Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - Development Review Board - 05/03/2016 CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REIVEW BOARD MEETING MINUTES 3 MAY 2016 The South Burlington Development Review Board held a regular meeting on Tuesday, 3 May 2016, at 6:45 p.m., in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset Street. MEMBERS PRESENT: B. Miller, Acting Chair; J. Smith, J. Wilking, M. Cota, F. Kochman, M. Behr ALSO PRESENT: R. Belair, Administrative Officer; L. Britt, Development Review Planner; J. Barlow, City Attorney; A. Roche 1. Additions, deletions, or changes in order of agenda items: No changes were made to the Agenda. 2. Comments & Questions from the public not related to the Agenda: No issues were raised. 3. Announcements: No announcements were made. 4. Training Session with City Attorney: Mr. Barlow said he had been asked to speak to the Board regarding conflicts of interest and ex- parte communication. He stressed that if a member has a concern with either of those situations, they should speak with Mr. Belair or Mr. Conner as dealing with a potential problem is easier than doing “damage control.” Mr. Barlow noted that prior to 2004, there was no requirement for a DRB or any other quasi-judicial board to have rules of procedure. In 2004, the Legislature enacted requirements for DRBs to have both Rules of Procedure and Conflict of Interest regulations. The South Burlington DRB has met both of these requirements. In addition, the Vermont League of Cities and Towns (VLCT) did a Rules of Procedure Manual which South Burlington used as a model. Mr. Barlow suggested members review this document. Mr. Barlow then outlined the difficulties in dealing with conflicts of interest: a. It is hard to define the boundaries b. People have different levels of sensitivity to these issues c. South Burlington is a comparatively small town in the grand scheme of things; therefore, people on the DRB know a lot of people (the connections that make life valuable to members also make them vulnerable) d. People chosen to serve on the Board are most likely to have connections that cause conflicts because they are involved and engaged in the community. Mr. Barlow stressed that it is important to deal with conflict of interest effectively so that decisions of the Board are not repealed by the Court. The Environmental Court can remand a decision back to a board and require the recusal of a member with a conflict. Mr. Barlow also stressed that the City has a significant investment in the land use program, including the time of everyone who serves on committees. Preserving the integrity of the program is of supreme importance. If community members are not confident in the ability of a board to render unbiased opinions, they will appeal that board’s decision(s). Mr. Barlow then directed attention to the definition of “conflict of interest” in the Rules of Procedure as follows: a. Someone closely associated with you that has a financial interest in a decision you are making b. Someone closely associated with you that has a direct or indirect personal interest, where a decision is important for other than a financial reason (e.g. a view) Mr. Barlow said if a member or members have one of those conflicts of interest, they should not participate in a hearing. He urged members to err on the side of caution if they are not sure of a conflict. He added that a member with a conflict can state that he/she believes he or she can act in an impartial manner or recuse him/herself. If there is a recusal, that person should leave the table and possibly the room. If a question of conflict comes up, the Board can take a break, discuss it, make a decision and then come back and reveal the decision. Mr. Kochman asked about an “opponent” (in a law case, for example). Mr. Barlow said recusal is not necessary unless there has been some ex-parte communication. Mr. Wilking asked about an application in which a Board member is an applicant and needs to be present. Mr. Barlow said this gives the perception that the Board member is “an inside player.” He stressed the need to be transparent and up front with the member’s position. Mr. Wilking asked if he should announce that he worked with a particular engineer in the past. Mr. Barlow said he should. Mr. Miller asked if this should occur at Sketch Plan Review or at Preliminary/Final hearings. Mr. Barlow said yes to all three. Mr. Kochman asked if an applicant can ask a member to recuse him/herself. Mr. Barlow said yes, but the Board member doesn’t have to comply. This could, however, lead to an appeal of the Board’s decision. Mr. Barlow also stressed that ex-parte communication with an interested party in an application is improper, even after a decision has been made. Mr. Wilking suggested that discussion of potential conflicts of interest and ex-parte communication become part of the DRB process prior to the hearing of an application. Mr. Kochman asked about the discretion the Board has regarding the design of a project. Mr. Behr said the Board can advise on design. Other members noted this can be a “bargaining chip.” Mr. Belair said there is no longer “design review.” There are specific design criteria in the Form Based Code district. Members then agreed to hear agenda item originally numbered as #5 following the three items being continued in order to comply with a specific time designation. 5. Preliminary & Final Application #SD-16-07 of Rye Associates, LLC, to amend a previously approved planned unit development consisting of 36 single family dwellings, four 4-unit multi-family dwellings, and a 5,100 sq. ft. general office building. The amendment consists of: 1) resubdividing lots 2-5 into three lots, 2) replacing granite posts with boulders to demarcate the neighborhood park, 3) reviewing the site plan for a new 4,726 sq. ft. general office building, and 4) revising landscaping for the general office building on lot #1, 1075 Hinesburg Road: Mr. Belair advised that the applicant had asked for a continuance to 17 May. Mr. Wilking moved to continue #SD-16-07 to 17 May 2016. Mr. Cota seconded. Motion passed 6-0. 6. Continued sketch plan application #SD-15-40 of John P. Larkin for a planned unit development consisting of: 1) razing a 54 unit hotel (Larkin Terrace), 2) constructing a 100 room hotel, 3) constructing a 51 room extended stay hotel, 4) constructing 77 residential units, and 5) constructing 9,000 sq. ft. of commercial space, 1185 & 1195 Shelburne Road: Mr. Belair advised that the applicant had asked for a continuance to 7 June. Mr. Wilking moved to continue #SD-15-40 to 7 June 2016. Mr. Cota seconded. Motion passed 6-0. 7. Continued Site Plan Application #SP-16-10 of Allen Brook Development, Inc., to construct a 50,155 sq. ft. building which will consist of: 1) 44,155 sq. ft. of warehouse & distribution use, and 2) 6,000 sq. ft. of retail warehouse outlet use, 6 Ethan Allen Drive: Mr. Belair advised that the applicant had asked for a continuance to the next meeting. Mr. Wilking moved to continue #SP-16-10 to 17 May 2016. Ms. Smith seconded. Motion passed 6-0. 8. Minutes of 5 and 19 April 2016: Mr. Wilking moved to approve the Minutes of 5 April 2016 as written. Ms. Smith seconded. Motion passed 6-0. Mr. Kochman asked that the words “members were OK with this” be stricken from the minutes of 19 April. Mr. Wilking moved to approve the Minutes of 19 April 2016 as amended. Ms. Smith seconded. Motion passed 6-0. 9. Other Business: Mr. Belair presented a request for a 3-month extension from the Brown Estates approval on Hinesburg Road. Mr. Wilking moved to grant a 3-month extension to the Brown Estates approval for 57 Hinesburg Road. Mr. Cota seconded. Motion passed 6-0. 10. (formerly #5): Design Review Application #DR-16-02 of Ann Roche to revise a Master Signage Permit for a new free-standing sign, 370 Dorset Street: Ms. Roche said she thought the sign provider had secured a permit for the sign, but he hadn’t. Mr. Belair said the sign is compliant with the Master Sign Criteria. Ms. Roche asked if the sign can be lighted. Mr. Belair said the Board would need details of the lighting. The applicant was given the option of continuing the hearing to add the lighting details to the application or approving this application and filing a new one for the lighting. The applicant chose to get an approval for the existing application and to file a new one for the lighting. Mr. Behr then moved to close #DR-16-02. Ms. Smith seconded. Motion passed 6-0. As there was no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned by common consent at 8:10 p.m. , Clerk 06/21/2016 , Date Published by ClerkBase ©2019 by Clerkbase. No Claim to Original Government Works. 1 CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD SD_16_07_1075HinesburgRoad_RyeAssociates_plat_May3 _mtg DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING Report preparation date: April 29, 2016 Application received: March 10, 2016 1075 Hinesburg Road Preliminary & Final Plat Application #SD-16-07 Meeting Date: May 3, 2016 Owner/Applicant Rye Associates, LLC c/o Dousevicz Construction 21 Carmichael Street, Suite 201 Essex, VT 05452 Contact Brad Dousevicz Dousevicz Construction 21 Carmichael Street, Suite 201 Essex, VT 05452 Engineer Civil Engineering Associates, Inc. 10 Mansfield View Lane South Burlington, VT 05403 Property Information Tax Parcel 0860-01075 SEQ-NR and SEQ-VC Location CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD SD_16_07_1075HinesburgRd_RyeAssociates_plat_May3_mtg DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING 2 Project Description Preliminary and final plat application #SD-16-07 of Rye Associates, LLC to amend a previously approved planned unit development consisting of 36 single family dwellings, four 4-unit multi-family dwellings, and a 5,100 sq. ft. general office building. The amendment consists of: 1) resubdividing lots 2 – 5 into three (3) lots, 2) replacing granite posts with boulders to demarcate the neighborhood park, 3) reviewing the site plan of a new 4,726 sq. ft. general office building, and 4) revising landscaping for the general office building on lot 1, 1075 Hinesburg Road. Comments Administrative Officer Ray Belair and Development Review Planner Lindsey Britt have reviewed the plans submitted on March 10, 2016 and updated April 22 and April 26, 2016 and offer the following comments. Zoning District and Dimensional Requirements The SEQ-VC Zoning District table below represents an analysis of the requirements as applied to Lot 2 (location of the new general office building) only. SEQ-VC Zoning District Required Proposed Min. Lot Size 40,000 SF 24,859 SF*  Max. Building Height 50 ft. 28 ft Max. Building Coverage 15% 20.5%* Max. Overall Coverage 30% 50%*  Min. Front Setback (Rye Circle) 20 ft. >20 ft  Min. Front Setback (Hinesburg Road) 50 ft. + 7 ft. 57 ft  Min. Side Setback 20 ft. >20 ft Min. Rear Setback 30 ft. N/A  Zoning compliance * Waiver approved in preliminary plat application #SD-13-22 and final plat application #SD-14-15. SEQ-NR Zoning District Required Proposed Note: No dimensional changes from previously approved final plat application #SD-14-15. Planned Unit Development Standards A. Lot Configuration In final plat application #SD-14-15 thirty lots were permitted, including Lot 2 through Lot 5 on the commercially zoned portion of the property (SEQ-VC), with the use of 31 Transfer of Development Rights. Lots 2-5 are proposed to be reduced to three lots (Lots 2-4). CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD SD_16_07_1075HinesburgRd_RyeAssociates_plat_May3_mtg DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING 3 Lot # Previously Approved Proposed Change in Size 2 0.43 acres 0.57 acres 0.14 acres 3 0.60 acres 0.58 acres -0.02 acres 4 0.42 acres 0.97 acres 0.55 acres 5 0.67 acres Eliminated Eliminated The only lot which is decreasing in size is Lot 3, which is losing 0.02 acres. This represents a 3.3% decrease in the size of the lot from what was previously approved. It should be noted that in preliminary plat application #SD-13-22 and final plat application #SD-14-15 Lots 1-2 and Lot 4-5 were granted waivers to permit 54% lot coverage and 21% building coverage and Lot 3 was granted a waiver to permit 63% lot coverage and 26% building coverage. 1. Staff recommends the Board approve the suggested lot reconfiguration as being within the density and coverage limits previously envisioned by the Board. B. Access, Street Configuration, and Parking One parking space on Lot 1 is proposed to be removed to make room for a turnaround and an additional 10 spaces (occurring primarily on Lot 2 but with some portion on Lot 1) will be added that will serve the existing building on commercial Lot 1 and the proposed building on commercial Lot 2. The proposed building on commercial Lot 2 will also be accessed through a new curb cut on the south side of the building that will provide access to a new parking lot that will have 11 spaces initially and an additional 10 reserved for the as- yet-not proposed building on commercial Lot 3. Those additional spaces will occur on Lot 3 and be accessed through the curb cut on the south side of Lot 2. Section 9.10(D)(4) requires three off-street parking spaces for every 1,000 square feet of non-residential use and the DRB may allow on-street parking within 500 lineal feet to count towards the requirement. The applicant has provided the following table to explain their parking allotments for commercial Lots 1-3: Lot Bldg. SF (one story) Req’d Parking Off-street Parking Individual Lot Review 1 5,100 15 13 2 4,726 14 21 3 10 Consolidated Review 1 & 2 9,826 29 34 3 10 Section 14.06(B)(2)(d) states that parking “shall be located to the side of the building(s) or to the front of the building adjacent to the public street with the lowest average daily volume of traffic.” The parking areas on commercial Lot 1 and commercial Lot 2 are both to the side of the buildings. Staff considers this criterion to be met. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD SD_16_07_1075HinesburgRd_RyeAssociates_plat_May3_mtg DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING 4 Section 13.06(B) of the Land Development Regulations require one major deciduous shade tree located within or near the parking perimeter for every five parking spaces and trees must have a caliper of 2 ½ inches or more. Plans indicate the required number of trees will be planted and they will be of the correct caliber. Waiting for comments from arborist. C. Wetlands Impact There are no changes to wetlands impacts from the previously permitted final plat application #SD-14-15. D. Parks and Open Space Planning According to Section 13.06(B)(6) of the LDRs, plans are required to show where snow will be stored. The plans indicate snow storage areas adjacent to both parking areas. Applicant has indicated the value for the building on commercial Lot 1 has been reduced from initial estimates to $666,979. This results in a minimum landscaping budget requirement of $14,170, which is illustrated in the table below. Total Building Construction or Improvement Cost % of Total Construction/Improvement Cost Cost Up to $250,000 3% $7,500 Next $250,000 2% $5,000 Remainder over $500,000 ($166,979) 1% $1,670 Total: $14,170 The applicant has requested to amend the previously approved landscaping budget from $16,784 to $14,245.01. Staff considers the landscaping budget and planting plan to be sufficient for the site. 2. Staff recommends the Board support the request for a decrease in the landscaping budget for Lot 1 to $14,245.01. The applicant has indicated the proposed building on commercial Lot 2 will cost $596,650. This results in a minimum landscaping budget requirement of $13,466.50. The applicant has proposed a budget of $13,500.05. Staff considers the landscaping budget and planting plan to be sufficient for the site. Total Building Construction or Improvement Cost % of Total Construction/Improvement Cost Cost Up to $250,000 3% $7,500 Next $250,000 2% $5,000 Remainder over $500,000 ($96,650) 1% $966.50 Total: $13,466.50 3. Staff recommends the Board support the request for a landscaping budget for Lot 2 of $13,500.05. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD SD_16_07_1075HinesburgRd_RyeAssociates_plat_May3_mtg DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING 5 The applicant has requested to amend the previously approved plan to allow for the use of boulders with average diameters “of three (3) feet” to demarcate the perimeter of the neighborhood park according to a cover letter dated April 22, 2016. This would be instead of granite posts (6”-10” in diameter, 30” tall). 4. Staff recommends the Board ask the applicant to update plans to show this change to three (3) foot diameter boulders. E. Building Orientation and Design Section 9.10 (D) Design Standards for Non-Residential Land Uses in the SEQ-VC Sub-District 1. Building Orientation. Non-residential buildings must be oriented to the principal public street on which the building has a façade. Primary building entries must be oriented to and open onto a sidewalk or other public walkway providing access from the public street. Secondary building entries may open onto parking areas. 2. Building Facades a. Building facades should be varied and articulated for pedestrian interest. b. Street level windows and numerous shop entries are encouraged along the sidewalk. Blank or solid walls (without glazing) should not exceed thirty feet (30’) in length at the street level. c. Building entries should be emphasized with special architectural treatment. d. All buildings should have a well-defined ‘base’ with richer detail in the pedestrian’s immediate view (i.e., textured materials, recessed entries, awnings, fenestration patterns) and a recognizable ‘top’ consisting of elements such as cornice treatments, roof overhangs with brackets, textured materials, stepped parapets. e. Buildings should have hipped or gabled roofs or flat roofs with an articulated parapet. Mansard style roofs are discouraged. f. Buildings in the SEQ-VC should employ “four-sided” design principles intended to ensure a high visual quality from any publicly-used vantage point. The Board has previously indicated that buildings should be oriented toward Rye Circle. Staff considers that the proposed building for commercial Lot 2 complies with the design standards above, for the following reasons. Windows are numerous and no “blank walls” are shown. The building includes doors facing to the south, west (Rye Circle), and north. The building’s roofs comply with the standards. The building employs a “four-sided” design principle and incorporates varied architectural features throughout. F. Waste Disposal Section 14.07 CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD SD_16_07_1075HinesburgRd_RyeAssociates_plat_May3_mtg DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING 6 C. All dumpsters and other facilities to handle solid waste, including compliance with any recycling, composting, or other requirements, shall be accessible, secure and properly screened with opaque fencing to ensure that trash and debris do not escape the enclosure(s). A dumpster is proposed at the eastern end of the parking area on the south side of commercial Lot 2. It will be located on a concrete pad, be accessed via hinged doors, and enclosed with screen board or another material. It is unclear from the plans whether space for composting, which is a requirement, will be provided within this enclosure. 5. Staff recommends the Board discuss with the applicant how and where space for composting will be provided on the site. G. Lighting Section 13.07 of the Land Development Regulations discusses exterior lighting and states that: A. General Requirements. All exterior lighting for all uses in all districts except for one-family and two-family uses shall be of such a type and location and shall have such shielding as will direct the light downward and will prevent the source of light from being visible from any adjacent residential property or street. Light fixtures that are generally acceptable are illustrated in Appendix D. “Source of light” shall be deemed to include any transparent or translucent lighting that is an integral part of the lighting fixture(s). Site illumination for uncovered areas shall be evenly distributed. Where feasible, energy efficient lighting is encouraged. B. Specific Requirements for Parking Areas. Light sources shall comply with the following: 1) The number and spacing of required light pole standards in a parking area or lot shall be determined based on the type of fixture, height of pole, number of fixtures on the pole, and the desired lighting level. Unless the applicant can demonstrate a reasonable alternative, lighting shall be considered evenly distributed if the light fixtures are placed at intervals that equal four times the mounting height. 2) Pole placement, mounting height, and fixture design shall serve to minimize lighting from becoming a nuisance. All light sources shall be arranged so as to reflect away from adjacent properties. All light sources shall be shielded or positioned so as to prevent glare from becoming a hazard or a nuisance, or having a negative impact on site users, adjacent properties, or the traveling public. Excessive spillover of light to nearby properties shall be avoided. Glare shall be minimized to drivers on adjacent streets. 3) Poles shall be rustproof metal, cast iron, fiberglass, finished wood or similar structural material, with a decorative surface or finish. 4) Poles in pedestrian areas shall not be greater than 30 feet in height and shall utilize underground wiring. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD SD_16_07_1075HinesburgRd_RyeAssociates_plat_May3_mtg DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING 7 5) Poles in all other areas shall not exceed thirty (30) feet in height, and shall utilize underground wiring. There is one pole light on the north side of the proposed building on commercial Lot 2 and one on the south side. These light the parking areas. Poles are shown to be 16 feet and 20 feet tall and to have forward throw fixtures. It is unclear to staff based on the plans whether these fixtures meet the requirements of Appendix D: Lighting of the LDRs and which pole is 16 feet tall and which is 20 feet tall. Components are made of aluminum. 6. Staff recommends the Board request additional details about the lights to ascertain whether they comply with Appendix D of the LDRs, specifically whether they “shield the light source to minimize glare and light trespass.” 6) Light sources on structures shall not exceed thirty (30) feet, or the height of the structure, whichever is less. Exterior lighting for parking garages and structures shall be mounted no higher than the roof of the structure. The proposed building on Lot 2 will have two (2) cone shade LED gooseneck lights mounted to the building on the northern elevation, three (3) mounted on the eastern elevation, and one (1) mounted on the southern elevation. There will be three (3) recessed LED lights mounted on the ceilings of the entry canopy at the northern elevation, two (2) on the southern elevation, and one (1) on the western elevation. The western side of the property is closest to residential uses and staff therefore finds it reasonable that less lighting would be provided on that side of the building. All of these fixtures will be mounted at less than 30 feet in height. Staff finds this criterion to be met. H. Stormwater Comments Waiting for comments I. Fire In an email to staff dated April 28, 2016 Deputy Chief Terry Francis stated “applicant shall ensure adequate fire department access pursuant to NFPA 1.” 7. Staff recommends the Board support the comment provided by the Fire Department. J. Energy Standards Staff notes that all new buildings are subject to the Stretch Energy Code pursuant to Section 3.15: Residential and Commercial Building Energy Standards of the LDRs. K. Utility Cabinets/HVAC Units CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD SD_16_07_1075HinesburgRd_RyeAssociates_plat_May3_mtg DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING 8 The plans should show any existing or proposed utility cabinets and/or ground mounted HVAC units. Per Section 13.18(B)(4) of the LDRs any such units would be required to be screened. It appears that there is an unlabeled utility cabinet at the northeast corner of commercial Lot 1 which does not meet the setback requirement of five (5) feet from the street right-of-way. 8. Staff recommends the Board get clarification from the applicant about whether there are currently or any proposed utility cabinets and/or ground mounted HVAC units on commercial Lot 1 and 2. RECOMMENDATION The Board should seek clarification on the issues identified above. Respectfully submitted, ________________________________ Ray Belair, Administrative Officer 1" = 40'11202BLA 1FEB. 24, 20161075 Hinesburg Rd.South Burlington, VermontBoundary LineAdjustmentofCommercial Lots 2 - 5- Location Map -Not to ScaleFOX RUN LANEHINESBURG RD.89116MEADOWLAND DR.TRCTRCRG/ACERECEIVED FOR RECORDING IN THE LAND RECORDS OFTHE CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT, AT______________ O'CLOCK ON THE ______ DAY OF__________, 20_____.ATTEST: ____________________________, CITY CLERKTo the best of my knowledge and belief this plat,consisting of two sheets, depicts the results of asurvey conducted by me as described in "SurveyNotes" above, based upon our analysis of landrecords and evidence found in the field. Existingboundaries shown are in substantialconformance with the records, except as noted.This plat is in substantial compliance with 27 VSA1403, "Recording of Land Plats". This statementvalid only when accompanied by my originalsignature and seal below. __________________________________________ Timothy R. Cowan VT LS 597APPROVED BY RESOLUTION OF THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEWBOARD OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT,ON THE _____ DAY OF ________, 20____, SUBJECT TO THEREQUIREMENTS AND CONDITIONS OF SAID RESOLUTION.SIGNED THIS _____ DAY OF _________, 20______.BY ___________________________________, CHAIRPERSON- Legend -- Survey Notes -4. Iron pipes shown as "found" are typically labeled with inside diameter, rods withoutside diameter, unless otherwise indicated. Condition of pipes, rods and markersfound are "Good" unless otherwise noted. Corners denoted "Proposed" shalltypically consist of58" diameter X 40" long rebar or by 4" square concrete markers,either type capped with aluminum disks stamped "Civil Engineering Assocs. - VTLS 597", and typically set flush with existing grade.5. Land areas (acreages) shown are calculated to the sidelines of existing orproposed streets as shown.- Reference Plat -A. "Subdivision Plat - Rye Meadows P.U.D."last revised 11/19/2014 by Civil EngineeringAssociates, Inc. Recorded, South BurlingtonLand Records.PROPOSED 10' wide sewer (force main) easement across Commercial Lot 4-5 to serve the Rye Homeowners Association (HOA).PROPOSED 10' wide easement, located along the street R.O.W. across Commercial Lots1 - 5, to serve Green Mountain Power Corp.PROPOSED 10' wide drainage easement crossing Lot 8.COMMERCIAL LOTS 1 - 5MAY be subject to inter-connective reciprocal access easements. Locations to be determined upon individual site plan approvals.EXISTING Easement (10' x 408.5'± ) serving Green Mtn. Power and Adelphia Cable Co., dated December 13, 1994. Volume 371 Page 650.[ SHADED ]PROPOSED drainage easement crossing Lots 1,2,3 and Lot 4-5 to detention basin on Lot 4-5.- Easement Notes -317Proposed Street shown as "Rye Circle". Variable width (from 55' to 61' wide). Land area: 2.25 acres.- Proposed Dedication -108RYE MEADOWP.U.D.1. Purpose of this survey and plat is to depict the adjustment of the boundaries ofCommercial Lots 2, 3, and 4 and to combine the resulting Lot 4 with Lot 5.2. Other (neighboring) property lines and buildings shown may be approximateonly, and are shown for informational purposes only.3. Field survey was conducted during 2012 and consisted of a closed-loop traverseutilizing an electronic total station instrument. Bearings shown are from Grid North,Vermont Coordinate System of 1983, based upon our GPS observations on oradjacent to the site.1213P:\AutoCADD Projects\2011\11202\1-CADD Files-11202\Dwg\11202 BLA 2-2016 Commercial Lots.dwg, 3/8/2016 1:11:46 PM, aloiselle DSMDSMACL1" = 50'11202C1.0DEC., 2011LOCATION MAP1" = 2000'ACERYEMEADOWASSOCIATES, INC25 OMEGA DRIVE, SUITE 201WILLISTON, VERMONT 054951075 HINESBURG RD.SOUTH BURLINGTONVERMONTPHASE IPROPOSEDCONDITIONSSITE PLANFOX RUN LANEHINESBURG RD.89116MEADOWLAND DR.RYEMEADOWPLANNED UNITDEVELOPMENTP:\AutoCADD Projects\2011\11202\1-CADD Files-11202\Dwg\11202K.dwg, 4/26/2016 10:11:06 AM, aloiselle SEQ-VCDISTRICT200'CURRENT VCDISTRICTLINETI &I &XXXXRYE CIRCLELANDON RD.HINESBURG RD.29 RYE CIRCLELOT 227 RYE CIRCLELOT 1EXISTINGBUILDINGEXISTINGSIDEWALKEXISTINGPAVEMENTPROPOSEDCONC. CURBPROPOSEDPAVEMENTPROPOSED 5' WIDECONC. SIDEWALK W/CURBEXISTING LIGHT POLE TOBE RELOCATED (SEELIGHTING PLAN)(3) EXISTING PARKINGSPACES REDUCED TO2 SPACESEXISTING CURBTO BE REMOVEDEXISTING ON-STREETPARKING89 RYE CIRCLELOT 391 RYE CIRCLELOT 4DUMPSTERENCLOSURE ONCONC. PADPROPOSEDBIKE RACK6' WIDECONC.SIDEWALKPROPOSEDLIGHT POLEADDITIONALSTREET PARKINGPROPOSEDCONC. CURBTURN-ROUNDSPACETURN-ROUNDSPACEBIOSWALEDSMDSMSAL1" = 30'11202C1.0FEB., 2016LOCATION MAP1" = 2000'PROPOSEDOVERALL SITEPLANACEPROGRESS PLANS4/25/16RYEMEADOWASSOCIATES, INC25 OMEGA DRIVE, SUITE 201WILLISTON, VERMONT 054951075 HINESBURG RD.SOUTH BURLINGTONVERMONTFOX RUN LANEHINESBURG RD.MEADOWLAND DR.RYEMEADOWCOMMERCIALDEVELOPMENT116891. UTILITIES SHOWN DO NOT PURPORT TO CONSTITUTE OR REPRESENT ALL UTILITIES LOCATEDUPON OR ADJACENT TO THE SURVEYED PREMISES. EXISTING UTILITY LOCATIONS AREAPPROXIMATE ONLY. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY ALL UTILITY CONFLICTS. ALLDISCREPANCIES SHALL BE REPORTED TO THE ENGINEER. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT DIGSAFE (888-344-7233) PRIOR TO ANY CONSTRUCTION.2. ALL EXISTING UTILITIES NOT INCORPORATED INTO THE FINAL DESIGN SHALL BE REMOVED ORABANDONED AS INDICATED ON THE PLANS OR DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER.3. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MAINTAIN AS-BUILT PLANS (WITH TIES) FOR ALL UNDERGROUNDUTILITIES. THOSE PLANS SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE OWNER AT THE COMPLETION OF THEPROJECT.4. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR/RESTORE ALL DISTURBED AREAS (ON OR OFF THE SITE) AS ADIRECT OR INDIRECT RESULT OF THE CONSTRUCTION.5. ALL GRASSED AREAS SHALL BE MAINTAINED UNTIL FULL VEGETATION IS ESTABLISHED.6. MAINTAIN ALL TREES OUTSIDE OF CONSTRUCTION LIMITS.7. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL WORK NECESSARY FOR COMPLETE ANDOPERABLE FACILITIES AND UTILITIES.8. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT SHOP DRAWINGS FOR ALL ITEMS AND MATERIALSINCORPORATED INTO THE SITE WORK. WORK SHALL NOT BEGIN ON ANY ITEM UNTIL SHOPDRAWING APPROVAL IS GRANTED.9. IN ADDITION TO THE REQUIREMENTS SET IN THESE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS, THECONTRACTOR SHALL COMPLETE THE WORK IN ACCORDANCE WITH ALL PERMIT CONDITIONS ANDANY LOCAL PUBLIC WORKS STANDARDS.10. THE TOLERANCE FOR FINISH GRADES FOR ALL PAVEMENT, WALKWAYS AND LAWN AREAS SHALL BE0.1 FEET.11. ANY DEWATERING NECESSARY FOR THE COMPLETION OF THE SITEWORK SHALL BE CONSIDEREDAS PART OF THE CONTRACT AND SHALL BE THE CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITY.12. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE ALL WORK WITHIN TOWN ROAD R.O.W. WITH TOWNAUTHORITIES.13. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL THE ELECTRICAL, CABLE AND TELEPHONE SERVICES INACCORDANCE WITH THE UTILITY COMPANIES REQUIREMENTS.14. EXISTING PAVEMENT AND TREE STUMPS TO BE REMOVED SHALL BE DISPOSED OF AT ANAPPROVED OFF-SITE LOCATION. ALL PAVEMENT CUTS SHALL BE MADE WITH A PAVEMENT SAW.15. IF THERE ARE ANY CONFLICTS OR INCONSISTENCIES WITH THE PLANS OR SPECIFICATIONS, THECONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT THE ENGINEER FOR VERIFICATION BEFORE WORK CONTINUES ONTHE ITEM IN QUESTION.16. PROPERTY LINE INFORMATION IS APPROXIMATE AND BASED ON EXISTING TAX MAP INFORMATION.THIS PLAN IS NOT A BOUNDARY SURVEY AND IS NOT INTENDED TO BE USED AS ONE.17. IF THE BUILDING IS TO BE SPRINKLERED, BACKFLOW PREVENTION SHALL BE PROVIDED INACCORDANCE WITH AWWA M14. THE SITE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONSTRUCT THE WATER LINE TOTWO FEET ABOVE THE FINISHED FLOOR. SEE MECHANICAL PLANS FOR RISER DETAIL.18. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR OBTAINING TESTING AND INSPECTION SERVICESINDICATED IN THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS, TYPICAL FOR CONCRETE AND SOIL TESTING.19. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL LAYOUT AND FIELD ENGINEERING REQUIRED FORCOMPLETION OF THE PROJECT. CIVIL ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES WILL PROVIDE AN AUTOCAD FILEWHERE APPLICABLE.20. THE OWNER SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE INSTALLATION OF ANY AND ALL SAFETY FENCES ORRAILS ABOVE EXISTING AND PROPOSED WALLS. THE OWNER SHALL VERIFY LOCAL, STATE ANDINSURANCE REQUIREMENT GUIDELINES FOR THE INSTALLATION AND VERIFY ANY AND ALLPERMITTING REQUIREMENTS.GENERAL NOTESLEGENDFMEGSTSTW100EXISTING CONTOUREXISTING CURBEXISTING FENCEEXISTING GRAVELEXISTING PAVEMENTEXISTING GUARD RAILEXISTING SWALEWETLANDSWETLANDS BUFFEREXISTING ELECTRICEXISTING FORCEMAINEXISTING GASEXISTING STORMEXISTING GRAVITY SEWEREXISTING TELEPHONEEXISTING WATERFMGSTSTWPROPOSED CONTOUR100PROPOSED CURBPROPOSED FENCEPROPOSED GRAVELPROPOSED PAVEMENTPROPOSED GUARD RAILPROPOSED SWALEPROPOSED ELECTRICPROPOSED FORCEMAINPROPOSED GASPROPOSED STORMPROPOSED GRAVITY SEWERPROPOSED TELEPHONEPROPOSED WATERSTREAMEXISTING WELLPROPOSED WELLEXISTING SEWER MANHOLEDEXISTING STORM MANHOLEEXISTING CATCH BASINEXISTING HYDRANTEXISTING SHUT OFFEXISTING UTILITY POLEEXISTING LIGHT POLEEXISTING GUY WIRE/POLEEXISTING SIGNEXISTING DECIDUOUS TREEEXISTING CONIFEROUS TREEEDGE OF BRUSH/WOODSAPPROXIMATE SETBACK LINEAPPROXIMATE PROPERTY LINESPROPOSED SEWER MANHOLEDPROPOSED STORM MANHOLEPROPOSED CATCH BASINIRON ROD/PIPE FOUNDCONCRETE MONUMENT FOUNDREBAR SETCONCRETE MONUMENT SETPROPOSED HYDRANTPROPOSED SHUT OFFPROPOSED UTILITY POLEPROPOSED LIGHT POLEPROPOSED EDGE OF BRUSH/WOODSPROPOSED SETBACK LINEPROPOSED PROPERTY LINECOMMERCIAL LOT 1 & 2 COVERAGES:ZONE: SEQ - VC DISTRCTMAXIMUM LOT COVERAGE ALLOWABLE = 54%MAXIMUM BUILDING COVERAGE ALLOWABLE = 21%LOTLOTSIZELOTCOVERAGEBUILDINGCOVERAGELOT 1LOT 226137 SF24859 SF51.03%50.0%21.17%20.50%SEQ-NR DISTRICTSEQ-VC DISTRICTP:\AutoCADD Projects\2011\11202\1-CADD Files-11202\Dwg\Commercial Lots\11202 - Commercial Lot2 - Site.dwg, 4/26/2016 9:51:39 AM, aloiselle DSMDSMACL1" = 15'11202C1.6MARCH, 2014LOCATION MAP1" = 2000'ACEPARK / OPENSPACE ACTIVEUSE AREAPLANFOX RUN LANEHINESBURG RD.89116MEADOWLAND DR.RYEASSOCIATES, INC25 OMEGA DRIVE, SUITE 201WILLISTON, VERMONT 054951075 HINESBURG RD.SOUTH BURLINGTONVERMONTRYEMEADOWPLANNED UNITDEVELOPMENTP:\AutoCADD Projects\2011\11202\1-CADD Files-11202\Dwg\11202K.dwg, 2/23/2016 11:02:24 AM, aloiselle UD UD UD UD UD UD UD UD UD UD WWWETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC SSSSSWWWWWWWWWWGGGGGGGGGGGGSSSG G G G G G G G G G G G G ST ST ST ST ST ST ST ST ST ST ST ST ST W W W W W W W W W W W W W WSSSSSSSSSRELOCATE LIGHT POLERYE CIRCLE GAS SERVICE6" WATER SERVICEETCETC NEW 5' WIDE SIDEWALK5.0'11.4'16.0'5.0'6.0'18'24'18'R=5'R=5'R=5'EX. 2" HDPE GAS MAINEX. 8" PVC SEWEREX. 18" STORMEX. 6" UNDERDRAINEX. 8" D.I. WATER MAINEX. 5" PRIMARYEX. 6" D.I. WATER SERVICEEX. GAS SERVICEEX. (2) 3" SECONDARYEX. GAS SERVICE22.0'8.0'9.0'9.0'9.0'18.0'NEW BIKE RACKEX. SMH #2RIM=406.8INV. IN=399.9INV. OUT=399.8EX. GAS SERVICEEX. 6" SEWER SERVICE(2) 3" CONDUITS FOR ELEC.,TEL. & CABLE SERVICE29 RYE CIRCLE - LOT 2PROPOSED COMMERCIAL BUILDINGF.F. EL. 409.6NEW YD #1 LOT 2RIM=408.25INV. OUT (12" HDPE)=404.25NEW YD #2 LOT 2RIM=407.3INV. IN (12" HDPE)=403.0INV. OUT (12" HDPE)=403.04.0'TRANSITION CURBSS6" SDR 35 PVCSEWER SERVICE1/4"/FT. SLOPE MIN.EX. SMHRIM=408.0INV.=401.1CORE NEW HOLE INEX. SMH FOR 6" PVCAT INV.=401.3INVERT AT BUILDING=402.8NEW 5' WIDE SIDEWALK12" HDPE 12" HDPETRANSITIONCURBCLEANOUTE E NEW CB #2 LOT2RIM 406 8TRANSITIONCURBNEW CB #1 LOT2RIM=408.9INV. IN=404.9INV. OUT=404.812" HDPETRANSITION CURB(TYP.)15" HDPE6" SDR 35 PVC6" PERF. SDR 35 PVCINV.=401.5BIOSWALETOP OF STONEELEV.= 405.5BIOSWALETOP BERM=406.5UD UD UD UD UD UDEETCSTR=5'EX. CB #12RIM=405.9INV. IN=402.9 (6" UD)INV. OUT=400.9 (15")EX. 6" UNDERDRAIN+407.4TRAN CUR(TYPDSMDSMSAL1" = 10'11202C2.0FEB., 2016LOCATION MAP1" = 2000'PROPOSED SITE& UTILITYPLAN4/25/2016ACEPROGRESS PLANSRYEMEADOWASSOCIATES, INC25 OMEGA DRIVE, SUITE 201WILLISTON, VERMONT 054951075 HINESBURG RD.SOUTH BURLINGTONVERMONTFOX RUN LANEHINESBURG RD.MEADOWLAND DR.RYEMEADOWCOMMERCIALDEVELOPMENT11689MATCH LINEMATCH LINEP:\AutoCADD Projects\2011\11202\1-CADD Files-11202\Dwg\Commercial Lots\11202 - Commercial Lot2 - Site.dwg, 4/26/2016 9:52:07 AM, aloiselle UD UD UD UD UD UD UD UD UD UD 07408408407ST ST ST ST ST ST ST ST ST ST ST ST ST410408407408RELOCATE LIGHT POLERYE CIRCLE HINESBURG RD.EX. 18" STORMEX. 6" UNDERDRAIN+408.28+408.5+408.9+409.48+409.58+409.42+409.0+409.5+408.229 RYE CIRCLE - LOT 2PROPOSED COMMERCIAL BUILDINGF.F. EL. 409.6+BC/TC408.9+BC408.65+409.5+409.5+409.5+409.5+409.6+409.6+408.88+409.6+409.5+409.0+409.0+409.0+409.0+409.5409.5++409.6+409.6+409.0409.0++BC408.3+408.98+TC408.88+409.4++BC407.6+TC407.9+BC407.4+406.5+408.9+408.74+408.0NEW YD #1 LOT 2RIM=408.25INV. OUT (12" HDPE)=404.25NEW YD #2 LOT 2RIM=407.3INV. IN (12" HDPE)=403.0INV. OUT (12" HDPE)=403.0NEW DMH LOT2RIM=406.4INV. IN (15")=400.8INV. IN (6")=401.3INV. OUT=400.7409409409TRANSITION CURB12" HDPE 12" HDPE407+408.64+408.06TRANSITIONCURB+409.4BC/TC408.81+409+407.7+407.4NEW CB #2 LOT2RIM=406.8INV. IN=402.2INV. OUT=402.1+BC408.0407407408408407TRANSITIONCURB408408NEW CB #1 LOT2RIM=408.9INV. IN=404.9INV. OUT=404.812" HDPETRANSITION CURB(TYP.)15" HDPE4066" SDR 35 PVC6" PERF. SDR 35 PVCINV.=401.5BIOSWALETOP OF STONEELEV.= 405.5BIOSWALETOP BERM=406.5406.3++406.5+405.5DSMDSMSAL11202C2.1FEB., 2016LOCATION MAP1" = 2000'PROPOSEDGRADING &DRAINAGE PLAN4/25/2016ACEPROGRESS PLANSRYEMEADOWASSOCIATES, INC25 OMEGA DRIVE, SUITE 201WILLISTON, VERMONT 054951075 HINESBURG RD.SOUTH BURLINGTONVERMONTFOX RUN LANEHINESBURG RD.MEADOWLAND DR.RYEMEADOWCOMMERCIALDEVELOPMENT116891" = 10'P:\AutoCADD Projects\2011\11202\1-CADD Files-11202\Dwg\Commercial Lots\11202 - Commercial Lot2 - Site.dwg, 4/26/2016 9:52:33 AM, aloiselle UD UD UD UD UD UD UD UDUDTN/F EASTMOUNTAINVIEW, LLCN/FSPHINXDEVELOPMENT,LLCN/FSPANIEL PROPERTIES,LLCANDAVALANCHEDEVELOPMENT, LLCNEW CB #14RIM=409.0INV. (6"UD)=406.0INV. IN (18"N)=402.7INV. OUT (18"S)=402.6NEW CB #13RIM=408.27INV. IN (18"N)=402.3INV. OUT (18"S)=402.2NEW 5'Ø CB #11RIM=405.49INV. IN (18"N)=400.1INV. IN (15"E)=400.5INV. IN (12"W)=400.5INV. OUT=400.0NEW CB #12RIM=405.9INV. (6"UD)=402.9INV. OUT=400.9NEW CB #4ARIM=399.5NV. IN (18")=395.5 OUT (18")=395.4NEW 24' HDPEW/FES #5 INV.=403.3NEW 24'HDPE W/FES #4 INV.=403.7NEW 24" HDPEW/FES #6 INV.=397.5FF=401.2NEW CB #9ARIM=402.5INV. =397.5NEW CB #10RIM=403.85INV. (6"UD)=400.85INV. IN (18"N)=398.5INV. OUT (18"S)=398.4NEW CB #9RIM=403.0INV. (6"UD)=400.0INV. IN (18")=397.0INV. OUT (18")=396.9NEW CB #4BRIM=402.7INV.(18")=397.2400 407 407408400408406F.F. 411.7407405F.F. 410.5B-401.5 F.F. 409.5B-400.5F.F. 409.7B-400.7F.F. 410.0B-401.0407 406 403404405406405405 404 403405 407 407 406404403403 13TYPE "C2"19TYPE "E"15TYPE"D"UDUDUDNEW YD #9RIM=402.4INV. OUT (12")=398.0INV.=398.5±408408408399F.F. 406.3F.F. 405.0F.F. 408.8 F.F. 407.5 27TYPE "C1"XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXPROPERTIES, 1st-404.0117TYPE "A"4.0"C"1st-405.5127TYPE "A"03.73"A"1st-405.0115TYPE "B"1st-403.3119TYPE "C"SEE SHEET C3.2ENLARGED PLANOF CMMERCIALLOT 27SEE SHEET C3.3ENLARGED PLANOF THE 4-PLEXBUILDINGS1st-404.0B-395.0FF=402.01st-403.6B-394.6STSTSTSTSTSTSTSTST ST ST ST ST ST ST ST ST ST STSTSTSTSTSTSTSTST ST ST ST410408407408RELOCATE LIGHT POLERYE CIRCLE HINESBURG RD. EXISTINGSIDEWALK EXISTINGPAVEMENT EXISTING ON-STREETPARKING EX. 18" STORMEX. 6" UNDERDRAINEX. CB #12RIM=405.9INV. IN=402.9 (6" UD)INV. O U T = 4 0 0 . 9 ( 1 5 " )EX. 6" UNDERDRAIN29 RYE CIRCLE - LOT 2PROPOSED COMMERCIAL BUILDINGF.F. EL. 409.6409409 409407NEW DMHRIM=404.0± ADJUSTTO FINISH GRADEINV. IN=399.8INV. OUT=399.715" HDPE W/FESINV=399.015" HDPE15" HDPE STONE PAN409 407407 408408 407408408406DSMDSMSAL11202C2.1AFEB., 2016LOCATION MAP1" = 2000'OVERALLPROPOSEDGRADING &DRAINAGE PLAN4/25/2016ACEPROGRESS PLANSRYEMEADOWASSOCIATES, INC25 OMEGA DRIVE, SUITE 201WILLISTON, VERMONT 054951075 HINESBURG RD.SOUTH BURLINGTONVERMONTFOX RUN LANEHINESBURG RD.MEADOWLAND DR.RYEMEADOWCOMMERCIALDEVELOPMENT116891" = 30'91 RYE CIRCLECOMMERCIAL LOT 429 RYE CIRCLECOMMERCIAL LOT 289 RYE CIRCLECOMMERCIAL LOT 327 RYE CIRCLECOMMERCIAL LOT 1P:\AutoCADD Projects\2011\11202\1-CADD Files-11202\Dwg\Commercial Lots\11202 - Commercial Lot2 - Site.dwg, 4/26/2016 9:53:03 AM, aloiselle RELOCATE LIGHT POLERYE CIRCLE29 RYE CIRCLE - LOT 2PROPOSED COMMERCIAL BUILDINGF.F. EL. 409.6DSMDSMSAL11202C2.2FEB., 2016LOCATION MAP1" = 2000'PROPOSEDLIGHTING PLAN4/25/2016ACEPROGRESS PLANSRYEMEADOWASSOCIATES, INC25 OMEGA DRIVE, SUITE 201WILLISTON, VERMONT 054951075 HINESBURG RD.SOUTH BURLINGTONVERMONTFOX RUN LANEHINESBURG RD.MEADOWLAND DR.RYEMEADOWCOMMERCIALDEVELOPMENT116891" = 10'P:\AutoCADD Projects\2011\11202\1-CADD Files-11202\Dwg\Commercial Lots\11202 - Commercial Lot2 - Site.dwg, 4/26/2016 9:53:35 AM, aloiselle DSMDSMACL1" = 50'11202C4.2DEC., 2011LOCATION MAP1" = 2000'ACEELECTRICAL& GASPLANFOX RUN LANEHINESBURG RD.89116MEADOWLAND DR.RYEASSOCIATES, INC25 OMEGA DRIVE, SUITE 201WILLISTON, VERMONT 054951075 HINESBURG RD.SOUTH BURLINGTONVERMONTRYEMEADOWPLANNED UNITDEVELOPMENTP:\AutoCADD Projects\2011\11202\1-CADD Files-11202\Dwg\11202K.dwg, 4/26/2016 2:01:26 PM, aloiselle RELOCATE LIGHT POLERYE CIRCLE HINESBURG RD.29 RYE CIRCLE - LOT 2PROPOSED COMMERCIAL BUILDINGF.F. EL. 409.6NEW YD #1 LOT 2RIM=408.25INV. OUT (12" HDPE)=404.25NEW YD #2 LOT 2RIM=407.3INV. IN (12" HDPE)=403.0INV. OUT (12" HDPE)=403.0NEW DMH LOT2RIM=406.4INV. IN (15")=400.8INV. IN (6")=401.3INV. OUT=400.7409409409EROSION CONTROL MATTINGBETWEEN CURB AND SIDEWALKCATCH BASININLET PROTECTION(TYP.)INSTALL STABILIZEDCONSTRUCTIONENTRANCE TO NEWCONSTRUCTION AREATRANSITION CURBINSTALL SILT FENCEINSTALL SILT FENCE12" HDPE 12" HDPE40715" HDPE TRANSITIONCURBEROSION CONTROLMATTING BETWEENPAVEMENT AND SWALE409NEW CB #2 LOT2RIM=406.8INV. IN=402.2INV. OUT=402.1407407408408407TRANSITIONCURB408408NEW CB #1 LOT2RIM=408.9INV. IN=404.9INV. OUT=404.812" HDPETRANSITION CURB(TYP.)15" HDPECATCH BASININLET PROTECTION(TYP.)4066" SDR 35 PVC6" PERF. SDR 35 PVCINV.=401.5BIOSWALETOP OF STONEELEV.= 405.5BIOSWALETOP BERM=406.5EROSION CONTROLMATTING BETWEENPAVEMENT AND SWALEDSMDSMSAL11202C3.0FEB., 2016LOCATION MAP1" = 2000'PROPOSED EPSCPLAN4/25/2016ACEPROGRESS PLANSRYEMEADOWASSOCIATES, INC25 OMEGA DRIVE, SUITE 201WILLISTON, VERMONT 054951075 HINESBURG RD.SOUTH BURLINGTONVERMONTFOX RUN LANEHINESBURG RD.MEADOWLAND DR.RYEMEADOWCOMMERCIALDEVELOPMENT116891" = 10'P:\AutoCADD Projects\2011\11202\1-CADD Files-11202\Dwg\Commercial Lots\11202 - Commercial Lot2 - Site.dwg, 4/26/2016 10:01:10 AM, aloiselle AS SHOWN11202C3.1--ACEDSMDSMSALRYEMEADOWASSOCIATES, INC25 OMEGA DRIVE, SUITE 201WILLISTON, VERMONT 054951075 HINESBURG RD.SOUTH BURLINGTONVERMONTRYEMEADOWCOMMERCIALDEVELOPMENTESPC DETAILS &SPECIFICATIONSIntroductionThis project is subject to the terms and conditions of the authorizationfrom the State of Vermont to discharge construction related storm waterrunoff.Coverage under the State Construction General Permit 3-9020 isrequired for any construction activity that disturbs 1 or more acres ofland, or is part of a larger development plan that will disturb 1 or moreacres.This project has been deemed to qualify as a Low Risk Site which issubject to the erosion prevention and sediment control (EPSC)standards set for in the State of Vermont'sLow Risk Site Handbook for Erosion Prevention and SedimentControlThe following narrative and implementation requirements represent theminimum standard for which this site is required to be maintained asregulated by the State of Vermont.Any best management practices (BMP's) depicted on the project's EPSCSite plan which go beyond the Handbook requirements are consideredto be integral to the management of the site and represent componentsof the municipal EPSC approval for the project which shall beimplemented.The EPSC plan depicts one snap shot in time of the site. Allconstruction sites are fluid in their day to day exposures and risks as itrelates to minimizing sediment loss from the site. It is theresponsibility of the Contractor to implement the necessary BMP'sto comply with the Low Risk Handbook standards outlined on thissheet based on the interim site disturbance conditions which may ormay not be shown on the EPSC Site Plan.Specific BMP's which are critical to allowing the project to be considereda Low risk site include the items checked below:xLimit the amount of disturbed earth to two acres or less at any onetime.xThere shall be a maximum of 7 consecutive days of disturbed earthexposure in any location before temporary or final stabilization isimplemented.1. Mark Site BoundariesPurpose:Mark the site boundaries to identify the limits of construction. Delineatingyour site will help to limit the area of disturbance, preserve existingvegetation and limit erosion potential on the site.How to comply:Before beginning construction, walk the site boundaries and flag trees,post signs, or install orange safety fence. Fence is required on anyboundary within 50 feet of a stream, lake, pond or wetland, unless thearea is already developed (existing roads, buildings, etc.)2. Limit Disturbance AreaPurpose:Limit the amount of soil exposed at one time to reduce the potentialerosion on site.Requirements:The permitted disturbance area is specified on the site's writtenauthorization to discharge. Only the acreage listed on the authorizationform may be exposed at any given time.How to comply:Plan ahead and phase the construction activities to ensure that no morethan the permitted acreage is disturbed at one time. Be sure to properlystabilize exposed soil with seed and mulch or erosion control mattingbefore beginning work in a new section of the site.3. Stabilize Construction EntrancePurpose:A stabilized construction entrance helps remove mud from vehiclewheels to prevent tracking onto streets.Requirements:If there will be any vehicle traffic off of the construction site, you mustinstall a stabilized construction entrance before construction begins.How to installRock Size: Use a mix of 1 to 4 inch stoneDepth: 8 inches minimumWidth: 12 feet minimumLength: 40 feet minimum (or length of driveway, if shorter)Geotextile: Place filter cloth under entire gravel bedMaintenance:Redress with clean stone as required to keep sediment from trackingonto the street.4. Install Silt FencePurpose:Silt fences intercept runoff and allow suspended sediment to settle out.Requirements:Silt fence must be installed:xon the downhill side of the construction activitiesxbetween any ditch, swale, storm sewer inlet, or waters of the Stateand the disturbed soil* Hay bales must not be used as sediment barriers due to theirtendency to degrade and fall apart.Where to place:xPlace silt fence on the downhill edge of bare soil. At the bottom ofslopes, place fence 10 feet downhill from the end of the slope (ifspace is available).xEnsure the silt fence catches all runoff from bare soil.xMaximum drainage area is ¼ acre for 100 feet of silt fence.xInstall silt fence across the slope (not up and down hills!)xInstall multiple rows of silt fence on long hills to break up flow.xDo not install silt fence across ditches, channels, or streams or instream buffers.How to install silt fence:xDig a trench 6 inches deep across the slopexUnroll silt fence along the trenchxEnsure stakes are on the downhill side of the fencexJoin fencing by rolling the end stakes togetherxDrive stakes in against downhill side of trenchxDrive stakes until 16 inches of fabric is in trenchxPush fabric into trench; spread along bottomxFill trench with soil and pack downMaintenance:xRemove accumulated sediment before it is halfway up the fence.xEnsure that silt fence is trenched in ground and there are no gaps.5. Divert Upland RunoffPurpose:Diversion berms intercept runoff from above the construction site anddirect it around the disturbed area. This prevents clean water frombecoming muddied with soil from the construction site.Requirements:If storm water runs onto your site from upslope areas and your sitemeets the following two conditions, you must install a diversion bermbefore disturbing any soil.1. You plan to have one or more acres of soil exposed at any one time(excluding roads).2. Average slope of the disturbed area is 20% or steeper.How to install:1. Compact the berm with a shovel or earth-moving equipment.2. Seed and mulch berm or cover with erosion control mattingimmediately after installation.3. Stabilize the flow channel with seed and straw mulch or erosioncontrol matting. Line the channel with 4 inch stone if the channelslope is greater than 20%.4. Ensure the berm drains to an outlet stabilized with riprap. Ensure thatthere is no erosion at the outlet.5. The diversion berm shall remain in place until the disturbed areas arecompletely stabilized.6. Slow Down Channelized RunoffPurpose:Stone check dams reduce erosion in drainage channels by slowingdown the storm water flow.Requirements:If there is a concentrated flow (e.g. in a ditch or channel) of storm wateron your site, then you must install stone check dams. Hay bales mustnot be used as check dams.How to install:Height: No greater than 2 feet. Center of dam should be 9 inches lowerthan the side elevationSide slopes: 2:1 or flatterStone size: Use a mixture of 2 to 9 inch stoneWidth: Dams should span the width of the channel and extend up thesides of the banksSpacing: Space the dams so that the bottom (toe) of the upstream damis at the elevation of the top (crest) of the downstream dam. Thisspacing is equal to the height of the check dam divided by the channelslope.Spacing (in feet) = Height of check dam (in feet)/Slope in channel (ft/ft)Maintenance:Remove sediment accumulated behind the dam as needed to allowchannel to drain through the stone check dam and prevent large flowsfrom carrying sediment over the dam. If significant erosion occursbetween check dams, a liner of stone should be installed.7. Construct Permanent ControlsPurpose:Permanent storm water treatment practices are constructed to maintainwater quality, ensure groundwater flows, and prevent downstreamflooding. Practices include detention ponds and wetlands, infiltrationbasins, and storm water filters.Requirements:If the total impervious* area on your site, or within the common plan ofdevelopment, will be 1 or more acres, you must apply for a State Stormwater Discharge Permit and construct permanent storm water treatmentpractices on your site. These practices must be installed before theconstruction of any impervious surfaces.How to comply:Contact the Vermont Storm water Program and follow the requirementsin the Vermont Storm water Management Manual. The Storm waterManagement Manual is available at:www.vtwaterquality.org/stormwater.htm*An impervious surface is a manmade surface, including, butnot limited to, paved and unpaved roads, parking areas, roofs,driveways, and walkways, from which precipitation runs off ratherthan infiltrates.8. Stabilize Exposed SoilPurpose:Seeding and mulching, applying erosion control matting, andhydroseeding are all methods to stabilize exposed soil. Mulches andmatting protect the soil surface while grass is establishing.Requirements:All areas of disturbance must have temporary or permanent stabilizationwithin 7, 14, or 21 days of initial disturbance, as stated in the projectauthorization. After this time, any disturbance in the area must bestabilized at the end of each work day.The following exceptions apply:xStabilization is not required if earthwork is to continue in the areawithin the next 24 hours and there is no precipitation forecast forthe next 24 hours.xStabilization is not required if the work is occurring in aself-contained excavation (i.e. no outlet) with a depth of 2 feet orgreater (e.g. house foundation excavation, utility trenches).All areas of disturbance must have permanent stabilization within 48hours of reaching final grade.How to comply:Prepare bare soil for seeding by grading the top 3 to 6 inches of soil andremoving any large rocks or debris.Seeding Rates for Temporary StabilizationApril 15 - Sept. 15 --- Ryegrass (annual or perennial: 20 lbs/acre)Sept. 15 - April 15 --- Winter rye: 120 lbs/acreSeeding Rates for Final Stabilization:ChooseMulching RatesApril 15 - Sept.15 -- Hay or Straw: 1 inch deep (1-2 bales/1000 s.f.)Sept.15 - April 15 -- Hay or Straw: 2 in. deep (2-4 bales/1000 s.f.)Erosion Control MattingAs per manufacturer's instructionsHydroseedAs per manufacturer's instructions9. Winter StabilizationPurpose:Managing construction sites to minimize erosion and prevent sedimentloading of waters is a year-round challenge. In Vermont, this challengebecomes even greater during the late fall, winter, and early springmonths.'Winter construction' as discussed here, describes the period betweenOctober 15 and April 15, when erosion prevention and sediment controlis significantly more difficult.Rains in late fall, thaws throughout the winter, and spring melt and rainscan produce significant flows over frozen and saturated ground, greatlyincreasing the potential for erosion.Requirements for Winter Shutdown:For those projects that will complete earth disturbance activities prior tothe winter period (October 15), the following requirements must beadhered to:1. For areas to be stabilized by vegetation, seeding shall be completedno later than September 15 to ensure adequate growth and cover.2. If seeding is not completed by September 15, additionalnon-vegetative protection must be used to stabilize the site for thewinter period. This includes use of Erosion Control Matting or nettingof a heavy mulch layer. Seeding with winter rye is recommended toallow for early germination during wet spring conditions.3. Where mulch is specified, apply roughly 2 inches with an 80-90%cover. Mulch should be tracked in or stabilized with netting in openareas vulnerable to wind.Requirements for Winter ConstructionIf construction activities involving earth disturbance continue pastOctober 15 or begin before April 15, the following requirements must beadhered to:1. Enlarged access points, stabilized to provide for snow stockpiling.2. Limits of disturbance moved or replaced to reflect boundary of winterwork.3. A snow management plan prepared with adequate storage andcontrol of meltwater, requiring cleared snow to be stored down slopeof all areas of disturbance and out of storm water treatment structures.4. A minimum 25 foot buffer shall be maintained from perimeter controlssuch as silt fence.5. In areas of disturbance that drain to a water body within 100 feet, tworows of silt fence must be installed along the contour.6. Drainage structures must be kept open and free of snow and icedams.7. Silt fence and other practices requiring earth disturbance must beinstalled ahead of frozen ground.8. Mulch used for temporary stabilization must be applied at double thestandard rate, or a minimum of 3 inches with an 80-90% cover.9. To ensure cover of disturbed soil in advance of a melt event, areas ofdisturbed soil must be stabilized at the end of each work day, with thefollowing exceptions:x If no precipitation within 24 hours is forecast and work will resumein the same disturbed area within 24 hours, daily stabilization is notnecessary.x Disturbed areas that collect and retain runoff, such as housefoundations or open utility trenches.10. Prior to stabilization, snow or ice must be removed to less than 1inch thickness.11. Use stone to stabilize areas such as the perimeter of buildingsunder construction or where construction vehicle traffic is anticipated.Stone paths should be 10 to 20 feet wide to accommodate vehiculartraffic.10. Stabilize Soil at Final GradePurpose:Stabilizing the site with seed and mulch or erosion control matting whenit reaches final grade is the best way to prevent erosion whileconstruction continues.Requirements:Within 48 hours of final grading, the exposed soil must be seeded andmulched or covered with erosion control matting.How to comply:Bring the site or sections of the site to final grade as soon as possibleafter construction is completed. This will reduce the need for additionalsediment and erosion control measures and will reduce the totaldisturbed area.For seeding and mulching rates, follow the specifications under Rule 8,Stabilizing Exposed Soil.11. Dewatering ActivitiesPurpose:Treat water pumped from dewatering activities so that it is clear whenleaving the construction site.Requirements:Water from dewatering activities that flows off of the construction sitemust be clear. Water must not be pumped into storm sewers, lakes, orwetlands unless the water is clear.How to comply:Using sock filters or sediment filter bags on dewatering discharge hosesor pipes, discharge water into silt fence enclosures installed in vegetatedareas away from waterways. Remove accumulated sediment after thewater has dispersed and stabilize the area with seed and mulch.12. Inspect Your SitePurpose:Perform site inspections to ensure that all sediment and erosion controlpractices are functioning properly. Regular inspections and maintenanceof practices will help to reduce costs and protect water quality.Requirements:Inspect the site at least once every 7 days and after every rainfall orsnow melt that results in a discharge from the site. Perform maintenanceto ensure that practices are functioning according to the specificationsoutlined in this handbook.In the event of a noticeable sediment discharge from the constructionsite, you must take immediate action to inspect and maintain existingerosion prevention and sediment control practices. Any visiblydiscolored storm water runoff to waters of the State must be reported.Forms for reporting discharges are available at:www.vtwaterquality.org/stormwater.htmN.T.S.CONSTRUCTION FENCE DETAILREVISED 08/01/2014E-002E-002 Constr FenceWOOD POST30"18"EXISTING GRADENATIVE MATERIALPLASTIC ORANGECONSTRUCTION FENCEREVISED 08/01/2014E-004E-004 Constr. Ent20' (6m) RROADWAYAASTABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCEN.T.S.12'. MIN.50' MIN.SECTION A-ADIVERSION RIDGE REQUIREDWHERE GRADE EXCEEDS 2%ROADWAY2% OR GREATERSPILLWAYFILTER FABRICSANDBAGS ORCONTINUOUS BERM OFEQUIVALENT HEIGHTDIVERSION RIDGESUPPLY WATER TO WASHWHEELS IF NECESSARY2"-3" (50-75mm) COURSEAGGREGATE MIN. 8"(150mm) THICKPLAN VIEWNOTES:1. THE ENTRANCE SHALL BE MAINTAINED IN A CONDITION THAT WILL PREVENTTRACKING OR FLOWING OF SEDIMENT ONTO PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAYS. THIS MAYREQUIRE TOP DRESSING, REPAIR AND/OR CLEAN OUT OF ANY MEASURES USED TOTRAP SEDIMENT.2. WHEN NECESSARY, WHEELS SHALL BE CLEANED PRIOR TO ENTRANCE ONTO PUBLICRIGHT-OF-WAY.3. WHEN WASHING IS REQUIRED, IT SHALL BE DONE ON AN AREA STABILIZED WITHCRUSHED STONE THAT DRAINS INTO AN APPROVED SEDIMENT TRAP OR SEDIMENTBASIN.NOTE:USE SANDBAGS OR OTHERAPPROVED METHODS TOCHANNELIZE RUNOFF TOBASIN AS REQUIREDREVISED 08/01/2014E-003E-003 Silt FenceN.T.S.SILT FENCE DETAILNOTES:1. INSTALL MIRIFI ENVIROFENCE, OR APPROVED EQUAL OR AS DETAILED HEREIN.2. INSTALL SILT FENCES AT TOES OF ALL UNPROTECTED SLOPES AND AS PARALLEL TOCONTOURS AS POSSIBLE. THIS INCLUDES ALL FILLED OR UNPROTECTED SLOPESCREATED DURING CONSTRUCTION, NOT NECESSARILY REFLECTED ON THE FINALPLANS. CURVE THE ENDS OF THE FENCE UP INTO THE SLOPE. REMOVE SEDIMENTWHEN ACCUMULATED TO HALF THE HEIGHT OF THE FENCE. SILT FENCES ARE TO BEMAINTAINED UNTIL SLOPES ARE STABILIZED.3. WHEN TWO SECTIONS OF FILTER CLOTH ADJOIN EACH OTHER, THEY SHALL BEOVERLAPPED BY 6", FOLDED AND STAPLED.10'10'2.5'METAL POST4 x 4 WOODPOST SPACING212 X 212 WOOD36" MIN.12" MIN.POST2"8"FILTER FABRIC TO BEMIRAFI 100X OR APPROVEDEQUALFILTER FABRIC TO BECLIPPED, BACKFILLED ANDTAMPED 8" BELOW GRADESTEEL OR WOOD STAKES(SEE CHART AT RIGHT)REVISED 08/01/2014E-005E-005 StockpileTEMPORARY STOCKPILE DETAILN.T.S.TEMPORARY SEEDING & MULCHOR NETTINGSILT FENCE OR HAYBALES INSTALLED ONDOWN GRADIENT SIDEREVISED 08/01/2014E-007E-007 Infilt SectSILT FENCE CONSTRUCTION DETAILN.T.S.2. ATTACH SILT FENCEAND EXTEND IT TOTHE TRENCH.3. STAPLE THE SILTFENCING TO THEEND POSTS.BACKFILL TRENCH.1. SET POSTS AND EXCAVATE A 4"X8" TRENCH, SET POST DOWNSLOPE.ANGLE 10°UPSLOPE FORSTABILITY ANDSELF CLEANINGPOSTSSILTFENCE100°12"MIN.8"COMPACTEDBACKFILLP:\AutoCADD Projects\2011\11202\1-CADD Files-11202\Dwg\Commercial Lots\11202 - Commercial Lot2 - Details.dwg, 2/22/2016 12:57:07 PM, aloiselle AS SHOWN11202C3.2--ACEDSMDSMSALRYEMEADOWASSOCIATES, INC25 OMEGA DRIVE, SUITE 201WILLISTON, VERMONT 054951075 HINESBURG RD.SOUTH BURLINGTONVERMONTRYEMEADOWCOMMERCIALDEVELOPMENTESPC DETAILSN.T.S.FOR PERIMETER CONTROLREVISED 12/19/2014E-010E-010 Silt Fence Perimeter ControlCorrect - Install J-hooks0.3 ACREDiscreet segments of silt fence,installed with J-hooks or `smiles' willbe much more effective.1 ACREIncorrect - Do Not layout "perimetercontrol" silt fences along property lines.All sediment laden runoff will concentrateand overwhelm the system.0.3 ACRE0.3 ACRESILT FENCE PLACEMENTN.T.S.STRAW ANCHORINGREVISED 12/19/2014E-012E-012 Straw AnchoringNOTES:1. ROUGHEN SLOPE WITH BULLDOZER.2. BROADCAST SEED AND FERTILIZER.3. SPREAD STRAW MULCH 3" (212 TONS PER ACRE)4. PUNCH STRAW MULCH INTO SLOPE BY RUNNING BULLDOZERUP AND DOWN SLOPE.'TRACKING' WITH MACHINERY ON SANDYSOIL PROVIDES ROUGHENING WITHOUTUNDUE COMPACTION.N.T.S.TYPICAL INSTALLATIONREVISED 12/19/2014E-011E-011 Grass Lined ChannelINTERMITTENT CHECK SLOTLONGITUDINAL ANCHOR TRENCHGRASS-LINED CHANNELTYPICAL INSTALLATIONWITH EROSION CONTROLBLANKETS OR TURFREINFORCEMENT MATSPREPARE SOIL AND APPLYSEED BEFORE INSTALLINGBLANKETS, MATS OR OTHERTEMPORARY CHANNEL LINERSYSTEMEXCAVATE CHANNELTO DESIGN GRADEAND CROSS SECTONNOTES:1. DESIGN VELOCITIES EXCEEDING 2 FT./SEC/ REQUIRE TEMPORARY BLANKETS, MATS ORSIMILAR LINERS TO PROTECT SEED AND SOIL UNTIL VEGETATION BECOMES ESTABLISHED.2. GRASS-LINED CHANNELS WITH DESIGN VELOCITIES EXCEEDING 6 FT./SEC. SHOULDINCLUDE TURF REINFORCEMENT MATS.6"6"6"DESIGNDEPTHOVERLAP 6" MINIMUMOVERCUT CHANNEL 2" TOALLOW BULKING DURINGSEEDBED PREPARATIONLONGITUDINALANCHOR TRENCHSHINGLE-LAP SPLICED ENDS OR BEGIN NEWROLL IN AN INTERMITTENT CHECK SLOTBERMISOMETRIC VIEWTYPICAL SLOPE SOIL STABILIZATIONSTAPLESREINFORCEMENT MATSEROSION BLANKETS & TURF12"4'N.T.S.SLOPE INSTALLATIONE-009E-009 Slope Erosion BlanketsNOTES:1. SLOPE SURFACE SHALL BE FREE OF ROCKS, CLODS, STICKSAND GRASS. MATS/BLANKETS SHALL HAVE GOOD SOILCONTACT.2. APPLY PERMANENT SEEDING BEFORE PLACING BLANKETS.3. LAY BLANKETS LOOSELY AND STAKE OR STAPLE TO MAINTAINDIRECT CONTACT WITH THE SOIL. DO NOT STRETCH.MATS/BLANKETS SHOULDBE INSTALLED VERTICALLYDOWNSLOPE.TAMP SOIL OVER MAT/BLANKETMIN. 4"OVERLAP6"112"112"12"REVISED 08/01/2014REVISED 08/01/2014E-006E-006 Check DamSTONE CHECK DAM STRUCTUREN.T.S. 30 36 41 50 66 100 15 18 20 25 33 48MAXIMUM WATER DEPTH OVER ROCK (mm) 0.35 0.30 0.25 0.20 0.15 0.1015075D-50OF ROCK(MM)DOWNSTREAM FLOWLINE SLOPE OF STRUCTURE (m/m)60cm(2 ft. MAX.)15cm TO 45cm(0.5 TO 1.5 ft.)DIFFERENCE75mm (3 in.) MIN.COARSE ROCK0.35 m/m OR FLATTERFLOW LINE SLOPEROCK SET IN 10cm (4 in.MIN.) TRENCHMINIMUM DEPTH OF COARSEROCK PLACED IN CHANNELFLOW LINE IS 15cm (0.5 ft.)SIDE VIEWFRONT VIEWEND POINTS 'A' MUST BE HIGHERTHAN THE FLOW LINE POINT 'B'AABABPLACE DOWNSTREAM STRUCTURESUCH THAT POINT 'B' ISAPPROXIMATELY LEVEL WITH THELOWEST GROUND ELEVATION OFTHE UPSTREAM STRUCTUREN.T.S.CATCH BASIN INLET PROTECTIONREVISED 12/19/2014E-013E-013 Catch Basin ProtectionGROUNDPLANCROSS-SECTION(W/ FABRIC)18" MIN.18"BURY FABRIC 12" MIN.FILTER FABRICWOODEN OR METALSTAKES PLACEDAROUND CATCH BASINWOODEN OR METALSTAKES PLACEDAROUND CATCHBASINFILTER FABRICSECURELY FASTENEDTO STAKES OVERLAPJOINTS TO THE NEXTSTAKEP:\AutoCADD Projects\2011\11202\1-CADD Files-11202\Dwg\Commercial Lots\11202 - Commercial Lot2 - Details.dwg, 2/22/2016 12:56:50 PM, aloiselle AS SHOWN11202C4.0--SITEDETAILSACEDSMDSMSALRYEMEADOWASSOCIATES, INC25 OMEGA DRIVE, SUITE 201WILLISTON, VERMONT 054951075 HINESBURG RD.SOUTH BURLINGTONVERMONTRYEMEADOWCOMMERCIALDEVELOPMENTN.T.S.CURB w/SIDEWALK DETAILREVISED 10/07/2015S-001(SIMILAR WITH OUT SIDEWALK)S-001 CurbCRUSHED GRAVEL (FINE)DENSE GRADEDSUB-BASE MATERIALNOTES:1. CURBING SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED IN 10' SECTIONS WITH18" JOINT BETWEEN SECTIONS.2. CURBING EXPANSION JOINTS SHALL BE CONSTRUCTEDEVERY 20' AND SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED OF MATERIALCONFORMING TO AASHTO DESIGNATION M-153 (12"SPONGE RUBBER OR CORK).3. ASPHALT TREATED FELT TO BE USED BETWEEN SIDEWALKAND CONCRETE CURB TOP.6"5"6"6"9"7"18"CONCRETE OR BRICKPAVERS12" R.TOP COURSE BITUMINOUSCONCRETE PAVEMENTBASE COURSE BITUMINOUSCONCRETE PAVEMENTPROVIDE 12" MIN. SUBBASEMATERIAL BEHIND CURBAND TO WITHIN 6" OFFINISHED GRADE FORGRASSED SURFACESLIMITS OF SUBBASEFOR CURB W/OUTSIDEWALKCONCRETE CURBNOTES:1. EXPANSION JOINTS SHALL NOT BE PLACED2. THE SIDEWALK SHALL BE DIVIDED AT INTERVALSOF FIVE FEET BY DUMMY JOINTS.3. NO DEICER SHALL BE APPLIED TO SIDEWALKUNTIL AT LEAST 30 DAYS OF AIR DRYING TIMEHAS OCCURRED.N.T.S.CONCRETE SIDEWALK DETAILS-002S-002 Conc Walk6"6"SIDEWALK WIDTH AS SHOWN ON PLANS8" COMPACTED CRUSHEDGRAVEL (704.05 FINE)5" THICK CONCRETE SIDEWALK(8" THICK AT DRIVEWAY CROSSINGS)UNDISTURBED SOIL ORAPPROVED COMPACTEDGRANULAR FILLREVISED 9/17/20154" MINIMUM TOPSOIL, SEED AND MULCHALL SIDESLOPE- USE EROSION MATTING (WHENREQUIRED) TO ESTABLISH VEGETATIONN.T.S.TYPICAL PAVEMENT SECTIONS-003S-003 Pave Sec-Shoulder6" CRUSHED GRAVEL - FINEAOT SPECIFICATION 704.052" TYPE IIBASE COURSESEPARATION/STABILIZATIONGEOTEXTILECOMPACTED SUBGRADE(FULL DEPTH CONSTRUCTION SECTION)EMULSIFIEDASPHALTBITUMINOUSCONCRETEPAVEMENT112" TYPE IVFINISH COURSE12" DENSE GRADED CRUSHED STONEAOT SPECIFICATION 704.0612" MINIMUMCRUSHED GRAVELSHOULDERREVISED 11/10/201431OR ASSHOWNON PLANS4" MINIMUM TOPSOIL, SEED ANDMULCH ALL SIDESLOPE- USE EROSION MATTING (WHENREQUIRED) TO ESTABLISHVEGETATION, PARTICULARLY ONLOW SIDE OF ROADWAYN.T.S.TRANSITION CURB DETAILS-006S-006 Trans Curb7"6'-0"1"FACE OF CURBEND TRANSITION SLOPEBEGIN TRANSITION SLOPETOP OF CURB (SEE PLANFOR TYPE OF CURB)FINISHED GRADE OF ROADPAVEMENTREVISED 08/01/2014N.T.S.S-014S-014 Pavement TransitionTRANSITION FROM NEW PAVEMENTTO EXISTING PAVEMENTEXIST. TOP COURSE TO BEREMOVED AND OVERLAINAS PART OF NEWPAVEMENT SECTIONSAW CUT PAVEMENT,CLEAN AND COAT WITHEMULSION PRIOR TOPAVINGEXIST. BASE MATERIALEXIST. BITUMINOUSPAVEMENT112" TYPE IV FINISH COURSE212" TYPE II BASE COURSENEWCONSTRUCTION18" (MIN.)EDGE OF EXISTINGPAVEMENTREVISED 08/13/2015N.T.S.LINE STRIPING DETAILS-015S-015 Parking Space Striping9'9'18'4" WHITEPAINTEDMARKINGS9'18'CURBING AND/OREDGE OF PAVEMENTHANDICAPSIGNHANDICAP PARKING SPACESTANDARD PARKING SPACE2' ON CENTERTRAFFIC MARKING PAINT TO BE READY-MIXED TRAFFIC PAINT SUITABLEFOR MARKING ON EITHER BITUMINOUS OR PORTLAND CEMENTCONCRETE PAVEMENT. READY-MIXED LOW VOC TRAFFIC PAINT SHALLCONSIST OF 100% ACRYLIC TYPE, FAST DRYING TRAFFIC PAINT.REVISED 12/09/2014CENTER POINTFOR MARKINGN.T.S.HANDICAPPED PARKING MARKING DETAILREVISED 4/07/2015S-015a3'-0"S-015a HC Pave Marking3'-6"PAVEMENT MARKINGS TO MEET STATE STANDARDS E-191NOTE:2" HIGH LETTERS(TYP.)N.T.S.HANDICAPPED PARKING SIGN DETAILREVISED 4/07/2015S-015b12"S-015b HC SignSIGN SHALL BE POSTED AT THE HEAD OF EACH HANDICAPPED SPACE.MOUNTING HEIGHT IS 60" MINIMUM TO BOTTOM OF SIGN.18"COLOR: LEGEND AND BORDER - GREENWHITE SYMBOL ON BLUE BACKGROUNDBACKGROUND - WHITEMATERIAL: AS PER VAOT STANDARD E-143MPOST: 2" (14 ga.) SQUARE STEEL SIGN POST INSTALL IN ACCORDANCE w/VAOT STANDARD E-1646"6"P:\AutoCADD Projects\2011\11202\1-CADD Files-11202\Dwg\Commercial Lots\11202 - Commercial Lot2 - Details.dwg, 2/22/2016 12:57:21 PM, aloiselle AS SHOWN11202C4.1--UTILITYDETAILSACEDSMDSMSALRYEMEADOWASSOCIATES, INC25 OMEGA DRIVE, SUITE 201WILLISTON, VERMONT 054951075 HINESBURG RD.SOUTH BURLINGTONVERMONTRYEMEADOWCOMMERCIALDEVELOPMENTNOTES:PAVEDN.T.S.DD+2'6"6"TYPICAL SEWER TRENCH DETAIL5'-0" MIN. COVER (PLOWED AREAS)4'-0" MIN. COVER (TYPICAL)6"1. COMPACTION OF BACKFILL AND BEDDING SHALL BE AMINIMUM OF 90% (95% UNDER ROADWAY SURFACES) OFMAXIMUM DRY DENSITY DETERMINED IN THE STANDARDPROCTOR TEST (ASTM D698).2. BEDDING MATERIAL SHALL NOT BE PLACED ON FROZENSUBGRADE.3. APPROVED BACKFILL SHALL NOT CONTAIN ANY STONES MORETHAN 12" IN LARGEST DIMENSION (6" IN ROADWAYS, 1 1/2""MAXIMUM DIAMETER WITHIN 24" OF THE OUTSIDE OF THEPIPE), OR CONTAIN ANY FROZEN, WET, OR ORGANIC MATERIAL.4. TRENCHES SHALL BE COMPLETELY DEWATERED PRIOR TOPLACING OF PIPE BEDDING MATERIAL AND KEPTDEWATERED DURING INSTALLATION OF PIPE AND BACKFILL.5. IN TRENCHES WITH UNSTABLE MATERIALS, TRENCH BOTTOMSHALL FIRST BE STABILIZED BY PLACEMENT OF FILTER FABRICTHEN CRUSHED STONE (3/4" MAXIMUM).6. THE SIDES OF TRENCHES 4' OR MORE IN DEPTH ENTERED BYPERSONNEL SHALL BE SHEETED OR SLOPED TO THE ANGLE OFREPOSE AS DEFINED BY O.S.H.A. STANDARDS.7. BEDDING MATERIAL FOR WASTEWATER LINES SHALL CONSISTOF CRUSHED STONE OR GRAVEL WITH A MAXIMUM SIZE OF 34".SUBMIT A SAMPLE TO THE ENGINEER FOR APPROVAL.8. ALL JOINTS TO BE INSPECTED BY OWNER/ENGINEER/TOWNPRIOR TO BACKFILL.APPROVED BACKFILLTHOROUGHLY COMPACTEDIN 8" LIFTS2" RIGID INSULATION WHENDEPTH OF PIPING IS LESSTHAN MINIMUM NOTED4" WIDE MAGNETIC"SEWER" TAPE INSTALLEDAPPROX. 2' BELOW SURFACESEWER LINE, SEE PLANFOR TYPE AND SIZEPIPE BEDDINGUNDISTURBED SOILOR ROCKTOPSOIL, RAKE,SEED & MULCHUNPAVEDREVISED 12/29/2014SWR-001SWR-001 Trench(SEE SITE PLAN)5'-0" MIN. COVER OVER FORCE MAINSN.T.S.TYPICAL CLEANOUT DETAILREVISED 10/22/2015SWR-007SWR-007 COCONCRETE CRADLE w/ 3 MILPOLYETHYLENE PLACEDBETWEEN PIPE & CONCRETE4" SDR 35 PVC4" SDR 35 PVC45° WYEFLOW*CLEANOUT TO BE INSTALLED AT INTERVALS OFNOT MORE THAN 100 FEET, AND UPSTREAM OFBEND(S) IN BUILDING SEWER(S) WHEN CHANGE INDIRECTION EXCEEDS 45° (USE LONG SWEEPFITTINGS WHEN EXCEEDING 45°)GRASSPAVEMENTCLEANOUT BOXINDEPENDENT OF PIPEPVC CAP6" D.I. VALVE BOX TOPSECTION w/ COVERMARKED "CLEANOUT"N.T.S.SEWER SERVICE CONNECTIONREVISED 08/01/2014SWR-003PLANELEVATIONFLOWUSE 4"x8' PVC PIPE TO MARKLOCATION AND DEPTH OFSERVICE CONNECTION. EXTENDFROM PLUG TO 6" MIN. ABOVEFINISH GRADE.- CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE 3 LOCATION TIES TOEND OF LATERAL TO BE INCLUDED ON "AS-BUILT"DRAWINGS. (IF CONSTRUCTION IS NOTCONCURRENT WITH LATERAL)- SEE TYPICAL TRENCH FOR BEDDING ANDBACKFILL REQUIREMENTS.4" 22 12° OR 45° ELBOWROTATED AS REQUIREDSEWER MAINEXISTINGSEWER MAIN4" 22 12° OR 45° ELBOWROTATED AS REQUIRED4" MIN. SDR 35 PVC SEWERSERVICE, CONTINUE AS PERPLAN AND INSTALL PVCCAP. SEE SITE PLAN FORSLOPE AND ELEVATIONS(MIN. SLOPE = 1/4" PER FT.)45° WYE SADDLE CONNECTION(COORDINATE PREFERREDCONNECTOR w/PUBLICWORKS DEPARTMENT)(@ EXISTING SEWER MAIN)STAINLESSSTEEL CLAMPSWR-003 Service Con-EXNOTES:PAVEDN.T.S.DD+2'6"6"TYPICAL WATER TRENCH DETAIL6'-0" MIN. COVER1. COMPACTION OF BACKFILL AND BEDDING SHALL BE AMINIMUM OF 90% (95% UNDER ROADWAY SURFACES) OFMAXIMUM DRY DENSITY DETERMINED IN THE STANDARDPROCTOR TEST (ASTM D698).2. BEDDING MATERIAL SHALL NOT BE PLACED ON FROZENSUBGRADE.3. APPROVED BACKFILL SHALL NOT CONTAIN ANY STONES MORETHAN 12" IN LARGEST DIMENSION (6" IN ROADWAYS, 1 1/2""MAXIMUM DIAMETER WITHIN 24" OF THE OUTSIDE OF THEPIPE), OR CONTAIN ANY FROZEN, WET, OR ORGANIC MATERIAL.4. TRENCHES SHALL BE COMPLETELY DEWATERED PRIOR TOPLACING OF PIPE BEDDING MATERIAL AND KEPTDEWATERED DURING INSTALLATION OF PIPE AND BACKFILL.5. IN TRENCHES WITH UNSTABLE MATERIALS, TRENCH BOTTOMSHALL FIRST BE STABILIZED BY PLACEMENT OF FILTER FABRICTHEN CRUSHED STONE (3/4" MAXIMUM).6. THE SIDES OF TRENCHES 4' OR MORE IN DEPTH ENTERED BYPERSONNEL SHALL BE SHEETED OR SLOPED TO THE ANGLE OFREPOSE AS DEFINED BY O.S.H.A. STANDARDS.7. BEDDING MATERIAL SHALL CONSIST OF CRUSHED STONE WITHA MAXIMUM SIZE OF 34". SUBMIT A SAMPLE TO THE ENGINEERFOR APPROVAL.8. CONTRACTOR TO INSTALL TRACER WIRE ALONG ALLSECTIONS OF NEW WATER LINE. TERMINATE TRACER WIRE ATALL VALVE BOXES AND HYDRANTS. COORDINATEINSTALLATION WITH TOWN AND ENGINEER.APPROVED BACKFILLTHOROUGHLY COMPACTEDIN 8" LIFTS2" RIGID INSULATION WHENDEPTH OF PIPING IS LESSTHAN 6'-0"WATER LINE, SEE PLANFOR TYPE AND SIZECRUSHED STONE BEDDINGUNDISTURBED SOILOR ROCKTOPSOIL, RAKE,SEED & MULCHUNPAVEDREVISED 12/29/2014W-001D/2INSTALL UTILITY LOCATORRIBBON OVER WATER MAINAPPROX. 2' BELOW SURFACETRACER WIRE (VERIFY TYPE WITHTOWN/ENGINEER PRIOR TO STARTOF CONSTRUCTION)W-001 Trench(SEE SITE PLAN)N.T.S.THRUST BLOCK DETAILSREVISED 2/23/2015W-003NO BACKFILLING WILL BE ALLOWED UNTIL ANY CONC. THRUST BLOCKSHAVE SET SUFFICIENTLY, AS DETERMINED BY THE ENGINEER AND/ORLOCAL WATER DEPT.PLACE 3 MIL (MIN.)POLYETHYLENESHEET BETWEEN ALLCONCRETE THRUSTBLOCKS AND PIPEAND/OR FITTINGS TOPREVENT BOND.NOTE:W-003 ThrustNOTE: THRUST BLOCK SHALL BE USED AT ALL BENDS, TEES & REDUCERSEFFECTIVEBEARINGAREAUNDISTURBEDSOILUNDISTURBEDSOILUNDISTURBEDSOILMINIMUM ONE FULLLENGTH OF PIPEPLUGUNDISTURBEDSOILBURIED GATE VALVE(WITH CONCRETESUPPORT VALVE &ANCHORN.T.S.WATER SERVICE CONNECTIONREVISED 2/23/2015W-006W-006 Serv Con1" MAX.6'-0" MIN.6'-0" MIN.6"MIN.UNDISTRUBED SOIL4"x8"x16" SOLIDCONCRETE BLOCKCURB STOPADJUSTABLE IRON CURBBOX w/ LID MARKED"WATER" - CONTRACTORTO COORD. FINAL CURBSTOP COVER WITH LOCALWATER DEPT.PROPERTY LINE OREASEMENT BOUNDARYSTATIONARY RODINSTALL A GOOSENECK LOOPWATER MAINTYPE 'K' COPPER SERVICEOR AS SHOWN ON PLANSCORPORATION(SEE PLAN FOR SIZE)FINISH GRADENOTE:1. SEE SPECIFICATIONS FORADDITIONAL TAPPINGSADDLE, CORPORATION,AND CURB STOPREQUIREMENTS.N.T.S.WATER/SEWER CROSSINGREVISED 6/15/2015W-007W-007 Water-Sewer CrossingWATER MAINPROFILE VIEW18"MIN.18"MIN.GRAVITY SEWER ORFORCE MAIN (JOINTSTO BE ENCASED)GRAVITY SEWEROR FORCE MAINPLAN VIEWWATER MAINSEWER MAIN10' MIN.10' MIN.10' MIN.10' MIN.SINGLE 20' LENGTH OFWATER QUALITY PIPEENCASEMENT IF SEPARATIONIS BETWEEN 12" TO 18"THE GRAVITY SEWER or FORCEMAIN JOINTS SHALL BE CONCRETEENCASED WHEN LOCATED ABOVETHE WATER MAINREFERENCE:VT. WATER SUPPLY RULECHAPTER 21, APPENDIX A,SECTION 8.6NOTES:1. AT CROSSINGS, ONE FULL LENGTH OF WATER/STORM PIPE SHALL BE LOCATED SOBOTH JOINTS WILL BE AS FAR FROM THE WATER/STORM AS POSSIBLE.2. IF THE STORM MAIN IS OVER THE WATER MAIN, THE FIRST STORM PIPE JOINTS ONEACH SIDE OF THE WATER MAIN MUST BE CONCRETE ENCASED. SPECIALSTRUCTURAL SUPPORT FOR THE WATER AND STORM PIPES MAY BE REQUIRED.3. WHERE IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO MAINTAIN THE 18" SEPARATION, THE STORM MATERIALSSHALL BE WATER MAIN PIPE OR EQUIVALENT AND SHALL BE PRESSURE TESTED TOWATER MAIN STANDARDS.4. WATER MAINS AND STORM LINES OR MANHOLES SHALL HAVE AT LEAST 10'HORIZONTAL SEPARATION. THIS DISTANCE SHALL BE MEASURED EDGE TO EDGE.N.T.S.WATER/STORM CROSSINGREVISED 12/23/2014W-007AW-007A Water-Storm CrossingL/2POINT OF CROSSINGJOINTMINIMUM 18" SEPARATIONBETWEEN OUTSIDE OFPIPESWATER ORSTORM LINEL/2L/2L/2WATER ORSTORM LINEP:\AutoCADD Projects\2011\11202\1-CADD Files-11202\Dwg\Commercial Lots\11202 - Commercial Lot2 - Details.dwg, 2/22/2016 12:57:34 PM, aloiselle AS SHOWN11202C4.2--STORMDETAILSACEDSMDSMSALRYEMEADOWASSOCIATES, INC25 OMEGA DRIVE, SUITE 201WILLISTON, VERMONT 054951075 HINESBURG RD.SOUTH BURLINGTONVERMONTRYEMEADOWCOMMERCIALDEVELOPMENTNOTES:N.T.S.TYPICAL STORM TRENCHREVISED 08/01/2014ST-003D+2'ST-003 Storm TrenchPAVED6"6"COVER PER PLANAPPROVED BACKFILLTHOROUGHLY COMPACTEDIN 8" LIFTSSTORM LINE, SEE PLANFOR TYPE AND SIZEPIPE BEDDINGUNDISTURBED SOILOR ROCKTOPSOIL, RAKE,SEED & MULCHUNPAVED1. COMPACTION OF BACKFILL AND BEDDING SHALL BE AMINIMUM OF 90% (95% UNDER ROADWAY SURFACES) OFMAXIMUM DRY DENSITY DETERMINED IN THE STANDARDPROCTOR TEST (ASTM D698).2. BEDDING MATERIAL SHALL NOT BE PLACED ON FROZENSUBGRADE.3. APPROVED BACKFILL SHALL NOT CONTAIN ANY STONES MORETHAN 12" IN LARGEST DIMENSION (6" IN ROADWAYS, 1 1/2""MAXIMUM DIAMETER WITHIN 24" OF THE OUTSIDE OF THEPIPE), OR CONTAIN ANY FROZEN, WET, OR ORGANIC MATERIAL.4. TRENCHES SHALL BE COMPLETELY DEWATERED PRIOR TOPLACING OF PIPE BEDDING MATERIAL AND KEPTDEWATERED DURING INSTALLATION OF PIPE AND BACKFILL.5. IN TRENCHES WITH UNSTABLE MATERIALS, TRENCH BOTTOMSHALL FIRST BE STABILIZED BY PLACEMENT OF FILTER FABRICTHEN CRUSHED STONE (3/4" MAXIMUM).6. THE SIDES OF TRENCHES 4' OR MORE IN DEPTH ENTERED BYPERSONNEL SHALL BE SHEETED OR SLOPED TO THE ANGLE OFREPOSE AS DEFINED BY O.S.H.A. STANDARDS.7. BEDDING MATERIAL SHALL CONSIST OF CRUSHED STONE WITHA MAXIMUM SIZE OF 34". SUBMIT A SAMPLE TO THE ENGINEERFOR APPROVAL.DN.T.S.TYPICAL STORM MANHOLEREVISED 01/09/2015ST-001ST-001 Typ MHFINISH GRADE48" MIN.SEE SITE PLANS24"6"MIN.12"SUMP4'-0" MIN.BASE AS REQ'D1' TO 4'BARRELSECTION12" MIN.SET FRAME ON FULLMORTAR BED & SEALJOINTADJUST TO GRADE w/PRECAST RISER SECTIONS(BRICKS SHALL NOT BEUSED)WATERTIGHT JOINTSUSING MASTIC OR RUBBERGASKETCOAT EXTERIOR OF ENTIREMANHOLE w/ AWATERTIGHT SEALANT (2COATS)CAST-IN-PLACE FLEXIBLEMANHOLE SLEEVESPRECAST CONCRETE ORPOURED IN PLACE BASESECTION6" MIN. CRUSHED STONEBEDDINGUNDISTURBED SOILOR ROCKPOLYPROPYLENEMANHOLE STEPS@ 8" O.C.CONE SECTION OR 4'ØTRAFFIC COVER (HEAVYDUTY) FOR SHALLOWMANHOLESLEBARON FRAME & COVERLC266 TYPE 'C' OR EQUAL(ADJUST TO MEET FINISHGRADE)N.T.S.TYPICAL CATCH BASIN @ CURBREVISED 9/24/2015ST-002ST-002 Typ CB(SIMILAR WITHOUT CURB)PRECAST MANHOLE STRUCTURESSHALL CONFORM TO ASTM SPEC.C478 (LATEST EDITION)18"SUMPHDPE OUTLET PIPE(SEE PLAN FOR SIZE)12"MAX.24"x24"48" MIN.SEE PLANS6" MIN. CRUSHED GRAVELSEAL w/ HYDRAULIC CEMENTMORTAR, OR CAST-IN-PLACEFLEXIBLE M.H. SLEEVESADJUST TO GRADE w/CONCRETE RISERSBITUMINOUS CONCRETEPAVEMENT (14" / FT. SLOPEMIN.)SET FRAME ON FULLMORTAR BEDLEBARON LK120 (LK120A FOR DESIGN GRADES >5%)C.I. GRATE w/ 3 FLANGED FRAME (OR APPROVEDEQUAL). RIM TO BE SET 1" BELOW NORMAL CROSSSECTION ELEV.)HIGH STRENGTHNON-SHRINK GROUTCONCRETE CURBPRECAST CONCRETE w/MONOLITHIC BASEWATERTIGHT JOINT USING1" MIN. WIDTH FLEXIBLEGASKET (SEAL EXTERIORJOINTS AND LIFT HOLES w/NON-SHRINK GROUT)N.T.S.YARD DRAIN DETAILSREVISED 08/01/2014ST-008ST-008 Yard Drain18" CAST IRON GRATEINLINE DRAIN SECTION18" INLINE DRAINSIZE: AS SHOWN ON PLANSTORM DRAINGRATE COVER IS REVERSIBLE; ONESIDE STICKS OUT AS IS SHOWN ONTHE RIGHT. ONE SIDE IS FLUSH AS ISSHOWN ON THE LEFT.DRAIN AREA = 98.7 SQ. INCHGRATE HAS H-20 (HEAVY TRAFFIC)DOT RATINGQUALITY: MATERIAL SHALLCONFORM TO ASTM A48 - CLASS 30BPAINT: CASTINGS ARE FURNISHEDWITH A BLACK PAINTCAST IRON GRATE"X" ADAPTOR90° ELBOWTEERISERADAPTORS AVAILABLE4" THRU 18"CAST IRON H-20 RATEDGRATEDRAIN BASIN AND INLINEDRAIN BY NYLOPLAST USA,INC. OR APPROVED EQUAL4" - 18"4"-9"12"N.T.S.TYPICAL UNDERDRAIN SECTIONREVISED 12/16/2014ST-009ST-009 Underdrain34" WASHED STONE(NO LIMESTONE)6" PERFORATED PVC PIPEDRAINAGE GEOTEXTILESTABILIZATION FABRICSEE ROAD SECTION*SLOPE ALL PIPE TO DRAIN @ 1% MIN.*SEE PLANS FOR INVERT ELEVATION18" MIN.FOR UNDERDRAIN12" MIN. *N.T.S.GRASS LINED DITCHREVISED 10/07/2015ST-014ST-014 Grass Ditch1313EXISTINGGRADETOPSOILEROSION CONTROLMATTING IN DITCHES w/PROFILE GRADESEXCEEDING 5%. STAPLE ASPER MANUF. SPECS.12"MIN.2' MIN.WIDTHST-011N.T.S.END SECTION DETAILREVISED 01/14/2015ST-011 End SectionAA31A-A24" MIN.CULVERT & END SECTIONTYPE I STONE FILLMATCH DITCH SECTION8'TYPE I STONE FILL(18" MIN. THICKNESS)CONTINUE STONEFILL IF REQUIREDEND SECTIONCULVERTSTABILIZATION FABRICMIRAFI 500X OR APPROVEDEQUALDIA.N.T.S.TYPICAL BIOSWALE DETAIL56" OF 4" MINUS ROUNDED RIVERSTONE12" PLANTING MIX50% SCREENED COMPOST50% CONCRETE SAND (ASTM 33)18" OF CONCRETE SAND (ASTM 33)4" OF 38" PEASTONE20" OF 34" DRAINAGE STONE6" PERFORATED PVC(SLOPE TO YARDDRAIN)FILTER FABRIC4" MIN. TOPSOIL31313" AVERAGE PONDING(0" AT UPHILL END,6" AT YARD DRAIN)SOIL NOTES:1. PLANTING MIX SHALL HAVE A PHBETWEEN 5.2 AND 7.0.2. CONCRETE SAND AND PLANTING MIXSHALL BE "BUCKET TAMPED" ONLY.DO NOT OVER COMPACTSEE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURALPLAN FOR PLANTING PLAN ANDDETAILSTREE PLANTINGSOIL LIMITS12" MIN.P:\AutoCADD Projects\2011\11202\1-CADD Files-11202\Dwg\Commercial Lots\11202 - Commercial Lot2 - Details.dwg, 4/25/2016 3:45:48 PM, aloiselle AS SHOWN11202C4.3--MISC.DETAILSACEDSMDSMSALRYEMEADOWASSOCIATES, INC25 OMEGA DRIVE, SUITE 201WILLISTON, VERMONT 054951075 HINESBURG RD.SOUTH BURLINGTONVERMONTRYEMEADOWCOMMERCIALDEVELOPMENTN.T.S.POLE LIGHT DETAILREVISED 12/19/2014L-002L-002 Pole Light2.1.24"5'-0" MIN.16'-0"20'-0"3"xFOREWARD THROW15"x21" SQUAREALUMINUM FIXTURE w/250w MH LAMP, DARKBRONZE FINISHxSPAULDING SE1-250M-FTw/ PHOTOELECTRICCONTROL AND CUTOFFSHIELD (OR APPROVEDEQUAL)xFOREWARD THROW 18"x26"SQUARE ALUMINUM FIXTURE w/400w MH LAMP, DARK BRONZEFINISHxSPAULDING SE11-400M-FT w/PHOTOELECTRIC CONTROL ANDCUTOFF SHIELD (OR APPROVEDEQUAL)PAVEMENT SURFACENON-TAPERED SQUAREALUMINUM POLE - DARKBRONZE FINISHHAND HOLE w/ COVERANCHOR BOLTS &TEMPLATE BY LIGHTPOLE SUPPLIERSEE LIGHT POLEBASE DETAILFINISH GRADEN.T.S.POLE LIGHT BASE DETAILREVISED 12/19/2014L-003L-003 Pole LIght Base24"(MIN.)5'-0" MIN.3"#3 TIES @ 12" O.C.GALV. STEEL TO PVCCONDUIT CONNECTORSCH 80 PVC FROMPOLE TO POLE w/SEPARATE GROUNDWIREPAVEMENTSURFACEPOLE AND LAMP AS PERLIGHTING SCHEDULEHAND HOLE w/ COVERANCHOR BOLTS &TEMPLATE BY LIGHTPOLE SUPPLIERBOLT OR CADWELDGROUND WIRE TO POLEFINISH GRADE34" CONDUIT FOR #6BARE COPPERGROUND WIRE(4) #5 VERTICAL34"x10' COPPER WELDGROUND ROD BONDTO CONDUIT, BASE &POLE24" PRECAST LIGHT POLE BASE(ROUND or TAPERED)or 24" Ø (MIN.) CAST-IN-PLACE- 5,000 psi @ 28 DAYS- REINFORCING AS SHOWN 2' MIN.CURBN.T.S.GAS LINE TRENCH DETAILREVISED 08/01/2014M-006M-006 Gas TrenchGAS MARKING TAPE SHALL BE12" BELOW FINISH GRADEAPPROVED BACKFILLTHOROUGHLY COMPACTEDIN 8" LIFTSGAS PIPEMIN. 6" SAND OR FINEGRAVEL ON ALL SIDESOF CONDUIT IN AREASOF ROCKY SOIL24" MIN.36" MIN.N.T.S.ELECTRICAL TRENCH - PRIMARYREVISED 08/01/2014M-007M-007 Elec. Trench PrimaryELECTRICAL CABLE MARKINGTAPE SHALL BE PLACED 8" TO12" BELOW FINISH GRADEAPPROVED BACKFILLTHOROUGHLY COMPACTEDIN 8" LIFTSTELEPHONECABLEMIN. 4" SAND OR FINEGRAVEL ON ALL SIDESOF CONDUITELECTRICAL CONDUIT24" MIN.40" MIN.CONDUIT SHALL BE ENCASED IN A 4" ENVELOPE OF CONCRETEUNDER THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:A. FOR INSTALLATION UNDER THE TRAVEL PORTION OF THEROAD.B. WITHIN 10' OF WATER, SEWER, GAS AND DRAIN CROSSING.N.T.S.ELECTRICAL TRENCH - SECONDARYREVISED 08/01/2014M-008M-008 Elec Trench Secondary24" MIN.24" MIN.12" MIN.APPROVED BACKFILLTHOROUGHLY COMPACTEDIN 8" LIFTSELECTRICAL CABLE MARKINGTAPE SHALL BE PLACED 8" TO12" BELOW FINISH GRADETELEPHONECABLEMIN. 4" SAND OR FINEGRAVEL ON ALL SIDESOF CONDUITELECTRICAL CONDUITREVISED 2/18/2015M-015M-015 Bike rackOR APPROVED EQUAL38 1/2"1 7/8"36"N.T.S.BIKE RACK (PARK-IT-BIKE RACKS)49 1/2"N.T.S.DETECTABLE WARNING SURFACEREVISED 08/01/2014M-005M-005 Detect Surf.DETECTABLE WARNING PLACEMENTDETECTABLE WARNING DETAILS1.6" MIN.2.4" MAX.0.65" MIN. BASETO BASE SPACINGSQUARE PATTERN,PARALLEL ALIGNMENTDIRECTION OF TRAVELFULL WIDTHOF RAMP6" MIN.8" MAX.24"BROOM FINISH ADJACENTSURFACES (TYP.)ADJACENT SURFACE OFRAMP / LEVEL LANDING(SEE DETECTABLEWARNING NOTE #5)50% MINIMUM TO65% MAXIMUM OFBASE DIAMETER0.9" MIN.1.4" MAX.0.2"DETECTABLE WARNING NOTES1. DETECTABLE WARNING SURFACES SHALL BE PAIDFOR AS SPECIFIED IN THE CONTRACT.2. CONCRETE ADJACENT TO ALL DETECTABLEWARNINGS SHALL HAVE A BROOM FINISH.3. THE COLOR OF THE DETECTABLE WARNING SHALLPROVIDE A VISUAL CONTRAST TO THESURROUNDING SURFACE AND SHALL BE ASSPECIFIED IN THE DOCUMENTS.4. TRUNCATED DOMES SHALL BE ALIGNED ON ASQUARE GRID IN THE PREDOMINANT DIRECTIONOF PEDESTRIAN TRAVEL.5. FOR SURFACE APPLIED TRUNCATED DOMEPRODUCTS, A MAXIMUM 0.25" VERTICAL CHANGEIN LEVEL IS ALLOWED. FOR CHANGES IN LEVELBETWEEN 0.25" AND 0.50", A BEVEL WITH AMAXIMUM 1:2 SLOPE IS REQUIRED. CHANGES INLEVEL GREATER THAN 0.50" MUST BE TREATED ASA RAMP - 8.3% MAXIMUM SLOPE.6. SEE THE TOWN FOR A LIST OF ACCEPTABLEDETECTABLE WARNINGS MANUFACTURERS FORANY WARNINGS TO BE INSTALLED WITHIN THEPUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY.N.T.S.HANDICAP RAMP NOTESREVISED 08/01/2014M-004M-004 HC Ramp Notes1. THE DIMENSIONS AND GRADES SHOWN ON THIS STANDARD WILL BEADHERED TO IN THE DESIGN AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF SIDEWALKRAMPS. WHERE SIDEWALKS RUN ADJACENT TO ROADWAYS ONSTEEP (5% OR GREATER) GRADES, RAMP GRADES WILL BE AS FLATAS POSSIBLE. ( ON LOW SIDE OF DRIVES AND INTERSECTING SIDESTREETS, RAMPS SHALL SLOPE TOWARDS DRIVE OR SIDE STREET @2% )2. NOMINAL RAMP DIMENSIONS: RAMP WIDTH - 5'-0" MINIMUM RAMPSLOPE - 8.3% MAXIMUM FLARE SLOPE - 10% MAXIMUM RAMP CROSSSLOPE - 2.0% MAXIMUM3. A LEVEL LANDING (NO GREATER THAN 2.0% SLOPE IN ANYDIRECTION) SHALL BE PROVIDED AT THE TOP OF SIDEWALK RAMPSTO ALLOW FOR STOPPING AND MANEUVERING OF WHEELCHAIRS.4. LEVEL LANDINGS AT THE BOTTOM OF PERPENDICULAR RAMPSSHALL BE WHOLLY CONTAINED WITHIN MARKED CROSSWALKS.5. DUMMY JOINTS SHALL BE PROVIDED AT TRANSITIONS (GRADECHANGES) AT TOPS AND BOTTOMS OF RAMPS AND FLARES.6. VERTICAL DROP-OFF EDGES TO RAMPS WILL NOT BE BUILT UNLESSTHE RAMP ABUTS AN AREA WHICH WILL NOT BE USED BYPEDESTRIANS.7. NO VERTICAL "LIP" OR "CURB REVEAL" WILL BE PROVIDED WHERETHE RAMP ADJOINS THE ROADWAY.8. AT MARKED CROSSWALKS, THE FULL WIDTH OF THE RAMP ORLANDING SHALL BE CONTAINED WITHIN THE PAVEMENT MARKINGS.9. WHERE POSSIBLE, RAMP FLARES SHOULD BE LOCATED OUTSIDE THEDIRECT LINE OF TRAVEL MOST LIKELY TO BE FOLLOWED BY THEVISUALLY IMPAIRED.10. SIGNS, POLES, PLANTERS, MAILBOXES, ETC. SHALL NOT BE LOCATEDWHERE THEY WILL INTERFERE WITH THE USE OF SIDEWALK RAMPS.11. WHERE POSSIBLE, SIDEWALK RAMPS SHOULD NOT BE LOCATEDWHERE USERS MUST CROSS DROP INLET GRATES, MANHOLECOVERS OR OTHER ACCESS LIDS. IF THIS CANNOT BE AVOIDED THENGRATE DESIGN AND PLACEMENT SHALL CONFORM TO ADAREQUIREMENTS.12. CURB DRAINAGE SHOULD BE CONSTRUCTED SO AS TO PRECLUDETHE FLOW OF WATER PAST THE SIDEWALK RAMP.13. WHEREVER FEASIBLE, TWO SIDEWALK RAMPS ARE RECOMMENDEDIN PREFERENCE TO A SINGLE RAMP.14. JOINTS WILL BE CONSTRUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH CURRENTSIDEWALK SPECIFICATIONS, HOWEVER EXPANSION JOINTS WITHINTHE SIDEWALK RAMP AREA WILL BE AVOIDED WHEREVER POSSIBLE.15. SIDEWALKS THAT ARE LESS THAN 5' WIDE REQUIRE 5' WIDE BY 5'LONG PASSING AREAS (NO GREATER THAN 2.0% CROSS SLOPE) ATINTERVALS NOT TO EXCEED 200 FEET.16. E.O.P. = EDGE OF PAVEMENT17. THE PUBLIC SIDEWALK CURB RAMP STANDARDS DEPICTED HEREMAY NOT BE APPROPRIATE FOR ALL LOCATIONS. FIELD CONDITIONSAT INDIVIDUAL LOCATIONS MAY REQUIRE SPECIFIC DESIGNS.DESIGNS MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THISSHEET TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT FEASIBLE ON ALTERATIONPROJECTS AND WHEN STRUCTURALLY PRACTICABLE ON NEWCONSTRUCTION PROJECTS AS REQUIRED BY THE AMERICANS WITHDISABILITIES ACT ACCESSIBILITY GUIDELINES.18. ALL AREAS OF SIDEWALK RAMPS SHALL HAVE EXPOSED AGGREGATE.P:\AutoCADD Projects\2011\11202\1-CADD Files-11202\Dwg\Commercial Lots\11202 - Commercial Lot2 - Details.dwg, 2/22/2016 12:58:07 PM, aloiselle NONEC5.0SITESPECIFICATIONSACE11202DSMDSMSALRYEMEADOWASSOCIATES, INC25 OMEGA DRIVE, SUITE 201WILLISTON, VERMONT 054951075 HINESBURG RD.SOUTH BURLINGTONVERMONTRYEMEADOWCOMMERCIALDEVELOPMENTP:\AutoCADD Projects\2011\11202\1-CADD Files-11202\Dwg\Commercial Lots\11202 - Commercial Lot2 - Details.dwg, 2/22/2016 12:58:22 PM, aloiselle ACENONEC5.1SITESPECIFICATIONS11202DSMDSMSALRYEMEADOWASSOCIATES, INC25 OMEGA DRIVE, SUITE 201WILLISTON, VERMONT 054951075 HINESBURG RD.SOUTH BURLINGTONVERMONTRYEMEADOWCOMMERCIALDEVELOPMENTP:\AutoCADD Projects\2011\11202\1-CADD Files-11202\Dwg\Commercial Lots\11202 - Commercial Lot2 - Details.dwg, 2/22/2016 12:58:35 PM, aloiselle ACENONEC5.2SITESPECIFICATIONS11202DSMDSMSALRYEMEADOWASSOCIATES, INC25 OMEGA DRIVE, SUITE 201WILLISTON, VERMONT 054951075 HINESBURG RD.SOUTH BURLINGTONVERMONTRYEMEADOWCOMMERCIALDEVELOPMENTP:\AutoCADD Projects\2011\11202\1-CADD Files-11202\Dwg\Commercial Lots\11202 - Commercial Lot2 - Details.dwg, 2/22/2016 12:58:55 PM, aloiselle ACENONEC5.3SITESPECIFICATIONS11202DSMDSMSALRYEMEADOWASSOCIATES, INC25 OMEGA DRIVE, SUITE 201WILLISTON, VERMONT 054951075 HINESBURG RD.SOUTH BURLINGTONVERMONTRYEMEADOWCOMMERCIALDEVELOPMENTP:\AutoCADD Projects\2011\11202\1-CADD Files-11202\Dwg\Commercial Lots\11202 - Commercial Lot2 - Details.dwg, 2/22/2016 12:59:08 PM, aloiselle SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD MEETING MINUTES 5 APRIL 2016 1 The South Burlington Development Review Board held a regular meeting on Tuesday, 5 April 2016, at 7:00 p.m., in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset Street. MEMBERS PRESENT: B. Miller, Acting Chair; D. Parsons, J. Wilking, M. Cota ALSO PRESENT: R. Belair, Administrative Officer; L. Britt, Development Review Planner; J. Myers, K. McQuillan, R. Bourbeau, J. Kournan, D. Vardakas, E. Townsend, P. Kahn, J. & S. Jewett, T. Barnes, E. Abrams, J. Doig, M. Morin, J. DuBois, D. Main, D. Heil, D. Burke, B. Gardner, T. Sheppard, C. Ruggerio, E. Levite, B. Bartlett, J. Goodwin, P. O’Leary, T. Barritt 1. Additions, deletions, or changes in order of agenda items: It was noted that the items for Saxon Partners and Allen Brook would not be heard at this meeting and would be continued to a later date. 2. Comments & Questions from the public not related to the Agenda: No issues were raised. 3. Announcements: There were no announcements. 4. Continued Final Plat Application #SD-16-02 of Jeffery & Elizabeth Goldberg to amend a previously approved planned unit development consisting of: 1) six two- family dwellings, and 2) three single family lots. The amendment consists of planting additional landscaping to replace existing plantings which were removed without approval, Windswept Lane: Mr. Burke noted that most of the Board members visited the site and looked at Autumn Hill Road. The current plan incorporates what was said at the site. They have saved 2 large pine trees behind units 11 & 12 and shifted the deck 3 feet to provide more room. SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD MEETING MINUTES 5 APRIL 2016 2 They are proposing a six (6) ft. high Arborvitae hedge 75 ft. in length (Mr. Burke showed the location) and also a 6-foot vinyl fence, 48 feet long, from the edge of the cedar hedge to the end of the right-of-way. Mr. Burke also showed the additional plantings in front that were part of the Act 250 requirements. Mr. Wilking said he was surprised to see how close the lot line was to the street. He also questioned the closeness of the deck to the cedar hedge. Mr. Burke said that would just be a maintenance issue. Mr. Jewett gave members documents including maps from before the project began and after the road was started. He indicated a gap which is a pathway to the stream. The area was planted by the first owners of the property. The Jewetts also planted 2 rows of trees. Mr. Jewett said that for 30 years that gap protected their property. He noted that no fewer than 12 trees are dying. He hoped the DRB would require a barrier such as they had before. Mr. Burke said that what is there is what was approved. There was never an intent to add trees, other than street trees in that area. Mr. Jewett said he had removed his objection because he thought there were going to be more trees. He also never knew how close that house would be. Mr. Ruggerio said he has the same perspective as the Jewetts. He hoped they could get protection from drifting snow. Since the road was raised, trees are sitting in a foot of water. He felt that if the water stays there, those trees will die. Mr. Wilking asked if they have considered putting up snow fencing. Mr. Burke acknowledged that unit 11-12 is close to the property line, but it is where it is supposed to be. He felt it does not make sense to put in a buffer across the right-of-way. Mr. Jewett said their property is not likely to be developed, and the DRB shouldn’t consider any future potential development there. The LDRs require the right-of-way, but they don’t require them to use it. To have trees across it now is not an issue; if it were to get used, those trees could be cut down. Mr. Burke said trees were not proposed to be there, and they shouldn’t be planting trees in a right-of-way, whether or not it is used. Mr. Miller agreed with Mr. Burke that there shouldn’t be plantings in the right-of-way. SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD MEETING MINUTES 5 APRIL 2016 3 Mr. Wilking said that most of the trees that were taken down were clearly on the Goldberg property. He added he would have liked to see all the neighbors agree on the snow maintenance issue and put up snow fencing. To be effective, a snow fence would have to be on the Goldberg property. Mr. Jewett felt the vinyl fence should be longer to deal with the problem. He said it is less attractive than trees, but they would be OK with it. Mrs. Jewett said that if two properties are different, there should be a barrier between them. She wanted trees put there. She added that they don’t want to see that “different type of community” in what was supposed to be rural, and she would bring that case to the City Council. Mr. Parsons said there is a limit to what can be done in a right-of-way, and the plan being presented is what the DRB can approve. Mr. Wilking said he understood the Jewetts’ concerns, but this is what was approved. Mr. Jewett said the issue of 2 different properties was never discussed, and building 11-12 was moved in the very last iteration. There had previously been a 23 foot setback. He felt the DRB made a mistake that should be rectified. Mr. Wilking then moved to close #SD-16-02. Mr. Cota seconded. Motion passed 4-0. 5. Continued sketch plan application #SD-16-03 of Gardner Construction, Inc., for a planned unit development to develop two adjacent parcels totaling 6.07 acres with 22 residential units consisting of the following: 1) 14 single family dwellings (one existing), and 2) four duplex buildings, totaling 21 new units, 1398 Hinesburg Road: Mr. Burke indicated the location of the property and a driveway across from Butler Drive going back to the existing house. He also indicated the piece of property added to the original parcel to square it off. The total is now just over 6 acres. There are temporary easements obtained from Mr. Gardner for a turnaround. Mr. Burke said they will preserve the existing house and add 14 single family homes (some of which are carriage units) and 4 duplexes. SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD MEETING MINUTES 5 APRIL 2016 4 Mr. Burke indicated what is included in “common land.” There is also an area where there will be “common amenities.” After meeting with staff, the road width was reduced from 26 feet to 24 feet at Public Works’ request. Garages are set back and all the units will have front façade/porches. They will meet all setbacks and coverages and will not require any waivers. They are also 2 below the maximum allowable density. Mr. Gardner already owns the TDRs needed to meet the project density. Mr. Burke noted they have moved the units closer to the road because that is what the regulations now require. Mr. Burke said they do not intend to have on-street parking as it would inhibit 2-way traffic on the road. Driveways can accommodate 2 cars, and there are 2-car garages. They could put up “no parking” signs, but they don’t anticipate an issue. Mr. Wilking noted that Ms. Smith’s comments suggest a 26 ft. street because of the density and the shorter driveways. Mr. Behr’s written comments also suggest this. Regarding the potential for future development on the adjacent property, Mr. Burke noted that with TDRs a few more units could be allowed, but it would be hard to do. The same person owns both properties. A floating easement exists to allow development potential. Mr. Burke noted the existing private road is 220 feet long. The regulations allow only 200. He said it is their intention to get it down to 200 feet. Units 8, 9 and 10 involve Class 2 wetlands. They will preserve the 50-foot buffer except at the 4-way intersection. Mr. Burke felt the State would approve the impact. Mr. Belair noted the Board has to approve the encroachment and require a State permit (with a copy of the permit to the Board). Mr. Burke said there will be a cedar fence as recommended by staff. Mr. Parsons noted that both Mr. Behr and Ms. Smith would prefer a cedar hedge. Mr. Wilking and Mr. Miller said either one is fine with them. SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD MEETING MINUTES 5 APRIL 2016 5 Mr. Burke indicated a green-hatched area of just over 10,000 sq. ft. for “common amenities.” He noted that staff was concerned with the proximity of this area to 5 units. Mr. Burke said they feel this would be a focal point of the development. They are considering picnic tables, planter boxes, barbeque pits, etc. A landscape architect will do a plan for that. Mr. Wilking had no problem with this not being park land. He did have a problem with density and felt it looks like they were trying to cram the last unit in. He said the Board does not have to approve 4 units per acre as the regulations say “up to” 4 units per acre. Mr. Miller agreed that it is a little too dense. He had no issue with the mix of building types. Mr. Burke said they would like some flexibility on the design of single family units so buyers have some say. The other units would be “fixed.” Information on this will be presented a preliminary plat. Mr. Miller reminded the applicant that they must meet the stretch energy code. Mr. Burke said they will and they will also meet the Fire Chief’s comments. Mr. Barnes, speaking on behalf of residents of Wildflower Drive, said they are excited about the development but have some concerns. Density is the biggest issue as it is a dramatic change in the character of the existing neighborhood. He felt the buildings are located just to maximize the density. He also noted that the minimum distance between 2 homes in their development is 40 feet; in this project it is 10 feet. Regarding access and street configuration, Mr. Barnes questioned what is a “private road” vs. a “driveway.” He felt that what is called a “private road” is a “driveway” and there shouldn’t be units facing it. Mr. Belair said that staff feels that if a roadway serves more than one home, it is not a “driveway” but a “private road.” In this case, if the lower street is ever extended to the adjacent property, it would become a city street. Mr. Barnes said that would further affect the character of their neighborhood. Mr. Barritt said the DRB doesn’t have to honor any number of TDRs. He agreed that the project is too dense and the park space too small. He asked the Board to scrutinize this very closely. No other issues were raised. 6. Sketch plan application #SD-16-04 of Mary Jo Capotrio to subdivide a 44,528 sq. ft. parcel developed with a single family dwelling into two lots of 19,168 sq. ft. (Lot #1) and 25,360 sq. ft. (Lot #2) and developing lot #2 with a two-family dwelling, 1408 Hinesburg Road: SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD MEETING MINUTES 5 APRIL 2016 6 Ms. Vardakas, speaking on behalf of her mother, said they want to have a separate home for her mother and husband which is more adapted to their needs. There is a TDR for another house. Mr. Miller said the issue is that if you look at the property from Hinesburg Road, the lot ratio is fine, but if you look at it from Dubois Drive, it is much too shallow. Mr. Miller recommended they look at it from Hinesburg Road and say the lot ratio is OK. Mr. Parsons agreed and asked that the applicant make the house more “welcoming” from the Hinesburg Road side. Mr. Wilking said that at the next level the Board will have to see what it looks like and whether bending the rules is OK. He had no problem with the concept. Mr. Cota was concerned with how far back the driveway is from Hinesburg Road. A neighbor felt it seems “forced” and said that if this were a vacant property, you would never construct it that way. He felt they were trying to “shoehorn” something in. He was also concerned that his water lines aren’t cut during construction. Mr. Bourbeau, another neighbor, noted that nearby properties are set back 80 feet and are single family houses. He didn’t see how this can be viewed from Hinesburg Road as the house address would be 1 Dubois Drive. The house would be only 20 feet from Dubois Drive. This would be closer than neighboring houses. Mr. Belair noted the regulations have changed and the maximum allowable setback is 25 feet. Mr. Parsons added that the existing lot is on Hinesburg Road, which is why the plan is being looked at from that road. Another neighbor felt this does not meet the intent of the rules since this is an L-shaped lot. Mr. Wilking said the Board sees odd-shaped lots all the time, and this is not unusual. Mr. Belair explained the next steps including meeting residential design requirements and having a survey done. 7. Continued site plan application #SP-16-10 of Allen Brook Development, Inc., to construct a 50,155 sq. ft. building which will consist of: 1) 44,155 sq. ft. of warehouse & distribution use, and 2) 6,000 sq. ft. of retail warehouse outlet use, 6 Ethan Allen Drive: It was noted that the applicant has requested a continuance. SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD MEETING MINUTES 5 APRIL 2016 7 Mr. Wilking moved to continue #SP-16-10 to 3 May 2016. Mr. Parsons seconded. Motion passed 4-0. 8. Site Plan Application #SP-16-15 of Willowbrook Homes, LLC, to reactivate condition #19 of #SD-15-04 which required that the zoning permit for the first building be obtained within 6 months from the approval date of 20 March 2015, Willowbrook Lane: Mr. O’Leary said this is the only change being requested. No issues were raised. Mr. Wilking moved to close #SP-16-15. Mr. Cota seconded. Motion passed 4-0. 9. Site Plan Application #SP-16-14 of G. E. Healthcare to amend a previously approved plan for a 233,133 sq. ft. general office building. The amendment consists of: 1) after-the-fact approval to relocate 3 trees, 2) after-the-fact approval to remove 240 cubic yards of sediment collected in two sediment ponds, and 3) expanding a parking area, 40 IDX Drive: Mr. Myers showed where the trees had been located and where they have been relocated. He also noted that the sediment was cleaned out as part of their stormwater approval. With regard to the parking lot, Mr. Myers noted that building #100 has been only partly occupied. When it is fully leased out, more parking will be needed. They are expanding the parking lot at the southeast corner. This will exceed required parking by 35 spaces which are needed for one of the new tenants. Mr. Miller noted that staff recommends that aisles be 24 feet. He questioned the safety of having people walking through the parking lot and suggested walkways around the lot. Mr. Myers said this would be hard to do, but they could stripe some walkways for safety. Mr. Miller stressed that the Board wants parking lots to be as pedestrian friendly as possible. Mr. Wilking asked how people would get to building #100. Mr. Myers said they are 2 sets of stairs coming down. He added that more people park in front of building #100. The lot is used more for building #200. SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD MEETING MINUTES 5 APRIL 2016 8 Mr. Miller asked about bicycle parking. Mr. Myers said it is there, they just didn’t show it on the plan. Mr. Belair noted that 2% of the parking must be for handicapped use. These have to be shown on the plan. The applicant said they will be shown on another application. Mr. Miller asked if the trees were moved to accommodate parking expansion. Mr. Myers said yes, but there is still a lot of screening in that area. Mr. Miller asked that the plan be updated with landscaping. He also noted the need to landscape the parking area islands. Mr. Wilking moved to continue #SP-16-14 to 19 April 2016. Mr. Cota seconded. Motion passed 4-0. 10. Continued sketch plan application #SD-15-28 of Saxon Partners, LLC, for a planned unit development consisting of: (as proposed by the applicant) 1) six boundary line adjustments with adjoining properties, and 2) construction of an 88,548 sq. ft. retail store which will include a 3,348 sq. ft. tire center and a 3,360 sq. ft. receiving area (BJ’s Wholesale Club), 65 Shunpike Road: It was noted that the applicant had requested a continuance. Mr. Wilking moved to continue #SD-15-28 to 17 May 2016. Mr. Parsons seconded. Motion passed 4-0. 11. Minutes of 15 March 2016: Mr. Wilking moved to approve the Minutes of 15 March 2016 as written. Mr. Cota seconded. Motion passed 4-0. As there was no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned by common consent at 9:50 p.m. __________________________________ Clerk __________________________________ Date DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD 19 APRIL 2016 1 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD 19 APRIL 2016 The South Burlington Development Review Board held a regular meeting on Tuesday, 19 April 2016, at 7:00 p.m., in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset Street. MEMBERS PRESENT: B. Miller, Acting Chair; J. Smith, D. Parsons, J. Wilking, M. Cota, F. Kochman ALSO PRESENT: R. Belair, Administrative Officer; L. Britt, Planning Department; D. Marshall, T. Chittenden, D. Duell, T. Barden, B. Dousevicz, J. Illick, K. Darr, L. Vera (by phone), M. Mahoney, B. De La Bruere, J. Myers, D. Main, D. Woolridge, M. Janswold, P. Cross 1. Additions, deletions, or changes in order of agenda items: No changes were made to the Agenda. 2. Comments & Questions from the public not related to the Agenda: No issues were raised. 3. Announcements: Mr. Miller welcomed new Board member Frank Kochman. 4. Conditional use application #CU-1602 of Lynn Vera to construct a 267 sq. ft. deck to the rear of a nonconforming single family dwelling, 11 Pavilion Avenue: Ms. Vera, appearing by phone, said she wants to build a small deck, smaller than decks of her neighbors. Mr. Miller noted that Ms. Vera will be removing a portion of a paved driveway to deal with a coverage issue. Ms. Vera said this seems a shame as it cost a lot to put in. No other issues were raised. Mr. Wilking moved to close #CU-16-02. Ms. Smith seconded. Motion passed 6-0. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD 19 APRIL 2016 2 5. Conditional Use Application #CU-16-01 and Site Plan Review Application #SP-16-11 of Rice Memorial High School for after-the-fact approval to amend a previously approved plan for a 126,875 sq. ft. educational facility. The amendment consists of adding two (2) 8’x 20’ detached accessory buildings, 99 Proctor Avenue: Mr. Barden said there are 2 steel walk-in containers in locations near the bleachers and near the refreshment stand. They are used to store athletic equipment and are not connected to land. They have been there since last summer. Mr. Belair said the LDRs consider these to be “buildings” as they have sides, doors, etc. Mr. Miller said they are “unbelievably ugly.” Mr. Wilking noted that in Burlington people were given a time limit to get rid of them, and he would be in favor of a limited time span before they have to be gone. He added he would have a hard time voting for keeping them on a long-term basis. Mr. Belair said a time limit is possible if both parties agree. Mr. Barden said he didn’t know what the school’s plan is. He personally wouldn’t have an issue with a time limit, but Father Bernie is on vacation, and it might depend on the school’s plans. Mr. Miller said he was thinking of having them gone before the start of the September, 2017 school year. Mr. Wilking said that’s longer than he would give. Mr. Duell, a neighbor on Proctor Avenue, noted that Sr. Laura de la Santo will be the new Principal. He said the “buildings” are actually shipping containers and are already rusting. He felt they will soon sink into the soil and the doors won’t be able to be opened. Mr. Duell said there are other things going on at Rice that he knows don’t have permits. He cited huge amounts of landfill brought in to level the ground (he showed the location on a map) and there are 2 dugouts being built that residents have an issue with (he showed the location of these). He said it appears it’s easier to “ask for forgiveness than for permission,” and he felt Rice should be following the rules. Mr. Belair said Rice is in the process of putting together a plan. They will have to add the fill to the plan. Mr. Barden said all the work was done by volunteers, and they assumed someone else was taking care of the permits. He added they have been trying to locate a plan. Mr. Miller suggested someone from Rice come to the Board and discuss long-range plan for the containers. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD 19 APRIL 2016 3 Mr. Wilking then moved to continue #CU-16-01 and #SP-16-11 until 17 May 2016. Mr. Cota seconded. Motion passed 6-0. 6. Continued Site Plan Application #SP-16-14 of G. E. Healthcare to amend a previously approved plan for a 233,133 sq. ft. general office building. The amendment consists of: 1) after-the-fact approval to relocate three trees; 2) after- the-fact approval to remove 240 cubic yards of sediment collected in two sediment ponds, and 3) expanding a parking area, 40 IDX Drive: Mr. Myers said they were continued for discussion about providing pedestrian pathways. They have now provided 2 boardwalks as well as some striped areas in the parking area. He indicated these on the parking plan. He also noted that the parking lot will be used mostly by people going to and from the northerly building (#200). People going to and from building #100 will mostly park in front of that building. Regarding handicapped spaces, they now meet the requirements, but they will be coming back with another plan for more. Mr. Wilking moved to close #SP-16-14. Mr. Cota seconded. Motion passed 6-0. 7. Sketch Plan Application #SD-16-05 of Rye Associates, LLC, to amend a previously approved planned unit development consisting of 36 single family dwellings, four 4-unit multi-family dwellings, and a 5,100 sq. ft. general office building. The amendment consists of: 1) resubdividing lots 2-5 in to three lots, 2) replacing granite posts with boulders to demarcate the neighborhood park, 3) reviewing the site plan for a new 4,726 sq. ft. general office building, and 4) revising landscaping for the general office building on lot 1, 1075 Hinesburg Road: Mr. Marshall showed the location on the west side of Hinesburg Road, north of Fox Run Lane. He indicated the VC zoning district. They had originally proposed 5 commercial lots with 20,000 sq. ft. of building area; they are now looking to consolidate the 5 lots into 4. In addition, the applicant for lot #1 would like to modify the landscape plan. On lot 2, there will be an office building with shared parking. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD 19 APRIL 2016 4 Mr. Marshall showed an open space area in the middle of the project. The last approval had granite posts to mark the open space area. They want to change these to boulders which were found on the site. Mr. Wilking said he was not in favor of the “loop road.” He understood it may be the lesser of 2 evils, but he didn’t like it. Mr. Kochman asked what would be the distance between curb cuts if they did away with the loop road. Mr. Marshall estimated 140 feet. Mr. Wilking felt this would make it much clearer to people as to how you get into the buildings. Mr. Kochman agreed. Mr. Marshall showed what it would look like with curb cuts instead of the loop road. The landscaping plan for lot #1 is being updated. This will include an area for snow storage. The cost value of the plantings is also being updated. Mr. Miller noted that $16,000.00 was approved, and they had reduced this to $14,000.00. Mr. Marshall said they still comply with the rules. Mr. Doucevicz added this will be a quality plan. Mr. Miller felt a 2’x2’ boulder is too small and won’t be as obvious a demarcation as a hedge or a man-made object. Ms. Smith noted the granite posts were only to be 30 inches high, which is only 6 inches higher than the boulders. Mr. Doucevicz asked if larger boulders would be OK. The Board asked for a minimum of 3’x 3’. No other issues were raised. 8. Sketch plan application #SD-16-06 of 55 Community Drive, LLC, for a planned unit development consisting of: 1) resubdividing found lots (#8B, 9, 10 and 11) into two lots of 7.4 acres (lot #8B) and 47.1 acre (lot #9), 2) eliminating proposed City street Community Way, and 3) constructing a 182,000 sq. ft. warehouse & distribution facility, 45 Community Drive: Mr. Illick said the application is for Technology Park and is for a FedEx Ground Distribution Facility, which is a permitted use. The facility is currently in Williston and has outgrown its space there. Mr. Illick noted that a wetland delineation was done in 1995, and this has now changed, requiring them to move the building west to avoid a wetland area. The building will be 182,000 sq. ft. Mr. Illick showed the location of an office within the building that monitors incoming DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD 19 APRIL 2016 5 traffic. He also showed a stormwater detention pond and the employee parking lot outside of the “secure lane.” The building will be brick, unlike most of the FedEx buildings around the country. It will be one story, 31 feet high, and will be cut into the bank. The southwest corner of the building will be 8 feet below grade. Mr. Illick said they will provide a landscaped berm at the Interstate side. It will not interfere with the Interstate view of the mountains. Mr. Illick showed two locations for stormwater treatment before water is discharged into the stream. He indicated the location of Muddy Brook which will receive this water. Mr. Kochman asked why the building will have a flat roof. Mr. Illick said with a flat roof, the snow is internally drained when it melts. With a pitched roof, there is the issue of snow falling from the roof around the building. Mr. Illick showed the location of the existing recreation path along the Interstate. It is a private path but they are delighted to have the public use it. At Community Drive, the building is at grade. Mr. Illick showed an area for a mini park which will have benches, landscaping and would look like a city park. They are providing 308 parking spaces. They would prefer 360. This is a 3-shift operation with some overlap of employees. FedEx hasn’t yet signed off on the parking spaces. Mr. Illick stressed they are trying to meet the needs of the business without having more parking than they need. Mr. Belair said the requirement is for 91 spaces. Mr. Illick noted the former Digital building has 1000 spaces and is usually pretty full. This plan proposes less than a third of that. Mr. Wilking said he believes you should build the parking for what you need, as long as your lot coverage is OK. Not have enough parking causes more problems. Mr. Illick said that historically they don’t provide all the parking users ask for; FedEx is asking for 360 or 390; he felt they can manage this. With regard to the location of parking, Mr. Illick showed an arc line that staff says is the front of the building. This means some parking they are indicating is in front. Mr. Illick said he believes they meet the criteria for a waiver, but there is also a potential modification of the LDRs that would allow up to 25% of parking in the front yard. What they now show in the front yard is under 25%. He would like to proceed with that design. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD 19 APRIL 2016 6 Mr. Kochman asked if parking is visible from Community Drive. Mr. Illick said it is not invisible, but there are berms of various heights, and the parking is in no way offensive. It would be handsomely landscaped. He then showed some building renderings including a view from a location on the Interstate where you cannot see the building. Mr. Wilking asked if there is a possibility of using parking at 30 Community Drive at busy times. A representative of FedEx said they won’t agree to that. Mr. Miller asked about growth projections. Mr. Illick said they estimate 10 years. Mr. Miller asked about the interval for light fixtures. Mr. Illick said they just replaced all parking lot lights with LEDs. The old standards don’t apply to LEDs; 0 to2 feet candles is the acceptable standard. The height is similar to all others in Tech Park. Mr. Miller asked about street trees. Mr. Illick said their landscaping exceeds the requirements. They will be pleased to work with the City Arborist. Mr. Illick said they are in the initial stages of a wetland permit. They have done the delineation which has to be confirmed before they can get the permit. Mr. Miller asked about interacting with the Bike/Pedestrian Committee. Mr. Illick said they have a very good relationship with the Committee. He stressed he would like the internal paths not to be “public paths,” and they will continue to allow public use of them. Members were OK with that. Mr. Wilking said his bigger concern is traffic. Mr. Illick said he would meet with the Bike/Ped Committee. He added that he would be dismayed if the Board wants the path to be public. They are only moving it to accommodate landscaping; they won’t do the landscaping if the path has to be public. Mr. Belair said that decision is up to the Board. Regarding traffic, a FedEx representative said this facility would be served by a hub in Connecticut. He showed where packages would arrive and be placed on conveyors and then loaded on trucks for delivery. Mr. Wilking said he want to see the impact on Kimball Avenue. Mr. Illick said they are updating the traffic study and will pay for a third party review of that study. He noted that FedEx insists that traffic projections be out 10 years. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD 19 APRIL 2016 7 Mr. Belair offered to Mr. Illick that he could choose to have the sketch plan continued. This would allow the Board to provide him guidance, based on a full staff review, of the plan as staff has not had a chance to review it and highlight any major issues. He was then asked if he would be willing to take the risk of not having the Board’s feedback on a full staff review. Mr. Illick indicated to the Board that he understood the risk and was willing to proceed without further review of the sketch plan. There was no public comment. Mr. Kochman moved to invoke technical review of the traffic study. Mr. Wilking seconded. Motion passed 6-0. 9. Minutes of 5 April 2016: No minutes were acted upon. As there was no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned by common consent at 9:20 p.m. _____________________________________ Clerk _____________________________________ Date #DR-16-02 1 CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING ANN ROCHE—370 DORSET STREET MASTER SIGNAGE PLAN #DR-16-02 FINDINGS OF FACT AND DECISION Design review application #DR-16-02 of Ann Roche to revise a Master Signage Permit for a new free- standing sign, 370 Dorset Street. The Development Review Board held a public hearing on May 3, 2016. The applicant represented herself. Based on the plans and materials contained in the document file for this application, the Development Review Board finds, concludes, and decides the following: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The applicant, Ann Roche, seeks to revise a Master Signage Permit for a new freestanding sign, 370 Dorset Street. 2. The owners of record of the subject property are Sisters and Brothers Investment Group, LLP. 3. The application was received on April 1, 2016. 4. The applicant submitted renderings of the proposed signage which consists of one new, “ann roche casual furniture Kasazza Kids” free-standing sign measuring 4ft. by 6ft. (24 sq. ft.) mounted to a height of 10+/- ft. replacing an existing 40 sq. ft. free-standing sign mounted to a height of 11+/- ft. in the same location. 5. The property lies within the Dorset Street/City Center Sign District Sign Ordinance Section 6: Dorset Street/City Center Sign District of the South Burlington Sign Ordinance reads in part that the Development Review Board must consider the following standards: (1) Consistent Design: the design of a sign shall consider and be compatible and harmonious with the design of buildings on the property and nearby. The design of all signs on a property shall promote consistency in terms of color, graphic style, lighting, location, material and proportions. (2) Promote City Center Goals: signs shall be designed and located in a manner which reinforces and respects the overall stated goals of the sign district and City Center Plan, including a high aesthetic quality and pedestrian orientation. #DR-16-02 2 (3) Color and Texture: the color and texture of a sign shall be compatible and harmonious with buildings on the property and nearby. The use of a maximum of three (3) predominant colors is encouraged to provide consistent foreground, text and background color schemes. (4) Materials Used: signs shall be designed and constructed of high-quality materials complimentary to the materials used in the buildings to which the signs are related. The proposed sign plan uses three (3) colors (forest green, burgundy, gold), provides texture and interest through the use of carving and insets, and the materials are of high quality, including 23K gold lettering and high density urethane. The Board finds these criterion have been met. Section 8(d) reads in part that the board must consider the following: (1) The initial application for a Master Signage Permit shall establish a consistent set of parameters for the shapes, materials, foreground and background color schemes, typefaces, sizes, installations and sign types to be utilized for a property and shall include color illustrations thereof. (2) Applicants are strongly encouraged to specify parameters that will lead over time to creating a strong consistency of shape, foreground and background color scheme, typeface, size, and installation in order to ensure that all signage on a property is in accordance with the goals of the Dorset Street/City Center Sign District. (3) All Master Signage Permit applications shall specify how one or more of these graphic elements will be used to relate all of the signs to each other visually. (4) Applicants may request a review and approval of a range of potential sizes for individual signs, so that an application for an individual sign of approved materials, color and design that is within an approved size range will require only approval of the Code Officer. The proposed sign plan proposes one freestanding sign on the site and therefore consistency between signage and over time is not an issue. No wall signs are proposed as part of the signage plan. Consistency within the signage plan is maintained by use of three (3) colors only and one font type. Applicant has requested approval of only one size sign in the proposed plan. The Board finds these criterion have been met. Section 9 addresses standards specifically for free-standing signs. (h) Dorset Street/City Center Sign District. Free-standing signs along Dorset Street are to be located in a sign corridor that begins adjacent to the road Right of Way and runs sixteen (16) feet from the edge of the Right of Way toward the building face. In those instances where dimensions do not provide for a two (2) foot setback from the Right of Way before a sign support post can be located, it is permitted to erect a centered single pole mounted sign of which the road side edge of the sign is directly outside the R.O.W. line. Free- standing signs in the Dorset Street/City Center District may not exceed thirty-two (32) square feet in overall dimensions and may be no higher than twelve (12) feet, measured from the average finished grade at the base of the sign to the highest point of any part of the sign structure. #DR-16-02 3 The Board finds the above criterion have been met. DECISION Motion by _____________, seconded by _____________, to approve sign design review application #DR-16-02 of Ann Roche subject to the following conditions: 1. All previous approvals and stipulations which are not changed by this decision, will remain in full effect. 2. The sign colors permitted are burgundy, forest green, and gold. 3. This project must be completed as shown on the plans submitted by the applicant, and on file in the South Burlington Department of Planning and Zoning. 4. The applicant shall obtain sign permits consistent with the master sign approval and specific standards of the Sign Ordinance in effect at the time of application from the Code Officer prior to any changes to signs on the property. 5. Any change to the approved plan shall require approval by the South Burlington Development Review Board or the Administrative Officer. 6. Pursuant to Section 20 of the Sign Ordinance, all signs shall be of substantial and sturdy construction, kept in good repair, and painted or cleaned as necessary to maintain a clean, safe, and orderly appearance. Mark Behr Yea Nay Abstain Not Present Matt Cota Yea Nay Abstain Not Present Frank Kochman Yea Nay Abstain Not present Bill Miller Yea Nay Abstain Not Present David Parsons Yea Nay Abstain Not Present Jennifer Smith Yea Nay Abstain Not Present John Wilking Yea Nay Abstain Not Present Motion carried by a vote of X– 0 – 0. Signed this ____ day of __________________ 2016, by _____________________________________ Bill Miller, Vice-Chair Please note: An appeal of this decision may be taken by filing, within 30 days of the date of this decision, a notice of appeal and the required fee by certified mail to the Superior Court, Environmental #DR-16-02 4 Division. See V.R.E.C.P. 5(b). A copy of the notice of appeal must also be mailed to the City of South Burlington Planning and Zoning Department at 575 Dorset Street, South Burlington, VT 05403. See V.R.E.C.P. 5(b) (4)(A). Please contact the Environmental Division at 802-828-1660 or http://vermontjudiciary.org/GTC/environmental/default.aspx for more information on filing requirements, deadlines, fees and mailing address. The applicant or permittee retains the obligation to identify, apply for, and obtain relevant state permits for this project. Call 802.879.5676 to speak with the regional Permit Specialist.