelburne Rd. traffic. Theyare 900 ft. from Allen Rd. and
further from Green Mountain Dr. The accident history at the
location is not high. They will have right and left turn
exiting lanes.
At the Green Mountain Dr/Bartlett Bay Rd/Rt. 7 intersection
conditions will depend on Agency of Transportation schedules
for construction. At Allen Rd., Mr. Spitz said their cal-
culations indicate a signal will be warranted now. The
Agency of Transporation will look into this in their report.
Craig Leiner does not feel a signal is warranted and feels
that Allen Rd. development will be the triggering factor.
Mrs. Maher said she feels that until Shelburne Rd. is widened
this development would pose a dangerous situation. She felt
the applicant should be asked to phase in his project so it
will be less dangerous.
Mrs. Lafleur summarized Mr. Leiner's appraisal: he agreed
with estimates for trip generation and with directional dis-
tribution, but disagrees with length of delays. He felt that
the less severe grade of the new driveway will improve the
situation and agreed with the 2 exiting lanes.
On other issues, Mr. Blanchard said that lot #10 was not
counted in the density. Mrs. Lafleur confirmed that lot
coverage is under 70%, even deducting the ravine. Mr. Larkin
said he will try to sell the restaurant to a separate party.
Mrs. Maher said she would vote for 100 units now and the rest
PLANNING COMMISSION
6 MAY 1986
PAGE 6
when the Shelburne Rd. project is completed. Mr. Burgess
agreed but felt that the second phase could begin when the
state announces its plans for beginning work on Shelburne Rd.
Mr. Belter said he would hate to see phasing over more than 2
years and didn't want to hold the developer hostage. Mr.
Jacob said he has had assurances from the City's Represen-
tative who is on the Highway Commission, that the project
will be done with due haste. Mrs. Maher agreed that it would
be all right to tie the second phase to the State's approval
of the plans.
Mr. Burgess moved that the South Burlington Planning Comm-
ission approve the Final Plat application of John Larkin for
the construction of a 200 unit hotel and existing restaurant
as depicted on a plan entitled "Overall Site Plan, Harbor Inn
Route 7_ South Burlington, Vermont," prepared by Krebs &
Lansing Consulting Engineers, Inc, dated June 1985, and
revised 3/12/86 with the following stipulations:
1. A $42,000 bond for landscaping shall be posted prior to
permit.
2. The northerly side of the parking lot shall have a con-
crete curb to prevent runoff onto the adjacent property._
There shall be a swale along the north side of the parking
lot.
3. There shall be 3 fire hydrants located in the parking lot
islands. These shall be shown on the plan and the location
approved by the S. Burlington Fire Chief prior to permit.
4. The applicant shall place in escrow an amount determined
by the City Engineer to construct a sidewalk along the Shel-
burne Road frontage after Shelburne Rd. is widened.
5. No more than 10% of the living units shall have kitchen-
ettes.
6. The applicant shall install a 44,000 gallon retention pond
as specified �Ry Wagner, Heindel & Noyes and the City Engineer
7. A snow fence shall be installed along the top of entire
length of the stream bank during construction.
8. The road through to Harbor View Rd. shall be completed
prior to occupancy.
9. The developer shall contribute 4% of the cost of the
Cit 's Shelburne Rd. intersection improvement package due to
the 146 peak hour trips generated by this development.
PLANNING COMMISSION
13 MAY 1986
PAGE 7
10. A 40,000 gallon per day sewer allocation is approved for
this project in accordance with the S. Burlington Sewer
Policy. The applicant shall pay $2.50 per gallon prior to
permit.
11. It is the applicant's responsibility to record the Final
Plat for the hotel project and for the extension of the road
through to Harbor View Rd. with the City Clerk within 90 days
or this approval shall be null and void. The record copy
must be approved � the Planner and signed � the Chairman or
Clerk of the Planning Commission prior to recording.
12. The building permit shall be obtained within 3 ears.
Mr. Belter seconded.
A poll of members indicated that the motion would not pass
without a phasing provision.
Mr. Burgess then proposed the following amendment: that ap-
proval for this project be for 100 units and the restaurant
in the first phase. The second phase will be approved as
soon as the State announces its construction schedule for
Shelburne Road. Mrs. Maher seconded.
Following a brief recess, Mr. Larkin requested that the words
"..of the 101st unit" be added to the 8th stipulation. He
,noted that all buildings will be sprinklered. Mr. Larkin
agreed to go with graveling if the Fire Chief requires.
Mr. Burgess then proposed the following amendment: that the
Harbor View Road connection, if deemed necessary 12y the City
Planner and Fire Chief, shall be roughed in and gravelled
prior to completion of phase 1- otherwise, it need not be
finished until hp ase 2. Mr. Belter seconded, and the
amendment was passed unanimously.
Mr. Burgess then proposed the following amendment to the
first amendment: that "the first 2 buildings, not to exceed
120 units" replace the words 11100 units" and that phasing of
the support facilities will be at the discretion of the City
Planner. Mr. Belter seconded, and this amendment passed
unanimously.
The vote on the amended first amendment followed, and it was
passed 5-1 with Ms. Peacock opposing.
The amended motion was then passed unanimously.