Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSD-22-10 - Supplemental - 0500 Old Farm Road (68)1 Marla Keene From:Tom Dipietro Sent:Friday, July 8, 2022 11:22 AM To:Marla Keene Cc:Erica Quallen; Dave Wheeler Subject:RE: SD-22-10 500 Old Farm Road O'Brien Eastview Final Plat - technical review Marla, On behalf of the Department of Public Works, I’d like to provide the following comments on the O’brien Eastview Project: General  Please calculate signal warrants for residential and partial-build at proposed signals at Kimball Ave/Old Farm Rd and Kimball Ave/Potash Rd to determine approximately when signal will be required.  Confirm lengths of left turn lanes are sufficient for peak hour traffic at Kimball Ave/Old Farm Rd and Kimball Ave/Potash Rd.  Smooth angle (approx. 30 degrees) at end of parking stalls for ease of maintenance.  The application narrative (Exhibit 000 - Page 29) proposes the open space and path elements that will be eligible for City acceptance and ownership. More discussion will be necessary with the DPW and Recreation Departments to confirm the future public ownership of these areas. Also, additional details regarding the proposed maintenance agreements will be necessary.  Phasing plan (Exhibit 123) o Has the project applied for Construction General Permit (CGP) coverage from the State of Vermont? The phasing plan must account for any requirements related to any maximum area to be “opened up” for construction contained in the CGP. o The board should consider a condition indicating that, “If discharges of sediment and nutrients are leaving the site then a new phase may not commence until the issues are corrected and the site stabilized to the satisfaction of the Director of public works, or his designee”. Make compliance with CGP a condition of the approval. o Language contained in the “triggers” section of the column should be reviewed for clarity. In some cases, the language is imprecise (e.g. “any time prior to or after completion of..”, see phases 5 and 6) and does not appear to place any restrictions, or provide clarity, regarding when work will take place.  If utilities are to be turned over to the City, then additional efforts may be necessary to place infrastructure within existing and/or proposed road ROWs. Any utility easements proposed for City acceptance must be centered within a 20’ wide easement.  Record drawings shall be prepared for any infrastructure proposed for City acceptance. Exhibit 099  Please show conduit running through the sleeves under the roadway.  Please show the location of pushbuttons (are these located where the “vehicle detection” symbol is used?) and direction of pedestrian signal heads so that MUTCD and ADA compliance can be ensured.  The southern corner requires two pedestal poles for ADA compliance: one in the existing location for the Old Farm Road crossing and an additional one for the eastbound Kimball Ave crossing. Perhaps cantilever pole #3 could be relocated and pushbutton and pedestrian signal head could be mounted on that pole.  3 second leading pedestrian interval feels too short for the crossings. Consider increasing to 6 seconds. 2  Flashing Don’t Walk across Kimball Ave must be at least 11 seconds.  Please add junction box detail. Exhibit 100  Please show conduit running through the sleeves under the roadway  Please show the location of pushbuttons (are these located where the “vehicle detection” symbol is used?) and direction of pedestrian signal heads so that MUTCD and ADA compliance can be ensured.  3 second leading pedestrian interval feels too short for the crossings. Consider increasing to 6 seconds.  Please add junction box detail.  Flashing Don’t Walk across Potash Rd must be at least 13 seconds. Exhibit 101 & 102  Mast arms should be of standard length and be rounded to the nearest 5’ Exhibit 104  Under General Specifications, please add: o “The signal system shall not operate without the appropriate pavement markings and related signing in place.” o “The signal heads shall be covered with an opaque covering until such time as the signal system is functional. At no time should the heads be viewed without having some form of signal indication, i.e. flashing operation or sequencing as per plan.” o “Traffic signals installed at new locations shall be activated only upon the approval of the engineer and after flashing for a minimum of 48 hours.”  Under Signal Equipment Specifications, please: o Spell out NEMA, IMSA, and ITE before abbreviating Exhibit 106  Add “left lane must turn left” (R3-7) on westbound Kimball Ave approach at Old Farm Road to match eastbound approach Exhibit 107  Add speed hump signs on Old Farm Road approaching Mabel Way.  Align building access sidewalk and crossing on Old Farm Rd at Mabel Way.  Recommend adding handicap parking and van accessible signs (R7-8, R7-8P) on handicap spot on Old Farm Road parking .  Sidewalk and driveway entry are misaligned at Old Farm Rd and driveway south of O’Brien Farm Rd Ext.  Is there curb between the driveway and sidewalk on driveway off Old Farm Rd south of O’Brien Farm Rd Ext? Please add if there is not already. It is unclear from the plans  Relocate path intersection to be closer to perpendicular south of Mabel Way. Exhibit 108  Detectable warning surface and crosswalk needed at Leo Lane sidewalk crossing.  Recommend adding handicap parking and van accessible signs (R7-8, R7-8P) on handicap spot on Old Farm Road parking. Exhibit 109  Why does the sidewalk get pushed up to the road adjacent to speed hump along Old Farm Rd?  Recommend adding handicap parking and van accessible signs (R7-8, R7-8P) on handicap spot on O’Brien Farm Road Ext parking  Sidewalk and driveway entry are misaligned on west side of O’Brien Farm Rd Ext 3 Exhibit 111  Narrative describes no signal at O’Brien Farm Rd and Old Farm Rd being warranted or shown in the plans (page 3) but Exhibit 111 shows incomplete signal plans for this intersection. Exhibit 119  Off of Potash Road, between lots 41 and 42 there is a 60’ wide access indicated. Confirm that this road is proposed to remain private? It appears as if there is a property line missing that would make this road its own lot. Exhibits 118 & 119  Proposed stormwater easements contain the phrase “…for the benefit of the City of South Burlington…”. For improved clarity, consider adding this phrase to all easements proposed for future City acceptance. It should be clarified whether or not the blue easements are proposed to be given to the City. Exhibit 124  Barn Road terminates without a hammerhead turnaround which is not consistent with Article 15.A (Subdivisions) of the LDRs. When the road becomes public, we’ll plow past the driveway for unit 38-5, but not to the end of the road until a connection is made.  Consider adding a sidewalk on at least one side of the connector road between Old Farm Rd and O’Brien Farm Rd Ext Exhibit 135 & 136  There appears to be a drainage line along the frontage of lots 26-29. Confirm that this line is to remain privately owned? Exhibit 140  The applicant should confirm that the sewer line east of the homes on Mabel Way is proposed to become public. If so, what steps will be taken to ensure that the City has continuous, unencumbered access to this infrastructure? No structures shall be placed within the proposed easement.  Can the proposed storm drain near station 6+80 be moved slightly so that it is not in the crosswalk? Exhibit 145  Confirm that the sewer line located primarily on lot 41 will remain private until it reaches the City owned infrastructure within Kimball Avenue.  The 10’ paved multi-use path stops near wetland #7. The applicant should continue this path to the east until it reaches the end of the property along Kimball Avenue. Exhibit 147  Cyclists traveling south on path along Potash Road will not be able to make the turn and head NW up the proposed 10’ paved multi-use path. What other configurations were considered? Is another section of path necessary to facilitate a connection from those traveling south on Potash Road that wish to connect to Mabel Way? There are 3 pedestrian elements located in a small area.  It was my understanding that this property would provide a multi-use path connection from the south end of Potash Road to Tilley Drive. As proposed, the path stops at the property line. Exhibit 150  The sidewalk along Old Farm Road is proposed to dead end at Hinesburg Road. In order to facilitate pedestrian traffic, a connection needs to be made to the existing path located to the south (near Tilley Drive) that currently dead ends on Pizzagalli Properties, LLC. 4  The sidewalk proposed along Old Farm Road is shown with no green space between it and the road (in some sections). Consider moving the sidewalk to the edge of the ROW to allow for green space. The sidewalk as proposed has some sharp turns/angles along its length. It will be difficult to maintain. The applicant will need to modify this to provide a more maintainable sidewalk. This will likely require relocation of existing drainage infrastructure in the ROW. It is also recommended that the plans include stone splash pads at pipe outlets. The City’s minimum culvert pipe size is 15” and driveway culvert is recommended to be 18” (https://vtrans.vermont.gov/sites/aot/files/operations/TheOrangeBook.pdf)  It is the DPW’s desire that this sidewalk along Old Farm Road be constructed as part of the O’brien Hillside project. Based on DPW’s current work load, if construction of this path were to become a City responsibility it would likely not be completed in a timeframe that would match up with home construction for the proposed development. You’ll soon be receiving a second email containing comments on stormwater and drainage from Dave. Please reach out if you have any questions on the above. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. -Tom From: Marla Keene <mkeene@southburlingtonvt.gov> Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2022 4:40 PM To: Jay Nadeau <jay.nadeau@champlainwater.org>; Terry Francis <tfrancis@southburlingtonvt.gov>; Tom Dipietro <tdipietro@southburlingtonvt.gov>; Adam Cate <acate@SouthBurlingtonVT.gov>; Dave Wheeler <dwheeler@southburlingtonvt.gov>; Craig Lambert <clambert@southburlingtonvt.gov> Subject: SD-22-10 500 Old Farm Road O'Brien Eastview Final Plat - technical review Hi everyone, This application will be reviewed by the Board at the July 19 DRB hearing. This is the last review of the large O’Brien Eastview project. I am sending this email early so you can allocate time appropriately. If you’d like to meet on this project, please let me know. Please provide comments by no later than Friday July 8. This hearing will take place over the course of several meetings, so you are welcome to request more information in your comments. Just a reminder, comments you provide are inserted directly into the staff report for the project, so please frame your response for public consumption. Draft Project Description Final plat application #SD-22-10 of O’Brien Eastview, LLC to create a planned unit development of six existing parcels currently developed with three single family homes and a barn and totaling 102.6 acres. The development is to consist of 155 homes in single family, duplex, and three-family dwellings on eleven (11) lots totaling 23.9 acres, eighteen (18) commercial development lots totaling 39.8 acres, and 25.2 acres of undeveloped or recreational open spaces, 500 Old Farm Road. \\192.168.9.13\apps\USERS\Planning & Zoning\Development Review Board\Applications\2022\SD-22-10_500 Old Farm Road_OBrien Eastview_FP_2022-07-19 Thanks, 5 Marla Keene, PE Development Review Planner City of South Burlington 180 Market Street South Burlington, VT 05403 (802) 846-4106 www.southburlingtonvt.gov Notice - Under Vermont’s Public Records Act, all e-mail, e-mail attachments as well as paper copies of documents received or prepared for use in matters concerning City business, concerning a City official or staff, or containing information relating to City business are likely to be regarded as public records which may be inspected by any person upon request, unless otherwise made confidential by law. If you have received this message in error, please notify us immediately by return email. Thank you for your cooperation.