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