Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBATCH - Supplemental - 1810 Shelburne RoadMOTION OF DENIAL JBL ' 3/24/87 That the South Burlington Planning Commission deny the site plan application of Hoyt Gahagan for construction of a 10,300 square foot car wash at 1810 Shelburne Road as depicted on a plan entitled "Site Plan, Car Wash, Shelburne Road., South Burlington, Vermont" prepared by Wiemann-Lamphere Architects, dated March 16, 1987 for the following reason: The traffic overlay zone 5 allows 140 peak hour trip ends for this X,L�, acre lot. The applicant projects 200 trip ends during some peak hours with 80% or 160 using the Shelburne Road/Harbor View Road intersection. This exceeds the allowable number under the overlay zone and is therefore denied. t 4 ,l7fA1,JLw,-.L — AL cJ (- - Pa 233 87 / / �1 JBL MOTION OF APPROVAL That the South Burlington Planning Commission approve the site plan application of Hoyt Gahagan for construction of a 10,300 square foot car wash at 181.0 Shelburne Road as depicted on a plan entitled "Site Plan, Car Wash, Shelburne Road., South Burlington, Vermont" prepared by Wiemann-Lamphere Architects, dated March 16, 1987 with the following stipulations: 1. $8300 landscaping bond shall. be posted prior to permit. Plans shall be revised to show larger., taller trees along the western side of the building and the total value of the plan shall equal the required amount. It shall be approved by the City Planner prior to permit. 2. All recommendations from Wagner, Heindel & Noyse for storm water detention and erosion control shall be implemented by the applicant. There shall be no stormwater retention within the Route 7 right-of-way. 3. A $ 3902 contribution toward Shelburne Road improvements shall be made prior to permit based on 152 trip ends generated by this development. 4. At least one hydrant shall be installed on site in a location approved by the fire department. 5. A sewer allocation of 16,000 gallons per day is granted in accordance with the South Burlington Sewer Policy. The applicant shall pay $2.50 per gallon prior to permit. 6. Only six self wash bays are approved within this motion. Any future self -wash bays shall return to the Commission for site plan review, including the traffic impact. 7. The building permit shall be obtained within 6 months or this approval is null and void. 1 City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 PLANNER 658-7955 May 2, 1988 Hoyt Gahagan RD 2, Box 60 Charlotte, Vermont 05455 Dear Mr. Gahagan: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 When the Shelburne Road carwash was approved (May 12, 1987), the Planning Commission required that you pay an intersection improvement fee of $2310 based on the 90 trip ends generated by the carwash that would go directly to Shelburne Road. Our records show that this was never paid. Please see Richard Ward, Zoning Administrator about settling this matter. For your future information, the muffler ship'and quick lube was assessed a fee of $257 for the 10 trip ends that will go directly to Shelburne Road. You will also have to contribute toward a new signal in an amount determined by the Planner. These fees will be required prior to obtaining a building permit. Sincerely, ] -;-�'L _(I, c ,Jane B. Lafleur, City Planner JBL/mcp 1 Enc.l cc: Richard Ward r] E M__V E 000 April 23, 1987 Ms. Jane LaFleur City Planner South Burlington Municipal Dorset Street South Burlington, Vermont Re: Gahagan Car Wash Dear Jane: Off ices 05401 As I mentioned to you this morning, I am becoming extremely frustrated with the ever changing rules attached to the above project. We, by this letter, are requesting to be re -heard by the Planning Commission on the above project and based on the following new data. 1. In our last discussion, I understood that the majority of the Commission was in favor of re -hearing the issue of a traffic light being installed. As verified by the letter from Gordon McArthur, attached, the traffic light does appear to be a reality and will be in- stalled, hopefully this summer, but certainly not later than summer 1988. 2. The additional information in reference to the "hourly trip ends" is outlined in Mr. Spitz's letter attached and these new estimated traffic numbers have shown that we do in fact fall within the traffic overlay. I would assume the main question would be how we could reduce the traffic from our original report done by Mr. Spitz dated March 12, 1987. Our new traffic numbers are as follows (from David Spitz's letter attached). TIME PERIOD HOURLY TRIP ENDS --------------------------------------------------------- SATURDAY, MID DAY WEEKDAY, 4 PM TO 6 PM WEEKDAY, MID DAY 120 50 74 WIEMANN-LAMPHERE, ARCHITECTS • 289 COLLEGE ST. • BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05401 • 802-864-0950 Ms. Jane LaFleur April 23, 1987 Page 2 The highest hour of the week, at 120 trip ends, should be used when applying the traffic overlay standards. - It should be understood that this car wash equipment (like all other car wash equipment in the area) can put more cars through the car wash as demonstrated in Mr. Spitz's first study dated March 12, 1987. In reality, however, the personnel can only produce sixty cars per hour and maintain a quality car wash. This is further verified by the numbers presented by FitzPatrick-Llewellyn and accepted by the Commission on May 20, 1987 as follows: ROCKY' S 1 SEAWAY 2 HOUR PEAK ADJ . RATF. PEAK RATE ADJ . RATE AVRG OF ADJ . RATE WEEKDAYS RATE q�2� 3-4PM 4-5PM 14 VTE 29 VTE 20 41 104 92 VTE 77 VTE 68 53 VTE 55 5-6PM 10 20 70 52 36 6-7PM 6 12 CLOSED -- 12 SATURDAY�� 10-11AM 30 61 84 62 62 1) COUNTS PERFORMED IN JULY, MONTHLY ADJMT FACTOR = 2.04 2) COUNTS PERFORMED IN MARCH, MONTHLY ADJMT FACTOR = 2.07 Mr. Frederick Bauer of Mr. Auto Wash Sales, who has helped set up some 200 car washes and personally owns four other car washes, is prepared to verify the above numbers and answer any detailed questions the Commission may have. 3. Finally, our client has offered to build the right turning lane at Harbor View Road to improve the turning movements at that intersection. At our last meeting, we pointed out the time problem and would respectfully request that you put us on the agenda for April 28th. It was our understanding that time had been reserved for this project on that evening and we have made arrangements to have Mr. Bauer available to testify. Ms. Jane LaFleur April 23, 1987 Page 3 I look forward to hearing from you. Sincerel '-nc el W MANN- AMPHERE J jo� es A. La; h),e i JAL/cad Encl. cc: Peter Jacobs TS, INC. .c tr .Yi F f 1 Gary Lavigne WIEMANN-LAMPHERE ARCHITECTS 289 College Street Burlington, Vermont 05402 Dear Mr. Lavigne, 15 Morse Drive Essex Jct., Vermont 05452 (802) 878-0305 April 21, 1987 I would like to provide additional comments on two aspects of the Gahagan car wash application on Harbor View Road (1) benefits crea- ted by a new traffic signal at Allen Road and (2) comparison to other recent car wash traffic estimates. Allen Road Traffic Siqnal Benefits I understand that the Vermont Agency of Transportation currently is designing traffic signal improvements for Allen Road. Installation of that signal will definitely improve the ability of cars to exit from Harbor View Road. Currently, gaps are created in Route 7 traffic flow by the signal at Bartlett Bay Road. Similar gaps will be created by a sig- nal at Allen Road. To the extent that those gaps overlap, left turns from Harbor View Road can take place more frequently than with uncontrolled Route 7 traffic movements. All calculations in the original car wash traffic report assumed random flow on Route 7. Once the Allen Road signal is installed, gaps in both directions will cause far better than random flow conditions. Reserve capacity for exiting Harbor View Road vehicles can be expected to increase accordingly. All parties should encourage the Vermont Agency of Transportation to act quickly on installation of an Allen Road traffic signal, to provide coordination with the Bartletts Bay Road signal, and to maximize benefits at other key locations such as Harbor View Road. Car Wash Traffic Comparisons Several parties have pointed counts, as submitted to the South below my estimates for the Gahagan counts are summarized below: Location Seaway (observed) Curth (estimated) Rocky's (adjusted) out that all other recent car wash Burlington Planning Commission, are well car wash. The hichest of those other Hourly Trip Ends 110 65 61 page 2 I will not attempt to affirm or deny the above numbers. However, I will follow the same procedures that were used in the above calcula- tions - i.e. development of an hourly volume that is appropriate for �b yC the entire year. In this manner, we can avoid the partial informationPC that the South Burlington Planning Commission clearly did not permit. " � Time Period Hourly Trip Ends Saturday, mid -day 120 Weekday, 4 p.m. - 6 p.m. 50 Weekday, mid -day 74 The highest hour of the week, at 120 trip ends, should be used when applying the traffic overlay standards. I hope that this new information will help demonstrate the accept- ability of a car wash at the Harbor View Road location. Sincerely, - David H. Spitz North Country Planning 0 15 Morse Drive 0 Essex Jct., Vr. ONE AG STATE OF V ERMONT AGENCY OF TRANSPORTATION 133 State Street, Administration Building Montpelier, Vermont 05602 tiSp�R-(P April 7, 1987 Mr. Gary G. Lavigne Weimann-Lamphere Architects 289 College Street Burlington, VT 05401 Dear Mr. Lavigne: In response to your April 4, 1987 letter concerning our schedule for the installation of a traffic signal at the Shelburne Road/Allen Road intersection in South Burlington, we offer the following. Design of the signal project is currently in progress. We anticipate completion of the design by June 1987. We will be ordering the signal equipment once the design details are available. At this time we are estimating that the signal system will be installed and operating by late fall 1987. However, because delivery of signal equipment sometimes takes several months, it is possible that the actual installation could be delayed until 1988. Very truly yours, Gordon B. MacArthur, P.E. Traffic and Safety Engineer a: 1 7, original All Cloth Car Care Centers MR. AUTO WASH- SALES & SERVICE, INC. 150 TOLLAND STREET, EAST HARTFORD, CONN. 06108 203 — 289.0265 February 23, 1987 TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: Re: The uahagan proposed Car Wash Center The proposed combination automatic and self-service car wash will use fresh water at the following flow rate. Each individual self-service bay will use four gallons of fresh water per minute usage time. One dollar will allow the customer four minutes of individual use. This proposed site will have six self-service bays, therefore having an estimated usage of twenty- four gallons per minute. The water will travel into a central troth which will baffle off in sand and then will overflow into an oil trap sized for the water volLune (normally 1,000 gal. oil trap) and out to tone sanitary sewer. The proposed automatic will use an estimated fifty gallons of water per car, fifteen gallons we anticipate to recycle in a flood pre -rinse and undercarriage wash. The rest of the wash process, we expect to use fresh water, leaving thirty-five gal- lons of usage per car. The water will travel off the car into a central sand troth which will divert off the sand and over- flow into two 1,000 gallon tanks used for storage in the re- cycling system and then finally overflow into the oil trap. The above usages are derived from our involvement in over 100 automatic car washes throughout New England. If you have any further questions with regard to water usage, please do not hesitate to call us at the above telephone number. Sincerely, MR. AUTO WASH SALES & SERVICE, INC. Frederick C. Bauer President FCB/mo %- )TY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON ) SITE PLAN APPLICATION 1) NAME, ADDRESS, AND PHONE NUMBER OF: a) Owner of Record Th s A. Far ell, Farrell Distributing Co ;iolmes Road, South Burlington, k'T 05401 b) Applicant Hoyt Gahagan, :D 2, Box 60 Charlotte, VT 05455 c) Contact Person Gary Lavine, ,;ier^ann-Lamphere Architects, Inc. 2S9 College Street, Burlington, VT 05401 2) PROJECT STREET ADDRESS: 1810 Shelburne Road, So. Burlington, VT 3) PROPOSED USE(s) Car Nash and Detail i;ork 4) SIZE OF PROJECT: (i.e. Building Square Footage, #units, maximum height and ;floors 7,000 s.f. car i.ash, 5,300 self wash 5) NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES (full and part time) : 5 full time, 6 part time 6) LOT COVERAGE: Building G.3 %; Building, Parking, Outside Storage: 40 % 8) COST ESTIMATES: Buildings: $ 290,000.00 Landscaping $ -.,300.00 Other Site Improvements: (Please list with cost) $ 73,000.00 narking, roads, utilities 9) ESTIMATED PROJECT COMPLETION DATE: October 1537 10) ESTIMATED AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC (in and out) i eekdays 4 trip ends/peak hour Weekends 61 trip en s _ peak hour 11) PEAK HOUR (s) OF OPERATION: 12 : 00 noon - 2: 90 PM 12) PEAK DAY (s) OF OPERATION: Saturday Sunday ti SIGN T OF APP ANT A 77. NORM COUI�TTRY -- ----�_�.-- - Drive PI��I�Il�TING Y Essex worm �..�-�=�-- Jct., Vermont OuSs ` r'M (802) 878-0305 Gary Lavigne WIEMANN-LAMPHERE ARCHITECTS 289 College Street Burlington, Vermont 05402 April 21, 1987 Dear Mr. Lavigne, I would like to provide additional comments on two aspects of the Gahagan car wash application on Harbor View Road (1) benefits crea- ted by a new traffic signal at Allen Road and (2) comparison to other recent car wash traffic estimates. Allen Road Traffic Siqnal Benefits I understand that the Vermont Agency of Transportation currently is designing traffic signal improvements for Allen Road. Installation of that signal will definitely improve the ability of cars to exit from Harbor View Road. Currently, gaps are created in Route 7 traffic flow by the signal at Bartlett Bay Road. Similar gaps will be created by a sig- nal at Allen Road. To the extent that those gaps overlap, left turns from Harbor View Road can take place more frequently than with uncontrolled Route 7 traffic movements. All calculations in the original car wash traffic report assumed random flow on Route 7. Once the Allen Road signal is installed, gaps in both directions will cause far better than random flow conditions. Reserve capacity for exiting Harbor View Road vehicles can be expected to increase accordingly. All parties should encourage the Vermont Agency of Transportation to act quickly on installation of an Allen Road traffic signal, to provide coordination with the Bartletts Bay Road signal, and to maximize benefits at other key locations such as Harbor View Road. Car Wash Traffic Comparisons Several parties have pointed counts, as submitted to the South below my estimates for the Gahagan counts are summarized below: Location Seaway (observed) Curth (estimated) Rocky's (adjusted) out that all other recent car wash Burlington Planning Commission, are well car wash. The highest of those other Hourly Trip Ends 110 65 61 page 2 I will not attempt to affirm or deny the above numbers. However, I will follow the same procedures that were used in the above calcula- tions - i.e. development of an hourly volume that is appropriate for the entire year. In this manner, we can avoid the partial information that the South Burlington Planning Commission clearly did not permit. Time Period Saturday, mid -day Weekday, 4 p.m. - 6 p.m. Weekday, mid -day Hourly Trip Ends 120 50 74 The highest hour of the week, at 120 trip ends, should be used when applying the traffic overlay standards. I hope that this new information will help demonstrate the accept- ability of a car wash at the Harbor View Road location. Sincerely, C z� �-#_ §� David H. Spitz North Country Planning 0 15 Morse Drive • Essex Jct., `T. 4�Op4 AGF� � co spo"IP O STATE OF VERMONT AGENCY OF TRANSPORTATION 133 State Street, Administration Building Montpelier, Vermont 05602 April 7, 1987 Mr. Gary G. Lavigne Weimann-Lamphere Architects 289 College Street Burlington, VT 05401 Dear Mr. Lavigne: In response to your April 4, 1987 letter concerning our schedule for the installation of a traffic signal at the Shelburne Road/Allen Road intersection in South Burlington, we offer the following. Design of the signal project is currently in progress. We anticipate coupletion of the design by June 1987. We will be ordering the signal equipment once the design details are available. At this time we are estimating that the signal system will be installed and operating by late fall 1987. However, because delivery of signal equignent sometimes takes several months, it is possible that the actual installation could be delayed until 1988. Very truly yours, Gordon B. MacArthur, P.E. Traffic and Safety Engineer �e. 0 "_�JC NOMI COLTNT_IZY - _ �_- _--�...�.� 1 Lk NI G 15 Morse Drive .�..�, Essex Jct., Vermont 05452 ,{f (802) 878-0305 Gary Lavigne WIEMANN-LAMPHERE ARCHITECTS 289 College Street Burlington, Vermont 05402 March 12, 1987 Dear Mr. Lavigne, At your request, I have estimated traffic volumes and impacts from a proposed car wash on Harbor View Road and Route 7 in South Burlington. The report includes (1) an estimate of development traf- fic volumes and travel routes, (2) an unsignalized capacity analysis of the Route 7/Harbor View Road intersection and (3) a review of whether traffic signal warrants are met at the Route 7/Harbor View Road intersection. Several references are made to previous North Coun- try Planning traffic reports for the Harbor View development. Because of debate over previous car wash applications, detailed efforts have been made to quantify anticipated traffic volumes. Esti- mates are given for winter versus non -winter volumes plus weekend peak, weekend average, weekday peak, late afternoon and early morning periods: There is considerable variability with winter volumes ranging from short-lived weekend peaks of 100 vehicles per hour (200 trip ends) down to normal late afternoon volumes of 25 vehicles per hour (50 trip ends). With highest volumes occurring during winter, on weekends, or mid -day on weekdays, the car wash will avoid the busiest Route 7 time periods and will spread out peak hours for overall Harbor View Road development traffic. Intersection analyses indicate that delays can be expected for exiting Harbor View Road vehicles. Anticipated Route 7 widening to 4 or 5 lanes will improve service for exiting right turns but exiting left turns can continue to expect very long delays. This situation is normal for side streets onto major throughfares, and signalization should not be encouraged unless minor street volumes are sufficiently high. page 2 A review of traffic signal warrants indicate that even with ad- dition of proposed office and car wash traffic, Harbor View Road does not yet require signalization. It is possible that a signal may never be required, depending on the following : (1) industrial/commercial uses on vacant land may be 1pw volume in nature, (2) more traffic may be channeled to existing Spear Street or proposed Allen Road connec- tions and (3) construction of a South Burlington bypass may alter Route 7 traffic patterns. With impending signal installation at Allen Road and other Route 7 locations, it is desirable to require additional signals only if clearly warranted. That is not yet the situation at Harbor View Road. Also , the possibility of gaps created by Bartletts Bay and Allen Road signals may improve levels of service for Harbor View Road exit- ing vehicles. Please let me know if any additional comments or information are required. Sincerely, David H. Spitz North Onint.ry Planning • 15 Nl()isc Drix,c • 1;,tisca,lcl., \'T. )page A-1 I. Car Wash Traffic Estimates Previous applications before the South Burlington Planning Com- mission have demonstrated the seasonal variability of car wash traf- fic. For this application we would like to quantify more completely some of the normal seasonal traffic patterns of car washes. Most of the description is taken from Frederick C. Bauer, President of "Mr. Auto Wash Sales & Service, Inc.", with experience in over 200 car washes in the Northeast. Local car wash counts previously submitted to South Burlington also are considered. The great majority of traffic will be through the automatic car wash with much lower traffic volumes through the self-service bays. At very busy time periods, the automatic car wash can serve 80 cars per hour while the self-service bays can only handle 3 to 4 cars per hour. The busiest time of year for the automatic car wash is the win- ter season extending from early December to late March. The car wash can expect approximately 100 good days during that season. Peak vol- umes of 80 cars per hour will be achieved only for about 10 warm sunny days, usually on Saturday or Sunday, during the winter. Average winter peaks, occurring between 10 a.m. and 4 p.m. on either weekdays or weekends, will be 45 to 55 cars per hour. In winter, car wash traffic drops off rapidly in the late afternoon due to darkness and cold. Traffic for the weekday 4 to 6 p.m. period will be 15 to 20 cars per hour. Winter traffic volumes should be even lower before 10 a.m. A previously submitted 1986 traffic count at the Seaway Car Wash on Shelburne Road generally supports the above described traffic patterns. During non -winter months, the automatic car wash can expect approximately 200 good days with average traffic volumes about half those of winter months. Again, busiest time periods will be on week- ends followed by mid -day on weekdays. Weekday 4 to 6 p.m. volumes will no longer be adversely affected by weather and are estimated at 20 to 25 cars per hour. Self-service bays also are busiest during winter months, but seasonal fluctuations are not as great as for the automatic car wash. However, weekend versus weekday fluctuations are higher since cus- tomers require more time and normally wear non -work clothes. Absolute weekend peaks will be 6 bays times 3.5 vehicles per bay or 21 vehi- cles per hour. Normal weekday volumes are estimated at up to 10 vehi- cles per hour with lower volumes during the 4 to 6 p.m. time period. A summary of projected car wash traffic volumes is given in Table 1. North ((nintry, Ilarming • 15 NlOise Drive: • I;,s,Scx, Jct., VE )page A-2 TABLE 1 : CAR WASH TRAFFIC ESTIMATES OP ,e Time Period Automatic Car Wash Self -Service Bays Total* Weekend Peak 80 vph 20 vph 100 vph (limited winter hours) Normal Weekend 55 vph 15 vph 70 vph ! 14-D Normal Weekday 45-50 vph 5-10 vph 55 vph 1�0 (10 a.m. - 4 p.m.) Normal Weekday, Late P.M. 20-25 vph 0-5 vph 25 vph 60 (4 p.m. - 6 p.m.) Normal Weekday, Early A.M. 10-15 vph 0-5 vph 15 vph 3� (7 a.m. - 10 a.m.) * Each vehicle per hour (vph) equals two trip ends. Thus the weekday 4 to 5 p.m. volume of.25 vph is equivalent to 50 trip ends. Previous reports by North Country Planning at this location assumed the following directional splits : (1) 90% of development traffic to/ from Route 7 and 10% to/from Spear Street, and (2) 67% of development traffic to/from Burlington and 33% to/from Shelburne. This report as- sumes one modification. Due to the residential nature of car wash de- mand, this report assumes 80% of traffic to/from Route 7 and 20% to/ from Spear Street. Totals for all time periods are given in Table 2. The report assumes that entering and exiting volumes will be equal. North ("Ountry 1 1mining • 15Marse Urivc • 11',s1Scx Jct., VE page A-3 TABLE 2 : CAR WASH'TRAFFIC ROUTES Route 7 To/From Route 7 To/From To/From Shelburne Burlington Spear St. Total (vph)* Weekend Peak 27 53 20 100 Normal Weekend 19 37 14 70 Normal Weekday 15 29 11 55 Normal Weekday, Late P.M. 7 13 5 25 Normal Weekday, Early A.M. 4 8 3 15 * Again, each vehicle per hour (vph) equals two trip ends. A. M. Peak Hour II., Traffic Volumes - Route 7/Harbor View Road Intersection A previous report by North Country Planning estimated "existing" plus proposed office building traffic through the Route 7/Harbor View Road intersection (Harbor View Office Building, NCP, 9/8/86, Fig- ure 1). Those volumes are added to the "late P.M." and "early A.M." car wash volumes from Table 2. A.M. and P.M. street peak hour volumes are given in Figure 1. FIGURE 1 : DEVELOPMENT TURNING MOVEMENTS To/From Burlington 66 y Harbor View Rd. P. M. �-35 Peak �— 17 Hour 3 To/From Shelburne To/From Burlington Harbor J`9 View Rd. /t_63 Ir -31 25 To/From Shelburne North G ni ntry Planning • 15 N lorsc • Isscx ,1ct., vr. age A-4 The previous North Country Planning report also estimated 1986 and 1991 design.hour traffic on Route 7 (Harbor View Office Build- ing, NCP, 9/8/86, Figure 2). Those figures are updated to 1987 and 1992 via use of a 2.3% annual growth rate and combined with devel- opment volumes to pro u�"ce mplete tray ff c movements in Figure 2. FIGURE 2: THROUGH TRAFFIC PLUS DEVELOPMENT TURNING MOVEMENTS Route 7/Harbor View Road To/ From Burlington 19 A 9 yHarbor View Rd. 1992 �63 P.M. �-31 DHV Tr 941 25 To/From Shelburne To/ From 3urlington 1438 4 Harbor View Rd. 1�_-6 3 1417--31 Tr 1050 25 To/From Shelburne Capacity calculations are based on two travel lanes on Route 7 in 1987 (Worksheet 1) and at least four lanes in 1992 (Worksheet 2). Results are given in Table 3. North Gnintry Planning • 15 NlOrsc llrivc • 111'SScx, Jet., X T. page A-5 TABLE 3 : INTERSECTION CAPACITY - ROUTE 7/HARBOR VIEW ROAD Approach & Turning Movement Time Period Level of Service Route 7, North - Left Turn 1987 P.M. B Harbor View - LeftlTurn E_--� E with 1 lane Harbor View - Right Turn C" Route 7, North - Left Turn 1992 P.M. A Harbor View - Left Turn E Harbor View - Right Turn A--C/D with 1 lane III. Review of Signal Warrants - Route 7/Harbor View Road In order to review whether signal warrants are met at the Route 7/Harbor View Road intersection, it is necessary to evaluate off-peak as well as peak traffic volumes. It is assumed that Route 7 volumes will be sufficiently high during all daytime hours to meet traffic warrants. Therefore it is necessary to review Harbor View Road exiting volumes under either Warrant 2, "Interruption of Continuous Traffic", or Warrant 9, "Four Hour Volumes". Peak hour volumes for existing Harbor View Road traffic plus pro- posed car wash and office developments are available in current and previous North Country Planning reports. Off-peak volumes are estimated from a composite of ITE and NCP data. Estimated totals are given in Table 4. North LOt1I1try lla.I11 ing • 1 5 NIo sc Drivc: • ES1Scx Jct., XT. page A-6 TABLE 4 : HARBOR VIEW RbAD EXITING VOLUMES Existing Office Car Time Period Traffic Building Wash Total Weekday A.M. Peak 34 6 12 52 Mid -day 20 8 44 72 P.M. Peak 41 33 20 94 Saturday 25 3 56 74 Total mid -day volumes approach but do not exceed either Warrants 2 or 9 for a side street with one lane exit in an urban area, There- fore it appears that signalization can still be withheld at the Route 7/Ha6or View Road intersection. North OOUn6jr Planl ing • 1,5mo se Drive• Is.Sex,Ict., x,r. UNSIONAI IYLU INILNSLCIIONS 10-37 WOI(KSIIE/ET FOR A OF TIN I I:RSEC 11 )NALYSIS of �Iwbor W oule / , NAME: VOLUMES IN PCPII LOCATION: iiOURLY VOLUMES i o�l 7 Major Street: e N N= V'N7 —. V, —V, V� — Grade � V, -- V� — % 5VI N=[�'�V — V V(-T: Date of Counts: 7 ad 16 wS1DP 'rime Period: PM — D YIELD 7 , I Average Running Speed: 5--N N =[D Minor Slrecl:_ —a % Harh)r V tw �OAG� PI IF: Grade VOLUME ADJUSTMENTS Movement Na '21) i !_ 3 4 I 5 Q `'� 7 9 Volume (vph) Vol. (pcph), see Table 10 `:3, lI STEP l: RT from Minor Street r`V., _ 1 /2 V, + V, _ + q �L = R5 vph (V,v) Conflicting Flow, V, Critical Gap, T,, and Potential Capacity, cp T, = 6'0 sec (Table 10-2) c.q — a 90 pcph (Fig. 10-3) Actual Capacity, cm c,,,g = cpg = pcph V' STEP 2: LT From Major Street p V, } V, _ + giil _ _ 166 vph (V ) ,' Conflicting Flow, V, Critical Cap, T, ,and Potential Capacity, c. T, _ 15• � sec (Table 10-2) cps _ � pcph (Fig. 10-3) Percent of cp Utilized and Impedance Factor (Fig. 10-5) IYAP (v,/Cp,) X 100QQ— - = 90 Actual Capacity, c,,, coA = cps _ 22� pcph STEP 3. LT From Minor Street ' V7 Conflicting Flaw, V, 1/2 V,-+ V,-i V,-i V, = 13 +i1L+ W +,5'� = X7vpt, (V,7) Critical Gap, T,, and Potential Capacity, cp T, • � 0 sec (Table 10-2) c,,7 — Ypcph (Fig. 10-3) Actual Capacity, cm 1 c,,,7 = CP7 X P, = X _.q _ = pcph SiiAKED-LANE CAPACITY v7 + if lane is shared /vy Sfi = (V7/Cm7) lVY/Cm4) Movement No. v(pcph) c h) c (pcph) c IDS 7 31 5 � 9 63 aa7 C 336 4 nc!'JL'S 1—a�ewooc�/ L-TF/ Kolet LlF/ 0{fice qnd (-Gr WASh UN51liNAVIZ 1:1) INII:HSL•l'IIONS j � �/ �j I0-37 WOItKSIIEET FOR ANALYSIS OF T INTERSECTIONS LOCATION: 1 -1 z!hnr VIAW /W /p0410 / . NAME: VOLUMES IN PCPII HOURLY VOLUMES y� /\ 0 U (aN Major Street• V' 2Lq Grade % a x V, N, qy ® �— V, a — V, V{ — V' ��V7 Date of Counts: 99a I k� 9 slop � Vy — — Time Period: fl D YIELD Average Running Speed:: �10 N = [ ] Minor Street__ Pi IF: Crade '� % Ka,,! r V Pw P60 VOLUME ADJUSTMENTS Movement Na 2 3 4 5 7 9 Volume v ti (P) 5a5 � � -7 3� G O fa F Q�boi l/e Vol. (pcph), see Table 10 1 I 1 foJQJ 7 I I / 3, STEP 1: RT from Minor Street V„ V, '' 1 /2 V, + V, = 13+ -5)5 = 538vp1, (V.y) Conflicting Flow, Critical Gap, T,, and Potential Capacity, cP T, _ � sec (Table 10-2) cp, = w pcph (Fig. 10-3) Actual Capacity, cm c,,,g = CF9 = Upcpll STEP 2: LT From Major Street f 1 V. Conflicting Flow, V{ V3 + V, = _ + 5 _ 50vph (V,{) Critical Gap, T� , and Potential Capacity, eP T, _ 5 - 7 sec (Table 10-2) cp{q= 50_ pcph (Fig. 10-3) Percent of cP Utilized and impedance Factor (Fig. 10-5) (v{/cP{) X 100 =g.6 P{_ � Actual Capacity, c,,, Cup{ _ CP{ _ A pcph STEP 3: LT From Minor Street ' Conflicting Flow, Vc -V? 1/2 V, t VJ V5+V{ _ � +,L25+�7/L + � — 13 vph (V,,) Critical Gap, T� , and Potential Capacity, cP T, - 5 sec (7a//yb;;lvTe� 10-2) cP, _ - pcph (Fig. 10-3) Actual Capacity, c,,, On Cm7 CP, X P{ x ' - ---L pcph SHARED -LANE CAPACITY sII v, + vy if lane is shared (V d Cm7) + (V9/Cm9) Movement Nr- piritdes and C, ✓ vVitS� of V��OP�1 eni 5 -/0 Y 0" �Qlr eS. ,,9. Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission 66 PEARL STREET P.O. BOX 108 ESSEX JUNCTION, VERMONT 05452 802 658-3004 March 17, 1987 Jane Lafleur, Planner City of South Burlington 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, Vermont 05401 RE: Harbor View Road Car Wash Dear Jane: I have reviewed the consultant's traffic report for this proposed development and have the following comments: 1. As you know, trip generation rates for this use are sketchy; although the consultant made a good effort to estimate trips, I think the P.M. peak hour trips will be higher than that for the weekday P.M. period, as shown on Table 2, p. A-3 of the report. Assuming the capacity of one automatic car wash is 50 v h and assuming 80% operation, this yields 40 vehicles per hour. 'sume 7.5 vph per self-service bay, with six bays; this yields 36 vehicles at 80% use. Thus, automatic and self-service would produce 76 vehicles. I don't know that my estimate is any better than the consultant's, but I offer it for your consideration. 2. 1 agree with the directional distribution, i.e. 80% to/from US 7 and 20 % to/from Spear Street. 3. I agree that with the car wash and office development, signal warrants are unlikely to be met at the US7/Harbor View intersection. In fact, given the future installation of a signal at Allen Road, signalization may be undesirable at Harbor View. However, I suggest that the location be monitored and if signal warrants are met, the applicant be required to contribute to the cost of the signal. If this is acceptable, CCRPC can monitor this location on an annual basis. 20 Years of Service to the Municipalities of ... Bolton Burlington Charlotte Colchester Essex Junction Essex Town Hinesburg Huntington Jericho Milton Richmond St. George Shelburne So. Burlington Underhill Westford Williston Winooski Jane Lafleur -2- March 17, 1987 4. The level of service estimate for 1987 appears reasonable. Note the heavy northbound right turns (63). Widening the Harbor View Road approach to two lanes, with an exclusive lane for southbound left turns and one for northbound right turns may be beneficial. The applicant should agree to make this improvement as a condition of approval. If you have any questions, please call. Sincerely, CRAIG VEINER TRANSPTION ENGINEER CTL:bf 1985 HCM: UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS Page-1 ********************************************************************* IDENTIFYING INFORMATION _____________________________________________________________________ AVERAGE RUNNING SPEED, MAJOR STREET.............. 35 PEAK HOUR FACTOR................................. .95 AREA POPULATION.................................. 150000 NAME OF THE EAST/WEST STREET..................... HARBOR VIEW ROAD NAME OF THE NORTH/SOUTH STREET................... US 7 GHELBURNE ROAD NAME OF THE ANALYST.............................. CCRPC DATE OF THE ANALYSIS (mm/dd/yy).................. 3/17/87 TIME PERIOD ANALYZED............................. 1987 PM PK INTERSECTION TYPE AND CONTROL _____________________________________________________________________ INTERSECTION TYPE: T-INTERSECTION MAJOR STREET DIRECTION: NORTH/SOUTH CONTROL TYPE WESTBOUND: STOP SIGN TRAFFIC VOLUMES _____________________________________________________________________ EB W8 NB SB ____ ____ _..... ..... ... _... _..... LEFT THRU -- 0 941 1289 RIGHT -- 63 25 0 NUMBER OF LANES _____________________________________________________________________ EB WB NB SB _..... ... .... ..... .... .... ..... .... .... LANES -- 1 1 1 ADJUSTMENT _____________________________________________________________________ FACTORS Page-2 PERCENT RIGHT TURN CURB RADIUS (ft) ACCELERATION LANE GRADE _______ ANGLE ___ FOR RIGHT TURNS FOR RIGHT TURNS EASTBOUND ----- ________________ _________________ --- _ WESTBOUND -2.00 90 20 N NORTHBOUND 0.00 90 20 N SOUTHB8UND 0.00 90 20 N VEHICLE COMPOSITION % SU TRUCKS % COMBINATION AND RV'S VEHICLES % MOTORCYCLES EASTBOUND --- --- --- WESTBOUND 0 0 0 NORTHBOUND 0 0 0 SOUTHBOUND 0 0 0 CRITICAL GAPS TABULAR VALUES ADJUSTED SIGHT DIST. FINAL (Table 10-2) ______________ VALUE ADJUSTMENT CRITICAL GAP MINOR RIGHTS ________ ___________ ---------------- WB 5.70 5.70 0.00 5.70 MAJOR LEFTS SB 5.10 5.10 0.00 5.10 MINOR LEFTS WB 6.8O 6.80 0.00 6.80 CAPACITY AND LEVEL -OF _____________________________________________________________________ -SERVICE Page-3 POTEN- ACTUAL FLOW- TIAL MOVEMENT SHARED RESERVE RATE CAPACITY CAPACITY CAPACITY CAPACITY MOVEMENT v(pcph) c (pcph) c (pcph) c (pcph) c = c - v LOS __..... ..... ..... ..... ..... p ..... ______..... M SH ... ..... ..... _..... ... ___ ___... .... .... .... ..... .... _... _ R SH ... ..... __..... .... _..... .... ..... .... ..... MINOR STREE WB LEFT 33 75 68 > 68 > 35 > E > 145 > 46 >E RIGHT 66 329 329 > 329 > 262 > C MAJOR STREET SB LEFT 57 388 388 388 331 B \ 1 7 L f �... � C�T�+-�. ` ` -___ _ �v.,-Y..��...�,,,�•��_ NORTH OUN I RY P.O. Box 333 MANNING A N(� 1 V NN - Winooski. Vermont 05404 � ;, - - (802) 655-3661 F , John Larkir: September 8, 1986 LTH Associates, Inc. 1185 Shelburne Road South Burlington, Vermont 05401 Dear John, Enclosed is a report on traffic impacts from your proposed 20,000 square foot office building on lot 9 of the "Bartlett Property" development. This report evaluates traffic movements at the Route 7/ Harbor View Road intersection and considers whether signalization and/or additional turning lanes will be necessary. Due to changes in types of development from the orig- inal subdivision application, it has been necessary to reeval- uate projected traffic for the total "Bartlett Property" project. Total residential units have dropped and commercial/ industrial uses have tended to be lower traffic generators. As a result, estimated trip ends have dropped from 425 to 340 in the a.m. peak hour and from 615 to 429 in the p.m. peak hour. During a recent p.m. peak hour count, 89 vehicles were observed passing through the Route 7/11arbor View Road intersection. Estimated addition of 44 trips from the proposed office building will bring the p.m. peak hour total to 133 trips, still far below the potential maximum for the entire project. Intersection analyses indicate that signalization and acceleration/deceleration and/or bypass lanes are not warranted at this time. Assuming that Route 7 is widened to 4 or 5 lanes as planned prior to design year 1991, intersection conditions will remain at or above 1986 levels of service. Although signalization is not warrantel,left-turning vehicles can expect very long delays at peak periods both in 1986 and 1991. In order to avoid similar delays for right - turning vehicles, it would be desirable to provide additional turning area at the location of Harbor View Road. Since left -turning volumes are fairly low, widening of the "throat" of the intersection should be sufficient rather than addition of a full second exiting lane. Traffic Impact Study page 2 Harbor View Office Building 9/8/86 In conclusion, additional traffic from the proposed 20,000 square foot office building will not sig- nificantly affect traffic flow in the vicinity. Since signa- lization is still not warranted for the near term future, widening of the throat of the Route 7/Harbor View Road inter- section is recommended to facilitate right -turn exits from Harbor View Road. I will be happy to provide any additional information that may be needed. Sincerely, Dcv��W David H. Spitz cc: Robert Blanchard Robert Krebs Traffic Impact Study page A-1 Harbor View Office Building 9/8/86 I. DATA SOURCES AND ASSUMPTIONS North Country Planning (NCP) recently completed a traffic impact study for the proposed Harbor View Inn on Route 7 just north of Harbor View Road. All data sources and assumptions for that report apply to this report as well. This report also relies on a recent NCP turning movement count, taken from 4 to 5 p.m. on August 21, 1986, at the intersection of Route 7 and Harbor View Road (see appendix). Major sources and assumptions are listed below. ° All 1986 and 1991 DHV calculations include recently proposed developments - the Lakewood project, Harbor View Inn and the Harbor View office building. In addition, 1991 calculations include an annual growth rate of 2.3%. ° 1991 calculations assume completion of Route 7 widening to 4 or 5 lanes. ° The six highest -volume traffic hours on Route 7 occur between noon and 6 p.m. (VAOT,*ATR #D-431). Therefore, capacity calculations are only performed for the p.m. design hour. However, traffic signal warrants and turning lane requirements are evaluated during both a.m, and p.m. hours. ° This report estimates that 90% of office traffic will pass through the Route 7/Harbor View Road intersection. That intersection will be the focus of this report. II. LTH "BARTLETT PROPERTY" DEVELOPMENT Estimates of traffic volumes for the entire 70 acre residential and commercial "Bartlett Property" development were initially done in 1983. Initial estimates were based on: ° 37 single-family residences ° 120 multi -family units ° 30 commercial acres containing 144,000 square feet ° 25% office ° 401/o specialty retail ° 5% new car sales ° 300/- wholesale/storage Total trip generation from the above estimates were as shown in Table 1. Traffic Impact Study Harbor View Office Building TABLE 1: ORIGINAL TRIP GENERATION ESTIMATES 70 Acre "Bartlett Property" Development Residential Commercial Total A.M. Enter 25 250 275 Exit 80 70 150 Total 105 320 425 P.M. Enter 75 215 290 Exit 40 285 325 Total 115 500 615 page A-2 9/8/86 Since 1983 there have been a number of changes in actual development including (a) reduction in the total number of residential units and (b) change in the commercial mix to lower volume traffic generators. Based on revised residential approvals and commercial occupants to date, current esti- mates are based on: ° 53 single-family and duplex units ° 89 multi -family units 20 commercial acres (excluding land with revised access via the Harbor View Inn) still containing 144,000 square feet ° 10% specialty retail ° 30% office ° 601/o mixed commercial/storage/manufacturing TABLE 2: ITE TRIP RATES Single -Family Multi -Family (Per Unit) (Per Unit) A.M. Enter .21 .10 Exit .55 .40 Total .76 .50 P.M. Enter .63 .47 Exit .37 .23 Total 1.00 .70 Ave. Wkday 10.00 6.10 Spec. Retail Office Mixed Comm. (Per 1000 GFA) (Per 1000 GFA) (Per Acre) 2.33 1.95 7.40 .57 .37 1.90 2.90 2.32 9.30 2.40 .36 3.00 2.71 1.84 9.00 5.11 2.20 12.00 79.10 12.30 59.90 Revised trip generations are calculated in Table 3. Traffic Impact Study Harbor View Office Building TABLE 3: REVISED LTH DEVELOPMENT TRIP PENERATION ESTIMATES Single-Fam. Multi-Fam. (53 Units) (89 Units) page A-3 9/8/86 Spec. Retail Office Mixed Comm. (149400 GFA) (43,200 GFA) (12.12 Ac) Total A.M. Enter 11 9 34 84 90 228 Exit 29 36 8 16 23 112 Total 40 45 42 100 113 340 P.M. Enter 33 42 35 16 36 162 Exit 20 20 39 79 109 267 Total 53 62 74 95 145 429 Ave. Wkday 530 543 1139 531 726 3469 The following levels of development have been completed to date. ° Single-family and duplex, 36 of 53 units (67.9%) ° Multi -family, 73 of 89 units (82.0%) ° Mixed commercial, 3 of 7 lots (42.90/.) ° Specialty retail and office (0%) Based on the above percentages plus the assumption that 90% of commer- cial traffic and 50% of residential traffic will travel to/from Route 7, current traffic estimates for the Route 7/Harbor View Road intersection are given in Table 4. TABLE 4: CURRENT ESTIMATED TRAFFIC VOLUMES Route 7/Harbor View Road Residential Commercial Total A.M. Enter 7 35 42 Exit 25 9 34 Total 32 44 76 P.M. Enter 29 14 43 Exit 15 42 57 Total 44 56 100 Average Weekday 403 280 683 Traffic Impact Study page A-4 Harbor View Office Building 9/8/86 III.- EXISTING CONDITIONS - ROUTE 7/HARBOR VIEW ROAD A recent on -site p.m. turning movement count by North Country Planning verifies the reasonableness of the revised estimates from section II. TABLE 5: OBSERVED TURNING MOVEMENTS Route 7/Harbor View Road - 1986 P.M. Peak Hour To/From To/From Burlington Shelburne Total Enter 29 19 48 Exit 31 10 41 89 The observed p.m. total of 89 trips (Table 5) compares closely to the estimated p.m. total of 100 trips (Table 4). Existing traffic conditions on Route 7 can be described as free - flowing past Harbor View Road. Sight distance is excellent and few back-ups occur from signalized intersections. Exiting traffic from Harbor View Road suffers the same fate as numerous other side streets and driveways along Route 7 - long delays in gaining access, particularly for left -turning vehicles. Delays for right -turning vehicles are shorter except when blockages occur from vehicles waiting to turn left. IV. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT A. Other Development Traffic volumes for the Lakewood project and for the Harbor View Inn are added independently. All other development in the area is included within the 2.3% normal annual growth rate. B. Harbor View Office Building The proposed office building on lot 9 of the LTH development will be 20,000 square feet in size (GFA). Based on the ITE trip generation rates from Table 2, estimated trips for the office building are given in Table 6. Traffic Impact Study Harbor View Office Building TABLE 6.: ESTIMATED TRIPS - HARBOR VIEW OFFICE BUILDING A.M. Peak Hour, Enter 39 Exit 7 Total 46 P.M. Peak Hour 7 37 44 page A-5 9/8/86 Average Weekday 246 V. ROUTE 7/HARBOR VIEW ROAD INTERSECTION ANALYSIS - 1986 AND 1991 Total development turning movements through the Route 7/Harbor View Road intersection are derived from Tables 4 and 6 for the A.M. peak hour and from Tables 5 and 6 for the P.M. peak hour. In both cases, 900/, of office traffic is estimated to travel through the intersection. Based on other nearby counts, 67% of traffic is assigned to/from Burlington and 33% to/from Shelburne. Totals are given in Figure 1. A.M. Peak Hour FIGURE 1: DEVELOPMENT TURNING MOVEMENTS Route 7/Harbor View Road to/from Burlington 58 7 Cam_ 27 11-� 29 to/from Shelburne P.M. Peak Hour to/from Burlington 3 50 ,z--- 24 to/from Shelburne Turning movement totals for both A.M. and P.M. peak hours are equal to or below those for the Harbor View Inn. Conclusions regarding extra turning lanes and signal requirements are similar to those from North Country Planning's Harbor View Inn report. Acceleration, deceleration and bypass lanes are not determined to be necessary. Similarly, Harbor View Road Traffic Impact Study Harbor View Office Building page A-6 9/8/86 traffic volumes are not high enough to warrant a traffic signal, but provision of two exiting turning lanes would be beneficial (see below). Unsignalized capacity analysis of the Route 7/Harbor View Road intersection is done for 1986 and 1991 P.M. design hours. Route 7 traffic volumes are derived from NCP's Harbor View Inn report. Complete traffic movements are given in Figure 2. FIGURE 2: THROUGH TRAFFIC PLUS DEVELOPMENT TURNING MOVEMENTS Route 7/Harbor View Road to/from Burlington 260 36 ly, 1986 P.M. DHV I '\ r-71 920 18 to/from Shelburne K._ 50 �-- 24 1991 P.M. DHV to/from Burlington 1406 6 �- 50 24 ItA OF 1026 18 to/from Shelburne Capacity calculations are based on two travel lanes on Route 7 in 1986 (Worksheet 1) and at least four lanes in 1991 (Worksheet 2). Results are given in Table 7. All Route 7 through movements and turns into Harbor View Road will operate at level of service C or better. Until Route 7 is widened, right turns from Harbor View Road can operate at level of service C only if two exiting lanes are provided. Under all conditions, left turn exits from Harbor View Road will operate at level of service E. TABLE 7: INTERSECTION CAPACITY - ROUTE 7/HARBOR VIEW ROAD Approach Turning Movement Time Period Level Of Service Rt 7, North Left 1986 P.M. B Harbor View Left It E Harbor View Right it C ,-, E if only 1 lane Rt 7, North Left 1991 P.M. A Harbor View Left it E Harbor View Right it A--C if only 1 Lane UNSIONALIZLU IN LRSLCIIONS ( 1 r J' 10-37' / WORKSHEET FOR ANALYSIS OF T INTERSECTIONS LOCATION: rbo�i/ �v/� (( " J��u//. NAME:__ HOURLY VOLUMES 7 Major Street: �c{ / G N VOLUMES IN PCPH N —(� ..,.— VS —60 `�ia0V6 4 V, — V2 V - Grade 2 V, .3, -96 -� V3 �N=Q V3 , V7 Vy Date of Counts2 q8C alil I c<ST1DP V, V9 Time Period: Z IDMa ❑ YIELD Average Running Speed: N = Q Minor Street: tee / PHF: Grade__0_% VOLUME ADJUSTMENTS Movement No. 2 3p 4 5 7 9 Volume (vph) 61 do / O 36 la 6 D d "/ n Vol. (pcph), see Table 10-1 Ll �. STEP 1: RT from Minor Street r► V9 Conflicting Flow, V, qq 1 /2 V3 + V, = —L_ + O = < vph W") Critical Gap, T, ,and Potential Capacity, cp — �)� T, _ � 0 sec (Table 10-2) cp9 — � • pcph (Fig. 10-3) Actual Capacity, cm C.9 = cp" = Jn1,pcph STEP 2: LT From Major Street t V, Conflicting Flow, V, V3 + V2 = 9 + 00 = 239 vph (V,,) Critical Gap, T� , and Potential Capacity, cp T, = J sec (Table 10-2) cp, _t� r' pcph (Fig. 10-3) Percent of cp Utilized and Impedance Factor (Fig. 10-5) (v,/cp,) X 100 = 3 P, Actual Capacity, Cm c Cm, = cp, _ -% pcph STEP 3: LT From Minor Street ' V, Conflicting Flow, Vc qq 1 /2 V3+V2+V5+V, = _L + 9Z+ 12D+ W) = 2!�d vph (V,,) Critical Gap, T,, and Potential Capacity, cp T, =: sec (Table 10-2) ep7 _ 110 pcph (Fig. 10-3) Actual Capacity, cm cmP , = cp7 X , = 1:X = 32 pcph SHARED -LANE CAPACITY v7 + vy if lane is shared S11 = (VdCm9) + (V9/Cm9) Movement No. v(pcph) c (pcph) c I (pcph) c LOS 7/ 9 _L 305 obo C 4 l �� �'h �� �� �M) %� - nc(udP, La�ewol,ci I---W f(oleil �:,� L7fl 0(F1* ,4 dPve�apr✓IP;Is �UNSIGNA►.ILLI) IN I LKSECIIONS / (' / \ /._.,_ I t 10/ io-37 l FOR ANALTJYSIS OF INTE/R)SECTIONS W� �ORKS/H,E1ET LOCATION: a/� VI'n". G+ /` % 7 �0 Cl �l NAME: HOURLY VOLUMES VOLUMES IN PCPII J Major Street: �� / �' G N V4 Vz— � V, — rade 2, 5 _ V2 96 $ V, N — Q V, V,V, V7 V9 Date of Counts:^ ���� � �ST�OP — — Time Period: phi V ❑ YIELD Average Running Speed: N =0 Minor Street:_�� PI -IF: Grade�96 VOLUME ADJUSTMENTS Movement No. 2 3 4 5 7 9 Volume (vph) �� -� �i�✓ c� �1.� Vol. (pcph), see Table 10-1 STEP 1: RT from Minor Street r► V9 Conflicting Flow, V, 1 /2 V, + V2 = + L3 vph (Vc9) Critical Gap, T,, and Potential Capacity, cP T, sec (Table 10-2) cp, = ' pcph (Fig. 10-3) Actual Capacity, cm C." = CP9 = 5�_?dpcph STEP 2: LT From Major Street t V4 Conflicting Flow, Vc V, + V2 = + % �� % vph (Vt4) Critical Gap, T� , and Potential Capacity, cP T, _ IL sec (Table 10-2) cP, _ kD pcph (Fig. 10-3) Percent of cP Utilized and Impedance Factor (Fig. 10-5) (v4/cP4) X 100 = P4 = • R 7 Actual Capacity, cm c,,,4 =cP4 = pcph STEP 3: IT From Minor Street ' V, Conflicting Flow, Vc 1/2 V3+V2+V5+V4 = +-` 3 + � + � = 1a65 vph (Vi7) Critical Gap, T,, and Potential Capacity, cP c- T, = -7'-5 sec (Table 10-2) c.7 = 100 pcph (Fig. 10-3) Actual Capacity, cm c,,,, = CP, X P4 = IL) ) X —q� _ /. pcph SHARED -LANE CAPACITY v, + v9 if lane is shared SH = (V7/Cm7) + (V9/Cm9) Movement No. v(pcph) c (pcph) c I ( pcph) c LOS 7 �i �n10 AF 4 �In , oo W11(� o�f?VP�opyr�2h1 (Sa;>1e gas w«dOo, TRAFFIC COUNT - NORTH COUNTRY PLANNING Route 7 at Harbor View Road, South Burlington Thursday, 8/21/86, 4:00 - 5:00 p.m. Cloudy Time To Harbor View Road From Period Shelburne Burlington 4:00 - 1 4 :05 - 3 4:10 3 2 4:15 2 3 4:20 - 1 4 :25 1 3 4:30 - 4 4:35 1 1 4 :40 3 1 4:45 3 3 4:50 4 4 4:55 3 3 Total 19 29 Totals: Enter Harbor View Road - 48 Exit Harbor View Road - 41 To/from Shelburne - 29 To/from Burlington - 60 All movements - 89 From Harbor View Road To Shelburne Burlington 1 2 4 4 1 - 1 2 3 - 5 3 1 2 1 3 - 1 4 1 2 10 31 Jane LaFleur, City Planner 575 DBrset Street S. Burlington, Vermont 05401 March 6, 1987 Dear Jane: Attached are some observations I asked Roger Dickinson to perform in an attempt to develope some local data regarding self -serve car wash bays. I ask that this data be submitted as "other data" to the planning commission when considering any and all projects involving self -serve car wash bays. Thank you. Sincerely, 4� . Q_� Harr F. Curth Ow Lot #1, Fassetts Bakery FITZPATRICK-LLEWELLYN INCORPORATED Engineering and Planning Services The Kiln • 15 Brickyard Road • Essex Junction • Vermont • 05452 • (802) 878-30 4 March 1987 Mr. Harry Curt'n RD 2 Box 34 Vergennes, Vermont 05491 RE: Self -Service Carwash Service Times FILE: 87024 Dear Mr. Curth: 1`l�sv� S A-v y0 MArx ` h' , As requested, we measured service times of self-service carwash users at two locations: Rocky's in Essex Junction and Newton's on Riverside Avenue in Burlington. Our measurements were performed during the early afternoon The weather was sunny with higher than on Thursday, February 26, 1987. average temperatures. At Rocky's, a total of 25 vehicles were observed to use the two self-service stations during a two -dour period. The average service time equaled 8 minutes and 5 seconds. At Newton's, a total of 17 vehicles were observed to use the four self-service stations during a 50 minute period. We were, unfortunately, unable to remain at this location for a longer time period. The average service time equaled 9 minutes and 28 seconds. We wish to thank you for this opportunity to be of service. Should you have any questions, or if we can be of additional assistance, please feel free to contact us. Sincerely, F,I�TZPATRICK-LLE)�ELLYN INCORPORATED RogeJ Dickinson, P.E. RJD:amov Design 0 Inspection 0 Studies 0 Permitting LAIL Ll Oj CAU-tj (-C co 1-7 ---------- C) q -RoLs,is PCV�V_w0E PcNP►V�. ReR�. �! '1nr . �. 0 C, i vvk_ �:V_Ccl( -Lis v q-c 7, ovt_jd� PLANNING COMMISSION 12 MAY 1987 PACE 6 Mr. Wallman presented his plan. He said the building was very visible from traffic coming up Harbor View Road so they have concentrated their landscaping on the north end. There are silos and truck bays which will have to have more landscaping. He said there would be very little addition in traffic. There will be four additional employees. Mrs. Lafleur said that Mr. Wallman had just brought in his landscaping plan. The Zoning Board had given approval but had stipulated no outside storage by this applicant or any future tenant. She said there were already a good number of trees there. Mrs. Lafleur said that Heindel & Noyse had not reviewed the plans yet. The Commission felt that they would let the City Planner review the review of Hiendel & Noyse and the applicant would not have to come back with it unless the Planner felt there was anything unusual. Mrs. Hurd moved that the South Burlington Planning Commission approve the site plan application of Irwin Wallman to construct a 2 story, 9,750 square foot addition to the south end of the existing Shelburne Plastics Building, lot #4, 8 Harbor View Road as depicted on the plan entitled "Site Plan, Shelburne Plastics, lot #4, Bartlett Property, Harbor View Road, South Burlington, Vermont," prepared by Krebs & Lansing Consulting Engineers Inc. dated 4 3 87 and a landscaping lan entitled Shelburne Plastics DreDared by Mount Philo Meadows. date 5 6 87 with the following stipulations: 1. A $4500 landscaping bond shall be posted prior to permit. 2. The applicant shall follow all drainage, storm water retention and erosion control measures recommended by Heindel & Noyse. The evaluation shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer prior to permit. 3. A 75 gallon per day sewer allocation is required and the $2.50 per allon fee shall be Daid prior to permit. 4. The building permit shall be obtained within 6 months or the approval is null and void. The motion was seconded by Mr. Burgess and all voted in favor. 4. Site Plan application of Hoyt Gahagan for construction of a car wash with seven self -awash bays and two future bays on the property owned by Gary Farrell. 1810 Shelburne Road. Mr. Gary Lavigne presented the plan for the applicant. There are 7 self service bays with restrooms, office and waiting rooms. The car wash will be open year round. Mrs. Lafleur said that circulation would be a problem if they added the two bays marked on the plan for "future bays". The plan should be PLANNING COMMISSION 12 MAY 1987 PAGE 7 considered as having 9 bays so that the applicant does not have to come back in the future just for those bays. . Mrs. Maher asked Mrs. Lafleur how much longer it takes to wash a car by hand in these bays as opposed to an automatic car wash. Mrs. Lafleur said that she had a number of estimates. One car every 12 minutes was the average for self-service and an automatic could put them- through at one a minute.. Mrs. Maher asked how the city could protect -themselves from having these bays converted to automatic. Mrs. lafleur said that a stipu_latiow;was the only way she knew. There was much discussion on the range of time it takes to wash a car. Mrs. Lafleur said that the worst case she got was still under the traffic overlay.district restrictions of 140 trip ends. The worst case anmber.sht had gotten was 90 trip ends. Mrs. Peacock said that she had gone back to Craige Lei-ners figures frog the last car wash and his numbers were higfi erl with 144 trip ends. Mrs_ Lafleur said that some of those trip ends would not go to Shelburne Road. Mr. Leiners figures said 80 would go toward Shelburne Road. Mrs. Maher said.she was still very uncomfortable about this applicant :.changing:: the bays to -an.-automatic car wash. Mr. Gafiagan replied that the building was the wrong size and -that -it would take a major conversion to do that. Mr. Lavigne said that they had discussed this and they realize that they would have to comeback -to the commission if they ever wanted to convert. Mrs. Maher asked Mr. Gahagan.if he was planning to convert the car wash to automatic. He said that in the.future when Shelburne Road is upgrading they may look into it. Mrs. Lafleur said that she needs revised plans showing more details on lot dimensions and pavement around the two future bays and a revised circulation plan. Mrs. Lafleur said that Mr. Szymanski had some conditions that he wished to see; a plan for details for the grit and grease separators, the road opening at Harbor View had to be a standard driveway opening with depressed curb. She said that she thought it already was that way.but the plan didn't show that. Mr. Wallman asked where the runoff from the washing bays would go. ,Mr. Gahagan said that most of it was recycled and what wasn't would go into the city sewer system. Mrs. Lafleur said that the city sewer allocation was 18,000 gallons per day. There is still some sewerage capacity available at the Bartlett Bay plant but it was getting close. Mr. Wallman asked what the situation was with a traffic light at Alien Road. Mrs. Lafleur said that the state said that it was definitely going 1m: Mr 7Wallman said that with this additional traffic it felt it was going to be a dangerous situation for a left turn without a light. Without the light it thought that Harbor View Road would also become unsafe for left turns without the Allen Road light. Mrs. Maher asked if there was any way we could prevent this from operating without the light at Allen Road. Mrs. Lafleur said that under the traffic overlay zone we couldn't deny this on the level of service -criteria. Mrs. Lafleur said that the only other issue was the right turn lane on Harbor View Road. At one point the developer had offered to build this lane but she didn't know if the offer still held. Mr. Lamphere said that they PLANNING COMMISSION 12 MAY 1987 PAGE 8 had revised this plan drastically from the last one and economically they could no longer afford the $12,000 it would take to build the lane. It felt that it was unreasonable to ask this developer to absorb the whole cost. Mrs. Lafleur said that they would be asked to contribute money for the Shelburne Road improvement fund. Mr. Jacob asked the commission if they wished to ask this developer to build the lane. Most felt that a contribution toward the Shelburne Road improvement fund would be enough. Mrs. Hurd moved that the South Burlington Planning Commission approve the site plan application of Hoyt Gahagan to construct a 9 bay self -wash car wash at 1810 Shelburne Road as depicted on the plan entitled Site Plan, car_ wash, Shelburne Road, South Burlington, Vermont," prepared by Wiemann- Lamphere, Architects, Inc., dated May 1, 1987 with the following stipulations: 1. Plans shall show a future circulation area around the two future bays. This shall be 24 feet in width at a minimum. 2. The eastern white pines proposed on the landscape plan shall be replaced with a suitable evergreen such as scotch pine, austrian pine or spruce. A $4500 landscaping bond shall be posted prior to permit. 3. A sewer allocation of 18,000 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. 4. The note reading "vac stations typical of 4" shall be removed from the plan. 5. The road opening on Harbor View Road shall be a standard driveway opening with a depressed concrete curb, not as a street opening as shown on the plat. 6. Details of grit and grease separators shall be forwarded to the city for review and approval prior to building permit. 7. The 90 decree driveway curve shall be concentric (uniform in width). 8. Plans shall show all dimensions. especially for lot lines. 9. Revised plans depicting all of the above changes shall be submitted to the City Planner for approval prior to permit. 10� A contribution toward the Route 7 - Shelburne Road intersection ,improvement fund shall be made based on 115 trip ends generated by this development. `�ai� PLANNING COMMISSION 12 MAY 1987 PAGE 9 11. There shall be no automatic bays under this approval. 12. The building permit shall be obtained within 6 months or this approval is null and void. The motion was seconded by Mr. Burgess and all voted in favor. Work Session 5. Continue discussion of South Burlington Zoning Regulations: Proposed Amendments to Zoning Map Boundaries. _ (The following letter categories were taken from Mrs. Lafleur's memo to the Commission) "a) The City Center Boundaries were discussed at the April 7, 1987 meeting." "b) The Deslaurier land on Dorset Street will be changed from C-2 to R7 with Central District 3 in front as discussed 4/7/87." "c) The Blodgett Property off from Shelburne Road." Mrs. Lafleur said that she had received a letter from a neighbor of this property. The Commission acknowledged that this request had come from the land owner and they would listen at a public hearing but make no recommendation this evening. "d) Outer Patchen Road around Harringtons and Frank Cota's: Change from R4 to C-1. This recommendation came from the Zoning Board." Mrs. Hurd said that she did not wish to see this zone expand much further but agreed with the Zoning Board that this land was not suitable for houses. The Commission agreed to go walk the land and see where the boundaries should be. "e) Airport -Industrial Boundary that bisects the airport should be "Airport" with Air -Industrial around the boundary only." Mrs. Lafleur said that this was a su22estion by the airport as they did not like to see their runway zoned the way it was. "f) Airport Parkway: should any R4 be changed to "Airport" to allow airport related uses, as suggested by the Airport." All commissioners disagreed and felt that the airport should keep their uses on their side of the road and not cross over into the R4 district. "g) Should the corner of Patchen Road and White Street stay C-1 or should only offices be allowed?" After much discussion it was agreed that offices are what the commission wants but a new zone may be necessary. Two neighbors were present and spoke in favor of the idea. Everyone agreed that they did not want any more restaurant facilities such as Wings and Things. Mrs. Lafleur said that R7 might be an option since that district allows offices as a conditional use. The commissioners still felt that a new zone similar to the Transitional Zone should be looked into. All also agreed that a new name other than "transitional" might be necessary. "Buffer Zone" was a suggested name. "h) Is there any land that can be zoned R4 since we are quickly running out of R4 land (gridded lots). Possible locations are 1) The R1 land at the northwest corner of Swift Street and Spear Street; and 2) The PLANNING COMMISSION 31 MARCH 1987 PAGE 2 closing, the Shelburne Rd. curb cut. Mr. Pomerleau said it is hard to get people accustomed to a new venture. He asked if they could agree to close it in 1991, regardless of what happens with Shelburne Rd. A poll of the Commission showed they did not favor this. Mr. Dooley moved that the Planning Commission approve the site plan application of Hobie Richards, John Rao, & Antonio Pomerleau for conversion of the existing building to a specialty fresh food market as depicted on a plan entitled "Alterations to the existing NBC Building -Shelburne Road" prepared �?y Gordon G. Woods dated January 1987, last revised 3/3/87 with the following stipulations: 1. A $1500 landscaping bond shall be posted prior to permit. This includes seven hawthorne trees, not shrubs. 2. Prior to permit, plans shall be submitted to Wagner, Heindel & Noyse for an erosion control and runoff evaluation. Their recommendations shall be reviewed j?y the City Engineer and implemented in conjunction with this development. 3. The Shelburne Road Access shall be closed and the front of the building shall be landscaped. 4. Revised plans ahll be approved �2y the City Planner prior to permit. 5. A $1463 contribution toward the Shelburne Road inter- section improvement fee based on the 57 trip ends generated by this development. This shall be paid prior to permit. 6. The building permit shall be obtained within 6 months or this approval is null and void. Mr. Burgess seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 3. Consider information Rd. (access request cf Hoyt Gahagan to esent additional regarding'"�proposed carwash at 1810 on Harbor View Rd) Cha 1 hii me Mr. Dooley said the proper procedure is for the Commission to decide if it will consider a request to hear additional in- formation. Mr. Lamphere said that the owner's option runs out tomorrow, and they have asked some questions. They would be willing to either widen the entrance to Harbor View Rd. (cost somewhere between $10,00-15,000) or would contribute a like amount toward a light at Allen Rd. It is their understanding that f PLANNING COMMISSION 31 MARCH 1987 PAGE 3 if some private money is available, the light could be in- stalled sooner. Mrs. Maher felt the arguments made last week were very strong and said she would approve the project if there were lights at Allen Rd. and Harbor View. Mr. Spitz said it was still his opinion that with access onto a public road they coo not fall into Zone 5. He again said that the difference between their peak and the Shelburne Rd. peak times should also be considered. The only time he felt they were above the maximum was on winter -weekends. Mr. Dooley said the Commission has established a precedent for seasonal changes and he didn't feel the Commission should back down from that. He did not feel widening the Harbor View access addressed the issue on which the application was denied. The concensus of the Commission was not to reconsider the application. They felt they would listen to new figures if there were a traffic light at Allen Rd. Mr. Dooley suggested that future requests of this sort come in writing only, and if the Commission agrees to reconsider, then the applicant can come back in. Work Session: Continue discussion on South Burlington Zoning Regulations a) Airport Approach Cones: Members questions whether the proposed language is more restrictive than the present language. Mr. Belter said there is also a question of where the cone is. A proposed runway has not been built but the Airport is still considering it in their calculations. It was agreed that Mrs. Lafleur will ask Airport people to come in to explain their language. 14.306 language has been made more specific. Mr. Dooley said he felt it would be nice to have the option of having landscaping somewhere else on the Airport property if it is not feasible on the specific site. Mrs. Lafleur noted in this regard that Mr. Houghton is allowing continuation of t11e berm as part of the landscaping on the new FAA project. Regarding noise control, Mrs. Lafleur noted the noise contour won't be as wide because of the F-16's. The Airport people are worried about residential development south of Williston Rd. and in the White St. area, including Kirby Rd. They say it will be a problem down the road. Mr. Dooley said the question really is what the Commission can do to regulate PLANNING COMMISSION 24 MARCH 1987 The South Burlington Planning Commission held a meeting on Tuesday, 24 March 1987, at 7:30 pm, in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset St. Members Present William Burgess, Acting Chairman; Mary -Barbara Maher, Catherine Peacock, John Belter, Judith Hurd, John Dooley Also Present Jane Lafleur, Planner; Sid Poger, The Other Paper; Gary Lavigne, Alexis, Gahagan, David Spitz, Elizabeth Edwards, Brian Precourt, Rinald Precourt, Erwin Valgoi, Erika Valgoi, R. Valgoi, Hobie Richards, Dennis Pomerleau, Kit Perkins, Demetrios Michaelidis, Nick Hurt, Paul Marquis, Mark Hill, Real Charlebois, P. Anthony Blake, John Rao, Gordon Woods Richard Clark. 1. Minutes of 10 March 1987 Mrs. Maher moved the minutes of 10 March be approved as written. Mrs. Hurd seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 2. Continue site plan application of Hoyt Gahagan for con- struction of a 10,300 sq. ft. car wash at 1810 Shelburne Rd. (access on Harbor View Road) Mr. Lavigne said there will be 6 self -wash facilities and 1 automatic lane.. There will also be a reconditioning lane. There is about a 57-foot setback from Shelburne Rd; 30% of the front yard is paved. The two remaining issues are traffic and erosion control. Mr. Spitz said the main source of their traffic estimates is Frederick Bauer whose counts seem to tally with Seaway's. The peak weekend vehicles per hour is 100 (200 trip ends) with 70 as the normal weekend projection. The most recent data, including LTH's approved building and this carwash, indicates that a traffic signal is still not warranted. The newly approved signal at Allen Road will create gaps for this road. Mrs. Lafleur noted the Allen Rd. light was part of the Shelburne Rd. plan which has been taken out of the 5-year plan, but since the signal is warranted now, it may be funded sep-arately. Mr. Spitz agreed that left turns will be delayed as is the case everywhere on Shelburne Rd. Mr. Burgess raised the question of who would be responsible for fixing the turning radius (adding a right turn lane on Harbor View). He felt this was the project that breaks the camel's back. Mrs. Lafleur said they could include this intersection in the formula and have each developer pay a share. There are not enough funds on hand for this work. PLANNING COMMISSION 10 MARCH 1987 PAGE 2 Mrs. Peacock asked what the traffic overlay would allow. Mrs. Lafleur said it would allow 140 trip ends, but there is a question of whether the overlay applies. The level of service was said to apply to the whole development, and, in addition, this project does not have direct access to Shelburne Rd. Mr. Dooley said he thought the issue was frontage on Shelburne Rd. Mrs. Lafleur said in practice that was right, but this is in Zone 5 and does not have access via a private driveway to Shelburne Rd. Mr. Dooley said the ultimate question is how much traffic the Commission wants this lot to generhte. Mrs. Lafleur asked what the overall level of service projections were. Mr.'Spitz said through movements are "A", left turn from Shelburne Rd. is "B", and from the side street, levels are "C" and "E". Mrs. Maher said this is too many cars feeding into an already bad situation. Mr. Dooley said it was his understanding the Commission's position was that if a level of service was below "C", the Commission wouldn't approve the project if it would make traffic worse. He felt this was too much trip generation and too adverse an effect. He then cited Sect. 17.304 of the Ordinance which he interpreted to say that if there is an indirect access to a regulated roadway, the traffic that is not expected to use the regulated roadway can be discounted, and the Commission can then make the final determination on which zone applies. He said that even dis- counting traffic that may not go to Shelburne Rd, the ap- plicant is still over the allowable limit. Mr. Spitz said that he felt the Commission shouldn't use the maximum weekend projection because at the time when this use would be the highest, Shelburne Rd. traffic would not be at its highest. He felt that the time of year is also important in considering a carwash. Members then considered the waste water question. Run-off from the site all goes down to the brook, and this is already excessive. Mr. Szymanski said that no approval should be granted until something is done not to make the situation worse. Mrs. Lafleur noted that the applicant's consultant and Wagner, Heindel & Noyse have both evaluated the project. The main concen is the timing of peak runoff, and it was felt that a retention pond would make the situation worse. There should thus be an acceptable means for treatment of storm - water runoff from the site to remove particulate material. This could include overland flow over grassed areas, sumped catch basins, or other means. Existing swales on the south and west boundaries should be cleaned, mulched and seeded prior to construction. Mrs. Edwards noted that both streams are rushing down from the Larkin development. Whatever methods were used there are PLANNING COMMISSION 24 MARCH 1987 PAGE 3 not working. She wanted to know how they could be sure this development would be monitored. Mrs. Lafleur noted that in the Larkin development there is a 40,000 gal retention area underground. She said someone will check on the situation and will also check to see that erosion control steps that were to be taken during construction have been followed. A poll of the Commission indicated that members felt the traffic issue would keep them from approving the project. Mr. Dooley moved that the Planning Commission deny the site plan application of Hoyt Gahagan for construction of a 10,300 ft. car wash at 1810 Shelburne Road as depicted on a plan entitled "Site Plan," Car Wash, Shelburne Road, South Burlington, Vermont" prepared by Wiemann-Lamphere Architects, dated March 16, 1987 for the following reasons: 1. The traffic overlay Zone 5 allows 140 peak hour trip ends for this 2.86 acre lot. The applicant projects 200 trip ends during some peak hours with 80% or 160 using the Shelburne Rd/Harbor View Road intersection This exceeds the allowable number under the overlay zone and Section 17.304 of the Ordinance. 2. The traffic generated 12y this development will cause further delays for traffic turning left onto Shelburne Road from Harbor View Road and the level of service for this turning movement is already at "E". Mrs. Maher seconded, and the motion passed unanimously. 3. PUBLIC HEARING: Preliminary and Final Plat application of Paul Marquis for subdivision of a 1.86 acre parcel (lot 2) into 2 lots of 40,364 sq. ft. and 40,458 sq. ft., at 5 Gregory Drive Nick Hurt reaffirmed that access to both lots will be through lot 2B, and that lot will be responsible for maintaining the access. Mrs. Lafleur said Mr. Szymanski has reviewed the plan and has no problems with it. Gregory Drive has not been built to city standards and the city is getting an opinion on what it will take to bring it to standard. The bank released the bond without city approval. Mr. Dooley moved that the Planning Commission approve the Final Plat application of Paul Marquis for RPM Development for a two lot subdivision of a 1.86 acre parcel at 5 Gregory Drive as depicted on a plan entitled "Utility Plan -RPM Devel- opment, Gregory and Daughters Industrial Park - Lot 2, Gregory Drive - Williston Road, South Burlington, Vermont" PLANNING COMMISSIUiv 24 February 1987 page 6 3. A fire h dran ocation apurove t shall be installed on the adjoining lot an a d by the South Bur inaton Fire Chief. 4. The building permit shall be obtained within 6 months or this approval is null and void. Mrs. Peacock seconded, and the motion passed unanimously. 5. Site plan a lication of Hoyt Gaha en for construction of a 7000 sq. 7t. car wash with one drive througFT tunneland an au omo ive accessory service and 6 self-service ba s with room for expansion at Shelburne Rd. access from Harbor View Road) Mrs. Lafleur noted this is one lot up from Allen Road. Mr. Trudell explained entrance would be from the existing right -of. - way and the existing drive. People would get out of their cars and come into a waiting area when the automatic lane is used. Mr. Dooley noted they project 120 trip ends at the weekend peak hour. Mrs. Lafleur said they can assume a share of traffic will go through Harbor View, but the Commission can still use the traffic overlay. She noted that the intersection was studied by the State recently and didn't need a signal; this development, however,may trigger the need for a signal. Mr. Jacob questioned whether the State would allow a signal so close to Allen Rd. which has just been granted a signal. Mr. Dooley suggested tabling the applica- tion until information can be gotten from Craig Leiner. Mrs. Lafleur said it can be put on the 10 March agenda. Mrs. Hurd commented that the liked the landscaping. Mr. Dooley said a report should be gotten from Wagner, Heindel & Noyes at the same time. Mrs. Lafleur noted that the 16,000 gpd required will put the City out of capacity at Bartlett Bay. Mrs. Lafleur also commented that she was questioning the ITE numbers used because their standard is based on one drive -through and this plan has 6 self-service bays as well. Mr. Dooley then moved to continue the a lication until the next re ar meeting of the Planning Commission. Mrs. Peacock secon ed. Motion Dassed unanimously. 6. Sketch plan applicationof Rest Havel, Inc. (Roland Boutin) for suoaivislon or a _1).9 acre parcel into 2 lots of 2 acres with the existinga o i iaue Hotel an acre o o e merge witha .24acr-lot at•2004 and 2040 Williston Rd. Mr. Boutin said he has plans to fill the back area as Lacey's did across.the road. The land is zoned Industrial -Commercial. Mrs. Lafleur indicated the developable portions of the lots. PLANNING COMMISSION 31 MARCH 1987 PAGE 2 closing the Shelburne Rd. curb cut. Mr. Pomerleau said it is hard to get people accustomed to a new venture. He asked if they could agree to close it in 1991, regardless of what happens with Shelburne Rd. A poll of the Commission showed they did not favor this. Mr. Dooley moved that the Planning Commission approve the site plan application of Hobie Richards, John Rao, & Antonio Pomerleau for conversion of the existing building to a specialty fresh food market as depicted on a plan entitled "Alterations to the Existing NBC Building -Shelburne Road" prepared bv Gordon G. Woods dated January 1987, last revised 3/3/87 with the following stipulations: 1. A $1500 landscaping bond shall be posted prior to permit. This includes seven hawthorne trees, not shrubs. 2. Prior to permit, plans shall be submitted to Wagner, Heindel & Noyse for an erosion control and runoff evaluation. Their recommendations shall be reviewed j?y the City Engineer and implemented in conjunction with this development. 3. The Shelburne Road Access shall be closed and the front of the building shall be landscaped. 4. Revised plans ahll be approved by the City Planner prior to permit. 5. A $1463 contribution toward the Shelburne Road inter- section improvement fee based on the 57 trip ends generated by this development. This shall be paid prior to permit. 6. The building permit shall be obtained within 6 months or this approval is null and void. Mr. Burgess seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 3. Consider information Rd. (access request of Hoyt Gahagan to present additional regarding the proposed carwash at 1810 on Harbor View Rd) Shelburne Mr. Dooley said the proper procedure is for the Commission to decide if it will consider a request to hear additional in- formation. Mr. Lamphere said that the owner's option runs out tomorrow, and they have asked some questions. They would be willing to either widen the entrance to Harbor View Rd. (cost somewhere between $10,00-15,000) or would contribute a like amount toward a light at Allen Rd. It is their understanding that PLANNING COMMISSION 31 MARCH 1987 PAGE 3 if some private money is available, the light could be in- stalled sooner. Mrs. Maher felt the arguments made last week were very strong and said she would approve the project if there were lights at Allen Rd. and Harbor View. Mr. Spitz said it was still his opinion that with access onto a public road they do not fall into Zone 5. He again said that the difference between their peak and the Shelburne Rd. peak times should Also be considered. The only time he felt they were above the maximum was on winter weekends. Mr. Dooley said the Commission has established a precedent for seasonal changes and he didn't feel the Commission should back down from that. He did not feel widening the Harbor View access addressed the issue on which the application was denied. The concensus of the Commission was not to reconsider the application. They felt they would listen to new figures if there were a traffic light at Allen Rd. Mr. Dooley suggested that future requests of this sort come in writing only, and if the Commission agrees to reconsider, then the applicant can come back in. Work Session: Continue discussion on South Burlington Zoning Reaulations a) Airport Approach Cones: Members questions whether the proposed language is more restrictive than the present language. Mr. Belter said there is also a question of where the cone is. A proposed runway has not been built but the Airport is still considering it in their calculations. It was agreed that Mrs. Lafleur will ask Airport people to come in to explain their language. 14.306 language has been made more specific. Mr. Dooley said he felt it would be nice to have the option of having landscaping somewhere else on the Airport property if it is not feasible on the specific site. Mrs. Lafleur noted in this regard that Mr. Houghton is allowing continuation of the berm as part of the landscaping on the new FAA project. Regarding noise control, Mrs. Lafleur noted the noise contour won't be as wide because of the F-16's. The Airport people are worried about residential development south of Williston Rd. and in the White St. area, including Kirby Rd. They say it will be a problem down the road. Mr. Dooley said the question really is what the Commission can do to regulate co April 21, 1987 Mrs. Jane B. LaFleur City Planner City of South Burlington 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, Vermont Re: Site Plan Application Hoyt Gahagan Dear Jane: 05401 V3 VAA W This letter is a request for the Planning Commission to re- consider the application referenced above. We will present the following information for reconsideration. 1. Letter from State of Vermont, Agency of Transportation, stating that they will be installing signalization at Shelburne and Allen Roads. 2. We will be resubmitting a revised traffic report based on new criteria. Thank you for your reconsideration. Sincerely, W WIEMANN-LAMP R IEM N AMP R Gar Gar G Lav 11 Gar G. La n- G L/cad ARCHITECTS, INC. WIEMANN-LAMPHERE, ARCHITECTS - 289 COLLEGE ST. * BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05401 9 802-864-0950 Ot'Aer: See Bill Szymanski's comments. A drainage and erosion control study is required from Wagner, Heindel & Noyse. This has not been done yet. Mr. Wallman would like this to be a condition of his permit as we have done before. However, if the Commission prefers to review it, all other issues should be discussed now so the study is the only outstanding issue. Sewer Allocation A 75 gallon per day allocation is required for the 5 additional employees. A $2.50 per gallon fee shall be paid prior to permit. 4) GAHAGAN, FARRELL PROPERTY, 1810 SHELBURNE ROAD Hoyt Gahagan proposes to construct a seven bay self-service carwash plus 2 bays for future expansion at the lot between Burlington Drug and Westinghouse on Shelburne Road. This is the same lot discussed several weeks ago but the plans have changed so that no drive through bay is proposed. The layout changes slightly due to less pavement. The property is zoned Commercial - Two and this is a permitted use.' Access: Access is shown from Harbor View Road via a 24 foot side driveway. There will be no direct access to Shelburne Road. Circulation: Circulation is adequate with a 24 foot wide driveway around the building. If the two future bays on the east side of the structure are built, a 24 foot wide drive must be constructed around the bays to maintain clear circulation around the building. This should be shown on the plans as "future circulation area." Parking: Four spaces are proposed which should be sufficient given the nature of this new proposal. There are no extra features such as pin -striping or special drive -through. Pre- sumably, parking will be used for maintenance people and employ- ees only. Landscaping: This $150,000 development requires $4500 in new landscaping. The plan is valued at $5200. The eastern white pines should be replaced with a suitable evergreen such as scotch pine, austrian pine or spruce. Traffic: If we assume this 2.86 acre lot is in Traffic Overlay Zone 5 due to the Shelburne Road frontage, 140 tripends are permitted to turn onto Route 7. The applicant projects a maximum of 72 tripends during the Shelburne Road peak hour. This number is derived from David Spitz's traffic study that stated a self- service bay could produce 3-4 vehicles per hour. (9 bays x 4/hour x 2 tripends per vehicles = 72 tripends) I called Newtons Carwash on Riverside Avenue in Burlington. Mr. George Newton stated that under optimum running conditions, a self-service bay could handle 1 car per 12 minutes or 5 per hour. 1. 5vek �'c1cs Jhom 3 Using this higher number, the nine bays would generate 90 tripends (9 bays x 5/hour x 2 tripends per vehicle = 90 tripends) This higher number is below the maximum 140 permitted. Other: See Bill Szymanski's comments. The applicant shall pay $e3M towards the Shelburne Road intersection improvement fund based on the,Wtrip ends to be generated by this development. 5) ZONE BOUNDARIES The following areas have already been discussed (a,b, and c) or should be considered for zone changes: a) City Center Boundaries - discussed 4/7/87. b) Deslaurier land on Dorset Street - change from C-2 to R7 with central District 3 in front. Discussed 4/7/87. c) Blodgett Property - change some R4 land to C-1. d) Outer Patchen Road around Harring tons and Frank Cota's: Change from R4 to C-1. (Recommendation of Zoning Board). e) Airport -Industrial Boundary that bisects the airport should be "Airport" with Air -Industrial around the boundary only. f) Airport Parkway: should any R4 be changed to "Airport" to allow Airport related uses, as suggested by airport? g) Should the corner of Patchen Road and White Street stay C-1 or should only offices be allowed? h) Is there any land that can be zoned R4 since we are quickly running out of R4 land (gridded lots). Possible locations are: 1) The R1 land at the northwest corner of Swift Street and Spear Street; and 2) The Pomerleau/Fayette (Milot) land on Shelburne Road behind Burger King. The land should be in a grid system rather than allowing Planned Commercial Developments (PCD's)/shopping centers. This can be done by prohibiting PCD's)/shopping centers. This can be done by prohibiting PCD's and PUD's in this area. 5. Gahagan Car Wash, 1810 Shelburne Road Enclosed is additional. information regarding the proposed car wash. The applicants contend that they can comply with the traffic overlay zone which allows 140 trip ends for this lot. The data they are providing are from previous submissions to the South Burlington Planning Commission. Prior to the meeting I will verify this data with data from our files. In addition, the applicants will furnish testimony from Fred Bauer from Connecticut who has installed the machinery in over 200 car washes. He plans to submit expert testimony on the speed and capacity of these car washes to also prove the car wash could not exceed the traffic overlay zone with the drive through and the self-service bays. I have asked that his testimony be avail- able in writing on Tuesday night. Finally, they are presenting evidence regarding the installation of a traffic signal at Allen Road and have offered to build a right turn lane at Harbor View Road. . Mr. Lamphere has asked the Commission to reopen the hearing on Tuesday night. I have told him that you only wish to review the evidence to determine if the hearing should be reopened. 5. Zoning Map Boundaries The following areas have already been discussed (a,b,and c) or should be considered for zone changes: a) City Center Boundaries - discussed 4/7/87. b) Deslaurier land on Dorset Street - change from C-2 to R7 with central District 3 in front. Discussed 4/7/87. c) Blodgett Property - chnage some R4 land to C-1. d) Outer Patchen Road around Harringtons and Frank Cota's: Change from R4 to C-1. (Recommendation of Zoning Board). e) Airport -Industrial Boundary that bisects the airport should be "Airport" with Air -Industrial around the boundary only. f) Airport Parkway: should any R4 be changed to "Airport" to allow Airport related uses, as suggested by airport? g) Should the corner of Patchen Road and White Street stay C-1 or should only offices be allowed? h) Is there any land that can be zoned R4 since we are quickly running out. of R4 land (gridded lots). Possi.b.le locations are: 1) the R1 land at the northwest corner of Swift. Street and Spear Street; and 2) the Pomerleau/Fayette (Milot) Land on Shelburne Road behind Burger King. 'rhe land should he in a grid system rather than a.l.Lowin. 1'.1,anned Commercial Developments ( PCD's) / shoppi n�; centers. This can be done by prohibiting PCD's and PUD's in this area. RAF M E M O R A N D U M To: South Burlington Planning Commission From: William J. Szymanski, City Manager Re: May 23, 1987 agenda items Date: May 8, 1987 2) •GREEN TREE PARK, SHUNPIKE ROAD 1. Cul-de-sac paved width should be 24' minimum because there will probably be parking along the curb and'20' is toonarrow. 2. In order to minimize the impact of surface runoff on properties to the north-west, a inlet should be placed at that location. 3. There should be a drainage Swale along the east side property line to intercept flow toward the east. 4. The developer or subsequent owner should be responsible for maintaining the holding pond not the City. 5. The location of underground utilities, electricity, telephone, gas, and street lights should be shown. 6. Properties having frontage on Shunpike Road shall access from new road. 3) SHELBURNE PLASTICS, HARBOR VIEW ROAD. 1. There is no need to place hay bales for erosion control within the traveled way of Harbor View Road. 2. Plan is well done and is acceptable. 4) CAR WASH, SHELBURNE ROAD 1. Road opening on Harbor View Road shall be standard driveway opening with depressed concrete curb, not a street opening as shown on plan. 2. Details of grit and grease separators shall be forwarded to the City for review and approval prior to issuing a building permit. 3. The 90 degree driveway curb shall be concentric (uniform in width). 4. Plan should have some dimensions at least the lot lines. Memorandum February 24, 1987 agenda meeting Page 2 5) GAHAGEN, CAR WASH, SHELBURNE ROAD 1. Site is large enough to accommodate a longer setback from Shelburne Road. This would possibly eliminate the retaining wall plus minimize the impact on the parking spaces if additional land is required for improvements to Shelburne Road. 2. Site shall include storm runoff control which shall be coordinated and reviewed by the City's hydrology consultant. 3. Road opening on Harbor View Road shall be standard driveway opening with depressed concrete curb, not a street opening as shown on plan. 4. The 90 degree driveway curve shall be concentric (uniform width.) 6) REST HAVEN, INC., BOUTIN LAND, WILLISTON ROAD 1. Record plans shall include exact surveyed dimensions. 7) MARQUIS, R.P.M. DEVELOPMENT, GREGORY DRIVE 1. Site plan is acceptable. 2 To: South Burlington From: Jane B. Lafleur, M E M O R A N D U M Planning Commission City Planner \0�p Re: March 24, 1987 Agenda Items Date: March 20, 1987 2) ,GAHAGAN, 1810 SHELBURNE ROAD Enclosed is a traffic study from North County Planning that evaluates the impact of this car was at the Harbor View Road/ - Route 7 intersection. Also enclosed are Craig Leiner's comments. David Spitz conc�udes that the car wash traffic will not add enough traffic to require a signal. He suggests that the future widening of Route 7 will help right turns from Harbor View Road but that left turns will be delayed as they are at all side streets. With a new signal at Allen Road, gaps will be created to allow easier turns. Mr. Spitz has assumed 80% of the traffic will come from or go to Route 7 and 20% to/from Spear Street. He concludes that in 1987 left turns from Harbor View will have an E level of service and right turns will have C. In 1992 with a widened Route 7, right turns from Harbor View and left turns from Route 7 on to Harbor View will have A while the left turn from Harbor View will have E. In both years, Harbor View must be widened for a right turn and left turn lane to maintain these levels. Craig Leiner agrees with this analysis and suggests that the applicant pay for widening the radius at Harbor View Road. Erosion control data will be available at the meeting. 3) MARQUIS, 5 GREGORY DRIVE Mr. Marquis proposes to subdivide a 1.86 acre parcel into two lots. Lot #2A will be 40,458 square feet; lot #2B will be 40.364 square feet. This property is directly south of Reprographics on Gregory Drive. A 6000 square foot building was approved several weeks ago on lot 2B. The property is zoned Industrial -Commercial and the lots meet the minimum lot size. Access is shown from a shared 24 foot wide driveway. An easement will be granted to lot #2A. The plan incorrectly shows Szymanski as the westerly abutter. I:t should be labeled RDR Enterprises prior to recording. See Bill Szymanski's and Chief Goddette's comments. 1 M M E M O R A N D U M To: South Burlington Planning Commission From: Jane B. Lafleur, City Planner Re: March 31, 1987 agenda items Date: March 27, 1987 2) RICHARDS, RAO AND POMERLEAU, 1525 SHELBURNE ROAD Enclosed are traffic studies from David Spitz and Craig Leiner. As noted last week, David concluded that, the proposed use will generate 40-57 trip ends. The overlay zone allows 51 trip ends. The level of service at the Bartlett Bay/Green Mountain Drive/Shelburne Road intersection is presently "E" and will remain at "E" until Route 7 is widened. At that time, it will be "C" with or without this use. These levels also assume some signal timing adjustments. These must be specified and then required of the applicant if this use is approved. It would be important for the City to evaluate the impact of any signal timing change on each leg of the intersection. Craig Leiner agrees with the level of service conclusion. He believes it is another policy decision if we will allow a use when the intersection is already below C. He also feels the access should be solely from Bartlett Bay Road and not from Route 7 to better manage access and to improve the efficiency and. safety of Route 7. In my view the Commission should apply the traffic overlay zone standards first. If these are not met the Planning Commission may chose to waive the overlay zone if there are site improvements that produce a net benefit for traffic flow in the vicinity. This includes a change 'or reduction in the number of curb cuts as well as the level of service criteria (Section 17.50). Deleting the Route 7 driveway may be the only condition under which this use should be approved. 3) GAHAGAN,,1810 SHELBURNE ROAD Mr. Gahagan would like to present additional information regarding the car wash that was denied by the Commission last Tuesday evening. 4) WORK SESSION Please see attachments and recommended amendments. 0 `Io South Burl i.ngton PI.anni.ng Gommiior From Jane B. Lafleur, City Planner J`' Re: March 10, 1987 agenda items Date: March 6, 1987 2) GAHAG 1810 SHELBURNE ROAD The st.ormwater/erosi.on evaluation from Wagner, Heindel and Noyse will not be available for this meetin-.t. This item should be tabled until March 24, 1987. The file for the original subdivision of the Bartlett property noted that, each new lot must complete a traffic study. 1 could not find any information to limit the amount of traffic or development within this commercial/residential subdivision except that a signal may be required as a result of development. David Spitz and Craig Leiner are working on this analysis. This will also be considered on March 24, 1987. 3) TABER, 23 PATCHEN ROAD Mr. & Mrs. Taber propose to convert the existing house at 23 Patchen Road to an insurance office. The property abuts the Mobil station on the corner and is zoned Commercial -one. Access is shown from an existing driveway to the south. The northerly curb cut will be closed. Circulation and Parking: A new, seven space gravel parking lot will be installed in the rear of the lot. Aisle width is ade- quate. The existing garage will be removed so the parking lot can be constructed. Landscaping: The building renovations require $45 of new land- scaping. The landscaping plan is valued at several hundred dollars. A bond must, be posted prior to permit,. Traffic: The overlay zone allows 5 trip. ends during the peak. hour. The applicant projects 4 and the 1TE data supports this . Other: See Bill Szymanski's comments. 1 plans show a 3300 square foot structure for six self-service bays and eight vacuum stations. Access: Access will be from Harbor View Road from a shared right-of-way with Westinghouse. Circulation is adequate. Landscaping: An $8300 landscaping plan is required. The plan is valued at $730-0. Larger trees should be planted on the Route 7 side of the building to screen it since it is 28 feet high and only 4-6 foot crab and barberry are shown. Parking: The plan shows ten spaces for employees and stacking space for more than 20 vehicles. Other: A sewer allocation of 16,000 gpd is requested. This uses all of the available capacity at the Bartletts Bay plant. The $2.50 fee must be paid prior to permit. An evaluation from Wagner, Heindel & Noyse must be completed prior to permit. All runoff must be retained on -site. It appears as though there will not be adequate space on the Shelburne Road side of the property for a retention pond. It can not be located within the Rte. 7 right-of-way. I suggest that the applicant move the building back from Route 7. (See Bill's memo regarding this) Traffic: The applicant projects that 12 ends will be produced as a result of this development during the peak hour. The overlay zone allows 140 trip ends. The ITE data suggest that 110 trip ends during the peak hour can be expected. Car wash data submitted to the Commission by other applicants suggested lower trip ends than the ITE data. Although this is a site plan review, it would be advisable to see the effect on the Harbor View Road/Route 7 intersection and whether it triggers the need for a signal. A contribution toward the Shelburne Road intersection improvement fund is required prior to permit based on the ends produced by this development. See Bill Szymanski's and Chief Goddette's comments. 6) REST HAVEN, INC., (d.b.a. LAPOLITIQUE), 2040 WILLISTON ROAD Mr. & Mrs. Boutin propose to subdivide a 3.89 acre parcel on which LaPolitique hotel is located. The hotel would be on a 2 acre parcel and the remaining lot would be merged with a 10,500 square foot lot at 2400 Williston Road to make a 2.13 acre parcel. This merging gives 70 feet of road frontage to the new subdivided lot which otherwise would have none. The property is zoned Industrial -Commercial. The rear of both lots drops off steeply. I estimate that .5 4 3uutt burliugtvu ,dire Dcpartmrnt 575 D urs et street 5uutb iSurlingtnn, Uerntnnt L15401 1 s. OFFICE OF JAMES W. GODDETTE, SR. CHIEF (802) 658-7960 MEMORANDUM TO: SO. BURLINGTON PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: CHIEF GODDETTE RE: TUESDAY FEBRUARY 24,1987 AGENDA DATE: FEBRUARY 19,1987 1. CAR WASH 1810 SHELBURNE ROAD PLANS HAVE BEEN REVIEWED BY THE FIRE DEPARTMENT AND THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED FOR FIRE PROTECTION. A. AT LEAST ONE HYDRANT INSTALLED ON PROPERTY IN A LOCATION APPROVED BY FIRE DEPT. B. THE DRIVE AROUND THE BUILDING BY SHELBURNE ROAD MUST NO LESS THEN 18' WIDE. 2. R.P.M. DEVELOPMENT LOT #2 GREGORY DRIVE PLANS REVIEWED DATED 3/12/86 AND AT THIS TIME I DO NOT SEE A PROBLEM WITH THIS PROJECT. 3. DENNIS BLODGET'T' 1340-42 SHELBURNE ROAD PLANS REVIEWED BY THIS DEPARTMENT AND AT THIS TIME THE ONLY PROBLEN I SEE IS THE DRIVE BETWEEN THE PARKING SPACES AND OFFICE MUST BE 30 Ft. FOR ACCESS. 4. NORDIC FORD GREEN MT. DRIVE ADDITION ONLY PROBLEM I FOUND AT THIS TIME IN AS FOLLOWS: A. THE ROAD BETWEEN THE BUILDING AND BANK MUST BE AT LEAST 30 FT. FOR EMERGENCY EQUIPMENT. B. AN INSPECTION WILL BE NEEDED TO SEE IF A HYDRANT IS REQUIRED. H Z Wagner, Helndel, and Noyes, Inc. consulting geologists vv iv P.O. Box 1629 Burlington, Vermont 05402-1629 802-658-0820 Gahagen Carwash Analysis of Hydrologic Impact on Bartlett Brook By: Jeffrey A. Nelson Date: March 23, 1987 Summary, Recommendations, and Conclusions 1. The proposed site plan as shown on Krebs and Lansing sheet dated February 12, 1987, has been analyzed using the TR20 hydrologic model. 2. Runoff from the site occurs in a northerly direction to Harbor View Rd. (sub -area A) and westerly to a ditch on the eastern side of Shelburne Rd. (sub -area B). 3. In the predevelopment conditions, the peak discharge rates for these two sub -areas are as follows: Sub -Area Peak 0 Time of Peak A 3.11 cfs 12.00 hours B 4.19 cfs 12.02 hours The peak discharge in the south fork of Bartlett Brook at the culvert crossing Shelburne Rd. (section 012) is 200.45 cfs in the pre -development condition. 4. For the post -development condition without any stormwater retention basin, the peak rates of discharge are as follows: Sub -Area Peak 0 Time of Peak A 2.63 cfs 11.96 hours B 10.66 cfs 11.98 hours For the south fork of Bartlett Brook at the Shelburne Rd. culvert, the peak discharge is projected to be 200.87 cfs. Pace 2 5. Various retention basin options were tested for the reduction of peak discharge from the site. However, without exception, each of these resulted in incrg_gses in the overall peak discharge for the south fork of Bartlett Brook. This is due to the location of the site and the timing of hydrograph peaks. Since the peak from the entire watershed passes later than the peak from the site itself, any delay in the peak from this site such as that caused by a retention basin has the effect of increasing the overall peak from the watershed. Therefore, we do not recommend the construction of a stormwater retention basin on the site. 6. The applicant should provide an acceptable means for the treatment of stormwater runoff from the site to remove particulate material. This could include overland flow over grassed areas, sumped catch basins, or some other means. 7. The existing swales along the southern and western boundaries of the site should be cleaned, mulched and seeded prior to the start of construction. Establishment of a thick grass cover will provide considerable removal of particulate matter. 8. An erosion control plan should be developed and implemented during construction. This should include silt fence along the downslope limit of any disturbed areas, and silt fence and hay bails securely anchored in all swales on 50—foot centers. I H Wagner, Helndel, and Noyes, Inc. consulting geologists vv V IN P.O. Box 1629 Burlington, Vermont 05402-1629 802-658-0820 Gahagen Carwash Analysis of Hydrologic Impact on Bartlett Brook By: Jeffrey A. Nelson Date: March 23, 1987 Summary, Recommendations, and Conclusions 1. The proposed site plan as shown on Krebs and Lansing sheet dated February 12, 1987, has been analyzed using the TR20 hydrologic model. 2. 3 4. Runoff from the site occurs in a northerly direction to Harbor View Rd. (sub -area A) and westerly to a ditch on the eastern side of Shelburne Rd. (sub -area B). In the predevelopment conditions, the peak discharge rates for these two sub -areas are as follows: Sub -Area Peak Q Time of Peak A 3.11 cfs 12.00 hours B 4.19 cfs 12.02 hours The peak discharge in the south fork of Bartlett Brook at the culvert crossing Shelburne Rd. (section 012) is 200.45 cfs in the pre -development condition. For the post -development condition without any stormwater retention basin, the peak rates of discharge are as follows: ub-Area Peak Q Time of Pea A 2.63 cfs 11.96 hours B 10.66 cfs 11.98 hours For the south fork of Bartlett Brook at the Shelburne Rd. culvert, the peak discharge is projected to be 200.87 cfs. Page 2 5. Various retention basin options were tested for the reduction of peak discharge from the site. However, without exception, each of these resulted in increases in the overall peak discharge for the south fork of Bartlett Brook. This is due to the location of the site and the timing of hydrograph peaks. Since the peak from the entire watershed passes later than the peak from the site itself, any delay in the peak from this site such as that caused by a retention basin has the effect of increasing the overall peak from the watershed. Therefore, we do not recommend the construction of a stormwater retention basin on the site. 6. The applicant should provide an acceptable means for the treatment of stormwater runoff from the site to remove particulate material. This could include overland flow over grassed areas, sumped catch basins, or some other means. 7. The existing swales along the southern and western boundaries of the site should be cleaned, mulched and seeded prior to the start of construction. Establishment of a thick grass cover will provide considerable removal of particulate matter. B. An erosion control plan should be developed and implemented during construction. This should include silt fence along the downslope limit of any disturbed areas, and silt fence and hay bails securely anchored in all swales on 50—foot centers. axk,N,YN 1500 CaApjmm+ln�`bcwl v 10, MO. �� hr r h rn L) nn ran nVT LAlhr Cl = 3b 0. .4:6 c 5) 1a ��� wrl (93. T� lv .70 q, 5 -t UVE�o0� City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05401 PLANNER 658-7955 June 12, 1987 Mr. Gary Lavigne Wiemann-Lamphere Architects 209 College Street Burlington, Vermont, 05401 Re: Hoyt Gahagan Car Wash sewer allocation Dear Gary: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 With regards to your letter of June 8, 1987, the City has no problem with a sewer allocation reduction for the Gahagan Car Wash. However, we base our sewer allocation calculations on State Environmental Protection Rules for flow quantities and sewer allocation. Act 250 uses these standards in their calculations. There is no set standard in the rules for car washes. In that case the State will base its calculations on existing, similar establishments. Therefore, we used water -meter readings for a local self -serve car wash to derive a sewer allocation amount for the Gahagan Car Wash. Our calculations are as follows: Similar local use water readings: 94,250 cf/3 months = (94,250 x 7.5 gallons/1 cf)/90 days = 7854 gallons per day (gpd) 7854 gpd/4 bays (at the local establishment) = 1964 gpd/bay 1964 x 9 bays (Gahagan) = 17,676 gpd required If the State uses similar numbers as ours, a sewer allocation of approximately 18,000 gallons per day for the Gahagan car wash will be required by Act 250. It is your burden of proof to show them that that amount is riot required for your particular car wash. 1.1' you have any questions please, feel free to call me. siricei,ely, Kathryn Perkins, Acting Planner kP/IIIcp PLANNER 658-7955 0 Hoyt Gahagan RD 2, Box 60 Charlotte, Vermont City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05401 05455 RE: 1810 Shelburne Road Dear Mr. Gahagan: Enclosed are the Commission meeting. questions. KP/mcp 1 Encl cc: David Spitz Gary Farrell Gary Lavigne ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 May 22, 1987 minutes from the May 12, 1987 Planning Please call me at 658-7958 if you have any Sincerely, Kathryn Perkins, Acting Planner PLANNER 658-7955 City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05401 May 8, 1987 0 Hoyt Gahagan RD2, Box 60 Charlotte, Vermont 05455 Dear Mr. Gahagan: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Enclosed are the agenda and my memo to the Planning Commission. Please be sure someone is present on Tuesday, May 12, 1987 to represent your application. Sincerely, Jane B. Lafleur, City Planner JBL/mcp Encls cc: Gary Lavigne David Spitz Gary Farrell PLANNER 658-7955 plc : Tarre.tl, &ary Rio sk&16u-� Qp City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05401 ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 April 7, 1987 Hoyt Gahagan RD2 Box 60 Charlotte, Vermont 05445 Re: Carwash, 1810 Shelburne Road Dear Mr. Gahagan: Enclosed are the minutes of the March 31, 1987 Planning Commission meeting. Please call me if you have any questions. JBL/mcp Encl cc: Gary Lavigne James Lamphere Sincerely, J(0-� . 6A-�-' Jane B. Lafleur, City Planner City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05401 PLANNER 658-7955 April 2, 1987 Mr. Gary Farrell Hospitality Inns 870 Williston Road South Burlington, Vermont 05403 Dear Mr. Farrell: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 As I noted in our telephone conversation yesterday the lot on Route 7 permits 140 trip ends during the peak hour. The car wash would produce 200 trip ends according to your traffic consultant. I have pulled together some samples of uses and building sizes that produce 140 trip ends. Please remember that these are ITE (Institute of Transportation Engineers) estimates from a limited number of studies. They are the best information to date but local studies often produce different results. Also, if a use exceeds the traffic overlay zone, the level of service data might be considered. In the carwash case, this did not help. Finally, the Commission will be recommending elimination of the traffic overlay zone and only use of level of service data since the overlay zone ignores the impact of the additional traffic on the roadway. The following uses and sizes produce 140 trip ends: General Office Space 49,295 square feet Retail - Hardware/Paint Store 26,923 square feet Shopping Center 9,708 square feet Restaurant -Quality Sit Down 13,526 square feet Restaurant -High Turnover 6,306 square feet Restaurant -Fast Food 1,777 square feet I hope this is helpful. Please call me if ,you have any questions. Sincerely, i Jane B. Lafleur, City Planner JBL/mcp City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05401 PLANNER 658-7955 April 1, 1987 Hoyt Gahagan RD2, Box 60 Charlotte, Vermont 05455 Re: 1810 Shelburne Road Dear Mr. Gahagan: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Enclosed are the minutes of the March 24, 1987 Planning Commission meeting: Please call me if you have any questions. Sincerely, ,,'" E�L-L� Jane B. Lafleur, City Planner JBL/mcp 1 Encl Cc: Gary Lavigne David Spitz Gary Farrell i City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05401 PLANNER 658-7955 March 27, 1987 Hoyt Gahagan RD2 Box 60 Charlotte, Vermont 05445 Re: Carwash, 1810 Shelburne Road Dear Mr. Gahagan: ZONING ADMINISTHAIOR 658-7958 Enclosed are the agenda and my memo to the Planning Commission regarding your request to present new information. Please be sure someone is present on Tuesday, March 31, 1987 to represent your request. Sincerely, t Jane B. Lafleur, City Planner JBL/mcp Encl cc: Gary Lavigne Jim Lamphere David Spitz City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05401 PLANNER 658-7955 March 20, 1987 Hoyt Gahagan RD2, Box 60 Charlotte, Vermont 05455 Re: Carwash, 1810 Shelburne Road Dear Mr. Gahagan: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Enclosed are the agenda and my memo to the Planning Commission regarding your application. Please be sure someone is present on Tuesday, March 24, 1987 to represent your request. Sincerely, Jane B. Lafleur, City Planner JBL/mcp Encls cc: Gary Lavigne City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05401 PLANNER 658-7955 March 6, 1987 Hoyt Gahagan RD2 Box 60 Charlotte, Vermont 05455 Re: Carwash, 1810 Shelburne Road Dear Mr. Gahagan: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Enclosed are the agenda and my memo to the Commission re- garding your plan. Please be sure someone is present on Tuesday, March 10, 1987 to represent your application. Sincerely, t Jane B. Lafle r, City Planner JBL/mcp Encls CC: Gary Lavigne David Spitz City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05401 PLANNER 658-7955 March 4, 1987 Hoyt Gahagan RD2 Box 60 Charlotte, Vermont 05455 Re: Carwash, 1810 Shelburne Road Dear Mr. Gahagan: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Enclosed are the minutes of the February 24, 1987 Planning Commission meeting. The Commission will continue discussion of this on Tuesday, March 10, 1987 provided a traffic study and storm water retention study are completed by Friday, March 6, 1987. Sincerely, J�rt Jane B. Lafleur, City Planner JBL/mcp 1 Encl cc: Gary Lavigne �tM 6U�lIMCTOy �f 4 f b �1 jNf-4 TOWM M'P�,� PLANNER 658-7955 City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05401 February 20, 1987 Hoyt Gahagan RD 2 Box 60 Charlotte, Vermont 05455 Re: Car Wash, 1810 Shelburne Road Dear Mr. Gahagan: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Enclosed are the agenda and my memo to the Planning Commission. Also enclosed are Bill Szymanski's comments. Please call me if you have any questions. Sincerel} , Jane B. Lafleur, City Planner JBL/mcp Encls cc: Thomas Farrell Gary Lavigne g (4 r� , June 8, 1987 Katherine Perkins Acting City Planner Municipal Offices Dorset Street South Burlington, Vermont 05401 Re: Site Plan Application Hoyt Gahagan Car Wash 1810 Shelburne Road Dear Kit: Under stipulation #3 of the approval by the Planning Commission, it states the sewer allocation of 18,000 gpd is granted in accordance with South Burlington sewer policy. We do not intend to use 18,000 gpd and this figure is erroneous. We submit a letter from the equip- ment manufacturer as to the exact number of gallons required per day. According to this letter, dated June 5th by Frederick Bauer, President of Mr. Auto Wash Sales & Service, Inc., the seven self service bays will require approximately 3,080 gallons of water per day; we would like that rounded off to 3,200 gallons of water per day because of the toilet in the office area. We therefore request that you change the sewer allocation of 18,000 gpd to 3,200 gallons per day. If you have any problems, please contact us as soon as possible. Sincerely, WIEMANN-LAM VERE ARCHITECTS, INC. Gar G. L igne G /cad Enc 1. WIEMANN-LAMPHERE, ARCHITECTS • 289 COLLEGE ST. • BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05401 • 802-864-0950 i .ie Original All Cloth Car Care Centers MR. AUTO WASH SALES & SERVICE. INC. 150 TOLLAND STREET, EAST HARTFORD, CONN. 06108 203 — 289.0265 June 5, 1987 TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: We at Mr. Auto Wash Sales & Service, Inc. project the future Gahagan site will anticipate $1,500,OO gross business per bay, per month. They will have the ability to offer in their self- service bays: Rinse, Wax, Soap, Foaming Brush, Engine Degreaser, Tire Chemical and Presoak. These eight selections will allow them to anticipate $2.50 per car average, per bay. Taking the $1,500.00 anticipated gross, dividing it by the $2.50 average per customer, gives us 600 customers, divided by a 30 day month; comes to 20 customers per bay, per day. The high pressure pumps will be designated at 32 gallons at 1,000 lb. pressure. Sixty percent of the usage time is done with high pressure, the balance is using low foaming bubble brush and tire chemical. We anticipate 60% or 22 gal. per car usage of water. Therefore, 22 gals. x 20 customers per bay, per day = hO gals. per bay, per day. Therefore, in the seven bays, we will use 3,080 gallons of water for the entire location per day with regard to the car wash, on an average basis. The $1,500.00 average per bay is derived from the National Survey; a copy of which is enclosed. Respectfully, Frederick C. Bauer President I CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON SITE PLAN APPLICATION 1) OWNER OF RECORD (name, address, phone #) Thomas A. Farrell Farrell Dist. Corp, Holmes Road, So. Burlington, VT 0540 2) APPLICANT (name, address, phone #) Hoyt Gahagan, RD 2, Box 60 Charlotte, VT 05455 3) CONTACT PERSON (name, address , phone #) Gary Lavigne Ur - DgSjC 1Viemann-Lamphere Architects, Inc. 239 College St., Burl., VT 05401 4) PROJECT STREET ADDRESS: 1810 Shelburne Road, So. Burl.. VT 5) LOT NUMBER (if applicable) 6) PROPOSED USE (S) Self Service Car 1Vash 7) SIZE OF PROJECT (i.e. total building square footage, # units, maximum height and # floors, square feet per floor) 5,000 sf_ , ]leiQ}It = 28' -0", one floor 8) NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES 1 fill] time, 1 part ±;'410- 0 9) LOT COVERAGE: building `% %; landscaped areas building, parking, outside storage 320 % 10) COST ESTIMATES: Buildings $ 150,000.00 Landscaping $ 6,332. Other Site Improvements (please list with cost) $ 50,000.00 parking, roads, utilities 1 1) ESTIMATED PROJECT COMPLETION DATE : - October 1937 12) ESTIMATED AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC (in and out) 15 vehicles per hour Estimated trip ends (in and out) during the following hours: Monday through Friday 11-12 noon 20 12-1p.m. i0 ; 1-2 p.m. 20 ; 2-3 p.m. 20 �n 3-4 p.m. 4-5 p.m. O 5-6 p.m. 10 6-7 p.m. --9 10 D 0+ 13) PEAK HOURS OF OPERATION: 12-: 00 Boon - 2 :00 Pi,i -- 14) PEA AYS OF OPERATION: �/ DAT SUTISSION DATE OF REAING aturday,,� Sunda S;,GKATURE OF APPLICANT Ri;VT`"-D 3/16/37 CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON SITE PLAN APPLICATION 1 ) OWNER OF RECORD (name, address, phone # ) Thy Farrell roll ,lolmes Road_,., 'So..,,._Burl ...... 2) APPLICANT (name, address, phone # ) Hoyt Galiagan, RD 2, Box 60 Charlotte,. VT 05455 3) CONTACT PERSON (name, address, phone #) Gary LavZ> Wiemann-Lamphere Architects, Inc., 239 College Street, Burl., VT 05401 4) PROJECT STREET ADDRESS: 1510 Shelburne Rd, So. Burlington, VT 05401 5) LOT NUMBER (if applicable) 6) PROPOSED USE(S) Car lash and Detail i':ork 7) SIZE OF PROJECT (i.e. total building square footage, # units, maximum height and # floors, square feet per floor) 10,300 sf, Height = 231011, one fl 8) NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES 5 full tine, 6 -)art time 9) LOT COVERAGE: building 3.3 %; landscaped areas % building, parking, outside storage 40 % � 4w� 10) COST ESTIMATES: Buildings $ 290,000• Landscaping $ 9,300. Other Site Improvements (please list with cost) $ 75,000. 1 narking, roads, utilities 11) ESTIMATED PROJECT COMPLETION DATE: October 1937 11ee ays 3 trips/hour 12 ) ESTIMATED AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC ( in and out) 4eekends 120 trips/hour Estimated trip ends (in and out) during the following hours: Monday through Friday 11-12 noon 110 12-1p.m.110 ; 1-2 p.m. 110 ; 2-3 p.m. lin 3-4 p.m. 110 4-5 p.m. 50 ; 5-6 p.m. So ; 6-7 p.m. ,;n -- - 13) PEAK HOURS OF OPERATION: - 14 ) PEAK DAYS OF OPERATION: Saturday & Sund DATE OF SUBMISSION DATE OF HEARING SIG average peak hour 140 trip ends) RE OF APPLICANT CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTOi. SITE PLAN APPLICATION 1) OWNER OF RECORD ( name, address, phone # ) T as A. Farrell Farrell Dist. Corp, Holmes Id., So. Burl., VT 05401 2) APPLICANT ( name, address, phone # ) Hoyt Gahagan, RD 2, Box 60 Charlotte, VT 05455 3) CONTACT PERSON (name, address, phone # ) Gary Lavigne 17iemann-La:pliere Architects, Inc. 2-'9 Colloge St., Burl., VT 05401 4) PROJECT STREET ADDRESS: 1010 Shelburne oad, So. Burlington, VT 5) LOT NUMBER (if applicable) 6) PROPOSED USE(S) Car ;wash and Detail :;ork 7) SIZE OF PROJECT (i.e. total building square footage, # units, maximum height and # floors, square feet per floor) 10,300 sf, height = 20'-01', one floor 8) NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES 5 full time, 6 part time 9) LOT COVERAGE: building U•3 %; landscaped areas % building, parking, outside storage40 % 10 ) COST ESTIMATES: Buildings $ 290, 000.00 , Landscaping $ 9,300.00 Other Site Improvements (please list with cost) $ 75,000.00 parking, roans, utilities 1 1 ) ESTIMATED PROJECT COMPLETION DATE: October 1987 1'eerk ays 4 trips/hour 12 ) ESTIMATED AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC ( in and out) �+eekends 61 trips/hour Estimated trip ends (in and out) during the following hours: Monday through Friday 11-12 noon 4 12-1p.m. 12 ; 1-2 p.m. 12 2-3 p.m. 4 3-4 p.m. 4-5 p.m. 4 ; 5-6 P.M. 4 6-7 p.m. 12 - - ._ 13 ) PEAK -HOURS OF -OPERATION: - - l2; 04- noon-;-2­G4 -P; ; - - 14) PEAK DAYS OF OPERATION: DATE OF SUBMISSION a DAT9 O HEARING Saturday $ Sunda SIGNATURE/OF APPLIC IISA."s►C �S 'IS/ hoUA M E M O R A N D U M To: South Burlington Planning Commission From: William J. Szymanski, City Manager Re: May 23, 1987 agenda items Date: May 8, 1987 2) GREEN TREE PARK, SHUNPIKE ROAD 1. Cul-de-sac paved width should be 24' minimum because there will probably be parking along the curb and 20' is toonarrow. 2. In order to minimize the impact of surface runoff on properties to the north-west, a inlet should be placed at that location. 3. There should be a drainage swale along the east side property line to intercept flow toward the east. 4. The developer or subsequent owner should be responsible for maintaining the holding pond not the City. 5. The location of underground utilities, electricity, telephone, gas, and street lights should be shown. 6. Properties having frontage on Shunpike Road shall access from new road. 3) SHELBURNE PLASTICS, HARBOR VIEW ROAD. 1. There is no need to place hay bales for erosion control within the traveled way of Harbor View Road. 2. Plan is well done and is acceptable. 4) CAR WASH, SHELBURNE ROAD 1. Road opening on Harbor View Road shall. be standard driveway opening with depressed concrete curb, not a street opening as shown on plan. 2. Details of grit and grease separators shall be forwarded to the City for review and approval prior to issuing a building permit. 3. The 90 degree driveway curb shall be concentric (uniform in width). 4. Plan should have some dimensions at least the lot, lines. CAS 3o al 40 . y s' <5 uc�an rnc�v,� a 0 9 t!� ,I 1I.40 P°�` 1Q�rc�►. b � �3. q � CD M, 3-0 .-d� q.v a°I�l to ,35 PLANTINB S14EDUL E EAR POSH SOON BURL INETON t1ERM04T KEY NAK SIZE QTY ct ARKS Cost EASTERN PHITE P PIMS STROM, 4- 6 30 B a 0 ti,14o.00 SUBRR WLE AEER SRCCRRR1�1 B -10 20 R R B 51,68B.UQ PIN ORK QUEM15 RLBR 6 FT 29 B 4 B $2,610.00 PAPER OWN BETl1LA PAPYRFERR 4 - 6 6 M CUMP, B $310.00 PFITZER 1WPER 11WEPUS CH. PFTTMERM. 9 t1, s oo FL WERTN6 ERR MAUS HENSIS 4 - 6 11 B 4 B t980 M fMN BARBERRY BEPRERIS YUHRTS 1B IN 37 B 4 B 22XX t619.00 17Q t4,64R.QQ X60 -::- la.'OL)J A G E N D A South Burlington Planning Commission City Hall Conference Room 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, Vermont Regular Meeting at 7:30 p.m. Tuesday, April 28, 1987 1. Minutes of April 14, 1987. 2. Review site plan application of Pizzagalli Realty Company for construction of a 1,500 square foot addition to the existing 15,000 square foot Karhu Building at 55-65 Green Mountain Drive. 3. Consider request of Hobie Richards, John Rao and Antonio Pomerleau to revise the condition of approval regarding traf- fic circulation in front of the existing building approved for a specialty food market at 1525 Shelburne Road. 4. Consider additional information for the reconsideration of the site plan application of Hoyt Gahagan for construction of a car wash at 1810 Shelburne Road. 5. Continue review of South Burlington Zoning Regulations: Discussion of Amendments to Zoning Map Boundaries. 6. Other business. Respectfully submitted, ` Jane B. Lafleur l City Planner e t-.�-�c�xrc�,� a.+�.-(Yv�e�,� c�Q�e�c�c1 (yc,�:Ji � n .-.�. �--✓��s!=�t,�.-rci 'A\kn t'�a& n6t cww--,Al 6'n tl�wkd.. S�raS,'�,,�r- taa•.Rdcl,� c.�•ua��x0 ,;,b "Qwrcm �j ic�1�t �Vwvt• lfxckox" N�s-t Ic�V'tivCW c;c & �Ocz&lo--o 4.96t 6-0.a6 .,o 'st ft,� 0ntk M". 64j� Ira e 4A& �S N�-Z COL�&St-X WOE � UjaA-� 19. OT YN Ec. i N s' i� G D . oo,-v - -- hA pL.. 4o Sal. + t6-v-- c sTrWcxu�• ovplse t`nvot at 04gMNV 9 Y , mm6rxmpeni 5 Lr 1-=, bmorol \ken 4 dA Adi C-w i o's &*-,-t e A o jQTorvo �, Shy Kavcr. IfA40\ ,l��nblo..� t� Un4AA�MVM S b\_mrw-' P�` N�-t t��wv�cfl c;c9 �.oca�dv�o '� Y�aa.9 PAt,fM - oj� I ro eA 4A �!o wow 6&- oCL-� ,g . t46T 1-1 Ec. t N S + �Pr�.�.E D. " �. •� � .-" p.-. 4, UA- I wo,,,, j+, ZO GUO r VO vc t*T &A-- ( cM — 'FLl 01 ) — M 5T s�•�rr� 0 0,-, E�,,Z L,� , �-,bj er\ �\ - kck.,) �Z ��iz'o�-, September 28, 1987 Ms. Jane LaFleur South Burlington Planning/Zoning Muncipal Offices Dorset Street So. Burlington, Vermont 05401 Re: Farrell - So. Burlington Dear Jane: We are in receipt of your finding of facts regarding the above project. Please note that I contacted both Dick Ward and Bill Szymanski referencing the fill permit and was informed that no specific permit was required, and was given the approval to proceed. If you have any questions, please give us a call. Sinc ely, IEMA -LAMPHERE TECTS, INC. /.ai ues A. aml ere JAL/cde WIEMANN-LAMPHERE, ARCHITECTS • 289 COLLEGE ST. 9 BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05401 • 802-864-0950 RECEJVED SEP2g1q.7 MRNAI���,g? talFf�t�i� September 21, 1987 South Burlington Water & Sewer Dept. 400 Dorset Street South Burlington, Vermont 05401 Attn: Mr. William Semanski Re: Farrell Garage Facilit Dear Bill, Wiemann-Lamphere Architects, Inc. is presently preparing the required Act 250 submittal to the state for the above mentioned project. We are requesting a letter stating that the present utilities (sewer, water) are capable of handling the following additional loads which the project will produce. Sewer Flow: 5 people - 15 Gals./day/person = 75 Water Consumption: 5 people - 15 Gals./day/person = 75 Your prompt assistance in this matter will be greatly appreciated. Should you have any questions, please contact me at (802) 864-0950. Sincerely, WIUAMN-LAMPHERE ARCHITECTS, INC. Frank M. Maras FMM:lh cc: D. Conners WIE§At V- RE, ARCHITECTS • 289 COLLEGE ST. • BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05401 • 802-864-0950