HomeMy WebLinkAboutBATCH - Supplemental - 0142 West Twin Oaks TerraceState of Vermont
Department of Fish and Game
Department of Forests and Parks
Department of Water Resources
Environmental Board
Division of Environmental Protection
Division of Recreation
Interagency Committee on Natural Resources
Natural Resources Conservation Council
AGENCY OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION
DISTRICT ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION
111 West Street
Essex Junction, VT 05452
September 11, 1975
Burlington Indoor Tennis Center, Inc.
Box 2111
South Burlington, Vermont 05401
Application # 4CO194
Dear Sirs:
On behalf of the District Environmental Commission and the
Division of Envirormnental Protection of the Agency of Environmental
Conservation, I acknowledge receipt of your application for a
subdivision of 125 lots on the south side of Kennedy Drive in the
City of South Burlington.
The application was received by this office on September 11, 1975.
You will be notified promptly of any decisions made on this
application.
Sincerely,
CURTIS W. CARTF-
Environmental Coordinator
cc:So. Burlingt5banning Commission
Mr. Duncan Brown
LEGAL NOTICE
CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON
SUBDIVISION HEARING
The South Burlington Planning Con -mission will hold a
public hearing -at the South Burlington City Hall, Conference
Room, 1175 Williston_ Road, South Burlington, Vermont on
Tuesday, July 8, 1975 at 7:30 p.m. to consider the following:
Application of Burlington Indoor Tennis Center,
Mr. Peter Bergh of South Burlington, Vermont for
approval of a subdivision of a parcel of land
containing thirty-five (3 5) acres into a cluster
development of one hundred and twenty-five (125)
town house units, said parcel of land is located
on Kenr_edy Drive, bounded on the east by properties
of Aesculapius Medical Center and Forest Park
Condominiums, on the west by properties of Howard
Brand and Arthur 7ergner, on the south by Interstate
I-89 and on the north by Kennedy Drive, as per
plans on file in the City Hall, 1175 Williston Road.
William Vessel, Chairman
South Burlington Planning Commission
6/21/75
MEMORANDUM
TO: SOUTH BURLINGTON PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: RICHARD WARD, ZONING ADMINISTRATOR
RE: PROPOSED CONDOMINIUM PROJECT FOR TWIN OAKS, BURLINGTON
INDOOR TENNIS CENTER
DATE: JULY 39 1975
Area in question is zoned Residential District (R-7) and
Conservation -Open Space District (drainageway). Parcel has
100 ft. G.M.P. right-of-way. Parcel contains 35 acres.
Allowable density is approximately 245 units - proposed is
122 condominium units.
Private streets are proposed. Each unit appears to be 1000
sq. ft. ground. floor area which is under the minimum lot
coverage allowed.
Maximum allowed 20% or 7 acres. Set -backs appear to be in
conformance with the exception of those units which are
nearest the G.M.P. right-of-way. This area borders the C.
0. District Interstate set -back of 150 ft. Some units
appear to be within 105 feet.
The proposed plan does not appear to have any open space
or park area other than alone the brook and a swamp near
Kennedy Drive.
A more detailed plan will be required showing number of
parking spaces, parking space requirements do not seem to be
adequate, 1.5 required per unit.
In addition to subdivision this apJlication is also subject
to site plan review at a later date, if the study plan is
approved.
NOTICE OF APPLICATION AND HEA �
10 VSA, Chapter 1.51 (Act 250)
Application # 4CO194
Pursuant to 10 VSA, § 6084(b) notice is hereby made that Burlington Indoor
`Tennis Center, Inc. Box 2111, South Burlington, Vermont
(applicant's name and address)
filed an application with District Commission # It , on September 11, 1975
(Date)
for a land use permit for a subdivi5i__on of 125 lats an thin. etg
n„h de-� -'
(nature and location of project)
Kennedy Drive in the City of South Burlington, Vermont.
xxXW*XXTXXat tx ameck xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxg xxxxxxxx
Pursuant to 10 VSA, § 6085 a hearing will be held on September 30, 1975
(Date)
3:00 P.M. at the Chittenden Regional Planning Commission, 58 Pearl Street, Essex Jct
(Location)
Parties to the hearing are the applicant, the municipality, the municipal
planning commission, the regional planning commission., state agencies,
adjoining property owners Who request a hearing, and such parties as may
be designated by the commission.
If no party appears in opposition, informal disposition of the case may
be made by stipulation, agreed settlement, consent order, or default as
specified in 3 VSA § 809(d).
District Commisison # 4
111 West Street_ _
--_----_- (Address)
Essex Junction. VT 054
879-6563
Phone #
eff: 2-14-74
I
MEMORANDUM
TO: SOUTH BURLINGTON PLAN`.ING COMMISSION
FROM: R ICHARD WARD, ZONING ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER
RE: ZONING CHANGE A�iEYDMENT FOR R7 DISTRICT AND TWIN
OAKS SUBDIVISION
DATE: JULY 17, 1975
Be advised that Attorney Richard Spokes will be drafting the
proposed amendment, allowing for clustering in R7 District.
He will also set up the first public hearing for the first
regular meeting of the Planning Commission in August. (8/12/75)
Anticipating no problems with this amendment the City Council
should be havinn a public hearing around mid September. This
will allow for the proper timing as required by Chapter 117.
In the meantime, however, the application of 11111r. Peter Bergh
will require some sort of action by the 'Planning Commission.
The application was filed on June 13, 1975, the Commission
must notify Mr. £ergh of a decision within forty-five (45)
days from the time of filing. (July 28, 1975)
The Planning Commission should disapprove the application at
this time or the application could be withdrawn.
PETER BERGN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE • SITE PLANNING • PLANNING • SHELBURNE, VERMONT 05482 • (802) 425-2433
July 23, 1975
Mr. Richard Ward, Zoning Administrator
City Hall
S. Burlington, Vermont
RE: Twin Oaks Townhouses
Dear Mr. Ward:
It is our understanding that while it was clearly the intent of
the Planning Commission to include a provision for cluster housing
in the R-7 district, this provision was somehow omitted from the
ordinance.
We further understand that the Planning Commission has gone on
record as being in favor of such a provision in the R-7 district,
and has begun the process to amend the ordinance to allow cluster
housing in the R-7 district.
We therefore request that our application presently before the
Planning Commission be withdrawn so that we may re -submit it at
such time as the ordinance provides for cluster housing in the
R-7 district.
We would appreciate it if you would advise us as to when we should
re -submit our application so that our project will be delayed no
longer than absolutely necessary.
cc. R. Unsworth
Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission
P.O. BOX 108, 58 PEARL STREET
ESSEX JUNCTION, VERMONT 05452
802 658-3004
September 19, ]. 9 75
r C`
Mr. Richard Ward
Zoning Administrative Officer
City of South Burlington
1175 Williston Road
South Burlington, Vermont 05401
Dear Mr. Ward;
Per your written request dated August 29, 1975, the Chittenden County
Regional Planning Commission staff is forwarding a traffic analysis of existing con-
ditions for Kennedy Drive, the Kennedy Drive -Hinesburg Road intersection, and
the Kennedy Drive -Dorset Street intersection. The following is a discussion of
our analysis.
Kennedy Drive
Kennedy Drive currently has 40 feet of pavement, curb -to -curb, with two
travel lanes marked 16 feet wide and 4 foot shoulders. The capacity of this roadway
at Level of Service (C) is approximately 2800 vehicles/hour (VPH) .
Based on 24-Hour mechanical traffic volume counts (see attachment 1) ,
Kennedy Drive presently carries an Average Daily Traffic (ADT) of approximately
7790 vehicles/day (VPD) . The peak hour volume is approximately 900 VPH which
results in a Volume/Capacity (V/C) ratio of 0.32. This ratio indicates that Kennedy
Drive is currently operating at about 320/. of capacity. Therefore, this roadway
should be able to handle a considerable amount of future traffic volume growth.
Kennedy Drive - Hinesburg Road Intersection
Based on intersection turning movements collected for this intersection (see
attachment 2) on November 27, 1974, an intersection capacity and a Volume/Capacity
(V/C) ratio was calculated for the P.M. peak period. The following table illustrates
these results.
... Serving 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
�r }
CHI TTENDEN COUNTY
REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION
URBAN TRANSPORTATION STI_11jY
INTER SECT I ON ! OLUMErr_:AFAG I TY ANALYSIS
SOUTH KURL I NGTON
D R _SET STREET AND KENNEDY DRIVE
raOVEMBER 27Y 1974
APPROACH DOR=_ ET STREET — SOUTH (A.M. PEAK PER I
RPPROAC;H TYPE URBAN; TWO WAY STREET
WITH PARKING PROHIBITED t l 0 BUS STOP
NO RIGHT TURN LANE; NO LEFT TURN LANE
CAPACITY ANALYSIS WITH LOAD FACTOR OF 0.85
APPROACH WIDTH =22.0 FEET
BASIC FLOW POTENTIAL = 18 _; UEH/HO R OF GREEN TIME
CYCLE LENGTH (C ) = 64. SECONDS; GREEN _22. SECOND,:—:. a
G-= C = (GREEN/CYCLE) = .344
INTERSECTION CHARACTERISTIC HIijU TMENT FACTOR
iR
POPULATION & PEAK HOUR FACTOR (f .90) .957,:
LOCATION IN TOWN 1.000
RIGHT TURNS (25 . Cii_i0%)
LEFT TURNS (1 _:. _ i_10% )
TRUCKS f ( 5. 000% ) 1.000
CURB USE AT INTER =:EC T I CRI 1.000
LOCAL ADj STMEHT FACTOR 1.000
feMB I PEED ADJUSTMENT FACTOR =
PEAK —HOUR VOLUME (VOL) = 344. VEHICLES PER HOUR
CAPACITY = 512. VEHICLES PER HOUR
IR
UOLUME/ ►= APAC: I TY = .672
s
-•. C:H I TTENDEN COUNTY
REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION
URBAN TRANSPORTATION STUDY
a'
INTERSECTION' VOLUME/CAPACITY ANALYS1
SOUTH BURLINGTC iN
DORSET STREET AND' k;ENNEDY DRIVE
NOVEMBER Gig! 1974
APPROACH : DORSET STREET — NORTH (P.M. PEAK PEEN
APPROACH TYPE URBAN; TWO WAY STREET
WITH PARKING PROHIBITED N i p BUS STOP
NO RIGHT TURN LANE; NO LEFT TURN LANE
CAPACITY ANALYSIS WITH LOAD FACTOR OF 0.85
APPq iACH WIDTH = 24.0 FEET
BASIC FLOW POTENTIAL = 2007. VEH/HOUP i �F GREEN TIME
CYCLE LENGTH (C) = 64. SECONDS; GREEN = 22. SECONDS
G-'C = (GREEN/CYCLE) = .344
INTERSECTION CHARACTERISTIC AD1 jU TMENT FAC:TE R
r-Vxt�:VNEv a as ao:oa4.,04 V�aovt.v A.:o:vV,A:oo o aCF
POPULATION r : PEAK HOUR FACTOR (r .90) .957
LOCATION IN TOWN 1.000
RIGHT TURNS is = 0 . t=1t_10%) .900
LEFT TURNS (3, 0CiG_%) .350
1 .ri_ 10
TRUCKS �. J . f_141i_i�:.� - �-
CURB USE AT INTERSECTION 1.000
LOCAL ADJUSTMENT FACTOR 1.000
COMBINED ADJUSTMENT FACTOR = .733
POAK—HOUR VOLUME (VOL) = 319. OEH I C LES PER HOUR
CAPACITY _ 505. WEH I CLE=: PER HOUR
OOLUME/CAPAC: I TY _ .631
CH I TTEHI1EN COUNTY
REGIONAL FLiiNN I N a COMMISSION
URBAN TRAti'=PORTATI►;N STUDY
INTERSECTION OOLUME/ APACITY ANALYSIS
:r OUTH BURL I NGTON
DORSET STREET AND KENNEDY DRIVE
t9OVEMDER 279 19714
A5='F'ROACH : INTERSTATE 189 - WEST (P.M. PEAK PER I
APPROACH TYPE URBAN; ONE HAY STREET
REET
WITH PARKING PROHIBITED N 0 BUS STOP
iO RIGHT TUN LANE; NO LEFT TURN LANE
CAPACITY ANALYSIS WITH L0 i3 FACTOR OF 0.85
APPROACH li :H WIDTH = 20.0 FEET
%31C FLOW POTENTIAL = 1 50. UEHYHOUR OF GREEN T i ME
_:TCLE LENGTH CC; --- 64. SECONDS; GREEN = 20. SECONDS
I l 1TERSECT I i N _ HHRAC ER I ST IADJUSTMENT FACTOR
POPULATION =. PEAK HOUR FACTi P is 75. & .90) - .977
LOCf1TI=N I-i TOWN 1.000
LEFT TURNS (30.000%) .900
CURD USE AT INTER=:ECTIfIN 1.000
LOCAL ADJUSTMENT FACTOR - : 00!.3
COMBINED ADJUSTMENT FACTOR =
ZFT; HOUR VOLUME (s: OL ) = 273. VEHICLES PER HOUR
CAPACITY 734. MEHICLES PER HOUR
.9_7
-• . CH I TTENDEN COUNTY
REGIONAL. PLANNING COMMISSION
URBAN TRANSPORTATION STUDY
INTERSECTION VOLUME/CRPRCITY ANRLY8IS
SOUTH BURLINGTON
DORSET STREET AND KEt" NEDY DRIVE
NOVEMBER 279 1974
APPROACH KENNEDY DRIVE - EAST (P.M. PEAK PER I O
APPROACH TYPE : i..iRBAN • TWO WAY STREET
WITH PARKING PROHIBITED N O BUS STOP
NO RIGHT TURN LANE; NO LEFT TURN -LANE
CAPACITY ANALYSIS WITH LOAD FACTOR OF 0.85
APPROACH WIDTH = 16.0 FEET
BASIC FLOW POTENTIAL = 1 14. QEH/H� BUR � �F GREEN TIME
CYCLE LENGTH (C) = 64. SECONDS; GREEN = ::8. SECONDS
r;/ C = t GREEN/C: t'CLE i = .438
INTERSECTION CHARACTERISTIC AID 1 i:_ TIMENT FACTOR
POPULATION & PEAK HOUUR FAQ :Ti R (5. .90) .957
LiCATION IN TOWN 1.000
0
RIGHT TURNS (29 . 0G_ii= %) .905
`EFT TURNS (1 500%) .964
CURB USE AT INTERSECTION 1.000
LOCAL ADJUSTMENT FACTOR i.000
C� iMBINED ADJUSTMENT FACTOR = . _=
35
PEAK -HOUR iUR VOLUME (VOL) = 1341. UEH I CLES PER HOUR
CAPACITY - 430. OOH I C LES PER HOUR
R
:..i� �LUME/CAPACI TY _ .710
r
1r.
APPROACH
�►:_:- j! ►..APPROACH
I = 9—t' ST
Y
CH I TTEHDEN . COUNTY
►Ut iTY
a•:EG I ► NAL PLANNING COMMISSION
.,IJPDAN TRANSPORTATION STUDY'
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS
DORSET STREET 0S) AND KENNEDY i►R196- (KD)
NOVEMBER 27P 1974
A. M . I'i►-iON
F'EAK PEAK
OTAL VOLUME 1510 84
RT — TOTAL ' , -0 4: ; 3
s.
% LT — TOTAL +. 0 36.
ST — TRUCK K .0 .0
% RT — TRUCK . 0 .0
LT — TRUCE. . E 1, .0
PEDESTRIANS :_i ►_1
TOTAL.VOLUME OLD ME
212
247
% RT — TOTAL
251. C
-JrJ. G
`: LT— TOTAL
•�0. 6
1+=1. r5
% TRUCKS
.0
.0
RT - TRUCK
.0
.0
% LT — TRUCK
.0
.0
PEDESTRIANS
0
0
TOTAL VOLUME
_ 4-1
03
. RT — TOTAL
25. 0
LT — TOTAL
18.
TRUCKS :KS
.0
T - TRUCK
• 4=1
`: RT - TRUCK
.0
. LT - TRUCK K
, i
PEDESTRIANS
0
TOTAL VOLUME
1:
RT — TOTAL
5 :. 0
. LT — TOTAL
4. 15
r
A. N. PEAK ?: 45 A. M. Ti=i 0: 45 A. M.
WON PEAK 11:45 A.M. T=► 12:45 P.M.
�`. •1. PEAK i. 0 P.M. TO 6: [_i:_i P.M.
P. N.
PEAK
;19
-:1.
4 _:. •9
Gf L
39.6
.0
.0
0
.0
0
l
•
._ H 1 TTEHI CH COUNT''
a
REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION
-
URBAN TRANSPORTATION
STUDY
INTERSECTION
TURNING MOVEMENTS
DCRSET STREET CPS)
AND K:ENNEDY URGE
(KB)
. N OEM ER 20 1974
NOON
P. M.
TOTAL
PERIOD
PERIOD
PERIOD
COUNT
NT
TOTAL VOLUME
260
456.
916
1632
WHO.
LT - TOTAL
39.2
39.5
42.0
40. 5_
APPROACH
ST - TRUCK K
.0
.0
.0
.0.
LT - TRUCI-..
. '1
. ki
.0
• 0
PEDESTRIANS
cl
0
!_i
s_i
TOTAL VBLUME
479
540
93=;
1965
. RT - TOTAL
29.6
35.4
34.2
33.4
}. D-EAS T
% LT - TOTAL
23.0
9.3
13.9
14.:=:
APPROACH
. _: T - TRUCK
.0
.0
• 0
• 1=1
. LT - TRUCK
. !_i
.0
.3
.0
TOTAL O iLUME
470
196
434
!loci
RT - TOTAL
26.4
34.7 ;
43.3
5
34.5
D :-So.
LT - TOTAL
16.0
4.1
1.4
{
=.1
'-; TRUCKS
_
� �
. `-i
• 0
• '-1
APPROACH
`': Si - TRUCK
.0
.0
.0
F_i
PEDESTRIANS
0
0
0
t
._i.
RT i - TOTAL
54.6
2.4
2.2
i 1. :_
2
1 9-W _;T
. ELT - TOTAL
4.3
41.5
47.0
38.6
APPROACH
ST - TRUCK
.0
.0
• t_1
.0
PEDESTRIANS
0
0�_1
ci
A, M, PERIOD
7 . 00 A.M.
TO 9: -- t
A.M.
NOON PERIOD
11 : t_1L_i A.M.
TO 1: t=0
P.M. .
P.M. PERIOD
=:00 P.M.
TO 6:00
P.M.
CHITTENDEN COUNTY REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION
TRAFFIC SURVEY
RECORDING COUNTER SUMMARY
Kennedy Drive (East of Twin, Oaks Tennis Club)
Counter Location
Station #
Two Way One Way Direction E & W Counter #
DATE
1 9-3-75
1 9-4-75
9-5-75
9-6-75
J 9-7-75
DAY
Monday
Tuesday
Wednesday
j__jhursd:a:�±Friday
Saturday
Sunda
HOUR
A. M.
12-1
57
52
99
113
1-2
36
20
65
54
2-3
17
26
47
23
3-4
5
10
9
9
4-5
9
12
8
8
5-6
19
20
21
5
6-7
135
124
53
26
7-8
547
494
140
60
8-9
598
562
246
115
9-10-
413
440
277
156
10-11 1
441
495
380
198
11-12 1
485
501
463
218
3MA
12-1
542
578
487
287
1-2
591
609
490
261
2-3
570
659
439
265
3-4
617
678
438
243
4-5
799
821
493
266
5-6
841
913
357
6-7
449
503
528
350
7-8
372
398
411
314
8-9
323
336
348
281
9-10
239
261
295
201.
10-11
1.58
148
200
137
11-12
T 97
115
140
154
24 Hour
TOTAL
8483
8936
5949
AM Peak
Midday
Peak
PM Peak
Remarks: ADT = 7789
t_ H I TTENDEN
COI NTY
' w
F:EG I OVAL PLANNING COMM � �,�� 1 Ott
I IR?AN TF;HN:: PQRTHT Z L N STUDY
INTERSECTION TURNING
MOVEMENTS
KENNEDY DRIVE (K D) AND
H I NESBURG
ROAD (HR ).
a iOUEMBER l_1
• 1974
PEAK
PEAK
; EAf .
RT — TOTAL
E.1. 4
61 . 'a
64. 4
R— O.
% LT — TOTAL
14.6
8.1
3.0
APPROACH
': 3T — TRUCK
,tit
.0
, 1i
RT — TRUCK
, ct
, •-t
, i 1
% LT — TRUCK
.0
PEDESTRIANS
0
TOTAL t.i� iLQME
164
141
00
VD —EAST
% LT — TOTAL
9.1
2.
%TRUC KS
.0
.0
. t
4:T — TRUCK
.13
.0
.0
L- _ TRUCK
.0
, I_i
.0
PEDESTRIANS
►_t
0
tt
TOTAL VOLUME
193
1
137
R+ — TOTAL
FQ
4.5
_.E_i
C•-r_
f�,. :�+,
- TOTAL
'�. LT T- NHL
6. `
0. 1
2. 1
LT TRUCK
, +mot
.0
• _I
PEDESTRIANS RI:"INS
}-t
ci
`•: RT — TOTAL
1. -9
it.—
1 . D
-
T+ _+;fE _; T
LT —_ TOTAL,
41. 5
E 1. `
c
42 . _�
v-
KS
i
ii�'F'f:!_+H+_fi
: S T — T i-..'.UCIi:
F -
LT TRUCK
.0
cl
WE S T R i rif• S
+ 1
!_1
'_i
11: 45
H.M. TO 12:
45 P.M.
P.M. PEAK 5: 00
P.M. TO 6:
00 P.M.
�
�
.
\
,
^
.
�. CH'T.EMDEN
COUNTY ~
..
RE(-;IQHH[- PLANNING COMMISSION
'
' URBAN TRANSPORTATION STUDY ^
ATERSECT7ON TURNING
MOVEMENQ
KEMR['DY DRIVE (KD)
AND HI0ESBURG ROAD
(HRk
`
.
hOUEMBER 27v
1974
R.M.
NOON
P.M.
TOTAL
PERIOD
PERIOD
PERIOD
COUNT
TOTAL VOLUME
245
269
541
1055
% 07 - TOTAL
64.1
61.7
65.4
64.2
HR-MO,
% LT - TOTAL
11.8
8.6
7.0
8.5
% TRUCKS
.3
.O
. (]
.0
APPROACH
��. �T TRUCK
, .0
.0
.0
.R
% RT - TRUCK
LT - TRUCK
.0
.O
.0
°0
_ pEDESTBIHMS
8
0
0
{�
TOTAL VOLUME
333
318
523
1179
% RT - TOTAL
19.5
4.7
6.6
9.8
[J-[HST
^ % LT - TOTAL
4.8
2.2
2.5
3.1
� TRU[KS
.8
.O
.O
.8
aPPROHCH
% ST - TRUCK
.0
.0
.0
.0
% RT - TRUCK
.0
. 0
.0
. �)
LT - TRUCK
.0
.0
.0
. O
PEDESTRIANS
O
O
8
O
TOT9L VOLUME
281
2n5
297
873
% RT - TOTAL
6.0
5.1
6.4
5.0
LT - TOTAL
9.3
36.6
34,7
27.1
% TRUCKS
. 0
.0
GPPPOH��
% ST - TRUCK
.0
.0
.0
.O
RT - TRUCK
. O
. O
. 0
. 0
LT - TRUCK
.0
.0
. 0
. O
PEDESTRIANS
0
0
O
O
TOTAL VOLUME
^
246
329
673
1248
% RT - TOTAL
'2.4
9.1
11.4
9.1
KD-WEST
% LT - TOTAL
40.7
20.7
38.2
30.1
� TRUCKS
.O
.8
.O
.O
APPROACH
% ST - TRUCK
.0
.8
.0.
.8
� PT - TRUCK
.O
.O
.0
.0
% LT - TRUCK
. O
~ 0
^ �
. 0
PEDESTRIANS
0
O
0
0
'
H.M. PERIOD 7:00 H.M. TO 9:30 H.M.
NOON PERIOD 11:80 H.M. TO 1:00 P.M.
P.M. PERIOD 3:08 P.M. TO 6:00 P.M.
Z
� .
CHI TTENDEN COUNTY
REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION
URBAN TRANSPORTATION STUDY
INTERSECTION VOLUME/CAPACITY ANALY I S
SOUTH BURL I NGTON
F :ENNEDY DR I (•:IE AND H I NE`_ BURG ROAD .
NOUEMBER 27 P 1974
APPROACH S KENNEU`i' TR I VE — EAST (P.M. PERK PER I O
APPROACH TYPE URBAN; TWO WAY' STREET
WITH PARKING PROHIBITED N 0 BUS STOP
NO RIGHT TURN LANE; NO LEFT TURN LANE
CAPACITY ANALYSIS I WITH LOAD FACTOR OF 0.05
APPROACH H WIDTH = 22.0 FEET
BASIC FLOW POTENTIAL = 1 VEH/HC (UR C (F GREEN TIME
CYCLE LENGTH (C) = 64. SECONDS; GREEN = 27. SECONDS
G/C = (GREEN/CYCLE) = .422
- - A + . �f 1=:TMENT FACTOR
INTERSECTION " CHARACTERISTIC I =:T I i_: �i��
POPULATION ,2 _. PEAK HOUR FAQ: TOR i �� 5. ". .85) .923
LQCATION It�iTOWN 1.000
RIGHT TURNS t = . ���_i0% i i.031,
LEFT TURNS i 1.�`:a00% j 1.081.3
TRUCKS ( 5. CiCi0%) 11000
CURB USE AT INTERSECTION 1.000
LOCAL ADJUSTMENT FACTOR 1.000
a oori a a aao- aaa a +o-AAAA AnAA;*;Aw :o��!r�����a?oao��o-
C:OHDINED ADJUSTMENT FACTOR = 1.027
PEAK —HOUR �R O FLUME (0 0 = 207. UEH I (= LES PER HOUR
CAPACITY! 794. OEH I C :LES PER HOUR
(.,(C(LIIt•1E/ :APACITY _ .261
CH I TTENDEN COUNTY
REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION
URBAN TRANSPORTATION STUDY
INTERSECTION VOLUME/CAPACITY ANALYSIS
SOUTH EURLINGTON
KENNEDY DRIVE AND H I NESBURG ROAD
NOVEMBER 27Y 1974
APPROACH : KENNEDY DRIVE - WEST (P.M. PEAK PER I O
APPROACH TYPE URBAN; TWO WAY STREET
WITH PARKIN& PROHIBITED N 0 DUB= STOP
NO RIGHT TURN LANE; NO LEFT TURN LANE
CAPACITY ANALYSIS WITH LOAD FACTOR OF 0.85
APPROACH WIDTH = 22.0 FEET
BASIC FLOW POTENTIAL = 1 8VEH: MHO R OF GREEN TIME
CYCLE LENGTH (C) = 64. SECONDS; GREEN = 27. SECONDS
GX = CGREEN/CYCLE ) = .422
INTERSECTION CHARACTERISTIC ADJUSTMENT FACTOR
:�::�:�:�o�aa:�:o�:�a�aa��::o:o:o+ra�:otoao;���o�►�:a000za� �aa���:a:aa�a���ao?o-
POPULATION & PEAK HOUR IR FACTOR (7 & .85) .923
LOCATION IN TOWN 1.000
RIGHT TURNS (11. 900%) .990
.EFT TURNS (_ 0. E_it_10%) .050
CURB USE AT INTER_ECTION 1.000 '
LOCAL AL ADJUSTMENT FACTOR i.000
COMBINED ADJUSTMENT USTMENT FACTOR =
PEAK -HOUR R VOLUME (U� �L ) _ 294. VEHICLES PER HOUR
CAPACITY _ 601. VEHICLES PER HOUR
1.10LUME/ APA : I T`i = . 4,":-:- +
3
:= H I TTENDEN COUNTY
REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION
URBAN TRANSPORTATION STUDY
INTERSECTION-VOLUME/CAPACITY ANAL` S0
SOUTH BURLINGTON
KENNEDY DRIVE AND H I NESBURG ROAD
NOUEMr ER c? a 1974
APPROACH : H I NE _ B ERG ROAD - NORTH (P.M. PEAK PER
APPROACH TYPE URBAN; TWO WAY STREET
WITH PARKING PROHIBITED N 0 BUS STOP
NO RIGHT TURN LANE; NO LEFT TURN LANE
CAPACITY ANALYSIS WITH LOAD FACTOR OF 0.85
APPROACH WIDTH = 24.0 FEET V
BASIC FLOW POTENTIAL = LF_ 0 .OEH-'Hi UR OF GREEN TIME
CYCLE LENGTH (C) = 64. SECONDS; GREEN _ 2-�. 'SECONDS
G.'C = (GREEN. -'CYCLE) - .359
INTERSECTION -CHARACTERISTIC ADJUSTMENT STMENT FACTOR
POPULATION ION & PEAK HOUR FA TOR (& .05) .923
LOCATION IN TOWN 1.000
RIGHT TURNS (30. 4_ 00%) .900
LEFT TURNS ( 3. }_i!_10% j 1. f-i21
TRIII:K1 ( 5.000%) 1.000
CURB USE AT INTERSECTION 1.000
LOCAL. ADJUSTMENT FACTOR 1.000
as s �a 4aoc#o ►o aoada?o- ra aaaoao�4aoo o x�aooWA ;O�o-A E
COMBINED ADJUSTMENT FACTOR = .343
PEAK -HOUR R O iLUNE COOL) = 225. OEH I CLES PER HOUR
R
CAPACITY = 611. OEH I CkES PER HOUR
R
VOLUME/CAPACITY _ - .303
CHITTENDEN COUNTY
RrG I OVAL PLANNING COMMISSION
URBAN TRANSPORTATION STUDY
I NTEF,SECT I OW VOLUME/CAPACITY ANALYS I'S
t
@ A SOUTH FURL I NGTOM -'
KENNEDY DRIVE AND H I NESBURG ROAD
APPROACH : HINESB ERG ROAD — SOUTH (P.M. PEAK PER
APPROACH TYPE URBAN; TWO WAY STREET
WITH PARKING PROHIBITED 3 FAR SIDE BUS 'STOP
NO RIGHT TURN LANE; NO LEFT TURN LANE
CAPACITY ANALYSIS WITH LOAD FACTOR QF 0.85
APPROACH WIDTH = 13.0 FEET
BASIC FLOW POTENTIAL = 1 05 5. UEH/Hi tUR OF GREEN TIME
CYCLE LENGTH (C) = r.4. SECONDS; GREEN _ 23. SECONDS
G/C = (GREENS'r CLE) = .359
INTERSECTION CHARACTERISTIC ADJUSTMENT FACTOR
POPULATION _. PEAK HOUR FACTOR ( 5. 05 ) .923
LOCATION IN TOWN 1.000
RIGHT TURNS ( _ . 11.1E_1':) 1.041
LEFT T!_IG'NS (= 0. t11_1►- %) 9 a
CURB USE =.E AT I NTERSECT I Oti 1.000
0
LOCAL ADJUSTMENT FACTOR 1.000
COMBINED ADJUSTMENT FACTOR = .767
PEAK —HOUR VOLUME (O iL) = 137. VEHICLES PER HOUR
CAPACITY = 291. VEHICLES PER HOUR
VOLUME/CAPACITY .471
Mr. Richard Ward
September 19, 1975
Page Two
Approach Approach V/C
Approach Volume (v) Capacity (c) Ratio
Kennedy Drive
East (P.M.) 207 883 .235
West (P.M.) 294 668 .440
Hinesburg Road
North (P.M.) 225 532 .423
South (P. M.) 137 253 .542
Assumptions
1) Intersection Capacity at Level of Service V .
2) Calculation based on methodology described in the Highway Capacity
Manual, 1965.
3) See attachment 2 for complete intersection volume/capacity analysis data.
In concluding the analysis of this intersection, it appears that under existing
conditions the intersection is operating at about 50% of capacity at the most con-
gested approach. If future traffic volume growth increases this congestion to a level
of 80% - 90% of capacity, then minor intersection reconstruction and/or readjusting
the light phases of the traffic control devices should increase the potential capacity
and reduce the V/C ratio to an acceptable level (.less than 80% of capacity) .
Kennedy Drive - Dorset Street Intersection
Based on intersection turning movements collected for this intersection (see
attachment 3) on November 27, 1974, an intersection capacity and volume/capacity
(V/C) ratio was calculated for the A.M. and/or P.M. peak period. The following
table illustrates these results.
Approach Approach V/C
Approach Volume (v) Capacity (c) Ratio
Kennedy Drive
East (P. M.)
341
480
.710
Interstate 189
West (P.M.)
273
734
.372
Dorset Street
North (P.M.)
319
505
.631
South (P.M.)
344
512
.672
Assumptions:
1) Maximimum intersection capacity relates to a signalized intersection with
balanced V/C ratios.
2) 64 second cycle length.
Mr. Richard Ward
September 19, 1975
Page Three
Assumptions (continued)
3) Kennedy Drive - East Approach; 28 second green time.
Interstate 189 - West Approach; 28 second green time.
Dorset Street - North & South Approach; 28 second green time.
4) Calculation based on methodology described in the Highway Capacity
Manual, 1965.
5) See attachment 3 for complete intersection volume/capacity analysis data.
According t .-� _, the Manual On Uniform Traffic Control Devices For Streets And
Highways, traffic control signals are required at an intersection generally if the
requirements of the appropriate warrant describing the intersection are exceeded. For
this particular intersection, Warrant 1, Minimum Vehicular Volume is appropriate.
The specific requirement is that for each of any 8 hours of an average day, the major
intersecting street (Kennedy Drive & Interstate 189 Exit Ramp) have a two-way hourly
traffic volume greater than 500 VPH and the minor intersecting street (Dorset Street)
have a one direction hourly traffic volume greater than 150 VPH (either approach
direction can be used for the same 8 hour period) . Presently, traffic flow at the
Kennedy Drive - Dorset Street intersection appears to be exceeding this criteria during
the morning and afternoon peak periods.
In concluding the analysis of this intersection, the Regional Planning Commission
staff strongly recommends that the City of South Burlington initiate a more detailed
analysis of the Kennedy Drive - Dorset Street intersection relative to the need for
traffic control signals. The Manual On Uniform Traffic Control Devices For Streets
and Highways is the adopted standard for all Vermont roadways. If further analysis
indicates that the requirements of Warrant 1 are being exceeded, then signalization
of this intersection should be considered.
Proposed Twin Oaks Development
Based on accepted national averages published by the Institute of Traffic Engin-
eers, it is estimated that the proposed (110)townhouse units will generate approx-
imately 60 left turn movements on Kennedy Drive during the P.M. peak period. These
left turn movements must oppose approximately 400 VPH traveling eastbound on
Kennedy Drive. Because of the extremely wide travel lanes (16ft.) and shoulders
(4 ft.) , most through vehicles traveling westbound should be able to maneuver around
left turning vehicles. If this situation does not occur, then it is recommended that
Kennedy Drive be remarked to provide two travel lanes 11 feet wide with 4 feet shoul-
ders and a middle lane 10 feet wide exclusively for left turn movements.
Mr. Richard Ward
September 19, 1975
Page Four
In either case, there appears to be no serious problem, from a traffic engineering
point of view, in allowing the use of Twin Oaks Drive as the entrance for the pro-
posed townhouse development.
If there are any questions concerning this analysis or our conclusions, please
don't hesitate to contact our office.
Very truly yours,
Gr .
BRUCE E. HOUGHTON
TRANSPORTATION ENGINEER
BEH/kss
CC: Mr. C. Harry Behney, Regional Commissioner
Attachments (3)
TWIN
OAKS
'Tennis& Swim Center
June 12, 1975
Mr. Richard Ward
Zoning Administrator
City Hall
South Burlington, Vermont
RE: Twin Oaks Townhouses
Dear Mr. Ward:
Enclosed is development application for Twin Oaks in triplicate,
and our check for $125 as per fee schedule.
Would you kindly arrainge a public hearing and meeting with the
Planning Commission at your first meeting in July. I under-
stand this will be July 8th.
Thank u.
Si c
Peter Bergh
im
Encl.
Kennedy Drive, Opposite High School e South Burlington, Vermont . Telephone: 658-0001
Mail Address: Box 906, Burlington, Vermont 05401
i
CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON
APPLICATION
FOR A DEVELOPMENT OR SUBDIVISION PERMIT
1. Applicant's Name, Address, and Phone Number Burlington
Indoor Tennis Center, Kennedy Drive, South Burlington 658-0001
2. Name Address, and Phone Number of the Person Whom the
Commission should contact regarding this Application
Peter Bergh, RD1, Shelburne, Vermont 425-2433 or 658-0001
3 Nature of the Development or Subdivision _ — 125 Unit
Townhouse Development
4. Location of Development or Subdivision
Kennedy Drive, South Burlington
5. High and Low Elevations of the Tract of Land involved
with the Development or Subdivision
High Point E1.316, Low Point El. 270
6. Address of each of the Applicant's Offices in Vermont
7. Applicant's Legal Interest in the Property (Fee Simple,
Option, Etc.)
Fee Simple
2 -
8. If the Applicant is not an individual, the Format, s Corp.e
and Place of Formation of the Applicant FORM: ,
DATE: 1/1/68 PLACE: South Burlington
9. Estimated Cost, Exclusive of.Land Cost of the Development -
(Applicant for a Subdivision Need. Not Lswer)
10. Application for a Subdivision, the Number of Lots
125 Townhouse Units
11. What Restrictive Covenants are Planned for any Deed(s) to
be issued?
Covenants normal and appropriate to Townhouse and Condominium
Developments
12. Description of the Proposed Development of Subdivision
A. Plans and Specifications:
(1) Attach a detailed lat or lot Plan of the
proposed project drawn to sca e, s owing the
location and dimensions of the entire tract.
This plan should also show: all lots, streets,
roads, water lines, sewage systems, drain
systems, buildings, existing or intended.
(2) In subdivisions where individual water and
sewage facilities are intended, indicate the
proposed location(s).
(3) Show all easements, parks, playgrounds, parking
areas, water courses, and other bodies of water,
natural or artificial, existing or intended.
(1+) Include a contour ma of the land nvolved
dawn on--a--scale of 5 foot dontour intervals.
(5) Indicate on the plans the location and width of
any easements for utilities, roads, etc., exist-
ing or intended. Attach a written explanation
of any such easements.
Green Mountain Power CO. has a 100' wide utility R.O.W. as shown on plan.
Proposed access road to the clusters will have a 60' R.O.W.
-3-
13. What is the purpose of this Subdivision or Development
and What is the intended use of the land after Subdivision
or Development?
Residential development
14. Describe the Site of the Proposed Development or Subdivis-
ion including information, if available, on Soils Streams
or Other bodies of Water, Bedrocks, Etc. The location of the
Townhouses is an open meadow surrounded by trees, having gentle slopes,
and sandy well -drained soils.
15. Acreage:
A. Number of acres owned, or in which you have a legal
interest 4a acres
B. Number of acres in this project 35 acres
C. Number of acres previously developed
5 acres (tennis center)
D. When do you anticipate beginning the project Sept. 1975
E. When will this development or subdivision be completed
Within three years
16. Water System:
A. What type of water system is to be provided, such as:
Individual system on each lot, community system,
municipal system, etc. Municipal
B. Where is the nearest municipal water system and is it
available and feasible to use it?
On site. Yes.
17. Sewage System:
Pr
What type of sewage disposal system is to be provided
or intended, such as: Individual system on each lot,
community system, or municipal system?
Municipal
- 4 -
B.
Where is the nearest community sewage system and is
it available and feasible to use it?
On site. Yes.
C. If the sewage system is other than a community,
municipal, or individual lot septic tank and leaching
field, include competent professional engineering
evidence that it will perform satisfactorily.
18. Adjacent Property:
A. List below the names and addresses of adjacent property
owners.
East boundary- Aesculapius Medical Center and Forest Park Condominium
South boundary- Interstate I-89; West boundary- Howard Brand and
Arthur Bergner; North boundary- Kennedy Drive.
B. What is the adjacent property used for at present?
Residential, medical center, agriculture, roads.
C. What is the future usage intended for the adjacent
property?
Residential, roads
19. Zoning:
A. Which'District or Districts is the proposed site with-
in according to the official zoning map of the City?
R-7
DATE June 12, 1975 SIGNATURE
Peter Bergh
M E M O R A N D U M
To: South Burlington Planning Commission
From: William J. Szymanski, City Manager
Re: Twin Oaks Site Plan
Date: July 7, 1975
1. The terminus of the access road is not adequate for
a turn -around for patrol and emergency vehicles. A
cul-de-sac should be provided.
2. If the road is to be private it should be laid out to
city standards as to R.O.W. width, setback, etc., so
that in the future it could become an accepted street.
3. Building setback requirements from Kennedy Drive (751),
and from F.A.I. 89 (1501) are not met.
Respectfully submitted,
William J. S ymanski
WJS/h
M E M O R A N D U M
To: South Burlington Planning Commission
From: Richard Ward, Zoning Administrative Officer
Re: Clustering provisions within zoning regulations
Date: July 8, 1975
Commissioner Krapcho raised a question on Monday, July 7th,
which is "Do we have provisions within the zoning regulations
to allow for clustering in the R7 District?"
After reviewing Section 6.30 of the zoning regulations and
discussing the matter with Attorney Spokes it would appear
that we do not.
Section 6.30,Residential Planned Unit Development,authorizes
the Planning Commission to waive the area, density and
dimensional requirements of Section 11.00 and to grant increases
in the density. However this is permitted only in R1 and R4
Districts, and has the specific purpose of encouraging clustered
housing development.
We are required to hold a public hearing on the proposed
condominiums. This is a warned hearing, however we cannot
consider the application as proposed until we make the necessary
amendment to Section 6.30, if that is the desire of the
commission.
Respectfully submitted,
I.
Richard -Ward
Zoning Administrative Officer
TWIN
OAKS
Tennis& Swim Center
June 12, 1975
Mr. Richard Ward
Zoning Administrator
City Hall
South Burlington, Vermont
RE: Twin Oaks Townhouses
Dear Mr. Ward:
Enclosed is development application for Twin Oaks in triplicate,
and our check for $125 as per fee schedule.
Would you kindly arratnge a public hearing and meeting with the
Planning Commission at your first meeting in July. I under-
stand this will be July 8th.
Thank u.
Si c
Peter Bergh
Mr.
Enc1.
Kennedy Drive, Opposite High School . South Burlington, Vermont . Telephone: 658-0001
Mail Address: Box 906, Burlington, Vermont 05401
CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON
APPLICATION
FOR A DEVELOPMENT OR SUBDIVISION PERMIT
1. Applicant's Name, Address, and Phone Number Burlington
Indoor Tennis Center, Kennedy Drive, South Burlington 658-0001
2. Name Address, and Phone Number of the Person Whom the
Commission should contact regarding this Application
Peter Bergh, RD1, Shelburne, Vermont 425-2433 or 658-0001
3. Nature of the Development or Subdivision _ 125 Unit
Townhouse Development .
4. Location of Development or Subdivision
Kennedy Drive, South Burlington
5. High and Low Elevations of the Tract of Land involved
with the Development or Subdivision
High Point E1.316, Low Point El. 270
6. Address of each of the Applicant's Offices in Vermont
Kennedy
%. Applicant's Legal Interest in the Property (Fee Simple,
Option, Etc.)
Fee Simple
!MW
i
8. If the Applicant is not an individual, the Form, ?te, s Corp.
and Place of Formation of the Applicant FORM:
DATE: 1/l/68 PLACE: South Burlington
9. Estimated Cost, Exclusive of Land Cost of the Development -
(Applicant for a Subdivision Need. Not Lswer)
10. Application for a Subdivision, the Number of Lots
125 Townhouse Units
11. What Restrictive Covenants are Planned for any Deed(s) to
be issued?
Covenants normal and appropriate to Townhouse and Condominium
Developments
t 12. Description of the Proposed Development of Subdivision
A. Plans and Specifications:
(1) Attach a detailed plat or plot plan of the
proposed project drawn to scale, showing the
location and dimensions of the entire tract.
This plan should also show: all lots, streets,
roads, water lines, sewage systems, drain
systems, buildings, existing or intended.
(2) In subdivisions where individual water and
sewage facilities are intended, indicate the
proposed location(s).
(3) Show all easements, parks, playgrounds, parking
areas, water courses, and other bodies of water,
natural or artificial, existing or intended.
(4) Include a contour maD of the land evolved
drawn on a scale of 5 foot contour intervals.
(5) Indicate on the plans the location and width of
any easements for utilities, roads, etc., exist-
ing or intended. Attach a written explanation
of any such easements.
Green Mountain Power Co. has a 100' wide utility R.O.W. as shown on plan.
Proposed access road to the clusters will have a 60' R.O.W.
-3-
13. What is the purpose of this Subdivision or Development
and What is the intended use of the land after Subdivision
or Development?
Residential development
14. Describe the Site of the Proposed Development or Subdivis-
ion including information, if available, on Soils Stre ms
or Other bodies of Water, Bedrocks, Etc. The location op the
Townhouses is an open meadow surrounded by trees, having gentle slopes,
and sandy well -drained soils.
15. Acreage:
A. Number of acres owned, or in which you have a legal
interest 40 acres,
B. Number of acres in this project 35 acres
C. Number of acres previously developed 5 acres (tennis center)
D. When do you anticipate beginning the project Sept. 1975
E. When will this development or subdivision be completed
Within three years
16. Water System:
A. What type of water system is to be provided, such as:
Individual system on each lot, community system,
municipal system, etc. Municipal
B. Where is the nearest municipal water system and is it
available and feasible to use it?
On site. Yes.
17. Sewage System:
A. What type of sewage disposal system is to be provided
or intended, such as: Individual system on each lot,
community system, or municipal system?
Municipal
r
- 4 -
B. Where is the nearest community sewage system and is
it available and feasible to use it?
On site. Yes.
C. If the sewage system is other than a community,
municipal, or individual lot septic tank and leaching
field, include competent professional engineering
evidence that it will perform satisfactorily.
18. Adjacent Property:
A. List below the names and addresses of adjacent property
owners.
East boundary- Aesculalius Medical Center and Forest Park Condominium
South boundary- Interstate I-89; West boundary- Howard Brand and
Arthur Bergner; North boundary- Kennedy Drive.
B. What is the adjacent property used for at present?
Residential, medical center, agriculture, roads.
C. What is the future usage intended for the adjacent
property?
Residential, roads
19. Zoning:
A. Which'District or Districts is the proposed site with-
in according to the official zoning map of the City?
R-7
DATE June 12, 1975 S
Peter Bergh