Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - Development Review Board - 04/18/2017DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD 18 APRIL 2017 The South Burlington Development Review Board held a regular meeting on Tuesday, 18 April 2017, at 7:00 p.m., in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset Street. MEMBERS PRESENT: B. Miller, Chair; J. Smith, J. Wilking, M. Cota, F. Kochman, ALSO PRESENT: R. Belair, Administrative Officer; L. Britt, Development Review Planner; B. McKenney, K. & K. Boudreau, J. Painter, S. Ticehurst, P. Wells, M. O’Brien, D. Marshall, D. Cummings, E. Langfeldt, A. Gill 1. Directions on emergency evacuation procedures from conference room: Mr. Miller provided directions on emergency evacuation procedures. 2. Additions, deletions, or changes in order of agenda items: Item #6 was moved to item #5. 3. Comments & Questions from the public not related to the Agenda: No issues were raised. 4. Announcements: There were no announcements. 5. Conditional Use Application #CU-17-04 and Site Plan Review Application #SP‐17‐15 of Roman Catholic Diocese of Burlington – Rice Memorial High School to amend a previously approved plan for a 126,875 sq. ft. educational facility. The amendment consists of constructing a brick walkway to the adjacent property, 99 Proctor Avenue: Mr. Wells explained that the Diocese moved into new quarters in 2011 and noticed a lot of foot traffic (including mothers with strollers) between Rice H.S. and the Lund Home. There was concern because of the rough terrain. The Bishop suggested the walkway. It will be maintained in winter time. No issues were raised. Mr. Cota moved to close #CU-17-04 and #SP-17-15. Mr. Kochman seconded. Motion passed 5-0. 6. Continued Preliminary Plat Application #SD-16-37 of O’Brien Farm Road, LLC, for a planned unit development on 39.16 acres consisting of: 1) 64 single family dwellings, 2) 27 two-family dwellings, and 3) 14 lots, 255 Kennedy Drive: Mr. Langfeldt noted that at the February meeting the DRB had asked for additional information which they have now provided as follows: Re: Proposed Street Types: Mr. Langfeldt showed an image of the “new urban design street type.” There would be material and color change to distinguish the road from the pedestrian way. He showed photos of where this has been done. The streets are essentially “glorified driveways,” not through streets. Mr. Langfeldt said this will be safer because they are narrower and are all dead end streets. The target speed is 15 mph. Mr. Kochman asked if this is authorized under form based code. Mr. Belair said it is. Mr. Kochman said he can see a dangerous potential. Mr. Gill then showed a chart indicating the average projected time between vehicles. Mr. Wilking asked if this design is recommended other than in form based code. Mr. Belair said it is not. Ms. Britt noted that both staff and Public Works support this. Phasing/Construction of Road “B”: Mr. Gill said the existing Kennedy Drive and Hinesburg Road access will serve until Road “B” is constructed (when the large new building is built). He showed maps indicating that level of service remains unchanged and there is no increase in queueing. Mr. Kochman felt the DRB shouldn’t rely on level of service, and they are not obliged to have a “D” level of service get a little bit worse but not enough to get to “E.” He added that this is desirable development with rotten traffic conditions, but people need a place to live. Phasing Plan Update: Mr. Langfeldt showed the phasing plan and noted it is tied to bonding requirements. He also showed the constructing schedule. He expressed concern with differing interpretations of Master Plan language. Mr. Miller said unambiguous language is needed and advised the applicant to work with staff to achieve that. Mr. Wilking said he had no issue with phasing the trails. Ms. Britt said the Master Plan can be amended or the waiver request can be removed from the Master Plan. Mr. Gill asked if they can join Final Plat with revision of the Master Plan. Mr. Belair said they can. Height Waivers: Mr. Gill said they calculated grades on all lots and the height waiver request. He showed a table of heights per unit. They are requesting waivers of 2 feet above those numbers. Mr. Miller asked if the DRB can grant that request. Mr. Belair said they can. He suggested revising the table to include the 2 feet so the DRB can see the maximum heights. Neighbor Concerns: Mr. Langfeldt noted there are 2 neighbors concerned with the development, and there was a meeting with them. As a result of that meeting, some additional screening is proposed. Mr. Kochman asked if the city requested an increase in density. Mr. Langfeldt said that is not what they said. They are trying to reach the underlying density. Mr. Cota said if the city didn’t want that density, it wouldn’t be in the regulations. Mr. Kochman asked if there are criteria for preserving wildlife. Ms. Britt said she has seen references to connections and preserving habitat. She didn’t know if “wildlife corridors” are specifically mentioned. Mr. Miller asked if an existing wildlife area precludes development. Mr. Belair said it does not. Mr. Gill said that is dealt with at Act 250. Mr. Kochman noted there is a priority for development here, but he didn’t want to violate a requirement, if there is one. Ms. Britt said staff doesn’t yet have comments from Public Works or the Arborist, but if the applicant has done everything asked for, it should be OK. Mr. Gill showed a plan indicating the additional plantings. Trail Connection to Old Farm Road: Mr. Gill said the Bike/Ped Committee wants a woodchip path. They will put it in, if the DRB feels it is necessary. Board members said they want the path. Mr. Gill then raised the question of permit duration. He noted the project will take at least 5-6 years to complete. Mr. Belair said in the past, the board has given 5 years with a one-year extension option. Mr. Langfeldt said they would like 5+1+1. Mr. Wilking said he had no issue with multiple one-year extensions. Mr. Gill suggested 7 years with 2 one-year extensions. Members then discussed whether to close the application tonight. Mr. Belair said staff can prepare a decision without closing. He felt that the 45-day requirement put staff in a tight box. Ms. Britt felt there could be a draft of the decision for discussion at the next meeting. Mr. Miller pledged to get it done as quickly as possible. Mr. Cota moved to continue #SD-16-37 to 2 May 2017. Mr. Wilking seconded. Motion passed 5-0. 7. Continued Preliminary and Final Plat Application #SD-17-06 of Donald R. Cummings for a planned unit development consisting of two lots, each developed with a single family dwelling. The project consists of: 1) subdividing the 1.16 acre parcel into two parcels of 0.6 acres (lot #1) and 0.56 acres (lot #2), and 2) relocating the zoning district boundary between the R-1 and R-2 zoning districts in conjunction with the planned unit development, 1811 Spear Street & 25 Harbor Ridge Road: Mr. Marshall noted they are combining 2 properties to allow for redistribution of density. He showed a plan with the 2 parcels of interest. The applicant worked with staff to transfer development density from one lot to the other. Mr. Marshall indicated where the densities would go. The applicant met with the Fire Chief and Marshall regarding access. They also have discussed stormwater management and drainage improvements with the Stormwater staff. Mr. Marshall showed the utility plan with the stormwater mitigation plan. Parts of the drainage way in the right-of-way will be paved as requested by Public Works. Roof runoff from the house on lot #2 would be directed to the retention area. Ms. Smith asked about deed restrictions regarding heights. Mr. Cummings said there are no restrictions in this area. His intention was to enhance views and he took down some trees to improve neighbors’ views. The plan is for the new house to be 5 feet taller than the existing house. There will be deed restrictions, but they prefer these not be part of the DRB review. The Board was OK with this. Mr. Cota moved to close #SD-17-06. Mr. Kochman seconded. Motion passed 5-0. 8. Minutes of 21 March and 4 April 2017: Mr. Cota moved to approve the Minutes of 21 March and 4 April 2017 as presented. Ms. Smith seconded. Motion passed 5-0. 9. Other Business: Mr. Belair presented a request for a 6-month extension to #SD-16-30 of Mary Jo Capotrio. Mr. Cota moved to grant the 6-month extension to #SD-16-30 as presented. Mr. Wilking seconded. Motion passed 5-0. As there was no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned by common consent at 8:36 p.m. , Clerk _________5/2/2017____________________________ Date Published by ClerkBase ©2019 by Clerkbase. No Claim to Original Government Works. #CU-17-04 & #SP-17-15 1 CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING RICE MEMORIAL HIGH SCHOOL – 99 PROCTOR AVENUE CONDITIONAL USE APPLICATION #CU-17-04 AND SITE PLAN APPLICATION #SP-17-15 FINDINGS OF FACT AND DECISION Conditional use application #CU-17-04 & site plan review application #SP-17-15 of Roman Catholic Diocese of Burlington – Rice Memorial High School to amend a previously approved plan for a 126,875 sq. ft. educational facility. The amendment consists of constructing a brick walkway to the adjacent property, 99 Proctor Avenue. The Development Review Board held a public hearing on April 18, 2017. The applicant was represented by _____________. 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, Roman Catholic Diocese of Burlington—Rice Memorial High School, seeks to amend a previously approved plan for a 126,875 sq. ft. educational facility. The amendment consists of constructing a brick walkway to the adjacent property, 99 Proctor Avenue. 2. The owner of record of the subject property is Roman Catholic Diocese of Burlington, Inc. 3. The applications were received on March 7, 2017. 4. The property lies within the Residential 4 Zoning District. 5. The plan submitted consists of one (1) page titled “Rice Memorial H.S. South Burlington, Vermont,” prepared by Forcier Consulting Engineers, PC, dated 4/29/2014 and revised 5/24/2016. CONDITIONAL USE STANDARDS An educational use is allowed in the Residential 4 Zoning District only as a conditional use and hence this application for a brick walkway must be reviewed under the conditional use standards. Pursuant to Section 14.10(E) of the LDRs, the proposed conditional use shall not result in an undue adverse effect on any of the following: (1) The capacity of existing or planned community facilities. (2) The character of the area affected, as defined by the purpose or purposes of the zoning district within which the project is located, and specifically stated policies and standards of the municipal plan. (3) Traffic on roads and highways in the vicinity. #CU-17-04 & #SP-17-15 2 (4) Bylaws and ordinances then in effect. (5) Utilization of renewable energy resources. The Board finds that the proposed brick walkway will not result in an undue adverse effect on any of the above criteria. SITE PLAN REVIEW STANDARDS Section 14 of the Land Development Regulations establish the following general review standards for site plan applications: A. Relationship of Proposed Development to the City of South Burlington Comprehensive Plan. Due attention by the applicant should be given to the goals and objectives and the stated land use policies for the City of South Burlington as set forth in the Comprehensive Plan. The Board finds the project will have no impact on the Comprehensive Plan. B. Relationship of Proposed Structures to the Site. 1) The site shall be planned to accomplish a desirable transition from structure to site, from structure to structure, and to provide for adequate planting, safe pedestrian movement, and adequate parking areas. 2) Parking 3) Without restricting the permissible limits of the applicable zoning district, the height and scale of each building shall be compatible with its site and existing or anticipated adjoining buildings. No structures are being proposed or changes to parking. C. Relationship of Structure and Site to Adjoining Area 1) The Development Review Board shall encourage the use of a combination of common materials and architectural characteristics (e.g. rhythm, color, texture, form or detailing), landscaping, buffers, screens, and visual interruptions to create attractive transitions between buildings of different architectural styles. 2) Proposed structures shall be related harmoniously to themselves, the terrain and to existing buildings and roads in the vicinity that have a visual relationship to the proposed structures. No structures are being proposed. Specific Review Standards A. Access to abutting properties. The reservation of land may be required on any lot for provision of access to abutting properties whenever such access is deemed necessary to reduce curb cuts onto an arterial or collector street, to provide additional access for emergency or other purposes, or to improve general access and circulation in the area. #CU-17-04 & #SP-17-15 3 The proposed walkway will create a connection between the school and a neighboring property. The Board finds that no reservation of land is necessary. B. Utility Services. Electric, telephone and other wire-served utility lines and service connections shall be underground insofar as feasible and subject to state public utilities regulations. Any utility installations remaining above ground shall be located so as to have a harmonious relation to neighboring properties and to the site. No new utilities are proposed. C. Disposal of Wastes. All dumpsters and other facilities to handle solid waste, including compliance with any recycling 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). Small receptacles intended for use by households or the public (i.e., non-dumpster, non-large drum) shall not be required to be fenced or screened. No new dumpsters, recycling, or composting areas are proposed. D. Landscaping and Screening Requirements. See Article 13, Section 13.06 Landscaping, Screening, and Street Trees. No new landscaping is proposed or required. DECISION Motion by ___________, seconded by ___________, to approve conditional use application #CU-17-04 and site plan application #SP-17-15 of Roman Catholic Diocese of Burlington—Rice Memorial High School, subject to the following conditions: 1. All previous approvals and stipulations which are not changed by this decision, will remain in full effect. 2. Prior to issuance of a zoning permit for the walkway, the applicant must submit to the Administrative Officer a final set of project plans as approved in digital (PDF) format. 3. The applicant must obtain a Certificate of Occupancy from the Administrative Officer prior to use of the new walkway. 4. 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. 5. The applicant must obtain a zoning permit within six (6) months pursuant to Section 17.04 of the Land Development Regulations or this approval is null and void. 6. Any change to the approved plan will require approval by the South Burlington Development Review Board or the Administrative Officer. #CU-17-04 & #SP-17-15 4 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 __________________ 2017, by _____________________________________ Bill Miller, 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 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 802.477.2241 to speak with the regional Permit Specialist. 12,09 2 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburl.com TO: South Burlington Development Review Board FROM: Lindsey Britt, Development Review Planner SUBJECT: SD-16-37 255 Kennedy Drive—O’Brien Farm Road, LLC DATE: April 18, 2017 Development Review Board meeting Preliminary plat application #SD-16-37 of O’Brien Farm Road, LLC for a planned unit development on 39.16 acres consisting of: 1) 64 single family dwellings, 2) 27 two (2) family dwellings, and 3) 14 lots, 255 Kennedy Drive. The Board began hearing about this application on March 7, 2017 and identified a few issues on which they wanted more information. The applicant prepared a presentation for the April 18, 2017 meeting which addresses most of these issues. Staff provides the following comments which address some issues raised on March 7th as well as some of the new materials provided by the applicant. 1. The applicant has submitted tables for the height waivers requested and staff has provided the applicant with feedback on the formatting of these tables. Staff is supportive of the height waiver requests. 2. Staff continues to think the condition of the master plan regarding the construction of the pedestrian paths requires those paths to be built during what is identified by the applicant as Phase 1A of the proposed project. a. The condition reads: “If off-road pedestrian paths are developed during the first phase of the project construction then the requirements of Section 15.12(M)(5) will not [be] applicable within the Master Plan area.” b. The applicant has listed on their plans “Phase 1A,” which staff thinks makes it identifiable as the “first phase” of the project as outlined in the master plan condition: “1” is the first positive whole number and “A” is the first letter of the alphabet. c. Staff has read the applicant’s concerns regarding this matter; however, staff is bound to read the decision in its plainest meaning and minimize any interpretation, which staff has done. d. Staff considers that to read the condition the way the applicant suggests would mean that the applicant could build all the housing units proposed as part of Phase 1A through Phase 5 before putting in any pedestrian paths, potentially leaving hundreds of people without these additional pedestrian connections for many years. e. If the Board agrees with staff on the meaning of the master plan condition then staff recommends the following possible solutions for the applicant: i. Seek to amend the master plan to either remove the waiver of 15.12(M)(5) or clarify the meaning of the waiver. ii. If the waiver is removed from the master plan decision then the applicant could instead seek that same waiver during preliminary or final plat. 2 3. The applicant updated the plans in response to comments from the Stormwater Section. Staff has not yet received new comments from Stormwater. 4. Staff recommends that, if the Board decides at the close of the hearing on April 18th that it is ready to enter deliberations, the hearing be left open and continued to a future date, so that if new questions arise during deliberations the Board is able to receive new information without having to re-open the hearing. VIA HAND-DELIVERY April 7, 2017 South Burlington Development Review Board C/O Mr. Raymond Belair, Administrative Officer South Burlington Planning and Zoning 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 Re: Preliminary Plat Application SD-16-37 Dear Board Members, Further to two recent Development Review Board meetings regarding Preliminary Plat Application SD-16-37 (the “Application”), enclosed the Board will find supplemental information regarding questions raised by the Board, by City staff, and committees charged with reviewing the Application. In past submissions Applicant has provided the Board with a letter detailing all of the issues presented with examples for their review attached as exhibits. Because of the volume of information being discussed and the number of visuals required, this format has proven difficult. For this reason, Applicant is providing for this submission a complete PowerPoint presentation for review by the Board. This presentation includes visual reference to new exhibits and plans created in response to issues raised. This presentation also includes Applicants notes and comments pertaining to the Application so that the Board can clearly understand Applicant’s position on the issues discussed prior to the hearing. We can, if desired, use the same presentation to discuss issues at the hearing. For clarity, the attached presentation addresses the following issues/items raised during review of our application, which we believe are the only outstanding items at this point: 1. Safety of proposed new City Street with integrated sidewalk. 2. Explanation of proposed road phasing and traffic impacts. Impacts of the 118 units proposed for construction without New City Road B. 3. Updated phasing plans with notes on the plans indicating how phasing will progress. All phasing now reviewed by Recreation Committee, who approved and supports the proposed phasing. 4. Discussion of issues regarding the timing of path improvements and the relationship of that timing to the approved Master Plan. Board to clarify their interpretation of the Master Plan decision they issued. 5. Updated height waiver requests, including specific pre-existing grades for all 118 units proposed and digital renderings to prove out no loss of scenic views. 6. Discussion of neighboring lots, existing and proposed screening. New screening proposed. 7. Updated landscape plans incorporating minor changes to allow for rear yard setbacks requested, and incorporating feedback from the City Arborist. Planting standards for landscaping and turf. 8. Responses to all issues raised by the City stormwater utility. Some items requested to be confirmed at Final Plat. 9. Discussion of the potential connection of an informal trail to Old Farm Road. Clarification of Pedestrian Committee comments. 10. Request for extended permit duration (if applicable at this time). 11. Conclusions and requested findings. Exhibits to this submission include: A. Exhibit A: PowerPoint presentation for review by the Board explaining each issue and providing full visuals as needed for explanation and clarity. B. Exhibit B: Memorandum from Roger Dickenson, the Project traffic consultant, discussing the specific impacts of the proposed project phasing, including specific LOS calculations for relevant intersections. This memo also contains detailed calculations pertaining to safety on the proposed dead end streets. C. Exhibit C: Updated Phasing Plans (included in complete plan set). D. Exhibit D: Chart of all height waivers requested on a unit-by-unit basis. E. Exhibit E: Digital renderings of proposed neighborhood to demonstrate no loss of scenic views from neighboring streets. F. Exhibit F: Digital photos and videos taken from property lines to demonstrate proximity to neighbors. G. Exhibit G: Section views demonstrating location and distance to neighboring homes on Old Farm Road. H. Exhibit H: Completely updated landscaping plans which include all comments from the City arborist, as well as new proposed screening at neighboring lots (included in complete plan set). Also included are standards for planting installation and warrantee. I. Exhibit I: Memorandum responding to all questions and issues raised by the City Stormwater utility. J. Exhibit J: Updated plans for intersections, traffic lights, and project road networks (included in complete plan set). Enclosed please find a full color print-out of the PowerPoint presentation designed for the Board and staff to review prior to the hearing, as well as three full-size copies of entirely updated plan sets that include the above-referenced plan changes. Digital copies of the other exhibits listed above are provided on the enclosed disc, along with a PPT file, which will allow for embedded hyperlinks to video to work, when viewed in slide-show mode. Please contact our office with any questions. We look forward to your review. Sincerely, Andrew Gill, Director of Development Enclosures O’Brien Farm Road,LLCPreliminary Plat Submission SupplementHearing Date April 18, 20171 Presentation Outline •This presentation responds to issues raised by Staff and the Board during hearings on February 07, 2017 and March 07, 2017.  As well as issues raised by the Recreation & Leisure Arts and Bike and Pedestrian Committees.  Specifically: 1. Sample Models of road types such as those suggested by Applicant for dead end streets C, D and F. 2. Further analysis of traffic safety on proposed streets C, D and F. 3. Further analysis of traffic impacts associated with proposed project road phasing.  Road B, not to be built with first 118 units proposed.  Specific traffic calculations.  Request for confirmation from Board of technical review requirement.4. Updated phasing plans and Recreation  and Parks Committee Feedback on proposed phasing of amenities and paths.5. Discussion of path timing and construction sequencing.  Conditions of Issued Master Plan.6. Height Waiver Requests.  Amended Table and Visual Impact Studies.  Compliant with City Staff requests.7. Existing conditions and proposed screening of abutting lots.8. Landscape Architecture; Response to Arborist Comments.  New plans submitted. 9. Stormwater utility review; responses to issues raised.  All comments to be incorporated at Final Plat.  10. Discussion of potential informal trail connection with Old Farm Road.  Applicant will proceed as Board requires.  11. Issued Permit Duration Request.12. Conclusion: Requested Findings from Development Review Board2 Proposed Street Types •During initial hearings the Board expressed some concern over having a sidewalk flush with a traveled way.  •Applicant is providing information that is the basis for this proposed design, including the New Urban Street manual, which is the main driver. •Applicant believes strongly that this design is a great benefit to the community, creating a safe pedestrian prioritized roadway for this neighborhood. •Many cities and towns use this new urban design manual, to create similar environments where the roadway is shared, and traffic is subordinate to pedestrians.  3 New City Lane Street TypeBased on Nat. Assoc. of City Transportation Officials DesignsProposed Street New Urban Design Street TypeApplicant has adapted New Urban Design street‐type to meet City Fire Safety and Public Works Requirements.4 Excerpts: New Urban Design Residential Shared Street 5 Shared Street Examples from New Urban Design Manual6 Proposed Shared Street Rendering7 City Zoning Currently Has Provisions for Lanes; Applicant is Proposing a 20’ LaneO’Brien Brothers has created a hybrid version of this lane, designed for the same purpose, but wide enough to accommodate emergency vehicles, and remove the necessity for another road!8 Bike and Pedestrian Committee Comments •As stated in the excerpt from a February 28themail to the Development Review Board from the South Burlington Bicycle and Pedestrian Committee, the committee “endorses” the grade level sidewalk proposed.•Applicant intends to use two different materials, cement and asphalt, which will result in two colors, as recommended, and shown here (at left).   Applicant is also willing to provide a stripe of paint between the sidewalk and road, if requested.  This stripe would be a bright color, like yellow or white.9 Shared Street Use (Number of Trips) and Potential Occurrences of Two‐Way Traffic•In response to safety concerns regarding when two cars going opposite directions might pass each other, we looked at how often this might occur.•Applicant’s traffic consultant has analyzed the frequency of trips, and potential occurrence of two cars passing each other (one coming and one going) on each of the proposed shared streets. •Analysis shows that during the AM/PM Peak hours, the busiest road sees one car every 3.5 minutes. •The average time between cars on all three roads (AM and PM Peak Hours Only) is one car (either coming or going) every 5.7 minutes.  Off peak hours would no doubt be lower •Statistical models predicting the occurrence of two cars meeting show ZEROoccurrence.  •The chance is so small that modeling did not quantify it. •An excerpt detailing report findings follows:10 Shared Street Use (Number of Trips) and Potential Occurrences of Two‐Way Traffic11 Traffic Impact Analysis; Proposed Phasing and Construction of Road B•At the February 7thmeeting the board expressed some concern with the proposed timing of constructing New City Road B and the light on Kennedy Drive.  •Applicant has provided a summary memo detailing the findings of a traffic impact study, that supports this phasing will not have any undue, or even, nominal impact on the existing traffic conditions at impacted intersections.•Applicant requests that the Board find at the preliminary plat level that the traffic study is accepted, and that the phasing proposed is accepted. •If the Board will require third party review of the Traffic Study, applicant requests that such review be invoked now for a specific scope of work within the overall traffic study, such that it can be completed in a timely manner.” •The following slides show the impact of the proposed 118 unit project (without Road B) on relevant adjacent intersections.  12 Traffic Impact Analysis; Impact of Construction of 118 Units w/out Road B Kennedy Intersection •Applicant has analyzed the impacts of the entire 118 unit development as proposed on surrounding intersections. The following slides provide a visual of the below chart.  All numbers provided do not include Road B. 13 314’ 66 Second314’ 66 SecondLOS Unchanged PM Peak Hour Impacts (Green is WITH Project) (Purple is W/OUT Project) 236’ 27 Second238’ 27 SecondLOS Unchanged 34’ 3 Second35’ 3 SecondLOS Unchanged 14 145’ 52 Second165’ 54 SecondLOS Unchanged  PM Peak Hour Impacts (Green is WITH Project) (Purple is W/OUT Project) 338’ 35 Second338’ 35 SecondLOS Unchanged 45’ 3 Second45’ 3 SecondLOS Unchanged15 244’ 63 Second258’ 66 SecondLOS Unchanged  PM Peak Hour Impacts (Green is WITH Project) (Purple is W/OUT Project) 436’ 58 Second446’ 59 SecondLOS Unchanged 19’ 2Second19’ 2SecondLOS Unchanged16 101’ 51 Second107’ 52 SecondLOS Unchanged  PM Peak Hour Impacts (Green is WITH Project) (Purple is W/OUT Project) 225’ 43 Second233’ 43 SecondLOS Unchanged 74’ 8 Second74’ 8 SecondLOS Unchanged17 13’ 17 Second13’ 19 SecondLOS Unchanged  PM Peak Hour Impacts (Green is WITH Project) (Purple is W/OUT Project) 13’ 17 Second13’ 19 SecondLOS Unchanged 13’ 17 Second13’ 19 SecondLOS Unchanged18 3’ 15 Second5’ 15 SecondLOS Unchanged  PM Peak Hour Impacts (Green is WITH Project) (Purple is W/OUT Project) 3’ 15 Second5’ 15 SecondLOS Unchanged 3’ 15 Second5’ 15 SecondLOS Unchanged19 3’ 9 Second3’ 8 SecondLOS Unchanged  PM Peak Hour Impacts (Green is WITH Project) (Purple is W/OUT Project) 5’ 9 Second5’ 9 SecondLOS Unchanged 20 Phasing Plan Updates •Applicant has provided updated phasing plans for the Phase I Home Farm Development Project. •These phasing plans provide for: a. Construction sequencing phases; andb. Amenity Construction timing. •The plans are presented on the following sheets.21 Home Farm Phase I Construction Sequence22 Home Farm Phase I Amenity Construction Timing 23 Recreation and Parks Committee Review •Applicant met with the Recreation committee on March 20th, 2017.•The Committee unanimously endorsed the Applicant’s proposed amenities.•The Committee unanimously endorsed the Applicant’s proposed construction phasing. •The Committee thanked the Applicant for their willingness to install the entire park and all pedestrian improvements so early in the project, and prior to the majority of the units allowed in the Master Plan being built.  •Applicant pointed out that all pedestrian and recreation amenities are proposed to be builtat completion of 118 units, only 25% of the total units contemplated within the Master Plan. 24 Construction of Pedestrian Paths•As outlined in the construction phasing plans, pedestrian paths are proposed to be built when the construction of homes and roads immediately around those paths is complete. •This is the plan approved and unanimously endorsed by the Recreation and Parks Committee. •City Staff has raised an issue with this approach in their comments.  The issue pertains to an interpretation of a finding of the Master Plan permit issued by the Board. •Applicant does not see any contradiction between what is proposed, and the language of the Master Plan. 25 Construction of Pedestrian Paths•Specifically, the City States in their comments from 03 07 17: •Applicant does not believe that the proposed phasing plan is in any way non‐compliant with the approved Master Plan. The approved Master Plan states: •Applicant considers the current application for 118 homes to be the first phase of project development. •Applicant’s interpretation is also consistent with all previous applications, submissions and discussions that Applicant has had with the Board, where it has clearly stated that the pedestrian amenities would be constructed concurrent to the phases of infrastructure and unit construction for these single family and duplex homes, so as to provide an orderly, logical and above all else SAFE site for construction personnel and the general public.26 Construction of Pedestrian Paths•Staff  is suggesting that the “first phase of development” contemplated in the Master Plan permit is the first construction phase (Phase 1A) of the Project.  This would mean that all pedestrian trails planned must be built when New City Road C is constructed. •This would result in trails being built in woods, and across a property that still needs to be logged and cleared for construction, where significant roads and 118 homes will be constructed .•This would result in a circular path through 2 acres of woods being opened to the public at Phase 1A, and then when Applicant constructs Phase 2, 2 acres being logged and cleared, and a stormwater  system being built in the middle of the trail, only inches from the trail in many points.•Applicant plans to travel from active zones in the south of the parcel to material stockpiles hidden in the north of the parcel throughout construction on haul roads that will be formed, using off‐road dump vehicles.  These large vehicles are not designed for safe use in pedestrian areas.  Having city residents and the general public crossing haul roads hiking with pets in this environment is simply unsafe.•In most cases with projects this large, communities seek to enforce construction perimeters to keep pedestrians outside of construction zones and safe.  Staff is seemingly requiring that we invite people inside construction zones, which is the opposite of normal.  There is a major liability issue if this recommendation is followed.•We believe the result of this interpretation is illogical, and therefore the Board will agree that the “first phase of development,” is the entirety of the 118 units currently proposed.  And therefore the phasing of trail construction proposed is compliant with the MP.•The Applicant notes this application is the firstand only applicationfiled under the Master Plan.  The Applicant also notes that the cover sheet and all of the plans filed with the original application on December 23, 2016 said “Obrien Home Farm Phase I.”•Applicant only removed the “Phase I” title from all of the plans at the request of Staff, who said it was confusing to call the project Phase I, while also calling the construction phases, Phase I, Phase II, etc. 27 Hypothetical Project Map if City Staff Recommendation is FollowedThe Parkdoes not yet exist.  Thisentire area needs to be cleared for stormwater treatment.  The trails go no‐where, the entire central trail system is not even connected to a public way, and you would need to walk through unmarked woods and active construction to even get to the start of the trail.28 Height Waiver Request •As requested by staff, Applicant is providing a table indicating the maximum proposed height of each of the 118 units proposed. •The height is calculated based on the pre‐infrastructure construction grading. •As indicated at the March 7thmeeting.  This results in standard 2‐story homes (in some cases), needing height waivers.•Applicant wishes to reiterate that the waivers requested are only seeking to permit the construction of the homes and architecture shown in Project plans.  Despite some of the large numbers requested. •Lastly, Applicant is requesting to add 2’to each number requested, simply because with the scale of this project, it is difficult for us to be accurate within inches, and we would hate to create a situation where a specific site condition now‐unknown changes the calculations causing delays during construction. •Regardless of the height waivers issued, in the end you will have the reasonably sized single family and duplex homes we are showing in our plans. 29 Height Waiver Request•This figure illustrates why using pre‐existing grading can result in the need for height waivers in single family homes•Purple is the existing grade. •Red is the finished grade after infrastructure work. •The orange line is the height measured from pre‐existing grade. •The green line is the height measured after infrastructure construction.  Which is the dimension that actually reflects the true height of the buildings.30 Height Waiver Request•Applicant is requesting a 2’ contingency, simply because knowing the exact ups and downs of the purple line for the entire 40 acre site is difficult, and we want to ensure there are no issues when individual permits are filed. An unknown minor undulation like the BLUE line could create a problem without the 2’ contingency.31 Sample Height Waiver Table for Review •Yellow highlighted unit numbers require a waiver.  •The waiver requested is the building height as calculated and shown, plus an additional two feet. •In some instances the number of stories requested also requires a waiver, due to the basement level of the home being exposed on the street‐side. •These instances are also highlighted in yellow. 32 Sample Height Waiver Table for Review •As outlined in the graph, the Board should note the wide discrepancy in “height” as calculated using the pre‐existing grades of this site. •The structure of Unit 49 is actually taller than unit 105/106 in terms of its actual constructed height above the foundation.•However,  Unit 49 is anticipated to be less than 28 feet tall, and unit 105/106 is expected to be nearly 37 feet tall.  •This variance is not related to unit sizes, which are all similar.•This goes both ways, unit 38 is only 11 feet tall, measured by these standards.  Despite the building being nearly 26 feet from foundation to roof.33 Digital Renderings of Proposed Homes•Before granting a height waiver it must be demonstrated to the Board that the proposed waiver will not: “detract from scenic views from adjacent public roadways. •The two adjacent existing public roadways from which the project will be seen are Eldredge Street and Old Farm Road. •Digital renderings of the proposed development are provided to show that no scenic views will be impacted, and to demonstrate the size and scale of the project.  •In fact, there are no scenic views from Old Farm Road or Eldredge Street, in the area where the project is proposed.  And therefore regardless of height, no scenic views will be impacted. •Given that no scenic views currently exist, and that the size and scale of the proposed units is in keeping with the surrounding neighborhoods as shown, we hope the Board will grant the height waivers requested.   34 View From Old Farm Road 35 View From Old Farm Road 36 View From Old Farm Road 37 View From Eldredge Toward Park38 View From Eldredge Toward Park39 View From Eldredge Toward Park40 View From Eldredge Toward Old Farm41 View From Eldredge Toward Old Farm42 View From Eldredge Toward Old Farm43 Neighbor Concerns; Site Conditions and Screening Proposed•At the last hearing our neighbors on Old Farm Road raised some concerns with the impacts of the Project on their views and property. •In response to these concerns, Applicant has carefully reviewed the areas in question.  •This review included marking the property line to fully understand where the proposed project is located, in relationship to existing homes. •This review also included an analysis of the slopes in the area, to determine areas where screening would be appropriate.  •Due to significant grade changes and existing dense wooded buffers, screening is only appropriate in select locations. 44 Neighbor Concerns; Site Conditions and Screening Proposed•A dense wooded buffer exists along this property line in the red box, and is paired with a significant drop in grade.•Subsequent site sections illustrate this grade change.   45 Neighbor Concerns; Site Conditions and Screening Proposed300’ From Existing Voldman Residence to New HomeApprox. 125’ From Pool To Existing ResidencePool is used only during months when Existing Dense Vegetation Downgradient is in Bloom. Line of Site from residence would look over roof tops, if they could be seen through existing woods, which is unlikely. 46 Neighbor Concerns; Site Conditions and Screening Proposed300 feet from Existing Weiner Residence to Unit 22 Line of Site from residence would look over roof tops, if they could be seen through existing woods, which is unlikely. 47 Neighbor Concerns; Site Conditions and Screening ProposedUnits proposed on New City Road F do have line of site to the existing residences Unit 34 is approximately 130 Feet from the Existing Weiner Residence, and is located on the same plane.  While significant mature trees exist on the Weiner lot, they are deciduous,  and will provide screening only in summer.  Given this, Applicant is providing a hedgerow of evergreen screening, now shown on the landscape plans and in this site section. Applicant notes that the southerly neighbor to this residence is likely about 70 feet from the Weiner residence or about ½ of the distance to the proposed new home.  The proximity of homes proposed seems in keeping with current surroundings. 48 Neighbor Impacts Video Links 4Videos from the approximate locations shown in red are linked to the shapes.  Please click the video location to view the video.  Videos demonstrate just how large the grade change is, and how big the mature trees ON neighboring properties are.  To enable links slide must be viewed in Powerpoint, in slide‐show view.123549 Still Photo Location 150 Still Photo Location 251 Still Photo Location 352 Still Photo Location 453 Still Photo From Location 554 Neighbor Concerns, Site Conditions and Screening Proposed •As shown in the videos and photos preceding, the dense existing screening between the Voldman Lot, and the Proposed Unit 21 is substantial.  However, given the pool location, and the request of the neighbor for additional screening.  Applicant is providing evergreen screening at the property line. •Applicant is also providing screening adjacent to unit 34, where the proposed units are on the same plane as the Weiner residence. •Applicant is not proposing any screening adjacent to Units 22, 23 or 33.  As shown in the videos, there is an incredibly steep slope here, densely wooded with 50’+ tall evergreen trees.  Given this, no screening is necessary.  •The amended landscape plan is shown on the next page. 55 Neighbor Concerns, Amended Landscape Plan New evergreen screening shown in red circles56 Landscape Plan Arborist Comments•The City Arborist provided comments in blue. •All comments have been adopted and included in amended landscaping plans. •Applicant is seeking approval of landscape plans as part of preliminary plat, to assist in expediting bidding and eventual bonding.57 Landscape Plan Changes to Accommodate Rear Yard Setback Waivers•At the last hearing we discussed re‐orienting a portion of the park walking trail behind units 63‐68, so the board could grant the requested rear setback waiver.  This has been done.•We also discussed adding some additional screening behind units 95 and 96.  This is also done.  •Before and after screenshots of relevant plans are provided on subsequent slides.  58 Landscape Plan Changes to Accommodate Rear Yard Setback WaiversBeforeAfter 59 Landscape Plan Changes to Accommodate Rear Yard Setback WaiversBeforeAfter 60 Stormwater Utility Comments and Responses •Krebs and Lansing has provided a memo addressing all of the items raised in these comments.  •We believe that these answers will be satisfactory to the stormwater utility. •We await their feedback on responses provided. 61 Stormwater Utility Comments and Responses 62 Stormwater Utility Comments and Responses 63 Trail Connection To Old Farm Road•Applicant has confirmed with the bike and pedestrian committee, that they are requesting Applicant construct a wood‐chip path that connects the end of New City Road A with Old Farm Road. •Applicant suggests that this connection is not needed, and that it will facilitate pedestrian traffic to Old Farm Road where there is no sidewalk, or pedestrian infrastructure to safely convey them anywhere else. •Applicant will leave this issue to the Board to decide, and will either construct the wood‐chip path as conditioned in permit approvals or not.  64 Issued Permit Duration Request•Further to Applicant’s submission, applicant wishes to confirm if there is a time limit placed on the findings issued at preliminary and final plat. •Applicant is committed to construction of the entire project proposed, but hopes the Board understands this could take more than five years to complete. •Applicant requests that any decisions be written such that the Applicant has sufficient time to complete the project, and such that any extension requests required can be approved administratively if possible, to expedite any needed extensions.65 Conclusion and Requested Findings•At this point the Applicant believes we have addressed all of the questions and concerns raised by the Board and Staff.  •In deciding on this Preliminary Plat, the Applicant requests that the board be as conclusive as possible with regard to: •Unit locations, unit counts and spacing: Applicant must produce extremely complicated erosion control plans, boundary surveys (for all 118 footprint lots), and other engineering plans for Final Plat submission.  These plans will be incredibly difficult to alter, and therefore as much certainty as can be provided with regard to the items that will greatly impact this future work is appreciated.  Additionally Applicant must estimate the cost of all infrastructure work, which is greatly affected by moving units, changes to roads, etc. •Waivers Requested: Applicant hopes the board can provide conclusive findings for all waivers requested, such that the Applicant can make adjustments to the plans and proceed to final plat with assurance that these details will not change.  This is again tied closely to the work required to produce the plans and documents needed at Final Plat. 66 Conclusion and Requested Findings•Traffic Study:  Applicant is requesting the Board make findings on the traffic study provided, including the proposed phasing.  This is an intricate part of the project that we hope can be confirmed at this time.  We would like to avoid a potential delay in the final plat proceedings to coordinate third party review.  If additional study will be required  by the Board (despite the supported conclusions presented and reviewed by the City engineer) we would request the board do so now so we can get started. •Project Phasing:  Applicant is required to produce construction cost estimates for final plat, which must be produced by construction phase.  Given this, we request the proposed phasing plan be approved, such that all of this work does not need to be re‐done, should that phasing be changed. •Landscaping Plan:  We request the board find the landscaping plan is suitable, such that we can finalize the plans, and begin work on a strategy for bonding the plans and constructing them. •Permit Duration: Applicant believes that the construction of this project could take upwards of five years.  Given this, we ask that any decision by the Board allow the applicant sufficient time to build and sell the project, without being required to seek extensions, or continue to come before the board.   If this is a component of the preliminary plat findings, we request it be in line with the project timelines.  67 Conclusion and Requested Findings•We remain excited about this project, and the opportunity to create this neighborhood in South Burlington. •Thank you to the Board and Staff for your continued expeditious review.  •We look forward to moving on to Final Plat this summer.68 Lamoureux & Dickinson Page 1 Consulting Engineers, Inc. TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM Project: O’Brien Home Farm Date: March 20, 2017 From: Roger Dickinson, PE, PTOE Subject: Requested Supplemental Information related to Traffic Impacts Below are outlined our response to questions and comments at recent DRB hearings for the above Project: Eldredge Street Capacity without New City Road ‘B’ access onto Kennedy Drive An analysis of future traffic conditions without the New City Road ‘B’ / Kennedy Drive access was included in the August 8, 2016 Traffic Impact Analysis for this Project. (top of pg 14 and Table 4). It is easily overlooked, however. With this Project being constructed in discrete phases, there will be a time when Eldredge Street will provide the only means of access to this Project via its existing intersections with Hinesburg Rd and Kennedy Drive. It is presently anticipated that the construction phasing will begin with construction of the residential units in Zone 1, followed by residential units in Zones 3 and 6. Zones 3 and 6 will be served by New City Roads ‘A’ and ‘E’, respectively. Both will ultimately loop to connect with each other and with New City Road ‘B’ in Zones 2A and 2B. The proposed residential units in Zones 1, 3 and 6 include: Table 1 - Proposed Residential Units Residential Unit Type Zone Total Units 1 3 6 Single-Family 28 -- 36 64 Multi-Family -- 44 10 54 Total 28 44 46 118 Extension of New City Road ‘B’ through Zone 2A, and construction of the new City Road ‘B’ / Kennedy Drive intersection, will be done coincidental with the proposed commercial and residential construction in Zones 2A and 2B. The timing of when construction in those zones might start is uncertain. For the purpose of this analysis, however, construction in Zone 2 is presumed to follow completion of the proposed residential units in Zones 1, 3 and 6. The peak hour trip generation of Zones 1, 3 and 6 is shown in Table 2. Figures 1 and 2 show the estimated directional distributions of the additional morning and afternoon peak hour trips that will be generated by Zones 1, 3 and 6 using only Eldredge St for access. Lamoureux & Dickinson Page 2 Consulting Engineers, Inc. Table 2 - Peak Hour Vehicle Trips - Zones 1, 3 & 6 Land-Use # Units AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total Single Family Dwelling Residential Condominium 64 54 12 5 36 27 48 32 40 24 24 12 64 36 Totals 118 17 63 80 64 36 100 Intersection capacity analyses were then performed to determine the temporary impact of Zone 1, 3 and 6 development without New City Road ‘B’ and its new access onto Kennedy Drive. The results of those analyses are shown in Table 3A. Table 3A - Partial-Build Intersection Capacity Analyses Results Approach 2025 AM Peak Hour 2025 PM Peak Hour (DHV) No-Build Partial-Build No-Build Partial-Build LOS Delay V/C Max Q LOS Delay V/C Max Q LOS Delay V/C Max Q LOS Delay V/C Max Q Kennedy Dr/Hinesburg Rd Kennedy Dr EB LT Kennedy Dr EB TH Kennedy Dr EB RT Kennedy Dr WB LT Kennedy Dr WB TH Kennedy Dr WB RT Hinesburg Rd NB LT Hinesburg Rd NB TH Hinesburg Rd NB RT Hinesburg Rd SB LT Hinesburg Rd SB TH Hinesburg Rd SB RT OVERALL D C A D C A D C A D D A C 46 27 2 47 28 0 44 34 4 42 44 4 28 0.50 0.51 0.19 0.43 0.46 0.05 0.61 0.59 0.15 0.44 0.72 0.22 117' 248' 39' 102' 201' 0' 177' 260' 36' 109' 275' 45' D C A D C A D C A D D A C 46 27 2 48 29 0 45 34 4 42 44 4 29 0.50 0.52 0.20 0.45 0.47 0.05 0.64 0.60 0.15 0.44 0.72 0.22 117' 249' 39' 107' 201' 0' 190' 270' 36' 111' 278' 45' E C A D C A E E A D D A D 66 27 3 52 35 3 63 58 2 51 43 8 37 0.81 0.47 0.14 0.56 0.69 0.20 0.74 0.84 0.10 0.44 0.59 0.23 314' 236' 34' 145' 338' 45' 244' 436' 19' 101' 225' 74' E C A D C A E E A D D A D 66 27 3 54 35 3 66 59 2 52 43 8 37 0.81 0.48 0.15 0.60 0.70 0.20 0.76 0.86 0.10 0.46 0.61 0.23 314' 238' 35' 165' 338' 45' 258' 446' 19' 107' 233' 74' Hinesburg Rd/Eldredge St Hayes Ave EB LT/TH/RT Eldredge St WB LT/TH/RT Hinesburg Rd NB LT Hinesburg Rd SB LT D B A A 26 14 9 9 0.23 0.07 0.04 0.01 23' 5' 3' 0' D C A A 28 15 9 9 0.25 0.14 0.04 0.02 25' 13' 3' 3' C B A A 17 15 9 9 0.14 0.03 0.03 0.02 13' 3' 3' 5' C C A A 19 15 8 9 0.15 0.08 0.03 0.05 13' 5' 3' 5' Comparing the results of the above Partial-Build analyses with the results of the No-Build analyses1, as shown in Table 3A above, indicates that the Kennedy Drive/Hinesburg Road and Hinesburg Road/ Eldredge Street intersections have adequate capacity to accommodate the proposed development of Zones 1, 3 and 6, and that adverse traffic congestion conditions will not be created prior to New City Road ‘B’ and its intersection with Kennedy Drive being constructed. 1 from Table 3 of the August 2016 TIA for this Project Lamoureux & Dickinson Page 3 Consulting Engineers, Inc. Figure 1 - Partial-Build (Zones 1, 3 & 6) AM Peak Hour Trip Distribution Hinesburg Rd Bayberry Ln 2 2 Kennedy Dr Kennedy Dr 1 0  3 5  2 3  3 3 4 13 11 0 9 1 Eldredge St Kimball Ave 8 Enter 12 Exit 36 Hayes Ave 23 Eldredge St 48 0  0  4 1 Hinesburg Rd Lamoureux & Dickinson Page 4 Consulting Engineers, Inc. Figure 2 - Partial Build (Zones 1, 3 & 6) PM Peak Hour Trip Distribution Hinesburg Rd Bayberry Ln 7 5 Kennedy Dr Kennedy Dr 4 0  10 4  6 86  10 11 2 8 7 0 6 4 Eldredge St Kimball Ave 25 Enter 40 Exit 24 Hayes Ave 16 Eldredge St 64 0  0  2 4 Hinesburg Rd Lamoureux & Dickinson Page 5 Consulting Engineers, Inc. New City Roads ‘C’, ‘D’ and ‘F’ - One Vehicle at a Time Statistical Analysis New City Roads ‘C’, ‘D’ and ‘F’ are cul-de-sacs serving a relatively low number of single family residences. It is proposed that these roads be constructed as narrow (15 ft wide) streets with a concrete sidewalk immediately adjacent. This raised the question of what the probability would be of a vehicle having to wait while another vehicle travels the street in the opposite direction. The probability of one or more vehicles being delayed because the street was being used by another vehicle was calculated by using a computer language known as General Purpose Simulation System (GPSS). The simulations randomly (using the negative exponential distribution) generate vehicles using morning and afternoon peak hour trip rates. Using a first-come first-serve model, a vehicle occupies the street for the amount of time that it would take to travel the entire length of the street at 15 mph. No other vehicle can enter while the street is occupied. Any vehicles that arrive while the street is occupied are held in a queue, and the resulting number of occurrences and delays tabulated. Each simulation consisted of ten runs in order to provide more reliable data. Table 4 presents the results of the simulations. Table 4 - One Vehicle at a Time Statistical Analysis Street Length Travel Time Peak Hour # Vehicles per Hour Avg. Time Between Vehicles # Times A Vehicle Waited Total Delay Time New City Road ‘C’ 350’ 16 sec. AM 8 7.5 min. 0 0 sec. PM 11 5.5 min. 0 0 sec. New City Road ‘D’ 450’ 20 sec. AM 13 4.6 min. 0 0 sec. PM 17 3.5 min. 0 0 sec. New City Road ‘F’ 250’ 11 sec. AM 8 7.5 min. 0 0 sec. PM 10 6.0 min. 0 0 sec. The above results indicate that the occurrences of a vehicle being delayed from using New City Roads ‘C’, ‘D’ and ‘F’ while another vehicle travels the street in the opposite direction will be very infrequent. O'Brien Home Farm Phase 1 Building Height Worksheet Building # Condition NE Elev. NW Elev. SE Elev. SW Elev. Finish Floor  Elev. Height from  Finish Floor    to Roof  Midpoint Roof  Midpoint  Elev. Average Pre‐ Existing  Grade Building  Height (From  pre‐ex.  Grade) Max  Number  of Stories  1 Existing  ground 342.5 338.9 342.7 338.6 1 Finish grade 347.1 339.4 347.9 339.4 2 Existing  ground 343.2 338.3 348.9 339 2 Finish grade 348 340 349 340 3 Existing  ground 349.4 339.8 350 340.7 3 Finish grade 350 342.2 350.5 342.2 4 Existing  ground 349.9 340.3 348.2 342.5 4 Finish grade 351 343.7 352.8 344 5 Existing  ground 348.5 343 351 345.5 5 Finish grade 352.75 346 353 346 6 Existing  ground 358.25 353.5 358.5 356.5 6 Finish grade 362 352.6 361 352.8 7 Existing  ground 356.1 352.2 357.7 352.5 7 Finish grade 359 352.1 360.2 351 8 Existing  ground 354.6 351.5 356 352.3 8 Finish grade 358.5 349 358.5 349 9 Existing  ground 356 351.8 354.5 350.9 9 Finish grade 358.2 348.5 358.2 348.5 10 Existing  ground 356.3 353 357.1 353 10 Finish grade 358.2 348.5 358.2 348.5 11 Existing  ground 353.6 350.6 355.4 352.5 11 Finish grade 358.5 348.5 358.5 348.5 12 Existing  ground 368 364.2 369.6 362.8 12 Finish grade 377 369.4 377 369.4 13 Existing  ground 369.6 364.1 370.2 365.4 13 Finish grade 376 367.4 376 367.4 14 Existing  ground 370 365.4 369 364 14 Finish grade 375.25 366.9 375.25 366.9 349 349.54 351.8 353.3 24.42 24.42 24.42 24.42 32.74 31.61 31.24 32.49 373.42 373.96 376.22 377.72 340.68 342.35 344.98 345.23 352.83 25.50 378.33 356.69 21.64 355.25 24.42 379.67 347.00 32.67 350.33 25.50 375.83 354.63 21.21 348.83 25.50 374.33 353.60 20.73 348.58 25.50 374.08 354.85 19.23 348.58 25.50 374.08 353.30 20.78 379 24.42 403.42 366.15 37.27 348.83 25.50 374.33 353.03 21.31 376.5 24.42 400.92 367.10 33.82 377 24.42 401.42 367.33 34.09 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Building # Condition NE Elev. NW Elev. SE Elev. SW Elev. Finish Floor  Elev. Height from  Finish Floor    to Roof  Midpoint Roof  Midpoint  Elev. Average Pre‐ Existing  Grade Building  Height (From  pre‐ex.  Grade) Max  Number  of Stories  15 Existing  ground 369.3 363.4 370.1 363 15 Finish grade 374.5 366.2 374.5 366.2 16 Existing  ground 370 362.5 369.5 360.5 16 Finish grade 374.5 366.2 374.5 366.2 17 Existing  ground 369.4 362.2 372.2 364.6 17 Finish grade 374.5 366.2 374.5 366.2 18 Existing  ground 371.9 364.4 371.6 365.5 18 Finish grade 375 366.7 375 366.7 19 Existing  ground 371.7 366.4 371.5 366.2 19 Finish grade 375.7 367.4 375.7 367.4 20 Existing  ground 371.7 368 370.7 367 20 Finish grade 376 367.7 376 367.7 21 Existing  ground 378.6 374.5 386.2 379.1 21 Finish grade 377 377 386.96 384 22 Existing  ground 375.5 375.1 377.5 376.6 22 Finish grade 385.46 375.5 385.46 375.5 23 Existing  ground 377.2 373.7 375.4 374.4 23 Finish grade 385.4 375.8 385.4 375.8 24 Existing  ground 378.6 374.3 376.2 374.3 24 Finish grade 384 375 384 375 25 Existing  ground 382.8 375.7 379.9 373.7 25 Finish grade 384.9 376 384 375 26 Existing  ground 390.5 376.9 385 376.2 26 Finish grade 386.5 377 386 377 27 Existing  ground 392.2 378 391 377.5 27 Finish grade 387.4 378 387.4 377.5 28 Existing  ground 388.7 377 390.8 377 28 Finish grade 388 378.5 388 378.5 29 Existing  ground 404.1 395.5 404.8 399 29 Finish grade 400 391.87 400 391.87 375.8 24.42 400.22 365.63 34.59 375.8 24.42 400.22 366.45 33.77 376.3 24.42 400.72 368.35 32.37 375.8 24.42 400.22 367.10 33.12 377.3 24.42 401.72 369.35 32.37 377 24.42 401.42 368.95 32.47 375.83 25.50 401.33 376.18 25.16 377.33 25.50 402.83 379.60 23.23 375.33 25.50 400.83 375.85 24.98 375.83 25.50 401.33 375.18 26.16 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 401.3 24.42 425.72 400.85 24.87 377.83 25.50 403.33 384.68 18.66 378.83 25.50 404.33 383.38 20.96 375.33 25.50 400.83 378.03 22.80 375.33 25.50 400.83 382.15 18.68 2 2 2 2 2 Building # Condition NE Elev. NW Elev. SE Elev. SW Elev. Finish Floor  Elev. Height from  Finish Floor    to Roof  Midpoint Roof  Midpoint  Elev. Average Pre‐ Existing  Grade Building  Height (From  pre‐ex.  Grade) Max  Number  of Stories  30 Existing  ground 405.4 400.4 407.4 401 30 Finish grade 404 395.67 404 395.67 31 Existing  ground 407.8 401 405.4 401 31 Finish grade 407 398.67 407 398.67 32 Existing  ground 404.7 401 404.9 398.7 32 Finish grade 409 400.67 409 400.67 33 Existing  ground 404.8 398.2 407.5 397.5 33 Finish grade 409.5 401.17 409.5 401.17 34 Existing  ground 411.9 410.1 409.2 410 34 Finish grade 410.66 411 410.66 411 35 Existing  ground 410.5 408.1 410.4 408.8 35 Finish grade 408.66 409 408.66 409 36 Existing  ground 411.6 409.8 410.7 408.4 36 Finish grade 406.17 406.5 406.17 406.5 37 Existing  ground 412.9 411.6 411.4 410.4 37 Finish grade 411 402 411 402 38 Existing  ground 414.4 412.9 413.3 411.8 38 Finish grade 408 399 408.46 399 39 Existing  ground 414.7 412.8 414.6 412.9 39 Finish grade 411.46 402 410 401.5 40 Existing  ground 414.1 412.9 414.9 412.9 40 Finish grade 415.28 405.33 415 404.5 41 Existing  ground 411.8 411.8 413.6 413.1 41 Finish grade 415.96 406 415.96 406 42 Existing  ground 411.4 410.4 411.4 411.4 42 Finish grade 416 406.5 416 406.5 43 Existing  ground 414.9 408.3 411.5 410.3 43 Finish grade 415 406 415.96 406.5 44 Existing  ground 408.7 406.1 411 407.5 44 Finish grade 414.96 405 414.96 405 406.33 25.50 431.83 411.25 20.58 405.33 25.50 430.83 408.33 22.51 406.33 25.50 431.83 412.58 19.25 406.33 25.50 431.83 411.15 20.68 401.83 25.50 427.33 413.75 13.58 405.66 25.50 431.16 413.70 17.46 402.58 25.50 428.08 411.58 16.50 398.83 25.50 424.33 413.10 11.23 410.8 24.42 435.22 402.00 33.22 407.8 24.42 432.22 410.13 22.09 412.3 24.42 436.72 410.30 26.42 410.3 24.42 434.72 409.45 25.27 405.3 24.42 429.72 403.55 26.17 408.3 24.42 432.72 403.80 28.92 410.3 24.42 434.72 402.33 32.39 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Building # Condition NE Elev. NW Elev. SE Elev. SW Elev. Finish Floor  Elev. Height from  Finish Floor    to Roof  Midpoint Roof  Midpoint  Elev. Average Pre‐ Existing  Grade Building  Height (From  pre‐ex.  Grade) Max  Number  of Stories  45 Existing  ground 405.5 404.6 408 405.8 45 Finish grade 414.45 404.5 414.45 405 46 Existing  ground 403 402.1 404.9 404.2 46 Finish grade 403.67 404 403.67 404 47 Existing  ground 400.8 399.2 402.5 401.5 47 Finish grade 401.18 401.5 401.18 401.5 48 Existing  ground 398.5 397.2 400.8 398.8 48 Finish grade 400.42 400.5 400.42 400.5 49 Existing  ground 395.3 394.4 397.8 396.5 49 Finish grade 397.25 397.33 397.25 397.33 50 Existing  ground 393.7 390.1 394.5 392.8 50 Finish grade 402 393 400 393 51 Existing  ground 395.3 389.9 393.6 389 51 Finish grade 400 391 400.96 391 52 Existing  ground 393.8 389.7 395 389.2 52 Finish grade 398 388.5 398.46 388.5 53 Existing  ground 390.5 387.5 392.9 389.4 53 Finish grade 397.46 387.5 397.46 387.5 54 Existing  ground 389.8 387.6 390.4 387.8 54 Finish grade 396.96 387 396.96 387 55 Existing  ground 386.5 385.3 389.5 387.6 55 Finish grade 396.46 386.5 396.46 386.5 56 Existing  ground 401.6 391.5 400.8 389.5 56 Finish grade 401.5 394.66 401.5 394.66 57 Existing  ground 403.2 392.4 402.3 391.5 57 Finish grade 404.5 397.66 404.5 397.66 58 Existing  ground 403.8 394.6 403 392.6 58 Finish grade 405.5 398.66 405.5 398.66 59 Existing  ground 404.7 394.5 404.1 395.1 59 Finish grade 405.7 398.86 405.7 398.86 404.83 25.50 430.33 405.98 24.36 401.79 24.42 426.21 398.83 27.38 405.29 24.42 429.71 403.55 26.16 402.8 24.42 427.22 401.00 26.22 2 2 2 2 398.62 24.42 423.04 396.00 27.04 2 393.33 25.50 418.83 392.78 26.06 2 391.33 25.50 416.83 391.95 24.88 2 388.83 25.50 414.33 391.93 22.41 2 387.83 25.50 413.33 390.08 23.25 2 387.33 25.50 412.83 388.90 23.93 2 386.83 25.50 412.33 387.23 25.11 2 402.8 24.42 427.22 395.85 31.37 2 405.8 24.42 430.22 397.35 32.87 2 406.8 24.42 431.22 398.50 32.72 2 407 24.42 431.42 399.60 31.82 2 Building # Condition NE Elev. NW Elev. SE Elev. SW Elev. Finish Floor  Elev. Height from  Finish Floor    to Roof  Midpoint Roof  Midpoint  Elev. Average Pre‐ Existing  Grade Building  Height (From  pre‐ex.  Grade) Max  Number  of Stories  60 Existing  ground 403 397.8 404.3 393.7 60 Finish grade 405.25 398.41 405.25 398.41 61 Existing  ground 402.8 399.1 403.1 399 61 Finish grade 404.5 397.66 404.5 397.66 62 Existing  ground 398.9 397.9 402 399 62 Finish grade 404.5 397.66 404.5 397.66 63 Existing  ground 396.3 394.7 397.9 397.7 63 Finish grade 403.25 396.41 403.25 396.41 64 Existing  ground 394.2 391.4 394.9 394.1 64 Finish grade 400 393.16 400 393.16 65/66 Existing  ground 393.7 389.5 393.3 388.9 65/66 Finish grade 397.33 389 397.33 389 67/68 Existing  ground 386.9 382.5 391.4 387.6 67/68 Finish grade 394.5 384.17 394.5 384.17 69/70 Existing  ground 382.8 378.7 385.6 381.3 69/70 Finish grade 391.25 382.92 391.25 382.92 71/72 Existing  ground 384.1 379.2 383.2 377.7 71/72 Finish grade 388.33 380 388.33 380 73/74 Existing  ground 381 377 382 378.8 73/74 Finish grade 386.75 378.42 386.75 378.42 75/76 Existing  ground 362.2 356 362.8 357.4 75/76 Finish grade 362.9 353 362.9 353 77/78 Existing  ground 362 352.5 362.5 356 77/78 Finish grade 361.7 351.8 361.7 351.8 79/80 Existing  ground 363.1 353.5 362.6 352.1 79/80 Finish grade 361.16 351.2 361.16 351.2 81/82 Existing  ground 363.5 353 363.5 352.9 81/82 Finish grade 360 350.9 360.3 350.8 83/84 Existing  ground 357.8 351.8 363 352.7 83/84 Finish grade 359.62 350 359.62 350 406.55 24.42 430.97 399.70 31.27 2 405.8 24.42 430.22 401.00 29.22 2 405.8 24.42 430.22 399.45 30.77 2 404.56 24.42 428.98 396.65 32.33 2 401.3 24.42 425.72 393.65 32.07 2 398.63 24.00 422.63 391.35 31.28 2 395.8 24.00 419.80 387.10 32.70 2 392.5 24.00 416.50 382.10 34.40 2 389.58 24.00 413.58 381.05 32.53 2 388.05 24.00 412.05 379.70 32.35 2 353.33 33.58 386.91 359.60 27.31 3 352.13 33.58 385.71 358.25 27.46 3 351.53 33.58 385.11 357.83 27.29 3 350.73 33.58 384.31 358.23 26.09 3 350 33.58 383.58 356.33 27.26 3 Building # Condition NE Elev. NW Elev. SE Elev. SW Elev. Finish Floor  Elev. Height from  Finish Floor    to Roof  Midpoint Roof  Midpoint  Elev. Average Pre‐ Existing  Grade Building  Height (From  pre‐ex.  Grade) Max  Number  of Stories  85/86 Existing  ground 358.4 354 357 351.6 85/86 Finish grade 359.5 349.5 359.5 349.5 87/88 Existing  ground 357.5 351.8 358.7 353.6 87/88 Finish grade 358.15 348.2 358.15 348.2 89/90 Existing  ground 360.3 357 357.6 353.1 89/90 Finish grade 359.2 349.25 359.2 349.25 91/92 Existing  ground 363.5 358.9 361.1 357.6 91/92 Finish grade 361.96 3552 360 352 93/94 Existing  ground 365 361.1 364.1 359.2 93/94 Finish grade 364.7 354.75 364 354.75 95/96 Existing  ground 364.9 360.2 366.2 361.1 95/96 Finish grade 366.36 357 366 356.4 97/98 Existing  ground 345.9 341.3 348.7 344.3 97/98 Finish grade 352 343.67 352 343.67 99/100 Existing  ground 344.8 340 346.1 341.1 99/100 Finish grade 351.5 343.17 351.5 343.17 101/102 Existing  ground 344.1 337.6 344.9 340.4 101/102 Finish grade 350.75 342.42 350.75 342.42 103/104 Existing  ground 342.7 343.6 343 336.8 103/104 Finish grade 350 341.2 350 341.2 105/106 Existing  ground 339.8 334.6 341.4 334.9 105/106 Finish grade 349.25 340.91 349.25 340.91 107/108 Existing  ground 341 337.3 340.1 335.2 107/108 Finish grade 348.25 339.91 348.25 339.91 109/110 Existing  ground 343.4 339.1 339.1 336.6 109/110 Finish grade 348 339.67 348 339.67 111/112 Existing  ground 347.6 342 344.1 338.5 111/112 Finish grade 350 341.67 350 341.67 113/114 Existing  ground 347.4 342.7 347 340.5 113/114 Finish grade 352.5 344.17 352.5 344.17 349.83 33.58 383.41 355.25 28.16 3 348.53 33.58 382.11 355.40 26.71 3 349.58 33.58 383.16 357.00 26.16 3 352.33 33.58 385.91 360.28 25.64 3 355.05 33.58 388.63 362.35 26.28 3 356.73 33.58 390.31 363.10 27.21 3 353.3 24.00 377.30 345.05 32.25 2 352.8 24.00 376.80 343.00 33.80 2 352 24.00 376.00 341.75 34.25 2 351.3 24.00 375.30 341.53 33.78 2 350.55 24.00 374.55 337.68 36.88 2 349.55 24.00 373.55 338.40 35.15 2 349.3 24.00 373.30 339.55 33.75 2 351.3 24.00 375.30 343.05 32.25 2 353.8 24.00 377.80 344.40 33.40 2 Building # Condition NE Elev. NW Elev. SE Elev. SW Elev. Finish Floor  Elev. Height from  Finish Floor    to Roof  Midpoint Roof  Midpoint  Elev. Average Pre‐ Existing  Grade Building  Height (From  pre‐ex.  Grade) Max  Number  of Stories  115/116 Existing  ground 349.1 344.6 347.3 341.9 115/116 Finish grade 355.2 346.87 355.2 346.87 117/118 Existing  ground 350.8 346.6 348 343.4 117/118 Finish grade 356.5 348.17 356.5 348.17 357.8 24.00 381.80 347.20 34.60 2 356.5 24.00 380.50 345.73 34.78 2 KREBS & LANSING Consulting Engineers, Inc. 164 Main Street Suite 201 Colchester, VT 05446 Telephone (802) 878-0375 Fax 878-9618 email@krebsandlansing.com Memorandum Date:  March 24, 2017  To:  Andrew Gill  From:  Scott Homsted, Krebs and Lansing Consulting Engineers, Inc.   Re: O’Brien Home Farm ‐  South Burlington Stormwater Section Comments  We offer the following line item response to the review comments provided by David Wheeler of  the City of South Burlington Stormwater Section.      1.      This project is located in both the Potash Brook and watershed. This watershed is listed as  stormwater impaired by the State of Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC).   Also, the project proposes to create greater than 1 acre of impervious area and disturb greater  than 1 acre of land.  It will therefore require a stormwater permit and construction permit from  the Vermont DEC Stormwater Division. The applicant should acquire these permits before starting  construction.    The project will be applying for both an Individual Stormwater Discharge Permit and either an  Individual Construction Stormwater Permit or coverage under General Permit 3‐9020.  These  applications will be filed with the State of Vermont Stormwater Section after we are farther  along the local permitting process to ensure the design of the stormwater management,  treatment and collection system is presented consistently to both the City and State.      2.      The project proposes to impact class 2 wetlands and their buffer. These impacts are only  allowed in conjunction with issuance of a wetlands permit by the Vermont DEC.    There are no actual class 2 wetland impacts proposed. We presume the buffer impacts  referenced are in regards to the outlet pipe from Stormwater Pond B. These type of impacts are  typically allowed, but will require a permit from the Wetlands Division.  We have begun the  process of obtaining a Wetlands Permit for these impacts.    3.      As the project proposes to create more than one‐half acre or more of impervious surface,  the project is subject to the requirements of section 12.03 of the LDRs.    O’Brien Home Farm Response to Stormwater Section Comments March 24, 2017 2 With the exception of the items noted in these comments, we believe the stormwater design is  in accordance with section 12.03 of the LDRs.  We will continue to work with Stormwater Section  and DPW staff to ensure compliance with all applicable regulations.    4.      The applicant should confirm that requirements in Section 12.03(C)(1) are met and that the  Water Quality Volume is infiltrated using Low Impact Development (LID).    The stormwater management system proposes several meet these requirements.  The majority  of the project flows towards Infiltration Basin “A”.  The infiltration basin will treat and infiltrate  runoff from approximately 24 acres of project area, including nearly 8 acres of impervious  surface.    After meeting with David Wheeler, we identified additional areas of the project that are suitable  for infiltration.   The first two hundred feet of Road A will drain towards the existing Eldredge  Street stormwater system.  To meet City infiltration requirements, a stormwater collection cross  pipe under Road A will be designed as flat perforated pipe (infiltration trench), to facilitate  infiltration of the water quality volume.  Similarly, stormwater collection cross pipes under Road  B will be designed as flat perforated pipe (infiltration trenches) to facilitate infiltration of the  water quality volume.  These changes will be added to the design prior to Final Plan.    Other areas of the project, such as Roads C, D, and F, are unable to meet standards for  infiltration due to the presence of high seasonal groundwater or ledge.  These conditions have  been documented via soil borings.  Water quality in these areas will be achieved via the use of  grassed channels and permanent pools in the ponds.    5.      The applicant should confirm that requirements in Section 12.03(C)(2) are met and that  peak runoff rates are not increased during the 1 year storm event.     The use of Micropool Extended Detention Ponds, Wet Ponds, Grass Channels, Infiltration  Trenches, and an Infiltration Basin will ensure that post development peak flows are maintained  at or below pre development levels.  HydroCAD stormwater modeling calculations will be  provided with the Final Plan submittal.    6.      The applicant is required to submit the additional information outlined in Section 12.03(D),  so that compliance with the City’s Stormwater Management Standards can be evaluated.        Due to the level of detail and sheer volume of calculations required, we are requesting to submit  this information at “final” rather than preliminary.  This will prevent needless reproduction of  work necessitated by minor changes to the design, while eliminating multiple reviews by City  Stormwater staff. HydroCAD stormwater modeling calculation, as well as supporting forms,  tables, spreadsheets, and plans, will be provided with the Final Plan submittal.    7.      Storm drains proposed to be taken over by the City will require a 20’ easement, centered on  pipe, free of structures or obstructions. As shown, some of the storm drains are less than 10’ from  building foundations.    O’Brien Home Farm Response to Stormwater Section Comments March 24, 2017 3 We have worked with Public Works staff to identify an acceptable easement.  For the final plan  application, Units 97‐118 will be adjusted slightly to enable a 20’ easement between Units 110  and 111.  We have presented the attached sketch entitled “Proposed Utility Easement” to Justin  Rabidoux who indicated it was acceptable.  Any other instances of a storm line running close to a  building are in areas where the line will remain private.    8.      Tress should not be planted within easements for storm drains proposed to be taken over by  the City.    The plans will be adjusted at the Final Plan submittal to ensure no trees are planted within  stormwater easements for storm lines.    9.      The Vermont Stormwater Management Manual (VSMM) indicates that a 12’ wide  maintenance access should be provided in order to facilitate equipment access for maintenance  of stormwater ponds (section 2.7.1.F).      Most of the ponds already show walking paths in the vicinity of the ponds.  For the final plan  submittal we will clarify and show a minimum of a 12’ wide stabilized surface for maintenance  access.  The visible gravel surface will remain 5’ wide, but the gravel subbase will be expanded to  12 feet, with a layer of topsoil and a grassed surface.  A detail will be provided.      10.   Stormwater Management “C” shows outlet structure near forebay berm. The riser should be  located so that short‐circuiting between inflow points and the riser does not occur. Section  2.7.1.D of the VSMM recommends maintaining a long flow path through the system. Additionally,  it is not recommend to place the Emergency Spill way over the outlet pipe, as depicted on the  Sheet C‐9.    We agree that the location of the outlet structure for Pond C is shown too close to the southerly  forebay of the pond.  This pond will have forebays on both ends, so the outlet structure will be  relocated to the middle of the permanent pool to minimize short‐circuiting in either direction.    11.   The DRB should include a condition requiring the applicant to regularly maintain all  stormwater treatment and conveyance infrastructure.    The applicant is amenable to such a condition.    Submitted by,      Scott Homsted        13187: memo city storm comments.doc    1 inch = 100 ft.(in feet)GRAPHIC SCALE100 050100200 400Pavement Marking &Traffic Signage Plan11" = 100'CBADateSheet numberScaleCheckedDrawnDesignSurvey Project No.Lamoureux & DickinsonConsulting Engineers, Inc.14 Morse Drive, Essex, VT 05452802-878-4450 www.LDengineering.com03-20-2017RDBHRDOthers14145O'Brien Home FarmKennedy Drive South Burlington, VTDPRELIMINARYNOT FORCONSTRUCTION3???GZJ?WUDIILFFRQWUROGZJ30 10' LEFT TURN LANEKennedy Drive ModificationsNew Left-Turn Lane @ City Road 'B'11" = 30'DateSheet numberScaleCheckedDrawnDesignSurvey Project No.Lamoureux & DickinsonConsulting Engineers, Inc.14 Morse Drive, Essex, VT 05452802-878-4450 www.LDengineering.com03-21-17RDBHRDOthers14145O'Brien Home FarmKennedy Drive South Burlington, VT1 inch = 30 ft.(in feet)GRAPHIC SCALE30 0 15 30 60 120PAVEMENT MARKING LEGENDNEW DOUBLE 4" SOLID YELLOW LINEDC B NEW CROSSWALK MARKINGNEW 4" SOLID WHITE LINENEW 24" SOLID WHITE STOPBARA E NEW LETTER OR SYMBOLFNEW 4" DOTTED WHITE LINEGNEW 4" DASHED WHITE LINEHINEW 6" SOLID YELLOW LINENEW 4" SOLID YELLOW LINEȭCROSS SECTION A-ANTSEXISTING SIDEWALKEXISTINGBIKEPATHEXISTING CONCRETE CURBSLOPE=1/4IN/FTSLOPE=1/4IN/FT25.5'25.5'10' TRAVEL LANE10' TRAVEL LANE10' TRAVEL LANE10' TRAVEL LANEEXISTING CONCRETE CURB6"6"COLD PLANE EXISTING PAVEMENT 112"& PLACE 112" TYPE IV BITUMINOUSCONCRETE PAVEMENT OVERLAY5% MAX. 5% MAX.2% MAX.8.3% MAX.BIKE PATH RAMP DETAILNTSNEW 5" CAST-IN-PLACE CONCRETESIDEWALK RAMP WITHDETECTABLE WARNING STRIPNEW 2" TYPE IV BITUMINOUSCONCRETE BIKE PATH RAMPVARIES5'VARIESEXISTINGBIKE PATHREMOVE & RESET EXISTING GRANITE CURBTO CREATE NEW RAMP WITH 0" REVEALPRELIMINARYNOT FORCONSTRUCTION3???GZJ?$.HQQHG\'ULYH3ODQ 6HFWLRQGZJ30 Traffic Signal Plan2As NotedDateSheet numberScaleCheckedDrawnDesignSurvey Project No.Lamoureux & DickinsonConsulting Engineers, Inc.14 Morse Drive, Essex, VT 05452802-878-4450 www.LDengineering.com03-21-17RDBHRDOthers14145O'Brien Home FarmKennedy Drive South Burlington, VT2"2-1/2"WIRED CONDUITFROM TODESCRIPTION-ELECTRICAL SERVICE100'TRAFFIC SIGNAL LEGEND4DZ - 1VIDEO DETECTION ZONE TRAFFIC SIGNAL HEADJUNCTION BOXWIRED CONDUITSIGNAL CONTROLLERMAST ARM POLECONDUIT SLEEVECAMERA FOR VIDEODETECTIONCONDUIT SCHEDULESTREET LIGHTINGJUNCTION BOX #18'JUNCTION BOX #170'12'JUNCTION BOX #315'SIGNAL WIRINGSIGNAL WIRINGJUNCTION BOX #3 JUNCTION BOX #48'SIGNAL WIRINGSTREET LIGHTINGNOTE:NEW SLEEVES MAY BE INSTALLED BY OPEN CUT EXCAVATION. PEARL ST REPORTEDLY HAS A20-22 FT WIDE X 8" THICK REINFORCED CEMENT CONCRETE PAVEMENT CENTERED IN THEROADWAY. SAW CUT & REMOVE OVER NEW SLEEVE. REPLACE WITH NEW TYPE II BITUMINOUSCONCRETE PAVEMENT WITH 12" MIN. DENSE GRADED CRUSHED STONE SUBBASE. MATCHEXISTING BITUMINOUS CONCRETE PAVEMENT THICKNESS ABOVE CONCRETE.EQUIPMENT QUANTITY1THE QUANTITIES LISTED ABOVE ARE APPROXIMATE AND AREFURNISHED FOR INFORMATION ONLY. MISCELLANEOUS (UNLISTED)WIRE, CABLE, HARDWARE ETC., ARE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE FOR AFUNCTIONING TRAFFIC SIGNAL SYSTEM.CANTILEVER POLES & FOUNDATIONSLED HAND/MAN PEDESTRIAN COUNTDOWN SIGNAL HEADSACCESSIBLE PEDESTRIAN PUSH BUTTON ASSEMBLIESJUNCTION BOXESLOCAL CONTROLLER1268VEHICLE VIDEO DETECTION SYSTEM CAMERASPEDESTAL POSTS & FOUNDATIONSPHASE 8NEW CITY ROAD 'B'PHASES 2 + 6KENNEDY DRIVE(DWELL)PHASES 1 + 6KENNEDY DRIVE WB LT & TH214442YELLOW CLEARFLASHING OPERATIONMAX 1 GREENRED CLEARVEH. EXTENSION44??2??2326326Signal Phasing PlanFR??6224MAX 2 GREEN??????LEADING PEDESTRIAN INTERVAL6NEMA DUAL RING / FULL ACTUATED PHASINGMAX 3 GREENList of Major EquipmentSignal Timing Data??????--FYWEEKDAYS SATURDAYSUNDAY HOLIDAYSTIMETOD PLAN7:00 - 9:00 amAM PEAKMID-DAY3:00 - 6:00 pmPM PEAKCYCLE (sec.)608181MAX 1MAX 3MAX 2MAX 3MAX 2MAX 2MAX 2MAX 2MAX 2OFF PEAK 60 MAX 2 MAX 2 MAX 2 MAX 210:00 am - 2:00 pmOFFSET (sec.)????????REMAINDER OF DAY3-SECTION5-SECTION5-12" POLYCARBONATE TRAFFIC SIGNALHEADS WITH TUNNEL VISORS &MOUNTING HARDWARE (ALL LED)MASTER CONTROLLERGROUND MOUNT SIGNAL CONTROLLER CABINET1-WALK44-FLASHING DON'T WALK1110 -MIN. GREEN (W/O PED)MIN. GREEN (W/ PED) 1415-NTS55" P44 GROUND MOUNTSIGNAL CABINETCONCRETE BASE18" HIGH ALUMINUM SPACERGROUND MOUNT CABINET DETAILCONTROLLER CABINETCONTROLLER CABINETJUNCTION BOX #2JUNCTION BOX #2CANTILEVER POLE #1PEDESTRIAN POLE #1JUNCTION BOX #3PHASE 8NEW CITY ROAD 'B'PHASES 2 + 6KENNEDY DRIVE(DWELL)PHASES 1 + 6KENNEDY DRIVEWB LT & TH24" X 24" LED NO RIGHT TURN ONRED SIGN WITH INTEGRAL HOOD1 inch = 10 ft.(in feet)GRAPHIC SCALE10 051020 4012'JUNCTION BOX #2CANTILEVER POLE #168'SIGNAL WIRINGCANTILEVER POLE #2JUNCTION BOX #4JUNCTION BOX #4JUNCTION BOX #1CONTROLLER CABINETSIGNAL WIRING8'JUNCTION BOX #1JUNCTION BOX #270'SIGNAL WIRINGSTREET LIGHTINGSTREET LIGHTINGJUNCTION BOX #3CONTROLLER CABINETJUNCTION BOX #3CONTROLLER CABINETSIGNAL WIRING10'STREET LIGHTING10'68'8'CANTILEVER POLE #2JUNCTION BOX #4STREET LIGHTINGPRELIMINARYNOT FORCONSTRUCTION3???GZJ?$6LJQDO3ODQGZJ30 Cantilever Pole Sections31" = 5'DateSheet numberScaleCheckedDrawnDesignSurvey Project No.Lamoureux & DickinsonConsulting Engineers, Inc.14 Morse Drive, Essex, VT 05452802-878-4450 www.LDengineering.com03-21-17RDBHRDOthers14145O'Brien Home FarmKennedy Drive South Burlington, VT1 INCH = 5 FT.( IN FEET )NOTE:THE DESIGN OF THE CANTILEVER POLES SHOWN HEREON IS THERESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR AND THE CANTILEVER POLEMANUFACTURER. ALL SIGNAL HEADS AND SIGNS SHOULD BECENTERED VERTICALLY ON THE CANTILEVER ARM. THE CANTILEVERPOLES SHALL BE DESIGNED TO PROVIDE A 17'-0" TO 19'-0" VERTICALCLEARANCE FROM THE PAVEMENT TO THE BOTTOM OF THE SIGNALHEADS (EXCLUDING BACKPLATE). THE SHOP DRAWINGS FOR THECANTILEVER POLES SHALL INCLUDE DETAILED DIMENSIONS(ANGLES, LENGTHS, DEAD LOAD DEFLECTIONS, ETC.) TO DETERMINETHE RESULTING ELEVATIONS OF EACH SIGNAL HEAD.GENERAL SPECIFICATIONS1.01 ALL WORK SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE 2011 VERMONT AGENCYOF TRANSPORTATION STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR CONSTRUCTION,THE MANUAL ON UNIFORM TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES (MUTCD), ANDTHESE PLANS.1.02 THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT ALL UTILITIES BEFORE EXCAVATIONTO VERIFY THE LOCATION OF ANY UNDERGROUND LINES. THECONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY "DIGSAFE" AT 811 PRIOR TO ANYEXCAVATION.1.03 CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY THE EXACT LOCATIONS OF EXISTINGUTILITIES AND SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY DAMAGE TO ANY UTILITY,PUBLIC OR PRIVATE, SHOWN HEREON.1.04 ANY SURFACES, LINES OR STRUCTURES WHICH HAVE BEEN DAMAGED BYTHE CONTRACTOR'S OPERATIONS SHALL BE RESTORED TO THECONDITION AT LEAST EQUAL TO THAT IN WHICH THEY WERE FOUNDIMMEDIATELY PRIOR TO THE BEGINNING OF CONSTRUCTION.1.05 L&D WAIVES ANY AND ALL RESPONSIBILITY AND LIABILITY FOR PROBLEMSTHAT MAY ARISE FROM FAILURE TO FOLLOW THESE PLANS ANDSPECIFICATIONS AND THE DESIGN INTENT THAT THEY CONVEY, ANYCHANGES MADE IN THE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS OR IN THECONSTRUCTION OF THE PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS WITHOUT L&D'SPRIOR KNOWLEDGE AND CONSENT, AND/OR FAILURE TO SCHEDULEOBSERVATION OF THE WORK AND TESTING IN PROGRESS.1.06 THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR DEMOLITION ANDREMOVAL OF EXISTING SIGNAL EQUIPMENT STRUCTURES, VEGETATIONAND PAVEMENT NECESSARY TO CONSTRUCT THE PROPOSED TRAFFICSIGNAL MODIFICATIONS. UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED ON THE PLANS, ALLSALVAGED AND UNUSED TRAFFIC SIGNAL EQUIPMENT SHALL BERETURNED TO THE VILLAGE OF ESSEX JUNCTION PUBLIC WORKS DEPT.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE ALL EXCESS MATERIAL, DEBRIS ANDTRASH FROM THE SITE UPON COMPLETION OF CONSTRUCTION, UNLESSOTHERWISE DIRECTED BY THE RESIDENT ENGINEER.PROJECT SCHEDULING & COORDINATION2.01 TO ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH THE PLAN(S), THE CONTRACTOR SHALLNOTIFY THE CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON'S PUBLIC WORKS DEPT. ANDTHE RESIDENT ENGINEER 24 HOURS IN ADVANCE OF STARTING ANYWORK, CUTTING THE PAVEMENT, BEGINNING THE INSTALLATION OF ANYSIGNAL EQUIPMENT, SIGNAL OPERATION MODIFICATIONS AND FINALINSPECTION.2.02 THE WORK PERFORMED AS PART OF THE PROPOSED TRAFFIC SIGNALMODIFICATIONS SHALL BE CLOSELY COORDINATED ANDPRE-SCHEDULED WITH THE CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON'S PUBLICWORKS DEPT.2.03 EXISTING TRAFFIC SIGNAL EQUIPMENT SHALL BE USED TO PROVIDETEMPORARY TRAFFIC SIGNALS AS SHOWN ON THESE PLANS UNTILSUCH TIME AS THE NEW TRAFFIC SIGNALS ARE MADE OPERATIONAL.PEDESTRIAN PUSH BUTTON SPECIFICATIONS3.01 PUSH BUTTON FACES ARE TO BE PARALLEL WITH THE CROSSWALKTHEY ARE SERVING.3.02 THE PUSH BUTTON ARROW SHALL POINT TOWARDS THE CROSSWALK.3.03 WHEN TWO PUSH BUTTONS ARE LOCATED ON ONE POLE WITH LESSTHEN 10 FOOT SEPARATION, THE WALK INDICATION SHALL BE A SPEECHMESSAGE, NOT JUST A TONE.1 INCH = 5 FT.( IN FEET )1/4"1/4"2'-0" DIA.1'1'5'-0" FOOTING DEPTH2" STEEL CLEARANCE1'WEEP HOLE. INSTALL 1/2" FLEXIBLEPLASTIC CONDUIT FOR #6 AWG SOFTDRAWN COPPER GROUNDCONDUCTOR. CONNECT TO GROUNDELECTRODE WITH STANDARD LOWRESISTANCE NON-FERROUS GROUNDELECTRODE CLAMP.ANCHOR BOLT ORIENTATION MAY VARY(TOED-IN, TOED-OUT OR AS SHOWN) BUTTHERE MUST BE A MINIMUM OF 3" OF COVERAND 3" OF CLEARANCE BETWEEN1/2" CONDUIT FOR GROUNDCONDUCTOR AND WEEP HOLE15" OVERLAP#4 BARS#4 BARS AT 1'-0"VERTICAL SPACING2" SCORE MARK TYPICALALL CONDUIT LOCATIONSCONDUITS - NUMBER,TYPE & SIZE AS REQ'D.POSITION ANCHOR BOLTS TOALLOW MINIMUM CLEARANCE OF1-1/2" TO NEAREST REINFORCINGSTEEL.3" CLEARANCEANCHOR BOLTS4 - #6 BARSELEVATIONSECTIONPEDESTAL POLE REINFORCED CONCRETE FOOTING DETAIL2" SCORE MARK DETAILUSED FOR CONDUITLOCATION IN BOTHCONCRETE & GROUT, SEE"SECTION" DETAIL.CONDUIT(S) - NUMBER,SIZE & TYPE AS REQ'D.3/4" x 24" ANCHOR BOLTS(4 REQ'D.)4 - #6 BARS (4'-6" LONG)24'' UNDER SIDEWALK OR CURB (MIN.)36' UNDER ROADWAY (MIN.)#4 BARS AT 12" VERTICALSPACING, 3" CLEARANCE5/8" X 8' MIN. COPPER CLADGROUND ELECTRODE#6 SOFT DRAWN COPPER GROUNDCONDUCTOR CONNECT TO GROUNDINGLUG IN POLEUSE EDGING TOOL AROUNDTOP OF CONCRETE BASECONDUITS TO EXTEND 2"ABOVE CONCRETE BASENTSPEDESTAL POLE #1SECTION LOOKING WEST3'-6"TOP OF POLE FOUNDATIONMATCH FINISH GRADEACCESSIBLE PEDESTRIAN PUSHBUTTON ASSEMBLIES10'4" Ø PEDESTAL POLE (412" O.D.) & CAPCOUNT-DOWN LED PEDESTRIANSIGNAL HEADS. CLAM-SHELLDIRECT MOUNT TO POLE.OCTAGONAL BASE1" = 2'7'PRELIMINARYNOT FORCONSTRUCTION3???GZJ?$&DQWLOHYHU6HFWLRQVGZJ30 Cantilever Pole Details4DateSheet numberScaleCheckedDrawnDesignSurvey Project No.Lamoureux & DickinsonConsulting Engineers, Inc.14 Morse Drive, Essex, VT 05452802-878-4450 www.LDengineering.com03-21-17RDBHRDOthers14145O'Brien Home FarmKennedy Drive South Burlington, VTROUNDED EDGE INSIDE9/16" O HOLES (TYP.)ANCHOR BOLT DETAILSIZEL (IN.)T (IN.)425484968999L6"T1/4"1/4"(SPREAD FOOTINGS OR PILES ARE OPTIONAL)1'-0"1'-0"FOOTING DEPTH2" STEEL CLEARANCE1'BCSFTPWEEP HOLE - INSTALL 12" Ø FLEXIBLE PLASTICCONDUIT FOR #6 AWG SOFT DRAWN COPPERGROUND CONDUCTOR. CONNECT TO GROUNDELECTRODE WITH STANDARD LOW RESISTANCENON-FERROUS GROUND ELECTRODE CLAMP.114" Ø BLIND HALF COUPLINGWIRE OUTLETS (TYP.)ANCHOR BOLT ORIENTATION MAY VARY(TOED-IN, TOED-OUT OR AS SHOWN) BUTTHERE MUST BE A MINIMUM OF 3" OFCOVER AND 3" OF CLEARANCE BETWEEN12" Ø CONDUIT FORGROUND CONDUCTOR2" SCORE MARK TYPICALALL CONDUIT LOCATIONS2" MIN. I. D. CONDUITPOSITION ANCHOR BOLTS TO ALLOWMINIMUM CLEARANCE OF 112" TO NEARESTREINFORCING STEEL.3" CLEARANCEANCHOR BOLTSELEVATIONANCHOR BOLT DETAILSECTIONCANTILEVER POLE FOOTING DETAIL2" SCORE MARK DETAILPOLE PENETRATION DETAILPOLE BASE / BASE PLATEDETAILUSED FOR CONDUIT LOCATION, SEE"SECTION" DETAIL.2" MIN. I. D. ELECTRICALCONDUIT(S) AS REQUIREDANCHOR BOLTS. SEE DETAILAND CHART AT LEFT24" UNDER SIDEWALK OR CURB (MIN)36" UNDER ROADWAY (MIN)58" Ø X 8' MIN. COPPER CLADGROUND ELECTRODE.END DETAIL 2" ØANCHOR BOLT ONLY114" TO 134" Ø BOLT4" x 4" x 1" PLATEINTERRUPTED THREADS#6 SOFT DRAWN COPPER GROUND CONDUCTORCONNECT TO GROUNDING LUG IN POLE4" GROUT PLACED AFTER POLE IS PLUMBEDIN BOTH CONCRETEAND GROUTALL SUPPORT BRACKETSARE TO BE GALVANIZEDL 312" x 212" x 516" OR Z 4" x 3" x 14"SIGN ON SINGLEMAST ARMEQUAL TO SIGN HEIGHTTHE CANTILEVER POLE FOOTING DETAIL AND POLEBASE / BASE PLATE DETAIL SHOWN ON THIS PAGEHAVE BEEN PROVIDED TO SHOW CERTAIN MINIMUMDIMENSIONAL AND INSTALLATION REQUIREMENTS.IT IS THE CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITY TO HAVETHE CANTILEVER POLES AND THEIR FOUNDATIONSDESIGNED BY A STRUCTURAL ENGINEER LICENSEDIN THE STATE OF VERMONT.SIGN BRACKET DETAILSMINIMUM DIMENSION -EDGE OF BOLT HOLE TOEDGE OF BASE PLATE =ANCHOR BOLTDIAMETERSEEDETAILAT RIGHTBOLT CIRCLEALIGN POLE BASE 90° TO MAST ARMGROUND WIRES SHALLBE CONNECTED TO THEGROUNDING LUGINSIDE THE HANDHOLEACCESS4" X 612" HANDHOLEFRAME WITH COVER (TYP.EACH POLE) - PLACE ONSIDE OF POLE AWAYFROM APPROACHINGTRAFFICNUTS UNDER POLEBASE FOR PLUMBADJUSTMENTTOP OF FOOTING4" GROUTFOOTINGDIAMETER58" Ø U-BOLT138" TYP.CONDUITS TO EXTEND 2"ABOVE BASE GROUT114" Ø x 48"112" Ø x 60"134" x 90"2" x 96"PRELIMINARYNOT FORCONSTRUCTION3???GZJ?$&DQWLOHYHU'HWDLOVGZJ30 Traffic Signal Specifications5DateSheet numberScaleCheckedDrawnDesignSurvey Project No.Lamoureux & DickinsonConsulting Engineers, Inc.14 Morse Drive, Essex, VT 05452802-878-4450 www.LDengineering.com03-21-17RDBHRDOthers14145O'Brien Home FarmKennedy Drive South Burlington, VTCANTILEVER MAST ARM POLE SPECIFICATIONSGENERAL SPECIFICATIONS1.01 THIS PROJECT INVOLVES THE INSTALLATION OF REPLACEMENT TRAFFIC SIGNAL SYSTEMS AT THEPEARL ST/POST OFFICE SQUARE AND PEARL ST/SO. SUMMIT ST INTERSECTIONS IN THE CITY OF SOUTHBURLINGTON.1.02 ALL WORK AND MATERIALS SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE 2011 VERMONT AGENCY OFTRANSPORTATION STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR CONSTRUCTION, THE MANUAL ON UNIFORMTRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES, THE CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON'S PUBLIC WORKS STANDARDS ANDTHESE PLANS.1.03 THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT ALL UTILITIES BEFORE EXCAVATION TO VERIFY THE LOCATION OFANY UNDERGROUND LINES. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY "DIGSAFE" AT 811 PRIOR TO ANYEXCAVATION. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY THE EXACT LOCATIONS OF EXISTING UTILITIES ANDSHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY DAMAGE TO ANY UTILITY, PUBLIC OR PRIVATE, SHOWN HEREON.1.04 ANY SURFACES, LINES, OR STRUCTURES WHICH HAVE BEEN DAMAGED BY THE CONTRACTOR'SOPERATIONS SHALL BE RESTORED TO THE CONDITION AT LEAST EQUAL TO THAT IN WHICH THEY WEREFOUND IMMEDIATELY PRIOR TO THE BEGINNING OF OPERATIONS.1.05 L&D WAIVES ANY AND ALL RESPONSIBILITY AND LIABILITY FOR PROBLEMS THAT MAY ARISE FROM:FAILURE TO FOLLOW THESE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND THE DESIGN INTENT THAT THEY CONVEY,ANY CHANGES MADE IN THE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS OR IN THE CONSTRUCTION OF THEPROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS WITHOUT L&D'S PRIOR KNOWLEDGE AND CONSENT, AND/OR FAILURE TOSCHEDULE OBSERVATION OF THE WORK AND TESTING IN PROGRESS.1.06 THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR DEMOLITION AND REMOVAL OF EXISTING SIGNALEQUIPMENT STRUCTURES, VEGETATION AND PAVEMENT NECESSARY TO CONSTRUCT THE PROJECT,UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED ON THE PLANS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE ALL EXCESS MATERIAL,DEBRIS AND TRASH FROM THE SITE ON A DAILY BASIS, UNLESS OTHERWISE DIRECTED BY THERESIDENT ENGINEER.1.07 TO ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH THE PLAN(S), THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY THE RESIDENTENGINEER AND THE CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON'S PUBLIC WORKS DEPT. 24 HOURS IN ADVANCE OFSTARTING ANY WORK, CUTTING THE PAVEMENT, BEGINNING THE INSTALLATION OF ANY SIGNALEQUIPMENT, START-UP OF SIGNAL OPERATION AND FINAL INSPECTION.2.01 ALL MATERIALS AND CONSTRUCTION SHALL CONFORM TO THE STATE OF VERMONT AGENCY OFTRANSPORTATION'S "STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR CONSTRUCTION", DATED 2011.2.02 OVERHEAD SIGN/SIGNAL SUPPORTS SHALL CONFORM TO "STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FORSTRUCTURAL SUPPORTS FOR HIGHWAY SIGNS, LUMINAIRES, AND TRAFFIC SIGNALS ", AASHTO, DATED2009 OR ITS LATEST REVISION.2.03 ADDITIONAL DESIGN CRITERIA ARE AS FOLLOWS:CONCRETE 28-DAY COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH (f'c) = 3,500 PSI,REINFORCING STEEL MAX. ALLOWABLE STRESS (fs) = 24,000 PSI (GRADE 60),FOOTING SOIL PRESSURE = 3,000 PSF (MAXIMUM),WIND LOAD AND ICE LOAD PER ABOVE REFERENCED AASHTO STANDARDS,FATIGUE DESIGN FOR CATEGORY II MAJOR ROADWAY PER ABOVE REFERENCED AASHTO STANDARDS.2.04 ANCHOR BOLTS - FOUR STAINLESS STEEL ANCHOR BOLTS WITH TWO HEXAGON NUTS, ONE WASHERAND ONE LOCK WASHER PER BOLT SHALL BE FURNISHED WITH EACH POLE. SEE SUBSECTION 714.09.2.05 FLANGE BOLTS - ALL FLANGE BOLTS AND HEX NUTS SHALL BE HIGH STRENGTH STEEL AND SHALLCONFORM TO ASTM A325. THE FLANGE BOLTS SHALL BE CAPABLE OF RESISTING 133% OF THE FULLDESIGN STRESS OF THE TUBE AT ITS YIELD STRENGTH STRESS.2.06 HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL MEMBERS - STEEL TUBES SHALL BE FORMED AND WELDED WITH ONECONTINUOUS LONGITUDINAL WELD ONLY. AFTER FORMING AND WELDING THEY SHALL BE COLDROLLED TO ENSURE UNIFORMITY OF SIZE AND SMOOTHNESS OF WELD. THEY SHALL HAVE A MINIMUMYIELD STRENGTH OF 55 KSI. THERE SHALL BE NO TRANSVERSE WELDING EXCEPT AT THE FLANGECONNECTIONS AND POLE BASE PLATES, WHERE THE TUBES SHALL TELESCOPE THE FLANGES ANDPLATES AND BE CONTINUOUSLY WELDED BOTH SIDES INSIDE AND OUT TO WITHSTAND THE FULLTRANSFER OF THE BENDING STRENGTH TO THE BOLTS. OPTIONALLY, THE MEMBERS MAY BE A SERIESOF TWO OR THREE DIFFERENT DIAMETER PIPES WELDED TOGETHER.2.07 GALVANIZING - ALL STEEL COMPONENTS, EXCEPT CONCRETE REINFORCING AND STAINLESS STEELHARDWARE, ARE TO BE HOT DIPPED GALVANIZED AFTER FABRICATION. THE ASSEMBLIES SHALL BEDESIGNED AND FABRICATED TO PERMIT GALVANIZING ON ALL INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR SURFACES ANDSHALL BE FREE OF POCKETS AND OTHER STRUCTURAL OBSTRUCTIONS THAT WILL NOT PERMITPROPER DEPOSITION OF ZINC COATING. GALVANIZING SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM A123AND A153.2.08 WELDINGA. ALL DESIGN DETAILS, WORKMANSHIP, PROCEDURES AND INSPECTION SHALL CONFORM WITHSUBSECTION 506.10.B. ALL WELDS SHALL BE AT LEAST AS STRONG AS THE MATERIAL(S) BEING WELDED.2.09 FOOTINGSA. FOOTINGS SHALL BE DESIGNED IN ACCORDANCE WITH VTRANS MATERIALS & RESEARCHENGINEERING INSTRUCTIONS - GEOTECHNICAL DESIGN PROCEDURES FOR MAST ARM ANDOVERHEAD SIGN SUPPORT FOUNDATIONS, DATED MARCH 9, 2010.B. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PERFORM A SOIL BORING AT EACH NEW MAST ARM AND/OR SIGNAL POLELOCATION, AND SHALL PREPARE A PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL REPORT IN ACCORDANCE WITHSECTION 4.0 OF THE ABOVE REFERENCED VTRANS GEOTECHNICAL DESIGN PROCEDURES.C. FOUNDATIONS SHALL BE DESIGNED TO RESIST LOADS EQUAL TO, OR GREATER THAN, THE MAXIMUMLOADS THAT THE POLE(S) ARE DESIGNED FOR.D. THREE TYPES OF FOUNDATIONS, AS OUTLINED IN AASHTO STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS (SEE NOTE1.02) SECTION 13 SHALL BE ALLOWED:1. DRILLED SHAFTS2. SPREAD FOOTINGS3. PILESE. DRILLED SHAFT FOOTINGS SHALL BE POURED IN DRILLED SHAFTS AGAINST UNDISTURBEDMATERIAL. THE TOP TWO FEET OF SOIL SHALL BE NEGLECTED FOR DESIGN PURPOSES.F. AS AN ALTERNATIVE TO THE DRILLED HOLES, FOOTINGS MAY BE POURED IN EXCAVATED HOLESUSING THE PROPER FORMS, WHICH MUST BE REMOVED. THE EXCAVATED HOLES SHALL BE ATLEAST TWO FEET CLEAR OF THE FOOTING. THE BACKFILL MATERIAL SHALL BE COMPACTED ASDESCRIBED IN SUBSECTION 204.12. DESIGN LIMITS AS FOR AUGURED FOOTINGS APPLY.G. WHEN THE DESIGN DEPTH OF A FOOTING CANNOT BE OBTAINED DUE TO UNFORESEEN FIELDCONDITIONS, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY THE ENGINEER AND OBTAIN A REVISED FOOTINGDETAIL FROM THE ENGINEER.H. ANY BACKFILL PLACED ADJACENT TO THE FOOTING SHALL BE GRANULAR MATERIAL MEETING THEREQUIREMENTS FOR GRANULAR BACKFILL FOR STRUCTURES, SUBSECTION 704.08. CONCRETE FORFOOTING SHALL CONFORM TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF CONCRETE, CLASS B, SECTION 501,STRUCTURAL CONCRETE. GROUT MATERIAL SHALL BE NON-SHRINKING MORTAR CONFORMING TOSUBSECTION 707.03 (MORTAR TYPE IV).I. THE TRAFFIC SIGNAL CANTILEVER MAST ARM POLES SHALL BE BACKRAKED BEFORE THE SIGNALSARE INSTALLED SO THAT THE POLES WILL BE PLUMB WHEN DEAD LOAD DEFLECTION DUE TO SIGNALHEADS OCCURS. THE AMOUNT OF BACKRAKE SHALL BE AS SHOWN ON THE PLANS. SIGNALS/SIGNSSHALL BE MOUNTED AND LEVELED AND POLES SHALL BE BACKRAKED PRIOR TO PLACING GROUTUNDER POLE BASE.2.10 SHOP DRAWINGS (3 COPIES OF EACH OR ELECTRONICALLY IN PDF FORMAT) SHALL BE SUBMITTED TOTHE RESIDENT ENGINEER FOR APPROVAL PRIOR TO FABRICATION. THE SHOP DRAWINGS SHALLINCLUDE THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION:A. DETAILED DRAWING OF EACH COMPONENT OF THE STRUCTURE.B. MATERIAL SPECIFICATIONS FOR EACH COMPONENT OF THE STRUCTURE, EITHER BY COMPLETESPECIFICATION OR REFERENCE TO APPLICABLE ASTM STANDARDS.C. NOTATION OF PROJECT NAME, PROJECT NUMBER, ROUTE NUMBER, AND STRUCTURE STATIONING(TO BE INCLUDED ON EACH SHEET).D. DETAILS FOR LOCATION OF SIGNS/SIGNALS AND ATTACHMENT HARDWARE FOR THE SUPPORTSTRUCTURE.E. ALL ELEVATION AND DIMENSIONS NECESSARY TO PROVIDE A COM PLETE SET OF RECORD PLANS.F. DEAD LOAD DEFLECTION AND CAMBER INFORMATION.G. WELDING DETAILS AND PROCEDURES ARE REQUIRED FOR ALL WELDS. PROCEDURES SHALL BESUBMITTED FOR APPROVAL WITH REFERENCE TO EACH WELD IDENTIFIED ON THE SHOP DRAWINGS.(SEE SUB-SECTION 506.10).2.11 EACH OVERHEAD TRAFFIC SIGNAL/SIGN SUPPORT SHALL BE GROUNDED. THE GROUND SHALLCONSIST OF:A) AN INTERNAL GROUND LUG OPPOSITE THE HAND HOLE.B) A #6 (MIN.) SOFT DRAWN COPPER GROUNDING ELECTRODE CONDUCTOR.C) A 5/8" X 8' (MIN.) COPPER CLAD GROUNDING ELECTRODE. THE RESISTANCE TO GROUND SHALL BE25 OHMS OR LESS. ADDITIONAL GROUNDING ELECTRODES MAY BE REQUIRED (MINIMUM SPACINGSHALL BE 6'). WHEN A POWER SERVICE, METER AND DISCONNECT ARE ATTACHED TO A POLE,THERE SHALL BE A CONTINUOUS GROUND WIRE FROM THE METER AND DISCONNECT WHICH MAYRUN INTERNAL TO THE UPRIGHT, THROUGH THE 1/2" FLEXIBLE TUBING IN THE CONCRETE BASE TOTHE REQUIRED GROUNDING ELECTRODE(S). THE GROUND WIRE FROM THE POLE GROUNDING LUG,CONTROLLER CABINET AND/OR LUMINAIRE MAY ATTACH TO THIS CONTINUOUS GROUNDINGELECTRODE CONDUCTOR FROM THE SERVICE METER AND DISCONNECT. THE CONTRACTOR SHALLPERFORM A RESISTANCE TO GROUND TEST ON THE CONTINUOUS GROUNDING ELECTRODECONDUCTOR FROM THE SERVICE METER AND DISCONNECT AND PROVIDE A WRITTEN STATEMENTTO THE AREA ELECTRICAL INSPECTOR THAT THE GROUNDING ELECTRODE CONDUCTOR ISCONTINUOUS FROM THE SERVICE METER AND DISCONNECT AND THE RESISTANCE TO GROUND IS 25OHMS OR LESS.2.12 THE COST OF SIGNAL/SIGN SUPPORTS, INCLUDING ALL HARDWARE, SIGN BRACKETS, FOOTING ANDLUMINAIRE ARMS SHALL BE INCLUDED IN THE BID PRICE. THESE COMPONENTS SHALL CONFORM TOALL APPLICABLE PROVISIONS OF SECTIONS 677, 678, AND 679.2.13 HORIZONTAL MEMBERS SHALL BE CAMBERED AND THE VERTICAL POLES BACKRAKED (WHEREAPPLICABLE) TO THE ANTICIPATED DEAD LOAD DEFLECTION PLUS THE CAMBER, IF ANY, SPECIFIED ONTHE PLANS.2.14 AN EQUIVALENT ALTERNATE DESIGN MAY BE SUBSTITUTED FOR THE DETAILS AND MATERIALS SHOWN.2.15 THE DETAILS OF DESIGN FOR THE STRUCTURE AND FOOTINGS ARE TO BE SUPPLIED BY THECONTRACTOR AND/OR BY THE MANUFACTURER. THE STRUCTURE SHALL BE DESIGNED TO RESIST THEMAXIMUM LOADING AS OUTLINED IN THE AASHTO STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS (SEE NOTE 2). ALLDETAILS OF THE STRUCTURE AND THE FOOTING SHALL BE CHECKED AND STAMPED BY A STRUCTURALENGINEER REGISTERED IN THE STATE OF VERMONT PRIOR TO SUBMITTAL OF THE SHOP DRAWINGS TOTHE ENGINEER.2.16 IN ADDITION TO THE SHOP DRAWINGS OUTLINED IN NOTE 2.10, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT ALLDESIGN CALCULATIONS TO THE RESIDENT ENGINEER SHOWING THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION FOREACH OF THE VERTICAL AND HORIZONTAL COMPONENTS OF THE STRUCTURE AND FOOTING:A. THE DESIGN AXIAL AND SHEAR FORCES AND BENDING AND TORSIONAL MOMENTS.B. THE DESIGN AXIAL, BENDING AND SHEAR STRESSES AND THE COMBINED STRESS RATIO.C. VIBRATION AND FATIGUE CALCULATIONS AS SET FORTH IN SECTION 11 OF THE AASHTOPUBLICATION REFERENCED IN NOTE 2.02.D. THE ALLOWABLE AXIAL, BENDING, AND SHEAR STRESSES.E. ITEMS A,B,D - SHALL BE SHOWN FOR EACH OF THE GROUP LOADINGS (I, II, III) AND FOR THE BASICWIND LOAD APPLIED TO THE TWO CASES OUTLINED IN THE AASHTO STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS(SEE NOTE 2) SECTION 1.2.5 (D) (4).F. FAILURE TO SUPPLY THE PROPER DESIGN INFORMATION SHALL BE CAUSE FOR REJECTION OF THESTRUCTURE.G. A MINIMUM OF TWO (2) WEEKS SHALL BE REQUIRED FOR REVIEW BY THE RESIDENT AND DESIGNENGINEERS.H. EVERY MEMBER AND CONNECTION IN AN OVERHEAD TRAFFIC SIGNAL SUPPORT SHALL BE DESIGNEDTO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL RESIDUAL CAPACITY FOR FUTURE MODIFICATIONS EQUIVALENT TO A5-SECTION TRAFFIC SIGNAL HEAD WITH A 5 INCH LOUVERED BACKPLATE LOCATED ON THEOUTERMOST EXTENT TO THE MAST ARM.2.17 THE CONTRACTOR/MANUFACTURER SHALL PROVIDE ALL STRUCTURE AND FOOTING DIMENSIONALDATA.2.18 FOR INSTALLATIONS WHERE BOTH "EXISTING" AND "FUTURE" CONDITIONS ARE SHOWN, THE SUPPORTSSHALL BE DESIGNED FOR THE MORE SEVERE OF THE TWO LOADING CONDITIONS. THE INFORMATIONOUTLINED IN NOTE 2.16 ABOVE SHALL BE PROVIDED FOR BOTH THE LOADING CONDITIONS.2.19 THE TRAFFIC SIGNALS SHALL BE MOUNTED TO THE ARM OR POLE USING A FIXED MOUNT SYSTEM ASSHOWN ON STD DETAIL E-171C.2.20 BASE PLATES SHALL BE STAMPED WITH THE VERTICAL POLE DIAMETER, HEIGHT, YIELD STRENGTH,GAUGE AND THE HORIZONTAL MEMBER DIAMETER, LENGTH, YIELD STRENGTH, GAUGE. ALTERNATELY,THE INFORMATION MAY BE STAMPED ON A METAL TAG RIVETED TO THE POLE NEAR THE HANDHOLE.SIGNAL EQUIPMENT SPECIFICATIONS3.01 ALL NEW EQUIPMENT SHALL MEET OR EXCEED 2011 VTRANS STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS 678 &752, NEMA STANDARDS AND IMSA OR ITE SPECIFICATIONS, WHERE APPLICABLE. INSTALLATION OFSIGNAL EQUIPMENT SHALL BE AS DETAILED ON THESE PLANS AND THE VTRANS STANDARDDETAILS REFERENCED ON THIS SHEET IN GENERAL SPECIFICATIONS.3.02 THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT SHOP DRAWINGS FOR EACH NEW TRAFFIC SIGNAL EQUIPMENTITEM TO THE RESIDENT ENGINEER FOR APPROVAL . SHOP DRAWING SUBMITTALS SHALLCONFORM TO VTRANS STD. SPECS.3.03 ALL POLE MOUNTED AND MAST ARM MOUNTED SIGNAL HEADS SHALL HAVE POLYCARBONATESECTIONS AND LENSES. THE SIGNAL HEADS SHALL HAVE FLAT BLACK HOUSINGS AND VISORS.BLACK LOUVERED BACKPLATES SHALL BE INSTALLED ON ALL SIGNAL HEADS UNLESS OTHERWISENOTED. ALL NEW SIGNAL HEADS SHALL BE 12" LED. ALL MAST ARM MOUNTED SIGNS AND SIGNALHEADS SHALL ALSO BE SECURED WITH SAFETY CABLES.3.04 ALL MAST ARM AND PEDESTAL POLES SHALL BE PAINTED FLAT BLACK WITH A POWDER COATINGPROCESS.3.05 MINIMUM CONDUIT SIZES SHALL BE: 2.5" Ø FOR POWER SERVICES AND 2" Ø FOR ALL OTHER(INCLUDING SIGNAL WIRING, STREET LIGHTING, LOOP LEAD-INS, INTERCONNECT, ETC.).3.06 PEDESTRIAN SIGNALS SHALL INCLUDE ACCESSIBLE PEDESTRIAN ASSEMBLIES AS DEFINED IN THEVTRANS SPECIFICATIONS. PEDESTRIAN INSTRUCTION SIGNS SHALL BE INCLUDED AT ALLPEDESTRIAN PUSH BUTTON LOCATIONS. PEDESTRIAN HEADS SHALL HAVE BLACK HOUSING,COUNTDOWN / SYMBOL TYPE FACES, AND SHALL BE CLAM-SHELL DIRECT MOUNTED.3.07 CONTROLLER/CABINET NOTES:A. THE VILLAGE OF ESSEX JUNCTION HAS STANDARDIZED ON ECONOLITE TRAFFIC SIGNALCONTROLLERS AND TRAFFIC SIGNAL CONTROL PRODUCTS. SUBSTITUTES AND "OR EQUALS"WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED.B. THE SIGNAL CONTROLLERS SHALL BE ECONOLITE COBALT ATC TS2 TYPE 2 CONTROLLERS.THE CONTROLLERS SHALL BE ENCLOSED IN A GROUND MOUNTED CABINET WITH BASE ANDEXTENSION. THE CABINETS SHALL BE ORIENTED SO THAT THE CABINET DOOR OPENS AWAYFROM TRAFFIC AND SHALL BE PAINTED FLAT BLACK FINISH WITH A POWDER COATINGPROCESS.C. COORDINATION BETWEEN THE SYSTEM MASTER AND LOCAL CONTROLLERS AT EACHINTERSECTION SHALL BE BY SPREAD SPECTRUM TELEMETRY. THE SIGNALS SHALL OPERATEUNCOORDINATED DURING OFF PEAK PERIODS.E. THE DWELL PHASE (PEARL ST PHASE 2/6) SHALL BE USED FOR THE START-UP PHASEFOLLOWING FLASHING OPERATION.F. SIGNAL TIMINGS SHOWN ON THESE PLANS MAY REQUIRE FINE-TUNING IN THE FIELD BASED ONTRAFFIC OBSERVATIONS. FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THIS PROJECT BY THE VILLAGE WILL BESUBJECT TO A 30-DAY TEST PERIOD, DURING WHICH ALL ADJUSTMENTS SHALL BE MADE ANDEQUIPMENT PROBLEMS CORRECTED BY THE CONTRACTOR AT NO ADDITIONAL EXPENSE. IFPROBLEMS ARISE DURING THE 30-DAY TEST PERIOD, THE ACCEPTANCE DATE MAY BEEXTENDED.H. UPON COMPLETION OF THE 30-DAY TEST PERIOD, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE TO THERESIDENT ENGINEER UPDATED SIGNAL TIMING PROGRAMMING SHEETS SHOWING ALLMODIFIED SETTINGS, IF ANY.I. THE CONTROLLER CABINETS SHALL HAVE AN APPROVED EMERGENCY GENERATORCONNECTION.3.08 TRAFFIC SIGNAL INTERCONNECT SYSTEM:THE TRAFFIC SIGNAL INTERCONNECT SYSTEM (TSIS) SHALL BE A SPREAD SPECTRUM WIRELESSCOMMUNICATION SYSTEM TO LINK THE POST OFFICE SQUARE SHOPPING CENTER AND SO.SUMMIT ST. THE TSIS SHALL BE DESIGNED TO PROVIDE TWO-WAY TELEMETRY DATA TRANSFERAND SIGNAL COORDINATION BETWEEN MULTIPLE SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS. THE TSISMANUFACTURER SHALL DEMONSTRATE A MINIMUM OF FIVE (5) YEARS SUCCESSFUL EXPERIENCEIN TRAFFIC CONTROL APPLICATIONS AT SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS. THE MANUFACTURERSHALL ALSO DEMONSTRATE A MINIMUM OF FIVE (5) YEARS SUCCESSFUL INTEGRATION OF ITSTSIS WITH THE SPECIFIED TRAFFIC SIGNAL CONTROL EQUIPMENT. THE SYSTEM SHALL BECAPABLE OF FUTURE EXPANSION TO LINK WITH OTHER INTERSECTIONS AND/OR A REMOTEMONITORING SITE. THE TSIS AT EACH INTERSECTION SHALL INCLUDE:A. A WIRELESS INTERCONNECT UNIT HAVING AN INTEGRATED TRANSMITTER/RECEIVER.B. ANTENNA AND POLE MOUNTING BRACKET.C. COMMUNICATION INTERFACE PANELS, COAX CABLE, DATA CABLE, JUMPER CABLE, LIGHTNINGPROTECTION PLUS ALL RELATED EQUIPMENT AND MISCELLANEOUS FITTINGS (INCL. CABINETWIRING).D. ALL LABOR, MATERIALS, EQUIPMENT AND SIGNAL CONTROLLER PROGRAMMING REQUIRED TOCOMPLETE THE INSTALLATION AND PROVIDE A FULLY FUNCTIONING TSIS.ALL TSIS COMPONENTS SHALL BE CURRENT PRODUCTION EQUIPMENT FURNISHED BY THE SAMEMANUFACTURER (FOR SYSTEM OPERATION COMPATIBILITY PURPOSES) UNLESS OTHERWISEAPPROVED IN ADVANCE BY THE ENGINEER.3.09 VEHICLE DETECTION SYSTEM:THE CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL A VEHICLE DETECTION SYSTEM (VDS) FOR ALL APPROACHESAND LANES AT EACH INTERSECTION UTILIZING THE ECONOLITE AUTOSCOPE DUO HYBRIDVIDEO/RADAR SENSOR SYSTEM. THE VDS SHALL INCLUDE:A. HYBRID VIDEO/RADAR SENSORS WITH ZOOM LENS AND INTEGRATED MACHINE VISIONPROCESSOR IN ONE COMPACT UNIT, WITH INTERNAL HEATER AND INTEGRATED ADJUSTABLESUNSHIELD.B. ALL MOUNTING HARDWARE.C. COMMUNICATIONS INTERFACE PANEL, DETECTOR PORT MASTER, VIDEO/RADAR SENSORCABLE, PLUS ALL ASSOCIATED EQUIPMENT AND MISCELLANEOUS FITTINGS (INCL. CABINETWIRING).D. ALL LABOR, MATERIAL, EQUIPMENT AND SIGNAL CONTROLLER PROGRAMMING REQUIRED TOCOMPLETE THE INSTALLATION AND MAKE THE VDS FULLY OPERATIONAL.E. VIDEO/RADAR SENSORS SHALL BE MOUNTED ON MAST ARMS USING EXTENSION BRACKETS NOLONGER THAN 12 INCHES, AND SHALL BE PROGRAMMED IN ACCORDANCE WITHMANUFACTURER'S INSTRUCTIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO ACHIEVE THE DETECTIONZONES AS SHOWN ON THE SIGNAL LAYOUT PLAN.ALL VDS COMPONENTS SHALL BE CURRENT PRODUCTION EQUIPMENT FURNISHED BY THE SAMEMANUFACTURER (FOR SYSTEM OPERATION COMPATIBILITY PURPOSES).3.10 EMERGENCY VEHICLE / TRANSIT PREEMPTION SYSTEM (BOTH INTERSECTIONS):THE EMERGENCY VEHICLE / TRANSIT PREEMPTION SYSTEM SHALL BE A LINE-OF-SIGHT SYSTEMUSING A VISIBLE STROBE LIGHT EMITTER TRANSMITTING VISIBLE FLASHES OF LIGHT AT ASPECIFIED FREQUENCY/PATTERN. THE SYSTEM SHALL BE COMPATIBLE WITH OTHER EXISTINGEMERGENCY VEHICLE / TRANSIT PREEMPTION SYSTEMS CURRENTLY IN USE IN THE CITY OFSOUTH BURLINGTON. THE SYSTEM SHALL INCLUDE:A. ALL NECESSARY INTERFACE BOARDS AND WIRING.B. OPTICAL PREEMPTION DETECTORSC. CONFIRMATION STROBES.EMITTERS AND OTHER VEHICLE MOUNTED EQUIPMENT TO BE PURCHASED SEPARATELY BY THECITY.ALL EMERGENCY VEHICLE / TRANSIT PREEMPTION SYSTEM COMPONENTS SHALL BE CURRENTPRODUCTION EQUIPMENT FURNISHED BY THE SAME CONTRACTOR (FOR SYSTEM OPERATIONCOMPATIBILITY PURPOSES) UNLESS OTHERWISE APPROVED IN ADVANCE BY THE ENGINEER.FINAL EMERGENCY VEHICLE PREEMPTION SIGNAL TIMINGS TO BE DETERMINED AFTERINSTALLATION WITH INPUT FROM THE LOCAL FIRE AND RESCUE DEPARTMENTS.PRELIMINARYNOT FORCONSTRUCTION3???GZJ?$7UDIILF6LJQDO6SHFVGZJ30 11" = 20'DateSheet numberScaleCheckedDrawnDesignSurvey Project No.Lamoureux & DickinsonConsulting Engineers, Inc.14 Morse Drive, Essex, VT 05452802-878-4450 www.LDengineering.com11-29-2016RDBHRDOthers14145O'Brien Home FarmKennedy Drive South Burlington, VTNew Crosswalk & RRFB PlanHinesburg Rd//Eldredge St/Hayes AveRECTANGULAR RAPID FLASHING BEACON DETAILPEDESTAL SIGNAL POLE(2.5" SQUARE STEELGALVANIZED SIGN POST)FRONT VIEWSIDE VIEW3' - 6"7' - 0"15' - 0" POLE HEIGHTSLEEVE AND ANCHORSEE DETAIL ON STANDARD T-45BI-DIRECTIONAL RAPID FLASHINGBAR WITH AMBER LEDS, BOTH SIDESCONDUIT1 inch = 20 ft.(in feet)GRAPHIC SCALE20 0 10 20 40 80THE RRFB SYSTEM SHALL CONSIST OF THE FOLLOWING:•SELF-CONTAINED SOLAR PANEL, BATTERIES AND ENERGY MANAGEMENT SYSTEM.•ON-BOARD USER INTERFACE/CONTROLLER AND DISPLAY CAPABLE OFIN-THE-FIELD SETUP OF FLASH DURATION, AMBIENT SETTINGS AND NIGHTINTENSITY.•AN INTEGRATED WIRELESS-BASED COMMUNICATION SYSTEM.•THE SOLAR PANEL, BATTERIES, COMMUNICATION SYSTEM AND ON-BOARD USERINTERFACE/CONTROLLER SHALL BE ENCLOSED IN ONE COMPACT,WEATHERPROOF, VENTED NEMA 3R SIDE POST MOUNTED ENCLOSURE.•LIGHTBARS WITH SIDE EMITTING PEDESTRIAN CONFIRMATION LIGHTS IN ABI-DIRECTIONAL CONFIGURATION.•ACCESSIBLE PUSH BUTTON ASSEMBLIES WITH INSTRUCTIONAL SIGNS ANDAUDIBLE TONE AND MESSAGE.•ALL RRFB SYSTEM COMPONENTS SHALL BE PAINTED BLACK.THE RRFB SHALL BE MANUFACTURED BY CARMANAH TECHNOLOGIES CORP., MODELR920 OR EQUAL.RECTANGULAR RAPID FLASHING BEACONCROSSWALK PLANQUANTITY1THE QUANTITIES LISTED ABOVE ARE APPROXIMATE AND ARE FURNISHED FORINFORMATION ONLY. MISCELLANEOUS (UNLISTED) WIRE, CABLE, HARDWARE ETC., AREREQUIRED TO PROVIDE FOR A FUNCTIONING RECTANGULAR RAPID FLASHING BEACON.LIGHT BARSRRFB INTERFACE / CONTROLLER / ENERGY MGMT. SYSTEMACCESSIBLE PUSH BUTTON ASSEMBLIES42LIST OF MAJOR EQUIPMENTITEM 900.620 SPECIAL PROVISION (RECTANGULAR RAPID FLASHING BEACON, BASE BID)ORITEM 900.620 SPECIAL PROVISION (RECTANGULAR RAPID FLASHING BEACON, BID ALTERNATE)RRFB POLES & FOUNDATIONS2LIST OF MAJOR EQUIPMENTSOLAR PANELS / BATTERIES2PEDESTRIAN CROSSING WARNING SIGNS(W11-2) 30" x 30", FYG COLOR, INSTALLBACK TO BACKDIAGONAL ARROW SIGNS (W16-7P),24" x 12", FYG COLOR (ARROW TOPOINT TO CROSSING). INSTALLBACK TO BACKACCESSIBLE PEDESTRIAN PUSH BUTTON ASSEMBLY, INSTALLON SIDEWALK SIDE OF POLE, PUSH BUTTON FACE TO BEPARALLEL WITH CROSSWALK WITH ARROW POINTINGTOWARDS THE CROSSWALK. PUSH BUTTON ASSEMBLY TOBE PROVIDED WITH A 9" x 12" R10-25 SIGN. PAYMENTINCIDENTAL TO ITEM 900.620 SPECIAL PROVISION(RECTANGULAR RAPID FLASHING BEACON, SCHOOL ST, BASEBID) OR ITEM 900.620 SPECIAL PROVISION (RECTANGULARRAPID FLASHING BEACON, SCHOOL ST, BID ALTERNATE)SOLAR PANEL WITH INTEGRATEDRRFB CONTROLLER, BATTERIES ANDRADIO TRANSMITTER/ANTENNAGENERAL SPECIFICATIONS1.01 ALL WORK SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE 2011 VERMONT AGENCYOF TRANSPORTATION STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR CONSTRUCTION,THE MANUAL ON UNIFORM TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES (MUTCD), ANDTHESE PLANS.1.02 THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT ALL UTILITIES BEFORE EXCAVATIONTO VERIFY THE LOCATION OF ANY UNDERGROUND LINES. THECONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY "DIGSAFE" AT 811 PRIOR TO ANYEXCAVATION.1.03 CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY THE EXACT LOCATIONS OF EXISTINGUTILITIES AND SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY DAMAGE TO ANY UTILITY,PUBLIC OR PRIVATE, SHOWN HEREON.1.04 ANY SURFACES, LINES OR STRUCTURES WHICH HAVE BEEN DAMAGED BYTHE CONTRACTOR'S OPERATIONS SHALL BE RESTORED TO THECONDITION AT LEAST EQUAL TO THAT IN WHICH THEY WERE FOUNDIMMEDIATELY PRIOR TO THE BEGINNING OF CONSTRUCTION.1.05 L&D WAIVES ANY AND ALL RESPONSIBILITY AND LIABILITY FOR PROBLEMSTHAT MAY ARISE FROM FAILURE TO FOLLOW THESE PLANS ANDSPECIFICATIONS AND THE DESIGN INTENT THAT THEY CONVEY, ANYCHANGES MADE IN THE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS OR IN THECONSTRUCTION OF THE PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS WITHOUT L&D'SPRIOR KNOWLEDGE AND CONSENT, AND/OR FAILURE TO SCHEDULEOBSERVATION OF THE WORK AND TESTING IN PROGRESS.1.06 THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR DEMOLITION ANDREMOVAL OF EXISTING SIGNAL EQUIPMENT STRUCTURES, VEGETATIONAND PAVEMENT NECESSARY TO CONSTRUCT THE PROPOSED TRAFFICSIGNAL MODIFICATIONS. UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED ON THE PLANS, ALLSALVAGED AND UNUSED TRAFFIC SIGNAL EQUIPMENT SHALL BERETURNED TO THE CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON PUBLIC WORKS DEPT.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE ALL EXCESS MATERIAL, DEBRIS ANDTRASH FROM THE SITE UPON COMPLETION OF CONSTRUCTION.PROJECT SCHEDULING & COORDINATION2.01 TO ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH THE PLAN(S), THE CONTRACTOR SHALLNOTIFY THE CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON PUBLIC WORKS DEPT. ANDTHE RESIDENT ENGINEER 24 HOURS IN ADVANCE OF STARTING ANYWORK, CUTTING THE PAVEMENT, BEGINNING THE INSTALLATION OF ANYSIGNAL EQUIPMENT, SIGNAL OPERATION MODIFICATIONS AND FINALINSPECTION.2.02 THE WORK PERFORMED AS PART OF THE PROPOSED TRAFFIC SIGNALMODIFICATIONS SHALL BE CLOSELY COORDINATED ANDPRE-SCHEDULED WITH THE CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON PUBLICWORKS DEPT.2.03 EXISTING TRAFFIC SIGNAL EQUIPMENT SHALL BE USED TO PROVIDETEMPORARY TRAFFIC SIGNALS AS SHOWN ON THESE PLANS UNTILSUCH TIME AS THE NEW TRAFFIC SIGNALS ARE MADE OPERATIONAL.PEDESTRIAN PUSH BUTTON SPECIFICATIONS3.01 PUSH BUTTON FACES ARE TO BE PARALLEL WITH THE CROSSWALKTHEY ARE SERVING.3.02 THE PUSH BUTTON ARROW SHALL POINT TOWARDS THE CROSSWALK.3.03 WHEN TWO PUSH BUTTONS ARE LOCATED ON ONE POLE WITH LESSTHEN 10 FOOT SEPARATION, THE WALK INDICATION SHALL BE A SPEECHMESSAGE, NOT JUST A TONE.PRELIMINARYNOT FORCONSTRUCTION3???GZJ?%55)%&URVVZDON3ODQGZJ30 2DateSheet numberScaleCheckedDrawnDesignSurvey Project No.Lamoureux & DickinsonConsulting Engineers, Inc.14 Morse Drive, Essex, VT 05452802-878-4450 www.LDengineering.com11-29-2016RDBHRDOthers14145O'Brien Home FarmKennedy Drive South Burlington, VTNew Crosswalk & RRFBTypical DetailsNTS24" PAINTED WHITE STRIPE EDGE OF ROADWAYPAVEMENTEDGE OF ROADWAYPAVEMENTLCPAINTED BLOCK PATTERN CROSSWALK DETAIL8'SIDEWALKBIKE PATHDETECTABLE WARNING SURFACEON CROSSWALK RAMP, TYPICALBOTH SIDES6" TYPE III BITUMINOUS CONCRETE PAVEMENTPLACED & COMPACTED IN 2" LIFTS. TOP LIFTTO OVERLAP JOINT BELOW. PAID UNDER ITEM900.680 SPECIAL PROVISION (BITUMINOUSCONCRETE PAVEMENT, HAND PLACED)TYPICAL CONCRETE CURB SECTIONTYPE B CONCRETE CURBEXISTINGPAVEMENTEXISTINGGRAVELSUBBASES=1/3"/FT.18"7" OR MATCH EXISTINGCURB REVEALCLEAN AND COAT ALL JOINTS AND SURFACESWITH EMULSIFIED ASPHALT PRIOR TO PAVINGCRUSHED GRAVELSUBBASE,COARSE GRADED24"4" TOPSOIL, TYP.VARIES(18" MIN.)NTSPAYMENT FOR EXCAVATION INCIDENTAL TO ITEM 616.28. AN EXCAVATIONALLOWANCE OF 0.22 CY/LF OF NEW CURB IS INCLUDED IN ITEM 616.28.PAYMENT FOR SUBBASE PAID AS ITEM 301.25.2" x 12" COLD PLANEEXISTING PAVEMENT18"7"24"10"T A P E R1/2" RADIUSFINISH GRADEINSTALL AT ALL ENDS OF NEW CONCRETE CURB SECTIONS(NOT FOR SIDEWALK RAMPS)CONCRETE CURB END TAPERNTSNTSSIDEWALK RAMPC5'-6"GRASSSTRIPBMIN.CAND CURB.SINGLE RAMP ON CORNERRADIUS, NARROW GRASSSTRIP BETWEEN SIDEWALKA5'-6"MIN.SINGLE RAMP ON TANGENT,NARROW OR NO GRASS STRIPABCBCONCRETE CURBACGRASSSTRIPAB8.3%MAXIMUMCURB TRANSITIONSection C-C5'-6"MIN. WIDTHSection B-BSection A-ACONCRETE CURB2'8.3%MAX.RAMPAUXILIARY8.3%MAX.AUXILIARYRAMPCURBSIDEWALK RAMP1/4" REVEAL EDGE OF PAVEMENTROADWAY SURFACECONCRETE CURB24"DETECTABLEWARNING SURFACESIDEWALK RAMP WITHBROOM FINISH SURFACESIDEWALKRAMP WITHBROOMFINISHSURFACEDETECTABLEWARNINGSURFACE2 4"SIDEWALK RAMP WITHDETECTABLE WARNINGSURFACENOTE: THE TYPE, COLOR AND MANUFACTURER OF THEDETECTABLE WARNING SURFACE SHALL BE APPROVEDBY THE TOWN AND OWNER.4" TOPSOIL, TYP.8" CRUSHED GRAVEL SUBBASE ,COARSE GRADEDMATCH EXISTINGGRADE1441S=0.02(MAX.)CONCRETE SIDEWALK, 5 INCH5'-0"6"1. SIDEWALK AND COLORED/TEXTURED CONCRETE SHALL BE CAST IN 100 FTSECTIONS. THERE WILL BE NO EXPANSION JOINTS. CONNECTION TO EXISTINGSIDEWALK AND BETWEEN 100 FT SECTIONS SHALL BE ACCOMPLISHED UTILIZING 18"X 5/8" SMOOTH STEEL (GRADE 60) DOWELS PLACED 12" ON CENTER (4 DOWELS FORA 5 FT WIDE SIDEWALK) CENTERED AT SIDEWALK JOINTS. DOWELS SHALL BEINSTALLED TO ALLOW LONGITUDINAL EXPANSION AND CONTRACTION AT THE JOINT.THE SIDEWALK SHALL BE GROOVED WITH A FALSE JOINT EVERY 5 FT.2. PAYMENT FOR ALL DOWELS AND INSTALLATION SHALL BE INCIDENTAL TO ITEM900.675 SPECIAL PROVISION (COLORED, TEXTURED CONCRETE) AND THEPORTLAND CEMENT CONCRETE SIDEWALK ITEMS.3. UPON PLACEMENT OF THE CONCRETE, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL APPLY ACONCRETE CURING / SEALING COMPOUND. THE COMPOUND SHALL BE ON THEVTRANS PRE-APPROVED PRODUCTS LIST. THE COMPOUND SHALL BE APPLIED PERMANUFACTURER'S SPECIFICATIONS. PAYMENT WILL BE UNDER ITEM 514.10.THE DIFFERENCE IN COST BETWEEN TREATING THE SIDEWALK WITH THESTANDARD VTRANS APPROVED CURING COMPOUND AND CERT1-VEX AC 1315, ASMANUFACTURED BY VEXON CHEMICALS, INC., SHALL BE PAID AS NON-PARTICIPATING UNDER ITEM 900.645 SPECIAL PROVISION (ALTERNATE CONCRETECURING COMPOUND, ADDITIONAL COST).SIDEWALK CONSTRUCTION NOTESTYPICAL CONCRETE SIDEWALK SECTION18" X 58"Ø SMOOTH STEEL DOWELS PLACED 12" O.C.BETWEN 100' SECTIONS AND AT ALL JOINTS WITHEXISTING SIDEWALKS. EPOXY DOWELS INTOEXISTING CONCRETE.NTSPRELIMINARYNOT FORCONSTRUCTION3???GZJ?%55)%'HWDLOVGZJ30 1 inch = 100 ft.(in feet)GRAPHIC SCALE100 050100200 400Pavement Marking &Traffic Signage Plan11" = 100'CBADateSheet numberScaleCheckedDrawnDesignSurvey Project No.Lamoureux & DickinsonConsulting Engineers, Inc.14 Morse Drive, Essex, VT 05452802-878-4450 www.LDengineering.com03-20-2017RDBHRDOthers14145O'Brien Home FarmKennedy Drive South Burlington, VTDPRELIMINARYNOT FORCONSTRUCTION3???GZJ?WUDIILFFRQWUROGZJ30 10' LEFT TURN LANEKennedy Drive ModificationsNew Left-Turn Lane @ City Road 'B'11" = 30'DateSheet numberScaleCheckedDrawnDesignSurvey Project No.Lamoureux & DickinsonConsulting Engineers, Inc.14 Morse Drive, Essex, VT 05452802-878-4450 www.LDengineering.com03-21-17RDBHRDOthers14145O'Brien Home FarmKennedy Drive South Burlington, VT1 inch = 30 ft.(in feet)GRAPHIC SCALE30 0 15 30 60 120PAVEMENT MARKING LEGENDNEW DOUBLE 4" SOLID YELLOW LINEDC B NEW CROSSWALK MARKINGNEW 4" SOLID WHITE LINENEW 24" SOLID WHITE STOPBARA E NEW LETTER OR SYMBOLFNEW 4" DOTTED WHITE LINEGNEW 4" DASHED WHITE LINEHINEW 6" SOLID YELLOW LINENEW 4" SOLID YELLOW LINEȭCROSS SECTION A-ANTSEXISTING SIDEWALKEXISTINGBIKEPATHEXISTING CONCRETE CURBSLOPE=1/4IN/FTSLOPE=1/4IN/FT25.5'25.5'10' TRAVEL LANE10' TRAVEL LANE10' TRAVEL LANE10' TRAVEL LANEEXISTING CONCRETE CURB6"6"COLD PLANE EXISTING PAVEMENT 112"& PLACE 112" TYPE IV BITUMINOUSCONCRETE PAVEMENT OVERLAY5% MAX. 5% MAX.2% MAX.8.3% MAX.BIKE PATH RAMP DETAILNTSNEW 5" CAST-IN-PLACE CONCRETESIDEWALK RAMP WITHDETECTABLE WARNING STRIPNEW 2" TYPE IV BITUMINOUSCONCRETE BIKE PATH RAMPVARIES5'VARIESEXISTINGBIKE PATHREMOVE & RESET EXISTING GRANITE CURBTO CREATE NEW RAMP WITH 0" REVEALPRELIMINARYNOT FORCONSTRUCTION3???GZJ?$.HQQHG\'ULYH3ODQ 6HFWLRQGZJ30 Traffic Signal Plan2As NotedDateSheet numberScaleCheckedDrawnDesignSurvey Project No.Lamoureux & DickinsonConsulting Engineers, Inc.14 Morse Drive, Essex, VT 05452802-878-4450 www.LDengineering.com03-21-17RDBHRDOthers14145O'Brien Home FarmKennedy Drive South Burlington, VT2"2-1/2"WIRED CONDUITFROM TODESCRIPTION-ELECTRICAL SERVICE100'TRAFFIC SIGNAL LEGEND4DZ - 1VIDEO DETECTION ZONE TRAFFIC SIGNAL HEADJUNCTION BOXWIRED CONDUITSIGNAL CONTROLLERMAST ARM POLECONDUIT SLEEVECAMERA FOR VIDEODETECTIONCONDUIT SCHEDULESTREET LIGHTINGJUNCTION BOX #18'JUNCTION BOX #170'12'JUNCTION BOX #315'SIGNAL WIRINGSIGNAL WIRINGJUNCTION BOX #3 JUNCTION BOX #48'SIGNAL WIRINGSTREET LIGHTINGNOTE:NEW SLEEVES MAY BE INSTALLED BY OPEN CUT EXCAVATION. PEARL ST REPORTEDLY HAS A20-22 FT WIDE X 8" THICK REINFORCED CEMENT CONCRETE PAVEMENT CENTERED IN THEROADWAY. SAW CUT & REMOVE OVER NEW SLEEVE. REPLACE WITH NEW TYPE II BITUMINOUSCONCRETE PAVEMENT WITH 12" MIN. DENSE GRADED CRUSHED STONE SUBBASE. MATCHEXISTING BITUMINOUS CONCRETE PAVEMENT THICKNESS ABOVE CONCRETE.EQUIPMENT QUANTITY1THE QUANTITIES LISTED ABOVE ARE APPROXIMATE AND AREFURNISHED FOR INFORMATION ONLY. MISCELLANEOUS (UNLISTED)WIRE, CABLE, HARDWARE ETC., ARE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE FOR AFUNCTIONING TRAFFIC SIGNAL SYSTEM.CANTILEVER POLES & FOUNDATIONSLED HAND/MAN PEDESTRIAN COUNTDOWN SIGNAL HEADSACCESSIBLE PEDESTRIAN PUSH BUTTON ASSEMBLIESJUNCTION BOXESLOCAL CONTROLLER1268VEHICLE VIDEO DETECTION SYSTEM CAMERASPEDESTAL POSTS & FOUNDATIONSPHASE 8NEW CITY ROAD 'B'PHASES 2 + 6KENNEDY DRIVE(DWELL)PHASES 1 + 6KENNEDY DRIVE WB LT & TH214442YELLOW CLEARFLASHING OPERATIONMAX 1 GREENRED CLEARVEH. EXTENSION44??2??2326326Signal Phasing PlanFR??6224MAX 2 GREEN??????LEADING PEDESTRIAN INTERVAL6NEMA DUAL RING / FULL ACTUATED PHASINGMAX 3 GREENList of Major EquipmentSignal Timing Data??????--FYWEEKDAYS SATURDAYSUNDAY HOLIDAYSTIMETOD PLAN7:00 - 9:00 amAM PEAKMID-DAY3:00 - 6:00 pmPM PEAKCYCLE (sec.)608181MAX 1MAX 3MAX 2MAX 3MAX 2MAX 2MAX 2MAX 2MAX 2OFF PEAK 60 MAX 2 MAX 2 MAX 2 MAX 210:00 am - 2:00 pmOFFSET (sec.)????????REMAINDER OF DAY3-SECTION5-SECTION5-12" POLYCARBONATE TRAFFIC SIGNALHEADS WITH TUNNEL VISORS &MOUNTING HARDWARE (ALL LED)MASTER CONTROLLERGROUND MOUNT SIGNAL CONTROLLER CABINET1-WALK44-FLASHING DON'T WALK1110 -MIN. GREEN (W/O PED)MIN. GREEN (W/ PED) 1415-NTS55" P44 GROUND MOUNTSIGNAL CABINETCONCRETE BASE18" HIGH ALUMINUM SPACERGROUND MOUNT CABINET DETAILCONTROLLER CABINETCONTROLLER CABINETJUNCTION BOX #2JUNCTION BOX #2CANTILEVER POLE #1PEDESTRIAN POLE #1JUNCTION BOX #3PHASE 8NEW CITY ROAD 'B'PHASES 2 + 6KENNEDY DRIVE(DWELL)PHASES 1 + 6KENNEDY DRIVEWB LT & TH24" X 24" LED NO RIGHT TURN ONRED SIGN WITH INTEGRAL HOOD1 inch = 10 ft.(in feet)GRAPHIC SCALE10 051020 4012'JUNCTION BOX #2CANTILEVER POLE #168'SIGNAL WIRINGCANTILEVER POLE #2JUNCTION BOX #4JUNCTION BOX #4JUNCTION BOX #1CONTROLLER CABINETSIGNAL WIRING8'JUNCTION BOX #1JUNCTION BOX #270'SIGNAL WIRINGSTREET LIGHTINGSTREET LIGHTINGJUNCTION BOX #3CONTROLLER CABINETJUNCTION BOX #3CONTROLLER CABINETSIGNAL WIRING10'STREET LIGHTING10'68'8'CANTILEVER POLE #2JUNCTION BOX #4STREET LIGHTINGPRELIMINARYNOT FORCONSTRUCTION3???GZJ?$6LJQDO3ODQGZJ30 Cantilever Pole Sections31" = 5'DateSheet numberScaleCheckedDrawnDesignSurvey Project No.Lamoureux & DickinsonConsulting Engineers, Inc.14 Morse Drive, Essex, VT 05452802-878-4450 www.LDengineering.com03-21-17RDBHRDOthers14145O'Brien Home FarmKennedy Drive South Burlington, VT1 INCH = 5 FT.( IN FEET )NOTE:THE DESIGN OF THE CANTILEVER POLES SHOWN HEREON IS THERESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR AND THE CANTILEVER POLEMANUFACTURER. ALL SIGNAL HEADS AND SIGNS SHOULD BECENTERED VERTICALLY ON THE CANTILEVER ARM. THE CANTILEVERPOLES SHALL BE DESIGNED TO PROVIDE A 17'-0" TO 19'-0" VERTICALCLEARANCE FROM THE PAVEMENT TO THE BOTTOM OF THE SIGNALHEADS (EXCLUDING BACKPLATE). THE SHOP DRAWINGS FOR THECANTILEVER POLES SHALL INCLUDE DETAILED DIMENSIONS(ANGLES, LENGTHS, DEAD LOAD DEFLECTIONS, ETC.) TO DETERMINETHE RESULTING ELEVATIONS OF EACH SIGNAL HEAD.GENERAL SPECIFICATIONS1.01 ALL WORK SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE 2011 VERMONT AGENCYOF TRANSPORTATION STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR CONSTRUCTION,THE MANUAL ON UNIFORM TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES (MUTCD), ANDTHESE PLANS.1.02 THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT ALL UTILITIES BEFORE EXCAVATIONTO VERIFY THE LOCATION OF ANY UNDERGROUND LINES. THECONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY "DIGSAFE" AT 811 PRIOR TO ANYEXCAVATION.1.03 CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY THE EXACT LOCATIONS OF EXISTINGUTILITIES AND SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY DAMAGE TO ANY UTILITY,PUBLIC OR PRIVATE, SHOWN HEREON.1.04 ANY SURFACES, LINES OR STRUCTURES WHICH HAVE BEEN DAMAGED BYTHE CONTRACTOR'S OPERATIONS SHALL BE RESTORED TO THECONDITION AT LEAST EQUAL TO THAT IN WHICH THEY WERE FOUNDIMMEDIATELY PRIOR TO THE BEGINNING OF CONSTRUCTION.1.05 L&D WAIVES ANY AND ALL RESPONSIBILITY AND LIABILITY FOR PROBLEMSTHAT MAY ARISE FROM FAILURE TO FOLLOW THESE PLANS ANDSPECIFICATIONS AND THE DESIGN INTENT THAT THEY CONVEY, ANYCHANGES MADE IN THE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS OR IN THECONSTRUCTION OF THE PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS WITHOUT L&D'SPRIOR KNOWLEDGE AND CONSENT, AND/OR FAILURE TO SCHEDULEOBSERVATION OF THE WORK AND TESTING IN PROGRESS.1.06 THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR DEMOLITION ANDREMOVAL OF EXISTING SIGNAL EQUIPMENT STRUCTURES, VEGETATIONAND PAVEMENT NECESSARY TO CONSTRUCT THE PROPOSED TRAFFICSIGNAL MODIFICATIONS. UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED ON THE PLANS, ALLSALVAGED AND UNUSED TRAFFIC SIGNAL EQUIPMENT SHALL BERETURNED TO THE VILLAGE OF ESSEX JUNCTION PUBLIC WORKS DEPT.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE ALL EXCESS MATERIAL, DEBRIS ANDTRASH FROM THE SITE UPON COMPLETION OF CONSTRUCTION, UNLESSOTHERWISE DIRECTED BY THE RESIDENT ENGINEER.PROJECT SCHEDULING & COORDINATION2.01 TO ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH THE PLAN(S), THE CONTRACTOR SHALLNOTIFY THE CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON'S PUBLIC WORKS DEPT. ANDTHE RESIDENT ENGINEER 24 HOURS IN ADVANCE OF STARTING ANYWORK, CUTTING THE PAVEMENT, BEGINNING THE INSTALLATION OF ANYSIGNAL EQUIPMENT, SIGNAL OPERATION MODIFICATIONS AND FINALINSPECTION.2.02 THE WORK PERFORMED AS PART OF THE PROPOSED TRAFFIC SIGNALMODIFICATIONS SHALL BE CLOSELY COORDINATED ANDPRE-SCHEDULED WITH THE CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON'S PUBLICWORKS DEPT.2.03 EXISTING TRAFFIC SIGNAL EQUIPMENT SHALL BE USED TO PROVIDETEMPORARY TRAFFIC SIGNALS AS SHOWN ON THESE PLANS UNTILSUCH TIME AS THE NEW TRAFFIC SIGNALS ARE MADE OPERATIONAL.PEDESTRIAN PUSH BUTTON SPECIFICATIONS3.01 PUSH BUTTON FACES ARE TO BE PARALLEL WITH THE CROSSWALKTHEY ARE SERVING.3.02 THE PUSH BUTTON ARROW SHALL POINT TOWARDS THE CROSSWALK.3.03 WHEN TWO PUSH BUTTONS ARE LOCATED ON ONE POLE WITH LESSTHEN 10 FOOT SEPARATION, THE WALK INDICATION SHALL BE A SPEECHMESSAGE, NOT JUST A TONE.1 INCH = 5 FT.( IN FEET )1/4"1/4"2'-0" DIA.1'1'5'-0" FOOTING DEPTH2" STEEL CLEARANCE1'WEEP HOLE. INSTALL 1/2" FLEXIBLEPLASTIC CONDUIT FOR #6 AWG SOFTDRAWN COPPER GROUNDCONDUCTOR. CONNECT TO GROUNDELECTRODE WITH STANDARD LOWRESISTANCE NON-FERROUS GROUNDELECTRODE CLAMP.ANCHOR BOLT ORIENTATION MAY VARY(TOED-IN, TOED-OUT OR AS SHOWN) BUTTHERE MUST BE A MINIMUM OF 3" OF COVERAND 3" OF CLEARANCE BETWEEN1/2" CONDUIT FOR GROUNDCONDUCTOR AND WEEP HOLE15" OVERLAP#4 BARS#4 BARS AT 1'-0"VERTICAL SPACING2" SCORE MARK TYPICALALL CONDUIT LOCATIONSCONDUITS - NUMBER,TYPE & SIZE AS REQ'D.POSITION ANCHOR BOLTS TOALLOW MINIMUM CLEARANCE OF1-1/2" TO NEAREST REINFORCINGSTEEL.3" CLEARANCEANCHOR BOLTS4 - #6 BARSELEVATIONSECTIONPEDESTAL POLE REINFORCED CONCRETE FOOTING DETAIL2" SCORE MARK DETAILUSED FOR CONDUITLOCATION IN BOTHCONCRETE & GROUT, SEE"SECTION" DETAIL.CONDUIT(S) - NUMBER,SIZE & TYPE AS REQ'D.3/4" x 24" ANCHOR BOLTS(4 REQ'D.)4 - #6 BARS (4'-6" LONG)24'' UNDER SIDEWALK OR CURB (MIN.)36' UNDER ROADWAY (MIN.)#4 BARS AT 12" VERTICALSPACING, 3" CLEARANCE5/8" X 8' MIN. COPPER CLADGROUND ELECTRODE#6 SOFT DRAWN COPPER GROUNDCONDUCTOR CONNECT TO GROUNDINGLUG IN POLEUSE EDGING TOOL AROUNDTOP OF CONCRETE BASECONDUITS TO EXTEND 2"ABOVE CONCRETE BASENTSPEDESTAL POLE #1SECTION LOOKING WEST3'-6"TOP OF POLE FOUNDATIONMATCH FINISH GRADEACCESSIBLE PEDESTRIAN PUSHBUTTON ASSEMBLIES10'4" Ø PEDESTAL POLE (412" O.D.) & CAPCOUNT-DOWN LED PEDESTRIANSIGNAL HEADS. CLAM-SHELLDIRECT MOUNT TO POLE.OCTAGONAL BASE1" = 2'7'PRELIMINARYNOT FORCONSTRUCTION3???GZJ?$&DQWLOHYHU6HFWLRQVGZJ30 Cantilever Pole Details4DateSheet numberScaleCheckedDrawnDesignSurvey Project No.Lamoureux & DickinsonConsulting Engineers, Inc.14 Morse Drive, Essex, VT 05452802-878-4450 www.LDengineering.com03-21-17RDBHRDOthers14145O'Brien Home FarmKennedy Drive South Burlington, VTROUNDED EDGE INSIDE9/16" O HOLES (TYP.)ANCHOR BOLT DETAILSIZEL (IN.)T (IN.)425484968999L6"T1/4"1/4"(SPREAD FOOTINGS OR PILES ARE OPTIONAL)1'-0"1'-0"FOOTING DEPTH2" STEEL CLEARANCE1'BCSFTPWEEP HOLE - INSTALL 12" Ø FLEXIBLE PLASTICCONDUIT FOR #6 AWG SOFT DRAWN COPPERGROUND CONDUCTOR. CONNECT TO GROUNDELECTRODE WITH STANDARD LOW RESISTANCENON-FERROUS GROUND ELECTRODE CLAMP.114" Ø BLIND HALF COUPLINGWIRE OUTLETS (TYP.)ANCHOR BOLT ORIENTATION MAY VARY(TOED-IN, TOED-OUT OR AS SHOWN) BUTTHERE MUST BE A MINIMUM OF 3" OFCOVER AND 3" OF CLEARANCE BETWEEN12" Ø CONDUIT FORGROUND CONDUCTOR2" SCORE MARK TYPICALALL CONDUIT LOCATIONS2" MIN. I. D. CONDUITPOSITION ANCHOR BOLTS TO ALLOWMINIMUM CLEARANCE OF 112" TO NEARESTREINFORCING STEEL.3" CLEARANCEANCHOR BOLTSELEVATIONANCHOR BOLT DETAILSECTIONCANTILEVER POLE FOOTING DETAIL2" SCORE MARK DETAILPOLE PENETRATION DETAILPOLE BASE / BASE PLATEDETAILUSED FOR CONDUIT LOCATION, SEE"SECTION" DETAIL.2" MIN. I. D. ELECTRICALCONDUIT(S) AS REQUIREDANCHOR BOLTS. SEE DETAILAND CHART AT LEFT24" UNDER SIDEWALK OR CURB (MIN)36" UNDER ROADWAY (MIN)58" Ø X 8' MIN. COPPER CLADGROUND ELECTRODE.END DETAIL 2" ØANCHOR BOLT ONLY114" TO 134" Ø BOLT4" x 4" x 1" PLATEINTERRUPTED THREADS#6 SOFT DRAWN COPPER GROUND CONDUCTORCONNECT TO GROUNDING LUG IN POLE4" GROUT PLACED AFTER POLE IS PLUMBEDIN BOTH CONCRETEAND GROUTALL SUPPORT BRACKETSARE TO BE GALVANIZEDL 312" x 212" x 516" OR Z 4" x 3" x 14"SIGN ON SINGLEMAST ARMEQUAL TO SIGN HEIGHTTHE CANTILEVER POLE FOOTING DETAIL AND POLEBASE / BASE PLATE DETAIL SHOWN ON THIS PAGEHAVE BEEN PROVIDED TO SHOW CERTAIN MINIMUMDIMENSIONAL AND INSTALLATION REQUIREMENTS.IT IS THE CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITY TO HAVETHE CANTILEVER POLES AND THEIR FOUNDATIONSDESIGNED BY A STRUCTURAL ENGINEER LICENSEDIN THE STATE OF VERMONT.SIGN BRACKET DETAILSMINIMUM DIMENSION -EDGE OF BOLT HOLE TOEDGE OF BASE PLATE =ANCHOR BOLTDIAMETERSEEDETAILAT RIGHTBOLT CIRCLEALIGN POLE BASE 90° TO MAST ARMGROUND WIRES SHALLBE CONNECTED TO THEGROUNDING LUGINSIDE THE HANDHOLEACCESS4" X 612" HANDHOLEFRAME WITH COVER (TYP.EACH POLE) - PLACE ONSIDE OF POLE AWAYFROM APPROACHINGTRAFFICNUTS UNDER POLEBASE FOR PLUMBADJUSTMENTTOP OF FOOTING4" GROUTFOOTINGDIAMETER58" Ø U-BOLT138" TYP.CONDUITS TO EXTEND 2"ABOVE BASE GROUT114" Ø x 48"112" Ø x 60"134" x 90"2" x 96"PRELIMINARYNOT FORCONSTRUCTION3???GZJ?$&DQWLOHYHU'HWDLOVGZJ30 Traffic Signal Specifications5DateSheet numberScaleCheckedDrawnDesignSurvey Project No.Lamoureux & DickinsonConsulting Engineers, Inc.14 Morse Drive, Essex, VT 05452802-878-4450 www.LDengineering.com03-21-17RDBHRDOthers14145O'Brien Home FarmKennedy Drive South Burlington, VTCANTILEVER MAST ARM POLE SPECIFICATIONSGENERAL SPECIFICATIONS1.01 THIS PROJECT INVOLVES THE INSTALLATION OF REPLACEMENT TRAFFIC SIGNAL SYSTEMS AT THEPEARL ST/POST OFFICE SQUARE AND PEARL ST/SO. SUMMIT ST INTERSECTIONS IN THE CITY OF SOUTHBURLINGTON.1.02 ALL WORK AND MATERIALS SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE 2011 VERMONT AGENCY OFTRANSPORTATION STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR CONSTRUCTION, THE MANUAL ON UNIFORMTRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES, THE CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON'S PUBLIC WORKS STANDARDS ANDTHESE PLANS.1.03 THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT ALL UTILITIES BEFORE EXCAVATION TO VERIFY THE LOCATION OFANY UNDERGROUND LINES. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY "DIGSAFE" AT 811 PRIOR TO ANYEXCAVATION. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY THE EXACT LOCATIONS OF EXISTING UTILITIES ANDSHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY DAMAGE TO ANY UTILITY, PUBLIC OR PRIVATE, SHOWN HEREON.1.04 ANY SURFACES, LINES, OR STRUCTURES WHICH HAVE BEEN DAMAGED BY THE CONTRACTOR'SOPERATIONS SHALL BE RESTORED TO THE CONDITION AT LEAST EQUAL TO THAT IN WHICH THEY WEREFOUND IMMEDIATELY PRIOR TO THE BEGINNING OF OPERATIONS.1.05 L&D WAIVES ANY AND ALL RESPONSIBILITY AND LIABILITY FOR PROBLEMS THAT MAY ARISE FROM:FAILURE TO FOLLOW THESE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND THE DESIGN INTENT THAT THEY CONVEY,ANY CHANGES MADE IN THE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS OR IN THE CONSTRUCTION OF THEPROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS WITHOUT L&D'S PRIOR KNOWLEDGE AND CONSENT, AND/OR FAILURE TOSCHEDULE OBSERVATION OF THE WORK AND TESTING IN PROGRESS.1.06 THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR DEMOLITION AND REMOVAL OF EXISTING SIGNALEQUIPMENT STRUCTURES, VEGETATION AND PAVEMENT NECESSARY TO CONSTRUCT THE PROJECT,UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED ON THE PLANS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE ALL EXCESS MATERIAL,DEBRIS AND TRASH FROM THE SITE ON A DAILY BASIS, UNLESS OTHERWISE DIRECTED BY THERESIDENT ENGINEER.1.07 TO ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH THE PLAN(S), THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY THE RESIDENTENGINEER AND THE CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON'S PUBLIC WORKS DEPT. 24 HOURS IN ADVANCE OFSTARTING ANY WORK, CUTTING THE PAVEMENT, BEGINNING THE INSTALLATION OF ANY SIGNALEQUIPMENT, START-UP OF SIGNAL OPERATION AND FINAL INSPECTION.2.01 ALL MATERIALS AND CONSTRUCTION SHALL CONFORM TO THE STATE OF VERMONT AGENCY OFTRANSPORTATION'S "STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR CONSTRUCTION", DATED 2011.2.02 OVERHEAD SIGN/SIGNAL SUPPORTS SHALL CONFORM TO "STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FORSTRUCTURAL SUPPORTS FOR HIGHWAY SIGNS, LUMINAIRES, AND TRAFFIC SIGNALS ", AASHTO, DATED2009 OR ITS LATEST REVISION.2.03 ADDITIONAL DESIGN CRITERIA ARE AS FOLLOWS:CONCRETE 28-DAY COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH (f'c) = 3,500 PSI,REINFORCING STEEL MAX. ALLOWABLE STRESS (fs) = 24,000 PSI (GRADE 60),FOOTING SOIL PRESSURE = 3,000 PSF (MAXIMUM),WIND LOAD AND ICE LOAD PER ABOVE REFERENCED AASHTO STANDARDS,FATIGUE DESIGN FOR CATEGORY II MAJOR ROADWAY PER ABOVE REFERENCED AASHTO STANDARDS.2.04 ANCHOR BOLTS - FOUR STAINLESS STEEL ANCHOR BOLTS WITH TWO HEXAGON NUTS, ONE WASHERAND ONE LOCK WASHER PER BOLT SHALL BE FURNISHED WITH EACH POLE. SEE SUBSECTION 714.09.2.05 FLANGE BOLTS - ALL FLANGE BOLTS AND HEX NUTS SHALL BE HIGH STRENGTH STEEL AND SHALLCONFORM TO ASTM A325. THE FLANGE BOLTS SHALL BE CAPABLE OF RESISTING 133% OF THE FULLDESIGN STRESS OF THE TUBE AT ITS YIELD STRENGTH STRESS.2.06 HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL MEMBERS - STEEL TUBES SHALL BE FORMED AND WELDED WITH ONECONTINUOUS LONGITUDINAL WELD ONLY. AFTER FORMING AND WELDING THEY SHALL BE COLDROLLED TO ENSURE UNIFORMITY OF SIZE AND SMOOTHNESS OF WELD. THEY SHALL HAVE A MINIMUMYIELD STRENGTH OF 55 KSI. THERE SHALL BE NO TRANSVERSE WELDING EXCEPT AT THE FLANGECONNECTIONS AND POLE BASE PLATES, WHERE THE TUBES SHALL TELESCOPE THE FLANGES ANDPLATES AND BE CONTINUOUSLY WELDED BOTH SIDES INSIDE AND OUT TO WITHSTAND THE FULLTRANSFER OF THE BENDING STRENGTH TO THE BOLTS. OPTIONALLY, THE MEMBERS MAY BE A SERIESOF TWO OR THREE DIFFERENT DIAMETER PIPES WELDED TOGETHER.2.07 GALVANIZING - ALL STEEL COMPONENTS, EXCEPT CONCRETE REINFORCING AND STAINLESS STEELHARDWARE, ARE TO BE HOT DIPPED GALVANIZED AFTER FABRICATION. THE ASSEMBLIES SHALL BEDESIGNED AND FABRICATED TO PERMIT GALVANIZING ON ALL INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR SURFACES ANDSHALL BE FREE OF POCKETS AND OTHER STRUCTURAL OBSTRUCTIONS THAT WILL NOT PERMITPROPER DEPOSITION OF ZINC COATING. GALVANIZING SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM A123AND A153.2.08 WELDINGA. ALL DESIGN DETAILS, WORKMANSHIP, PROCEDURES AND INSPECTION SHALL CONFORM WITHSUBSECTION 506.10.B. ALL WELDS SHALL BE AT LEAST AS STRONG AS THE MATERIAL(S) BEING WELDED.2.09 FOOTINGSA. FOOTINGS SHALL BE DESIGNED IN ACCORDANCE WITH VTRANS MATERIALS & RESEARCHENGINEERING INSTRUCTIONS - GEOTECHNICAL DESIGN PROCEDURES FOR MAST ARM ANDOVERHEAD SIGN SUPPORT FOUNDATIONS, DATED MARCH 9, 2010.B. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PERFORM A SOIL BORING AT EACH NEW MAST ARM AND/OR SIGNAL POLELOCATION, AND SHALL PREPARE A PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL REPORT IN ACCORDANCE WITHSECTION 4.0 OF THE ABOVE REFERENCED VTRANS GEOTECHNICAL DESIGN PROCEDURES.C. FOUNDATIONS SHALL BE DESIGNED TO RESIST LOADS EQUAL TO, OR GREATER THAN, THE MAXIMUMLOADS THAT THE POLE(S) ARE DESIGNED FOR.D. THREE TYPES OF FOUNDATIONS, AS OUTLINED IN AASHTO STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS (SEE NOTE1.02) SECTION 13 SHALL BE ALLOWED:1. DRILLED SHAFTS2. SPREAD FOOTINGS3. PILESE. DRILLED SHAFT FOOTINGS SHALL BE POURED IN DRILLED SHAFTS AGAINST UNDISTURBEDMATERIAL. THE TOP TWO FEET OF SOIL SHALL BE NEGLECTED FOR DESIGN PURPOSES.F. AS AN ALTERNATIVE TO THE DRILLED HOLES, FOOTINGS MAY BE POURED IN EXCAVATED HOLESUSING THE PROPER FORMS, WHICH MUST BE REMOVED. THE EXCAVATED HOLES SHALL BE ATLEAST TWO FEET CLEAR OF THE FOOTING. THE BACKFILL MATERIAL SHALL BE COMPACTED ASDESCRIBED IN SUBSECTION 204.12. DESIGN LIMITS AS FOR AUGURED FOOTINGS APPLY.G. WHEN THE DESIGN DEPTH OF A FOOTING CANNOT BE OBTAINED DUE TO UNFORESEEN FIELDCONDITIONS, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY THE ENGINEER AND OBTAIN A REVISED FOOTINGDETAIL FROM THE ENGINEER.H. ANY BACKFILL PLACED ADJACENT TO THE FOOTING SHALL BE GRANULAR MATERIAL MEETING THEREQUIREMENTS FOR GRANULAR BACKFILL FOR STRUCTURES, SUBSECTION 704.08. CONCRETE FORFOOTING SHALL CONFORM TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF CONCRETE, CLASS B, SECTION 501,STRUCTURAL CONCRETE. GROUT MATERIAL SHALL BE NON-SHRINKING MORTAR CONFORMING TOSUBSECTION 707.03 (MORTAR TYPE IV).I. THE TRAFFIC SIGNAL CANTILEVER MAST ARM POLES SHALL BE BACKRAKED BEFORE THE SIGNALSARE INSTALLED SO THAT THE POLES WILL BE PLUMB WHEN DEAD LOAD DEFLECTION DUE TO SIGNALHEADS OCCURS. THE AMOUNT OF BACKRAKE SHALL BE AS SHOWN ON THE PLANS. SIGNALS/SIGNSSHALL BE MOUNTED AND LEVELED AND POLES SHALL BE BACKRAKED PRIOR TO PLACING GROUTUNDER POLE BASE.2.10 SHOP DRAWINGS (3 COPIES OF EACH OR ELECTRONICALLY IN PDF FORMAT) SHALL BE SUBMITTED TOTHE RESIDENT ENGINEER FOR APPROVAL PRIOR TO FABRICATION. THE SHOP DRAWINGS SHALLINCLUDE THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION:A. DETAILED DRAWING OF EACH COMPONENT OF THE STRUCTURE.B. MATERIAL SPECIFICATIONS FOR EACH COMPONENT OF THE STRUCTURE, EITHER BY COMPLETESPECIFICATION OR REFERENCE TO APPLICABLE ASTM STANDARDS.C. NOTATION OF PROJECT NAME, PROJECT NUMBER, ROUTE NUMBER, AND STRUCTURE STATIONING(TO BE INCLUDED ON EACH SHEET).D. DETAILS FOR LOCATION OF SIGNS/SIGNALS AND ATTACHMENT HARDWARE FOR THE SUPPORTSTRUCTURE.E. ALL ELEVATION AND DIMENSIONS NECESSARY TO PROVIDE A COM PLETE SET OF RECORD PLANS.F. DEAD LOAD DEFLECTION AND CAMBER INFORMATION.G. WELDING DETAILS AND PROCEDURES ARE REQUIRED FOR ALL WELDS. PROCEDURES SHALL BESUBMITTED FOR APPROVAL WITH REFERENCE TO EACH WELD IDENTIFIED ON THE SHOP DRAWINGS.(SEE SUB-SECTION 506.10).2.11 EACH OVERHEAD TRAFFIC SIGNAL/SIGN SUPPORT SHALL BE GROUNDED. THE GROUND SHALLCONSIST OF:A) AN INTERNAL GROUND LUG OPPOSITE THE HAND HOLE.B) A #6 (MIN.) SOFT DRAWN COPPER GROUNDING ELECTRODE CONDUCTOR.C) A 5/8" X 8' (MIN.) COPPER CLAD GROUNDING ELECTRODE. THE RESISTANCE TO GROUND SHALL BE25 OHMS OR LESS. ADDITIONAL GROUNDING ELECTRODES MAY BE REQUIRED (MINIMUM SPACINGSHALL BE 6'). WHEN A POWER SERVICE, METER AND DISCONNECT ARE ATTACHED TO A POLE,THERE SHALL BE A CONTINUOUS GROUND WIRE FROM THE METER AND DISCONNECT WHICH MAYRUN INTERNAL TO THE UPRIGHT, THROUGH THE 1/2" FLEXIBLE TUBING IN THE CONCRETE BASE TOTHE REQUIRED GROUNDING ELECTRODE(S). THE GROUND WIRE FROM THE POLE GROUNDING LUG,CONTROLLER CABINET AND/OR LUMINAIRE MAY ATTACH TO THIS CONTINUOUS GROUNDINGELECTRODE CONDUCTOR FROM THE SERVICE METER AND DISCONNECT. THE CONTRACTOR SHALLPERFORM A RESISTANCE TO GROUND TEST ON THE CONTINUOUS GROUNDING ELECTRODECONDUCTOR FROM THE SERVICE METER AND DISCONNECT AND PROVIDE A WRITTEN STATEMENTTO THE AREA ELECTRICAL INSPECTOR THAT THE GROUNDING ELECTRODE CONDUCTOR ISCONTINUOUS FROM THE SERVICE METER AND DISCONNECT AND THE RESISTANCE TO GROUND IS 25OHMS OR LESS.2.12 THE COST OF SIGNAL/SIGN SUPPORTS, INCLUDING ALL HARDWARE, SIGN BRACKETS, FOOTING ANDLUMINAIRE ARMS SHALL BE INCLUDED IN THE BID PRICE. THESE COMPONENTS SHALL CONFORM TOALL APPLICABLE PROVISIONS OF SECTIONS 677, 678, AND 679.2.13 HORIZONTAL MEMBERS SHALL BE CAMBERED AND THE VERTICAL POLES BACKRAKED (WHEREAPPLICABLE) TO THE ANTICIPATED DEAD LOAD DEFLECTION PLUS THE CAMBER, IF ANY, SPECIFIED ONTHE PLANS.2.14 AN EQUIVALENT ALTERNATE DESIGN MAY BE SUBSTITUTED FOR THE DETAILS AND MATERIALS SHOWN.2.15 THE DETAILS OF DESIGN FOR THE STRUCTURE AND FOOTINGS ARE TO BE SUPPLIED BY THECONTRACTOR AND/OR BY THE MANUFACTURER. THE STRUCTURE SHALL BE DESIGNED TO RESIST THEMAXIMUM LOADING AS OUTLINED IN THE AASHTO STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS (SEE NOTE 2). ALLDETAILS OF THE STRUCTURE AND THE FOOTING SHALL BE CHECKED AND STAMPED BY A STRUCTURALENGINEER REGISTERED IN THE STATE OF VERMONT PRIOR TO SUBMITTAL OF THE SHOP DRAWINGS TOTHE ENGINEER.2.16 IN ADDITION TO THE SHOP DRAWINGS OUTLINED IN NOTE 2.10, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT ALLDESIGN CALCULATIONS TO THE RESIDENT ENGINEER SHOWING THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION FOREACH OF THE VERTICAL AND HORIZONTAL COMPONENTS OF THE STRUCTURE AND FOOTING:A. THE DESIGN AXIAL AND SHEAR FORCES AND BENDING AND TORSIONAL MOMENTS.B. THE DESIGN AXIAL, BENDING AND SHEAR STRESSES AND THE COMBINED STRESS RATIO.C. VIBRATION AND FATIGUE CALCULATIONS AS SET FORTH IN SECTION 11 OF THE AASHTOPUBLICATION REFERENCED IN NOTE 2.02.D. THE ALLOWABLE AXIAL, BENDING, AND SHEAR STRESSES.E. ITEMS A,B,D - SHALL BE SHOWN FOR EACH OF THE GROUP LOADINGS (I, II, III) AND FOR THE BASICWIND LOAD APPLIED TO THE TWO CASES OUTLINED IN THE AASHTO STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS(SEE NOTE 2) SECTION 1.2.5 (D) (4).F. FAILURE TO SUPPLY THE PROPER DESIGN INFORMATION SHALL BE CAUSE FOR REJECTION OF THESTRUCTURE.G. A MINIMUM OF TWO (2) WEEKS SHALL BE REQUIRED FOR REVIEW BY THE RESIDENT AND DESIGNENGINEERS.H. EVERY MEMBER AND CONNECTION IN AN OVERHEAD TRAFFIC SIGNAL SUPPORT SHALL BE DESIGNEDTO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL RESIDUAL CAPACITY FOR FUTURE MODIFICATIONS EQUIVALENT TO A5-SECTION TRAFFIC SIGNAL HEAD WITH A 5 INCH LOUVERED BACKPLATE LOCATED ON THEOUTERMOST EXTENT TO THE MAST ARM.2.17 THE CONTRACTOR/MANUFACTURER SHALL PROVIDE ALL STRUCTURE AND FOOTING DIMENSIONALDATA.2.18 FOR INSTALLATIONS WHERE BOTH "EXISTING" AND "FUTURE" CONDITIONS ARE SHOWN, THE SUPPORTSSHALL BE DESIGNED FOR THE MORE SEVERE OF THE TWO LOADING CONDITIONS. THE INFORMATIONOUTLINED IN NOTE 2.16 ABOVE SHALL BE PROVIDED FOR BOTH THE LOADING CONDITIONS.2.19 THE TRAFFIC SIGNALS SHALL BE MOUNTED TO THE ARM OR POLE USING A FIXED MOUNT SYSTEM ASSHOWN ON STD DETAIL E-171C.2.20 BASE PLATES SHALL BE STAMPED WITH THE VERTICAL POLE DIAMETER, HEIGHT, YIELD STRENGTH,GAUGE AND THE HORIZONTAL MEMBER DIAMETER, LENGTH, YIELD STRENGTH, GAUGE. ALTERNATELY,THE INFORMATION MAY BE STAMPED ON A METAL TAG RIVETED TO THE POLE NEAR THE HANDHOLE.SIGNAL EQUIPMENT SPECIFICATIONS3.01 ALL NEW EQUIPMENT SHALL MEET OR EXCEED 2011 VTRANS STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS 678 &752, NEMA STANDARDS AND IMSA OR ITE SPECIFICATIONS, WHERE APPLICABLE. INSTALLATION OFSIGNAL EQUIPMENT SHALL BE AS DETAILED ON THESE PLANS AND THE VTRANS STANDARDDETAILS REFERENCED ON THIS SHEET IN GENERAL SPECIFICATIONS.3.02 THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT SHOP DRAWINGS FOR EACH NEW TRAFFIC SIGNAL EQUIPMENTITEM TO THE RESIDENT ENGINEER FOR APPROVAL . SHOP DRAWING SUBMITTALS SHALLCONFORM TO VTRANS STD. SPECS.3.03 ALL POLE MOUNTED AND MAST ARM MOUNTED SIGNAL HEADS SHALL HAVE POLYCARBONATESECTIONS AND LENSES. THE SIGNAL HEADS SHALL HAVE FLAT BLACK HOUSINGS AND VISORS.BLACK LOUVERED BACKPLATES SHALL BE INSTALLED ON ALL SIGNAL HEADS UNLESS OTHERWISENOTED. ALL NEW SIGNAL HEADS SHALL BE 12" LED. ALL MAST ARM MOUNTED SIGNS AND SIGNALHEADS SHALL ALSO BE SECURED WITH SAFETY CABLES.3.04 ALL MAST ARM AND PEDESTAL POLES SHALL BE PAINTED FLAT BLACK WITH A POWDER COATINGPROCESS.3.05 MINIMUM CONDUIT SIZES SHALL BE: 2.5" Ø FOR POWER SERVICES AND 2" Ø FOR ALL OTHER(INCLUDING SIGNAL WIRING, STREET LIGHTING, LOOP LEAD-INS, INTERCONNECT, ETC.).3.06 PEDESTRIAN SIGNALS SHALL INCLUDE ACCESSIBLE PEDESTRIAN ASSEMBLIES AS DEFINED IN THEVTRANS SPECIFICATIONS. PEDESTRIAN INSTRUCTION SIGNS SHALL BE INCLUDED AT ALLPEDESTRIAN PUSH BUTTON LOCATIONS. PEDESTRIAN HEADS SHALL HAVE BLACK HOUSING,COUNTDOWN / SYMBOL TYPE FACES, AND SHALL BE CLAM-SHELL DIRECT MOUNTED.3.07 CONTROLLER/CABINET NOTES:A. THE VILLAGE OF ESSEX JUNCTION HAS STANDARDIZED ON ECONOLITE TRAFFIC SIGNALCONTROLLERS AND TRAFFIC SIGNAL CONTROL PRODUCTS. SUBSTITUTES AND "OR EQUALS"WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED.B. THE SIGNAL CONTROLLERS SHALL BE ECONOLITE COBALT ATC TS2 TYPE 2 CONTROLLERS.THE CONTROLLERS SHALL BE ENCLOSED IN A GROUND MOUNTED CABINET WITH BASE ANDEXTENSION. THE CABINETS SHALL BE ORIENTED SO THAT THE CABINET DOOR OPENS AWAYFROM TRAFFIC AND SHALL BE PAINTED FLAT BLACK FINISH WITH A POWDER COATINGPROCESS.C. COORDINATION BETWEEN THE SYSTEM MASTER AND LOCAL CONTROLLERS AT EACHINTERSECTION SHALL BE BY SPREAD SPECTRUM TELEMETRY. THE SIGNALS SHALL OPERATEUNCOORDINATED DURING OFF PEAK PERIODS.E. THE DWELL PHASE (PEARL ST PHASE 2/6) SHALL BE USED FOR THE START-UP PHASEFOLLOWING FLASHING OPERATION.F. SIGNAL TIMINGS SHOWN ON THESE PLANS MAY REQUIRE FINE-TUNING IN THE FIELD BASED ONTRAFFIC OBSERVATIONS. FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THIS PROJECT BY THE VILLAGE WILL BESUBJECT TO A 30-DAY TEST PERIOD, DURING WHICH ALL ADJUSTMENTS SHALL BE MADE ANDEQUIPMENT PROBLEMS CORRECTED BY THE CONTRACTOR AT NO ADDITIONAL EXPENSE. IFPROBLEMS ARISE DURING THE 30-DAY TEST PERIOD, THE ACCEPTANCE DATE MAY BEEXTENDED.H. UPON COMPLETION OF THE 30-DAY TEST PERIOD, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE TO THERESIDENT ENGINEER UPDATED SIGNAL TIMING PROGRAMMING SHEETS SHOWING ALLMODIFIED SETTINGS, IF ANY.I. THE CONTROLLER CABINETS SHALL HAVE AN APPROVED EMERGENCY GENERATORCONNECTION.3.08 TRAFFIC SIGNAL INTERCONNECT SYSTEM:THE TRAFFIC SIGNAL INTERCONNECT SYSTEM (TSIS) SHALL BE A SPREAD SPECTRUM WIRELESSCOMMUNICATION SYSTEM TO LINK THE POST OFFICE SQUARE SHOPPING CENTER AND SO.SUMMIT ST. THE TSIS SHALL BE DESIGNED TO PROVIDE TWO-WAY TELEMETRY DATA TRANSFERAND SIGNAL COORDINATION BETWEEN MULTIPLE SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS. THE TSISMANUFACTURER SHALL DEMONSTRATE A MINIMUM OF FIVE (5) YEARS SUCCESSFUL EXPERIENCEIN TRAFFIC CONTROL APPLICATIONS AT SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS. THE MANUFACTURERSHALL ALSO DEMONSTRATE A MINIMUM OF FIVE (5) YEARS SUCCESSFUL INTEGRATION OF ITSTSIS WITH THE SPECIFIED TRAFFIC SIGNAL CONTROL EQUIPMENT. THE SYSTEM SHALL BECAPABLE OF FUTURE EXPANSION TO LINK WITH OTHER INTERSECTIONS AND/OR A REMOTEMONITORING SITE. THE TSIS AT EACH INTERSECTION SHALL INCLUDE:A. A WIRELESS INTERCONNECT UNIT HAVING AN INTEGRATED TRANSMITTER/RECEIVER.B. ANTENNA AND POLE MOUNTING BRACKET.C. COMMUNICATION INTERFACE PANELS, COAX CABLE, DATA CABLE, JUMPER CABLE, LIGHTNINGPROTECTION PLUS ALL RELATED EQUIPMENT AND MISCELLANEOUS FITTINGS (INCL. CABINETWIRING).D. ALL LABOR, MATERIALS, EQUIPMENT AND SIGNAL CONTROLLER PROGRAMMING REQUIRED TOCOMPLETE THE INSTALLATION AND PROVIDE A FULLY FUNCTIONING TSIS.ALL TSIS COMPONENTS SHALL BE CURRENT PRODUCTION EQUIPMENT FURNISHED BY THE SAMEMANUFACTURER (FOR SYSTEM OPERATION COMPATIBILITY PURPOSES) UNLESS OTHERWISEAPPROVED IN ADVANCE BY THE ENGINEER.3.09 VEHICLE DETECTION SYSTEM:THE CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL A VEHICLE DETECTION SYSTEM (VDS) FOR ALL APPROACHESAND LANES AT EACH INTERSECTION UTILIZING THE ECONOLITE AUTOSCOPE DUO HYBRIDVIDEO/RADAR SENSOR SYSTEM. THE VDS SHALL INCLUDE:A. HYBRID VIDEO/RADAR SENSORS WITH ZOOM LENS AND INTEGRATED MACHINE VISIONPROCESSOR IN ONE COMPACT UNIT, WITH INTERNAL HEATER AND INTEGRATED ADJUSTABLESUNSHIELD.B. ALL MOUNTING HARDWARE.C. COMMUNICATIONS INTERFACE PANEL, DETECTOR PORT MASTER, VIDEO/RADAR SENSORCABLE, PLUS ALL ASSOCIATED EQUIPMENT AND MISCELLANEOUS FITTINGS (INCL. CABINETWIRING).D. ALL LABOR, MATERIAL, EQUIPMENT AND SIGNAL CONTROLLER PROGRAMMING REQUIRED TOCOMPLETE THE INSTALLATION AND MAKE THE VDS FULLY OPERATIONAL.E. VIDEO/RADAR SENSORS SHALL BE MOUNTED ON MAST ARMS USING EXTENSION BRACKETS NOLONGER THAN 12 INCHES, AND SHALL BE PROGRAMMED IN ACCORDANCE WITHMANUFACTURER'S INSTRUCTIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO ACHIEVE THE DETECTIONZONES AS SHOWN ON THE SIGNAL LAYOUT PLAN.ALL VDS COMPONENTS SHALL BE CURRENT PRODUCTION EQUIPMENT FURNISHED BY THE SAMEMANUFACTURER (FOR SYSTEM OPERATION COMPATIBILITY PURPOSES).3.10 EMERGENCY VEHICLE / TRANSIT PREEMPTION SYSTEM (BOTH INTERSECTIONS):THE EMERGENCY VEHICLE / TRANSIT PREEMPTION SYSTEM SHALL BE A LINE-OF-SIGHT SYSTEMUSING A VISIBLE STROBE LIGHT EMITTER TRANSMITTING VISIBLE FLASHES OF LIGHT AT ASPECIFIED FREQUENCY/PATTERN. THE SYSTEM SHALL BE COMPATIBLE WITH OTHER EXISTINGEMERGENCY VEHICLE / TRANSIT PREEMPTION SYSTEMS CURRENTLY IN USE IN THE CITY OFSOUTH BURLINGTON. THE SYSTEM SHALL INCLUDE:A. ALL NECESSARY INTERFACE BOARDS AND WIRING.B. OPTICAL PREEMPTION DETECTORSC. CONFIRMATION STROBES.EMITTERS AND OTHER VEHICLE MOUNTED EQUIPMENT TO BE PURCHASED SEPARATELY BY THECITY.ALL EMERGENCY VEHICLE / TRANSIT PREEMPTION SYSTEM COMPONENTS SHALL BE CURRENTPRODUCTION EQUIPMENT FURNISHED BY THE SAME CONTRACTOR (FOR SYSTEM OPERATIONCOMPATIBILITY PURPOSES) UNLESS OTHERWISE APPROVED IN ADVANCE BY THE ENGINEER.FINAL EMERGENCY VEHICLE PREEMPTION SIGNAL TIMINGS TO BE DETERMINED AFTERINSTALLATION WITH INPUT FROM THE LOCAL FIRE AND RESCUE DEPARTMENTS.PRELIMINARYNOT FORCONSTRUCTION3???GZJ?$7UDIILF6LJQDO6SHFVGZJ30 11" = 20'DateSheet numberScaleCheckedDrawnDesignSurvey Project No.Lamoureux & DickinsonConsulting Engineers, Inc.14 Morse Drive, Essex, VT 05452802-878-4450 www.LDengineering.com11-29-2016RDBHRDOthers14145O'Brien Home FarmKennedy Drive South Burlington, VTNew Crosswalk & RRFB PlanHinesburg Rd//Eldredge St/Hayes AveRECTANGULAR RAPID FLASHING BEACON DETAILPEDESTAL SIGNAL POLE(2.5" SQUARE STEELGALVANIZED SIGN POST)FRONT VIEWSIDE VIEW3' - 6"7' - 0"15' - 0" POLE HEIGHTSLEEVE AND ANCHORSEE DETAIL ON STANDARD T-45BI-DIRECTIONAL RAPID FLASHINGBAR WITH AMBER LEDS, BOTH SIDESCONDUIT1 inch = 20 ft.(in feet)GRAPHIC SCALE20 0 10 20 40 80THE RRFB SYSTEM SHALL CONSIST OF THE FOLLOWING:•SELF-CONTAINED SOLAR PANEL, BATTERIES AND ENERGY MANAGEMENT SYSTEM.•ON-BOARD USER INTERFACE/CONTROLLER AND DISPLAY CAPABLE OFIN-THE-FIELD SETUP OF FLASH DURATION, AMBIENT SETTINGS AND NIGHTINTENSITY.•AN INTEGRATED WIRELESS-BASED COMMUNICATION SYSTEM.•THE SOLAR PANEL, BATTERIES, COMMUNICATION SYSTEM AND ON-BOARD USERINTERFACE/CONTROLLER SHALL BE ENCLOSED IN ONE COMPACT,WEATHERPROOF, VENTED NEMA 3R SIDE POST MOUNTED ENCLOSURE.•LIGHTBARS WITH SIDE EMITTING PEDESTRIAN CONFIRMATION LIGHTS IN ABI-DIRECTIONAL CONFIGURATION.•ACCESSIBLE PUSH BUTTON ASSEMBLIES WITH INSTRUCTIONAL SIGNS ANDAUDIBLE TONE AND MESSAGE.•ALL RRFB SYSTEM COMPONENTS SHALL BE PAINTED BLACK.THE RRFB SHALL BE MANUFACTURED BY CARMANAH TECHNOLOGIES CORP., MODELR920 OR EQUAL.RECTANGULAR RAPID FLASHING BEACONCROSSWALK PLANQUANTITY1THE QUANTITIES LISTED ABOVE ARE APPROXIMATE AND ARE FURNISHED FORINFORMATION ONLY. MISCELLANEOUS (UNLISTED) WIRE, CABLE, HARDWARE ETC., AREREQUIRED TO PROVIDE FOR A FUNCTIONING RECTANGULAR RAPID FLASHING BEACON.LIGHT BARSRRFB INTERFACE / CONTROLLER / ENERGY MGMT. SYSTEMACCESSIBLE PUSH BUTTON ASSEMBLIES42LIST OF MAJOR EQUIPMENTITEM 900.620 SPECIAL PROVISION (RECTANGULAR RAPID FLASHING BEACON, BASE BID)ORITEM 900.620 SPECIAL PROVISION (RECTANGULAR RAPID FLASHING BEACON, BID ALTERNATE)RRFB POLES & FOUNDATIONS2LIST OF MAJOR EQUIPMENTSOLAR PANELS / BATTERIES2PEDESTRIAN CROSSING WARNING SIGNS(W11-2) 30" x 30", FYG COLOR, INSTALLBACK TO BACKDIAGONAL ARROW SIGNS (W16-7P),24" x 12", FYG COLOR (ARROW TOPOINT TO CROSSING). INSTALLBACK TO BACKACCESSIBLE PEDESTRIAN PUSH BUTTON ASSEMBLY, INSTALLON SIDEWALK SIDE OF POLE, PUSH BUTTON FACE TO BEPARALLEL WITH CROSSWALK WITH ARROW POINTINGTOWARDS THE CROSSWALK. PUSH BUTTON ASSEMBLY TOBE PROVIDED WITH A 9" x 12" R10-25 SIGN. PAYMENTINCIDENTAL TO ITEM 900.620 SPECIAL PROVISION(RECTANGULAR RAPID FLASHING BEACON, SCHOOL ST, BASEBID) OR ITEM 900.620 SPECIAL PROVISION (RECTANGULARRAPID FLASHING BEACON, SCHOOL ST, BID ALTERNATE)SOLAR PANEL WITH INTEGRATEDRRFB CONTROLLER, BATTERIES ANDRADIO TRANSMITTER/ANTENNAGENERAL SPECIFICATIONS1.01 ALL WORK SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE 2011 VERMONT AGENCYOF TRANSPORTATION STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR CONSTRUCTION,THE MANUAL ON UNIFORM TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES (MUTCD), ANDTHESE PLANS.1.02 THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT ALL UTILITIES BEFORE EXCAVATIONTO VERIFY THE LOCATION OF ANY UNDERGROUND LINES. THECONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY "DIGSAFE" AT 811 PRIOR TO ANYEXCAVATION.1.03 CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY THE EXACT LOCATIONS OF EXISTINGUTILITIES AND SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY DAMAGE TO ANY UTILITY,PUBLIC OR PRIVATE, SHOWN HEREON.1.04 ANY SURFACES, LINES OR STRUCTURES WHICH HAVE BEEN DAMAGED BYTHE CONTRACTOR'S OPERATIONS SHALL BE RESTORED TO THECONDITION AT LEAST EQUAL TO THAT IN WHICH THEY WERE FOUNDIMMEDIATELY PRIOR TO THE BEGINNING OF CONSTRUCTION.1.05 L&D WAIVES ANY AND ALL RESPONSIBILITY AND LIABILITY FOR PROBLEMSTHAT MAY ARISE FROM FAILURE TO FOLLOW THESE PLANS ANDSPECIFICATIONS AND THE DESIGN INTENT THAT THEY CONVEY, ANYCHANGES MADE IN THE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS OR IN THECONSTRUCTION OF THE PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS WITHOUT L&D'SPRIOR KNOWLEDGE AND CONSENT, AND/OR FAILURE TO SCHEDULEOBSERVATION OF THE WORK AND TESTING IN PROGRESS.1.06 THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR DEMOLITION ANDREMOVAL OF EXISTING SIGNAL EQUIPMENT STRUCTURES, VEGETATIONAND PAVEMENT NECESSARY TO CONSTRUCT THE PROPOSED TRAFFICSIGNAL MODIFICATIONS. UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED ON THE PLANS, ALLSALVAGED AND UNUSED TRAFFIC SIGNAL EQUIPMENT SHALL BERETURNED TO THE CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON PUBLIC WORKS DEPT.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE ALL EXCESS MATERIAL, DEBRIS ANDTRASH FROM THE SITE UPON COMPLETION OF CONSTRUCTION.PROJECT SCHEDULING & COORDINATION2.01 TO ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH THE PLAN(S), THE CONTRACTOR SHALLNOTIFY THE CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON PUBLIC WORKS DEPT. ANDTHE RESIDENT ENGINEER 24 HOURS IN ADVANCE OF STARTING ANYWORK, CUTTING THE PAVEMENT, BEGINNING THE INSTALLATION OF ANYSIGNAL EQUIPMENT, SIGNAL OPERATION MODIFICATIONS AND FINALINSPECTION.2.02 THE WORK PERFORMED AS PART OF THE PROPOSED TRAFFIC SIGNALMODIFICATIONS SHALL BE CLOSELY COORDINATED ANDPRE-SCHEDULED WITH THE CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON PUBLICWORKS DEPT.2.03 EXISTING TRAFFIC SIGNAL EQUIPMENT SHALL BE USED TO PROVIDETEMPORARY TRAFFIC SIGNALS AS SHOWN ON THESE PLANS UNTILSUCH TIME AS THE NEW TRAFFIC SIGNALS ARE MADE OPERATIONAL.PEDESTRIAN PUSH BUTTON SPECIFICATIONS3.01 PUSH BUTTON FACES ARE TO BE PARALLEL WITH THE CROSSWALKTHEY ARE SERVING.3.02 THE PUSH BUTTON ARROW SHALL POINT TOWARDS THE CROSSWALK.3.03 WHEN TWO PUSH BUTTONS ARE LOCATED ON ONE POLE WITH LESSTHEN 10 FOOT SEPARATION, THE WALK INDICATION SHALL BE A SPEECHMESSAGE, NOT JUST A TONE.PRELIMINARYNOT FORCONSTRUCTION3???GZJ?%55)%&URVVZDON3ODQGZJ30 2DateSheet numberScaleCheckedDrawnDesignSurvey Project No.Lamoureux & DickinsonConsulting Engineers, Inc.14 Morse Drive, Essex, VT 05452802-878-4450 www.LDengineering.com11-29-2016RDBHRDOthers14145O'Brien Home FarmKennedy Drive South Burlington, VTNew Crosswalk & RRFBTypical DetailsNTS24" PAINTED WHITE STRIPE EDGE OF ROADWAYPAVEMENTEDGE OF ROADWAYPAVEMENTLCPAINTED BLOCK PATTERN CROSSWALK DETAIL8'SIDEWALKBIKE PATHDETECTABLE WARNING SURFACEON CROSSWALK RAMP, TYPICALBOTH SIDES6" TYPE III BITUMINOUS CONCRETE PAVEMENTPLACED & COMPACTED IN 2" LIFTS. TOP LIFTTO OVERLAP JOINT BELOW. PAID UNDER ITEM900.680 SPECIAL PROVISION (BITUMINOUSCONCRETE PAVEMENT, HAND PLACED)TYPICAL CONCRETE CURB SECTIONTYPE B CONCRETE CURBEXISTINGPAVEMENTEXISTINGGRAVELSUBBASES=1/3"/FT.18"7" OR MATCH EXISTINGCURB REVEALCLEAN AND COAT ALL JOINTS AND SURFACESWITH EMULSIFIED ASPHALT PRIOR TO PAVINGCRUSHED GRAVELSUBBASE,COARSE GRADED24"4" TOPSOIL, TYP.VARIES(18" MIN.)NTSPAYMENT FOR EXCAVATION INCIDENTAL TO ITEM 616.28. AN EXCAVATIONALLOWANCE OF 0.22 CY/LF OF NEW CURB IS INCLUDED IN ITEM 616.28.PAYMENT FOR SUBBASE PAID AS ITEM 301.25.2" x 12" COLD PLANEEXISTING PAVEMENT18"7"24"10"T A P E R1/2" RADIUSFINISH GRADEINSTALL AT ALL ENDS OF NEW CONCRETE CURB SECTIONS(NOT FOR SIDEWALK RAMPS)CONCRETE CURB END TAPERNTSNTSSIDEWALK RAMPC5'-6"GRASSSTRIPBMIN.CAND CURB.SINGLE RAMP ON CORNERRADIUS, NARROW GRASSSTRIP BETWEEN SIDEWALKA5'-6"MIN.SINGLE RAMP ON TANGENT,NARROW OR NO GRASS STRIPABCBCONCRETE CURBACGRASSSTRIPAB8.3%MAXIMUMCURB TRANSITIONSection C-C5'-6"MIN. WIDTHSection B-BSection A-ACONCRETE CURB2'8.3%MAX.RAMPAUXILIARY8.3%MAX.AUXILIARYRAMPCURBSIDEWALK RAMP1/4" REVEAL EDGE OF PAVEMENTROADWAY SURFACECONCRETE CURB24"DETECTABLEWARNING SURFACESIDEWALK RAMP WITHBROOM FINISH SURFACESIDEWALKRAMP WITHBROOMFINISHSURFACEDETECTABLEWARNINGSURFACE2 4"SIDEWALK RAMP WITHDETECTABLE WARNINGSURFACENOTE: THE TYPE, COLOR AND MANUFACTURER OF THEDETECTABLE WARNING SURFACE SHALL BE APPROVEDBY THE TOWN AND OWNER.4" TOPSOIL, TYP.8" CRUSHED GRAVEL SUBBASE ,COARSE GRADEDMATCH EXISTINGGRADE1441S=0.02(MAX.)CONCRETE SIDEWALK, 5 INCH5'-0"6"1. SIDEWALK AND COLORED/TEXTURED CONCRETE SHALL BE CAST IN 100 FTSECTIONS. THERE WILL BE NO EXPANSION JOINTS. CONNECTION TO EXISTINGSIDEWALK AND BETWEEN 100 FT SECTIONS SHALL BE ACCOMPLISHED UTILIZING 18"X 5/8" SMOOTH STEEL (GRADE 60) DOWELS PLACED 12" ON CENTER (4 DOWELS FORA 5 FT WIDE SIDEWALK) CENTERED AT SIDEWALK JOINTS. DOWELS SHALL BEINSTALLED TO ALLOW LONGITUDINAL EXPANSION AND CONTRACTION AT THE JOINT.THE SIDEWALK SHALL BE GROOVED WITH A FALSE JOINT EVERY 5 FT.2. PAYMENT FOR ALL DOWELS AND INSTALLATION SHALL BE INCIDENTAL TO ITEM900.675 SPECIAL PROVISION (COLORED, TEXTURED CONCRETE) AND THEPORTLAND CEMENT CONCRETE SIDEWALK ITEMS.3. UPON PLACEMENT OF THE CONCRETE, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL APPLY ACONCRETE CURING / SEALING COMPOUND. THE COMPOUND SHALL BE ON THEVTRANS PRE-APPROVED PRODUCTS LIST. THE COMPOUND SHALL BE APPLIED PERMANUFACTURER'S SPECIFICATIONS. PAYMENT WILL BE UNDER ITEM 514.10.THE DIFFERENCE IN COST BETWEEN TREATING THE SIDEWALK WITH THESTANDARD VTRANS APPROVED CURING COMPOUND AND CERT1-VEX AC 1315, ASMANUFACTURED BY VEXON CHEMICALS, INC., SHALL BE PAID AS NON-PARTICIPATING UNDER ITEM 900.645 SPECIAL PROVISION (ALTERNATE CONCRETECURING COMPOUND, ADDITIONAL COST).SIDEWALK CONSTRUCTION NOTESTYPICAL CONCRETE SIDEWALK SECTION18" X 58"Ø SMOOTH STEEL DOWELS PLACED 12" O.C.BETWEN 100' SECTIONS AND AT ALL JOINTS WITHEXISTING SIDEWALKS. EPOXY DOWELS INTOEXISTING CONCRETE.NTSPRELIMINARYNOT FORCONSTRUCTION3???GZJ?%55)%'HWDLOVGZJ30 #SD-17-06 1 CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING DONALD R. CUMMINGS—1811 SPEAR STREET & 25 HARBOR RIDGE ROAD PRELIMINARY & FINAL PLAT APPLICATION #SD-17-06 FINDINGS OF FACT AND DECISION Preliminary & final plat application #SD-17-06 of Donald R. Cummings for a planned unit development consisting of two (2) lots, each developed with a single family dwelling. The project consists of: 1) subdividing the 1.16 acre parcel into two (2) parcels of 0.6 acres (lot #1) and 0.56 acres (lot #2), and 2) relocating the zoning district boundary between the R-1 and R-2 Zoning Districts in conjunction with the planned unit development, 1811 Spear Street & 25 Harbor Ridge Road. The Development Review Board held a public hearing on April 18, 2017. The applicant was represented by Donald Cummings and David Marshall. 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, Donald R. Cummings, seeks preliminary and final plat approval for a planned unit development consisting of two (2) lots, each developed with a single family dwelling. The project consists of: 1) subdividing the 1.16 acre parcel into two (2) parcels of 0.6 acres (lot #1) and 0.56 acres (lot #2), and 2) relocating the zoning district boundary between the R-1 and R-2 Zoning Districts in conjunction with the planned unit development, 1811 Spear Street & 25 Harbor Ridge Road. 2. The owner of record of the subject properties is Donald R. Cummings. 3. The subject properties are located in the Residential 1 and Residential 2 Zoning Districts. 4. The application was received on February 24, 2017. 5. The plans submitted consists of six (6) pages with the first page titled “Plat of Survey Donald Cummings,” prepared by Civil Engineering Associates, Inc., and dated 12/5/2016. A) Density The zoning district boundary between R1 and R2 cuts through the existing Harbor Ridge Road parcel. By adjusting the boundary line as proposed (i.e. in a westerly direction on Lot 1 and an easterly direction on Lot 2) the existing house on Harbor Ridge Road and the existing house on Spear Street will both be in the R1 Zoning District. The total R1 Zoning District area within the PUD and within which the existing houses will be located is proposed to be 2.05 acres, which is sufficient to accommodate the proposed density of two (2) housing units in that zoning district (1 unit/acre). The total R2 Zoning District area within the PUD is proposed to be 0.73 acres, which is sufficient to accommodate one (1) housing unit in #SD-17-06 2 that district (2 units/acre). The Board finds that the zoning district boundary line adjustment is necessary to advance the project as a PUD and therefore the Board finds the adjustment acceptable. B) PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Pursuant to Section 15.18 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations, PUDs shall comply with the following standards and conditions: (A)(1) Sufficient water supply and wastewater disposal capacity is available to meet the needs of the project. A condition of plat approval will be that the applicant receive any necessary permits related to water and wastewater supply from the appropriate permitting agencies. (A)(2) Sufficient grading and erosion controls will be utilized during and after construction to prevent soil erosion and runoff from creating unhealthy or dangerous conditions on the subject property and adjacent properties. This is criterion is covered by the discussion below on stormwater. (A)(3) The project incorporates access, circulation, and traffic management strategies sufficient to prevent unreasonable congestion of adjacent roads. All two (2) proposed lots will be accessible from public roads. The existing two (2) houses already have driveways connecting them to either Spear Street (1811 Spear St.) or Harbor Ridge Road (25 Harbor Ridge Rd.) and when a house is developed on Lot 2 it will have access to Harbor Ridge Road via a shared driveway with 25 Harbor Ridge Road. The Board finds this criterion met. (A)(4) The project’s design respects and will provide suitable protection to wetlands, streams, wildlife habitat as identified in the Open Space Strategy, and any unique natural features on the site. The Board finds that none of the features listed in this criterion are present at the site. (A)(5) The project is designed to be visually compatible with the planned development patterns in the area, as specified in the Comprehensive Plan and the purpose of the zoning district(s) in which it is located. The project is located in low density residential zoning districts with many single family houses. The proposed dwelling unit that could be accommodated on Lot 2 would also be single family. The Board finds this criterion met. (A)(6) Open space areas on the site have been located in such a way as to maximize opportunities for creating contiguous open spaces between adjoining parcels and/or stream buffer areas. The subdivision of the property and the proposed location of a future house would preserve the expanse of open space behind the existing house at 1811 Spear Street. That backyard open space continues through #SD-17-06 3 the yards of several other houses to the north to Westview Drive and to the south to Allen Road. The Board finds this criterion met. (A)(7) The layout of a subdivision or PUD has been reviewed by the Fire Chief or (designee) to ensure that adequate fire protection can be provided. The Fire Marshall received project plans and no comments were submitted. (A)(8) Roads, recreation paths, stormwater facilities, sidewalks, landscaping, utility lines and lighting have been designed in a manner that is compatible with the extension of such services and infrastructure to adjacent landowners. The Board finds this criterion met. (A)(9) Roads, utilities, sidewalks, recreation paths, and lighting are designed in a manner that is consistent with City utility and roadway plans and maintenance standards, absent a specific agreement with the applicant related to maintenance that has been approved by the City Council. For Transect Zone subdivisions, this standard shall only apply to the location and type of roads, recreation paths, and sidewalks. The Board received the following comment from the Public Works Department in an email dated March 27, 2017: My only comment is to have the applicant pave the bottom portion of their driveway that is within the road ROW. Gravel always gets deposited in our road from this property, I’d like to clean it up as much as possible. The Board finds that this decision will contain a condition requiring the paving of the bottom portion of the driveway within the City right-of-way. (A)(10) The project is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan for the affected district(s). The project is located in the Southwest Quadrant where the Comprehensive Plan states future land use should remain principally residential and care should be taken to maintain and improve stormwater runoff. The project is residential and stormwater is discussed below. The Board finds the proposed project meets this criterion. C) SITE PLAN REVIEW STANDARDS Pursuant to Section 14.03(A)(6) of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations, any PUD shall require site plan approval. Section 14.06 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations establishes the following general review standards for all site plan applications: A) Relationship of Proposed Development to the City of South Burlington Comprehensive Plan. Due attention by the applicant should be given to the goals and objectives and the stated land use policies for the City of South Burlington as set forth in the Comprehensive Plan. #SD-17-06 4 The Board finds that this criterion is being met as discussed above. B) Relationship of Proposed Structures to the Site. (1) The site shall be planned to accomplish a desirable transition from structure to site, from structure to structure, and to provide for adequate planting, safe pedestrian movement, and adequate parking areas. (2) Parking (3) Without restricting the permissible limits of the applicable zoning district, the height and scale of each building shall be compatible with its site and existing or anticipated adjoining buildings. (4) Newly installed utility services and service modifications necessitated by exterior alterations or building expansion shall, to the extent feasible, be underground. D) Relationship of Structures and Site to Adjoining Area. (1) The Development Review Board shall encourage the use of a combination of common materials and architectural characteristics (e.g., rhythm, color, texture, form or detailing), landscaping, buffers, screens and visual interruptions to create attractive transitions between buildings of different architectural styles. (2) Proposed structures shall be related harmoniously to themselves, the terrain and to existing buildings and roads in the vicinity that have a visual relationship to the proposed structures. At present no building is being proposed, the plans only show where a single family dwelling could possibly be located on Lot 2. The Board finds the existing mature trees will help create desirable transitions when a building is constructed on the site. The Board finds that the height and scale of the future single family dwelling should be compatible with the site and the neighboring houses, the utilities should be underground to the extent feasible, and the structures within the PUD should relate harmoniously to themselves and the terrain. In addition to the above general review standards, site plan applications shall meet the following specific standards as set forth in Section 14.07 of the Land Development Regulations: 1. Access to Abutting Properties. The reservation of land may be required on any lot for provision of access to abutting properties whenever such access is deemed necessary to reduce curb cuts onto an arterial or collector street, to provide additional access for emergency or other purposes, or to improve general access and circulation in the area. The Board does not consider the reservation of land to be necessary. 2. Utility Services. Electric, telephone and other wire-served utility lines and service connections shall be underground. Any utility installations remaining above ground shall be located so as to have a harmonious relation to neighboring properties and to the site. Pursuant to Section 15.13(E) of the Land Development Regulations, any new utility lines, services, and service modifications must be underground. #SD-17-06 5 3. Disposal of Wastes. All dumpsters and other facilities to handle solid waste, including compliance with any recycling 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). The applicant is not proposing any new dumpsters or other facilities at this time. 4. Landscaping and Screening Requirements. (See Article 13, Section 13.06) No construction is proposed as part of this application. The Board finds this criterion inapplicable. D) SUBDIVISION STANDARDS 15.10 Lot Layout A. Lots shall be laid out in such a way that they can be developed in full compliance with these land development regulations, and giving consideration to topography, soils, and drainage conditions. B. Except within the City Center FBC District, the following standards shall apply: Corner lots shall have extra width to conform to setbacks on each street. No subdivision showing any reserved strips shall be approved. A width to length ratio of one to five (1:5) shall be used as a guideline by the Development Review Board in evaluating lot proportions. Developments consisting predominantly of square or roughly square lots or lot with an excessive length to width ratio (i.e. spaghetti lots) shall not be approved. Existing Lot 3 will have a ratio of approximately 1:3 and Lots 2 and 3 a ratio of approximately 1:2.5. The existing lot on Harbor Ridge Road currently has a ratio of close to 1:1, therefore the subdivision will create two (2) lots with ratios closer to the recommended 1:5. The existing lot on Spear Street will maintain the same ratio. In combination with the applicant’s request to change the location of the zoning district boundary lines, the proposed lots can be developed in compliance with the land development regulations. The Board finds these criteria to be met. E) WAIVERS The applicant is requesting that the side setback on the north side of Lot 1 be reduced from the required 25 feet to 15 feet to allow for a future possible expansion to the existing house on Lot 1. The side setback along the north side of Lot 1 abuts Lot 2, which is mostly in the R2 Zoning District where only a 10 foot side setback is required. The Board finds the requested 15 foot side setback to be compatible with development patterns of the neighborhood. F) STORMWATER The Board received the following comments from the Stormwater Section in an email dated 4/14/2017: 1. This project is located in the Bartlett Brook watershed. This watershed is listed as stormwater impaired by the State of Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC). 2. It is understood that the applicant has proposed to install a bioswale to treat stromwater runoff from the proposed development. 3. While not a requirement, the applicant could consider installing a gutter along the back roof of the proposed house in order to direct additional runoff toward the bioswale. #SD-17-06 6 Thank you for the opportunity to comment. The Board encourages, but does not require, the applicant to consider the advice of the Stormwater Section regarding the installation of a gutter if a new dwelling unit is ever built. DECISION Motion by __________, seconded by ___________, to approve preliminary & final plat application #SD- 17-06 of Donald R. Cummings subject to the following conditions: 1. All previous approvals and stipulations will remain in full effect except as amended herein. 2. This project must be completed as shown on the plat submitted by the applicant and on file in the South Burlington Department of Planning and Zoning. 3. The plans must be revised to show the changes below and will require approval of the Administrative Officer. Three (3) copies of the approved revised plans must be submitted to the Administrative Officer prior to recording the plat. a. The survey plats must be revised to include the signature and seal of the land surveyor. b. Proposed Site Plan (C1.0) must be revised to have a title different from Proposed Site Plan (C1.1). c. The plans must be revised to show the portion of the proposed shared driveway in the right-of-way being paved at 25 Harbor Ridge Road. d. The plans must be revised to show arrows with single heads indicating the direction in which the zoning district boundary line will be adjusted rather than the two-headed arrows currently shown. 4. The Board approves the following waiver: a. Side setback of 15 feet on the north side of Lot 1 5. The applicant must receive final wastewater and water allocations prior to issuance of a zoning permit. 6. Pursuant to Section 15.13(E) of the Land Development Regulations, any new utility lines, services, and service modifications must be underground. 7. The proposed project must adhere to standards for erosion control as set forth in Section 16.03 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations. In addition, the grading plan must meet the standards set forth in Section 16.04 of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations. 8. The applicant will be responsible to regularly maintain all stormwater treatment and conveyance structures on-site. 9. The mylars must be recorded prior to any zoning permit issuance. 10. The applicant must submit to the Administrative Officer a final set of project plans as approved in digital (PDF) format prior to recording the final plat plans. #SD-17-06 7 11. The final plat plans (Proposed Site Plan (C1.1) and the Subdivision Plats) must be recorded in the land records within 180 days or this approval is null and void. The plan must be signed by the Board Chair or Clerk prior to recording. Prior to recording the final plat plan, the applicant must submit a copy of the survey plats in digital format. The format of the digital information will require approval of the South Burlington GIS Coordinator. 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 __________________ 2017, by _____________________________________ Bill Miller, 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 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 802.477.2241 to speak with the regional Permit Specialist. CIVIL ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. 10 Mansfield View Lane Phone:802-864-2323 South Burlington, VT 05403 Fax:802-864-2323 E-Mail:mail@cea-vt.com April 7, 2017 Ms. Lindsey Britt, DRB Administrator City of South Burlington Planning & Zoning 550 Dorset Street South Burlington, Vermont 05401 Re:Cummings Properties –25 Harbor Ridge Road and 1811 Spear Street Proposed PUD,2-Lot Subdivision Preliminary Plat Application Final Plat Application –Supplemental Information Dear Ms. Britt: Based upon input from Staff, we have revised the plans to reflect the latest concepts for the proposed subdivision of the 25 Harbor Ridge Road property into two parcels.The revisions to the previously submitted plans are summarized below. 1.Waiver Request –The proposed subdivision of the lands and the extension of the R1 regulations into the proposed Lot 1 parcel will further introduce the larger R1 setback standards into a neighborhood generally regulated by smaller R2 setbacks. We are requesting that the setback line on the north side of Lot 1 be reduced from 25’feet to 15’. This value is still less than the 10’value associated with the R2 district and what is being use on the undeveloped proposed Lot 2 parcel immediately to the north. The proposed relief from the 25’standard will enable the potential expansion of the existing building footprint in an orderly manner which reflects the current interior layout of the house. The conceptual footprint additions are shown on Sheet C1.1and reflect previous planning efforts with a local architect on how best to enable the existing home to be retained and expanded. 2.Water Service Revision –In working with Mr.John Tymecjki from the Water Department,the proposed water service for the new Lot 2 has been revised to benefit from the higher pressure available from the water main on the west side of Harbor Ridge Road. 3.Stormwater –In speaking with Mr. Dave Wheeler from Stormwater Services,he asked that the proposed use of the bioretention area be supported with a basis of design. This has been completed (see attached letter to Dave Wheeler) and the Ms. Lindsey Britt Page 2 of 2 April 7, 2017 plans have been updated to reflect the level of detail described in the supporting letter. The proposed bioretention system has bene relocated to the east so as to enable the retention of the existing trees located along the west property line. 4.Subdivision Plat –The plat has bene revised to reflect: a.the Lot 1 setback waiver request,, b.the retention of an electrical easement across lot (favoring Lot 1) 5.Sheet C1.0 –Proposed Site Plan –Has been revised to show the proper orientation of the proposed regulation extensions and lot numbers consistent with that originally submitted plat plan. 6.Sheet C1.1 –Proposed Site Plan –Has been revised to show: a.the proper location of the existing sewer service, b.the preferred location for the new water service for Lot 2, c.additional callouts for the abandonment of the portions of the existing sewer service line to be taken out of service, d.orientation of the proposed regulation extensions and lot numbers consistent with that originally submitted plat plan. e.depiction of the existing electrical service. 7.Sheet C2.0 –Details –modifications of the bioretention detail and the inclusion of a yard drain detail. This completes our summary of the recent revisions to the application components.If you should have any questions, please feel free to contact me at 864-2323 x310. Respectfully, David S. Marshall,P.E. Project Engineer Enclosures:Letter to Dave Wheeler 3 Sets of Full Size Design Plans –One Set of 11x17 P-1 Perimeter Boundary Survey Plat P-2 Subdivision Plat C1.0 Site Improvements Plan C1.1 Site Improvements Plan C2.0 Details CD of plans and documents cc:(all w enclosures and 11x17 plans)D. Cummings;CEA File 16184.00 P:\AutoCADD Projects\2016\16184\3-Permitting\1-Local Applications\2-Preliminary\Britt Preil and Final Cover 3.doc PROPOSED 50' ADJUSTMENT TO ZONING REGULATIONS G G GGGS S S UEU E FO F O G G RAISED BEDS (TYP.) BENCH GAS O E FENCE 50'PROP. R E S . 2 50'PROP. R E S . 1 WWWW W W WWWWWSSSW W S SPEAR ST.HARBOR RIDGE RD.IRISH FARM RD.200.0'101.3'103.4'108.8'109.5'244.1' LOT 2 (24,320 S.F.) LOT 3 (70,132 S.F.) CONSTANTINOS MICHADELIDES 1809 SPEAR ST. JOHN LARKIN INC. 200 ALLEN RD. FUSAN T FLOYD TRUST 1813 SPEAR ST. DONALD R. & LYNN T. CUMMINGS 25 HARBOR RIDGE RD. ALLEN ROAD LAND CO. INC. 62 HARBOR RIDGE RD. ALLEN ROAD LAND CO. INC. 44 HARBOR RIDGE RD. DONALD R. CUMMINGS 1811 SPEAR ST. DAVID R. & ELIZABETH J. LECLAIR 24 HARBOR RIDGE RD.50' ZONE ADJUSTMENT342344346348350352354356358360362364366368306308310312314316318320322324326328330332334336338340342370 JOHN LARKIN INC. (CHAMPLAIN WATER DISTRICT) 200 ALLEN RD. SOUTH VILLAGE AGRICULTURAL FARM 0 ALLEN RD. EAST CEDAR HE D G E R O WCEDAR HEDGEROWHEDGE8" APPLE 60" MAPLE 20" LOCUST CEDARS12" APPLE 12" APPLE 12" APPLE PORCHCEDARS8" BIRCH (2 BOL) 8" CEDAR 38" MAPLE 10" APPLE 10" APPLE 10" APPLE GARDEN 28" LOCUSTCEDAR HEDGEROW3103203303 4 0 443.9' 492.1'150.2'200.2'55.9'27.86' 266.2'204.64'200.3'199.79'149.6'146.00'156.8' EXIST. WATER TANK EXIST. WATER TANK EXIST. HOUSE EXIST. HOUSE EXIST. HOUSE EXIST. HOUSE DSM DSM SAL 1" = 40' 16184 C1.0 FEB., 2017 LOCATION MAP 1" = 2000' DONALD CUMMINGS 1811 SPEAR STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON VERMONT 05403 PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PROPOSED SITE PLAN PROJECT LOCATION A C E 25 HARBOR RIDGE ROAD SOUTH BURLINGTON, VT TOW N B O U N D A R Y TOW N B O U N D A R Y LEGEND UE G ST S FO W 100 EXISTING CONTOUR EXISTING FENCE EXISTING GRAVEL EXISTING SWALE EXISTING UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC EXISTING GAS EXISTING STORM EXISTING GRAVITY SEWER EXISTING FIBER OPTIC EXISTING WATER EXISTING SEWER MANHOLE EXISTING CATCH BASIN EXISTING HYDRANT EXISTING SHUT OFF EXISTING UTILITY POLE EXISTING LIGHT POLE EXISTING DECIDUOUS TREE APPROXIMATE SETBACK LINE APPROXIMATE PROPERTY LINE OE EXISTINGOVERHEAD ELECTRIC 1.UTILITIES SHOWN DO NOT PURPORT TO CONSTITUTE OR REPRESENT ALL UTILITIES LOCATED UPON OR ADJACENT TO THE SURVEYED PREMISES. EXISTING UTILITY LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE ONLY. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY ALL UTILITY CONFLICTS. ALL DISCREPANCIES SHALL BE REPORTED TO THE ENGINEER. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT DIG SAFE (888-344-7233) PRIOR TO ANY CONSTRUCTION. 2.ALL EXISTING UTILITIES NOT INCORPORATED INTO THE FINAL DESIGN SHALL BE REMOVED OR ABANDONED AS INDICATED ON THE PLANS OR DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER. 3.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MAINTAIN AS-BUILT PLANS (WITH TIES) FOR ALL UNDERGROUND UTILITIES. THOSE PLANS SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE OWNER AT THE COMPLETION OF THE PROJECT. 4.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR/RESTORE ALL DISTURBED AREAS (ON OR OFF THE SITE) AS A DIRECT 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 AND OPERABLE FACILITIES AND UTILITIES. 8.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT SHOP DRAWINGS FOR ALL ITEMS AND MATERIALS INCORPORATED INTO THE SITE WORK. WORK SHALL NOT BEGIN ON ANY ITEM UNTIL SHOP DRAWING APPROVAL IS GRANTED. 9.IN ADDITION TO THE REQUIREMENTS SET IN THESE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL COMPLETE THE WORK IN ACCORDANCE WITH ALL PERMIT CONDITIONS AND ANY LOCAL PUBLIC WORKS STANDARDS. 10.THE TOLERANCE FOR FINISH GRADES FOR ALL PAVEMENT, WALKWAYS AND LAWN AREAS SHALL BE 0.1 FEET. 11.ANY DEWATERING NECESSARY FOR THE COMPLETION OF THE SITEWORK SHALL BE CONSIDERED AS 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 TOWN AUTHORITIES. 13.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL THE ELECTRICAL, CABLE AND TELEPHONE SERVICES IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE UTILITY COMPANIES REQUIREMENTS. 14.EXISTING PAVEMENT AND TREE STUMPS TO BE REMOVED SHALL BE DISPOSED OF AT AN APPROVED 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, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT THE ENGINEER FOR VERIFICATION BEFORE WORK CONTINUES ON THE 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 IN ACCORDANCE WITH AWWA M14. THE SITE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONSTRUCT THE WATER LINE TO TWO FEET ABOVE THE FINISHED FLOOR. SEE MECHANICAL PLANS FOR RISER DETAIL. 18.THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR OBTAINING TESTING AND INSPECTION SERVICES INDICATED IN THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS, TYPICAL FOR CONCRETE AND SOIL TESTING. 19.THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL LAYOUT AND FIELD ENGINEERING REQUIRED FOR COMPLETION OF THE PROJECT. CIVIL ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES WILL PROVIDE AN AUTOCAD FILE WHERE APPLICABLE. 20.THE OWNER SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE INSTALLATION OF ANY AND ALL SAFETY FENCES OR RAILS ABOVE EXISTING AND PROPOSED WALLS. THE OWNER SHALL VERIFY LOCAL, STATE AND INSURANCE REQUIREMENT GUIDELINES FOR THE INSTALLATION AND VERIFY ANY AND ALL PERMITTING REQUIREMENTS. GENERAL NOTES 04/07/17 DSM PLAN REVISIONS P:\AutoCADD Projects\2016\16184\1-CADD Files-16184\Dwg\16184 - Site.dwg, 4/7/2017 11:23:21 AM, DWG To PDF.pc3 GGGGGGGGSS S 72: “ CB RIM=303.5 24" HDPE INV.=301.8 EXISTING TRANSFORMER PAD ELECTRIC METER EXIST. GRAVEL DRIVEWAY STONE OVER CLEANOUTUEUE UEU E UE U E F O FO FO F O F O FO G G G G G G THRESHOLD ELEV.=335.2 STAIRS EXIST. STAIRS EXIST. STAIRS CB RIM=300.1 SMH RIM=300.0 EXIST. WATER SHUT-OFF PROPOSED GRASS LINED PRE-TREAMENT SWALE PROPOSED BIOSWALE RELOCATE AS REQUIRED WWWWWWWWWWW W WWWWWWWWWWSSW W W W W W S S S S W W W W S S S W 10'MIN.CONNECT TO EXIST. SEWER SERVICE EXISTING SEWER SERVICE TO BE ABANDONED MAINTAIN 18" VERTICAL SEPARATION G APPROX. LOCATION OF EXISTING WATER SERVICE NEW 1" TYPE 'K' COPPER WATER SERVICE NEW SHUTOFF VALVE APPROX. LOCATION OF EXIST. SEWER SERVICE STUB APPROX. LOCATION OF EXIST. SEWER SERVICE NEW EDGE OF GRAVEL DRIVEWAY APPROX. LOCATION OF EXISTING WATER MAIN NEW WATER SERVICE CONNECTION RETAIN EXISTING TREES SSEXISTING CLEANOUT (C.O.) C.O. UE UE UE CUT AND CAP EXISTING SEWER LINE NEW YARD DRAIN CONCEPTUAL BUILDING ADDITION CONCEPTUAL PARKING C.O. PROPOSED GRASS SWALE EXISTING GRASS CHANNELSTNEW YARD DRAIN RIM=307.5 6" UNDERDRAIN AND SURFACE DRAIN DISCHARGE LINE STONE OUTFALL AT END OF 6" LINE AT EDGE OF EXISTING SWALE HARBOR RIDGE RD.2"RIP RAP 2" CRAB APPLE 4" CEDAR 4" CEDAR 337336335334333332331330329328327326325324323322321320319318317316315314313312311310309 3044" FUR CEDARS 4" FUR 4" FUR 10" FUR CHAIN LINK FEN C E SWALE 2" FUR 10" MAPLE (5 BOL) 2" FUR 4" FUR4"6" 6" CRAB APPLE EXIST. SWALE 10" CEDAR8" CEDAR 4" OAK 6" OAK 4" OAK 6" CEDAR 3" FUR10" OAK 8" FUR 24" STUMP 10' HIGH 12" STUMP 6" OAK 10" OAK14" CEDAR 8" FUR 12" BIRCH (2 BOL) 10" FUR 10" FUR 8" FUR 6" FUR 6" FUR BOULDER BOULDER BRUCHBRUCH18" STUMP BRUCH 8" MAPLE (2 BOL) 30" MAPLE DECK DECK CEDAR HEDGEROWWOVEN WIRE FENCE 6" FUR 8" FUR 8" FUR BOULD E R BOULDER BOULDERS2" FUR 14" ASH 10" FUR HEDGEEXIST. HOUSE NEW 8" H D P E NEW 12" HDPE NEW DRA I N A G E S W A L E NEW SWALE DRAI N A G E NEW DRA INAGE SWALE N E W D R A I N A G E SW A L E NEW SWALE POSSIBLE HOUSE F.F.=339.0 B.E.=329.0 GARAGE F.F.=329.0 33233433633831431631832232431230830432033031010' SIDE YARD SETBACK (RES.2) 10' SIDE YARD SETBACK (RES. 2 ) 25' SIDE YARD SETBACK (RES.1)30' FRONT YARD SETBACK(RES.2)15' SIDE YARD SETBACK (RES.1)30' REAR YARDSETBACK (RES.1)15' ACCESSORY SETBACK (RES.1)15' ACCESSORY SETBACK(RES.1)10' SIDE YARD SE T B A C K ( R E S . 2 )30' FRONT YARD SETBACK(RES.2)10' SIDE YARD SETBACK (RES.2) 25' SIDE YARD SETBACK (RES.1)4" PERF. PVCST 307307308310EXIST. PORCH DSM DSM SAL 1" = 15' 16184 C1.1 FEB., 2017 LOCATION MAP 1" = 2000' DONALD CUMMINGS 1811 SPEAR STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON VERMONT 05403 PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PROPOSED SITE PLAN PROJECT LOCATION 04/07/17 DSM PLAN REVISIONS 25 HARBOR RIDGE ROAD SOUTH BURLINGTON, VT A C E TOW N B O U N D A R Y TOW N B O U N D A R Y LEGEND UE G ST S FO W 100 EXISTING CONTOUR EXISTING FENCE EXISTING GRAVEL EXISTING SWALE EXISTING UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC EXISTING GAS EXISTING STORM EXISTING GRAVITY SEWER EXISTING FIBER OPTIC EXISTING WATER EXISTING SEWER MANHOLE EXISTING CATCH BASIN EXISTING HYDRANT EXISTING SHUT OFF EXISTING UTILITY POLE EXISTING LIGHT POLE EXISTING DECIDUOUS TREE APPROXIMATE SETBACK LINE APPROXIMATE PROPERTY LINE OE EXISTINGOVERHEAD ELECTRIC NOTES 1.UTILITIES SHOWN DO NOT PURPORT TO CONSTITUTE OR REPRESENT ALL UTILITIES LOCATED UPON OR ADJACENT TO THE SURVEYED PREMISES. EXISTING UTILITY LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE ONLY. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY ALL UTILITY CONFLICTS. ALL DISCREPANCIES SHALL BE REPORTED TO THE ENGINEER. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT DIG SAFE (888-344-7233) PRIOR TO ANY CONSTRUCTION. 2.THIS PLAN IS NOT A BOUNDARY SURVEY AND IS NOT INTENDED TO BE USED AS ONE. 3.PROPERTY LINE INFORMATION IS APPROXIMATE AND BASED ON A PLAT ENTITLED "" DATED PREPARED BY CIVIL ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. INTENDED TO BE USED AS ONE. MONUMENTATION RECOVERED IS CONSISTENT WITH RECORDED DOCUMENTS. 4. SITE INFORMATION IS BASED ON A FIELD SURVEY PERFORMED BY CIVIL ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC NOVEMBER 2016. CIVIL ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. SURVEY ORIENTATION IS "GRID NORTH", VERMONT COORDINATE SYSTEM OF 1983 (HORIZONTAL) AND NAVD88 (VERTICAL) ESTABLISHED FROM GPS OBSERVATIONS ON SITE. 5.CONTOUR INFORMATION IS BASED UPON SURVEY PERFORMED BY CIVIL ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES INC. NOVEMBER 2016 (LOT 2) AND LIDAR DATA FROM 2004. HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL DATUM BASED ON VCS NAD 83 AND NAVD 88. COVERAGE CATEGORY BUILDING TOTAL ZONING RES. 1 25% SETBACK SIDE YARD ACCESSORY BUILDING HEIGHT PRIMARY ZONING DISTRICT: RESIDENTIAL1 & RESIDENTIAL 2 LOT 1 25 25' FRONT YARD 50' PROPOSED RES. 1 PROPOSED RES. 2 9% 14% -- 1% 18'  “ 140' 15' REAR YARD  “30 -- -- -- -- 15% ZONING RES. 2 40% 25 10' 30' 15' 30 20% COVERAGE CATEGORY BUILDING TOTAL ZONING RES. 1 25% SETBACK SIDE YARD ACCESSORY BUILDING HEIGHT PRIMARY ZONING DISTRICT: RESIDENTIAL1 & RESIDENTIAL 2 LOT 2 25 25' FRONT YARD 50' PROPOSED RES. 1 PROPOSED RES. 2 -- -- 6% 19% -- 15' REAR YARD 30  “ --  “  “ 15% ZONING RES. 2 40% 25 10' 30' 15' 30 20% -- -- -- S W UE PROPOSED UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC PROPOSED GRAVITY SEWER PROPOSED WATER PROPOSED YARD DRAIN PROPOSED SHUT OFF PROPOSED SWALE ST PROPOSED STORM P:\AutoCADD Projects\2016\16184\1-CADD Files-16184\Dwg\16184 - Site.dwg, 4/7/2017 11:23:28 AM, DWG To PDF.pc3 S 72: “ CB RIM=303.5 24" HDPE INV.=301.8 EXISTING TRANSFORMER PAD ELECTRIC METER EXIST. GRAVEL DRIVEWAY THRESHOLD ELEV.=335.2 STAIRS EXIST. STAIRS EXIST. STAIRS CB RIM=300.1 PROPOSED GRASS LINED PRE-TREAMENT SWALE PROPOSED BIOSWALE RELOCATE AS REQUIRED W W W W W RETAIN EXISTING TREES NEW YARD DRAIN CONCEPTUAL BUILDING ADDITION CONCEPTUAL PARKING PROPOSED GRASS SWALE EXISTING GRASS CHANNELSTNEW YARD DRAIN RIM=307.5 6" UNDERDRAIN AND SURFACE DRAIN DISCHARGE LINE STONE OUTFALL AT END OF 6" LINE AT EDGE OF EXISTING SWALE HARBOR RIDGE RD.2"RIP RAP 2" CRAB APPLE 4" CEDAR 4" CEDAR 337336335334333332331330329328327326325324323322321320319318317316315314313312311310309 3044" FUR CEDARS 4" FUR 4" FUR 10" FUR CHAIN LINK FENC E SWALE 2" FUR 10" MAPLE (5 BOL) 2" FUR 4" FUR4"6" 6" CRAB APPLE EXIST. SWALE 10" CEDAR8" CEDAR 4" OAK 6" OAK 4" OAK 6" CEDAR 3" FUR10" OAK 8" FUR 24" STUMP 10' HIGH 12" STUMP 6" OAK 10" OAK14" CEDAR 8" FUR 12" BIRCH (2 BOL) 10" FUR 10" FUR 8" FUR 6" FUR 6" FUR BOULDER BOULDER BRUCHBRUCH18" STUMP BRUCH 8" MAPLE (2 BOL) 30" MAPLE DECK DECK CEDAR HEDGEROWWOVEN WIRE FENCE 6" FUR 8" FUR 8" FUR BOULD E R BOULDER BOULDERS2" FUR 14" ASH 10" FUR HEDGEEXIST. HOUSE NEW 8" H D P E NEW 12" HDPE NEW DRA I N A G E S W A L E NEW SWALE DRAI N A G E NEW DRA INAGE SWALE N E W D R A I N A G E SW A L E NEW SWALE POSSIBLE HOUSE F.F.=339.0 B.E.=329.0 GARAGE F.F.=329.0 33233433633831431631832232431230830432033031020,000 S.F. WATERSHED SIZE 2% RECOMMENDED SURFACE AREA OF BIORETENTION SYSTEM 400 S.F. MINIMUM REQUIRED SURFACE AREA 410 S.F. PROPOSED SURFACE AREA4" PERF. PVCST 307307308310EXIST. PORCH DSM DSM SAL 1" = 15' 16184 C1.1A FEB., 2017 LOCATION MAP 1" = 2000' DONALD CUMMINGS 1811 SPEAR STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON VERMONT 05403 PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT STORMWATER WORKSHEET PROJECT LOCATION 25 HARBOR RIDGE ROAD SOUTH BURLINGTON, VT A C E TOW N B O U N D A R Y TOW N B O U N D A R Y LEGEND UE G ST S FO W 100 EXISTING CONTOUR EXISTING FENCE EXISTING GRAVEL EXISTING SWALE EXISTING UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC EXISTING GAS EXISTING STORM EXISTING GRAVITY SEWER EXISTING FIBER OPTIC EXISTING WATER EXISTING SEWER MANHOLE EXISTING CATCH BASIN EXISTING HYDRANT EXISTING SHUT OFF EXISTING UTILITY POLE EXISTING LIGHT POLE EXISTING DECIDUOUS TREE APPROXIMATE SETBACK LINE APPROXIMATE PROPERTY LINE OE EXISTINGOVERHEAD ELECTRIC 04/07/17 DSM PLAN REVISIONS P:\AutoCADD Projects\2016\16184\1-CADD Files-16184\Dwg\16184 - Site.dwg, 4/7/2017 11:23:33 AM, DWG To PDF.pc3 DSM DSM SAL AS SHOWN 16184 C2.0 FEB., 2017 DETAILS A C E DONALD CUMMINGS 1811 SPEAR STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON VERMONT 05403 PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT 25 HARBOR RIDGE ROAD SOUTH BURLINGTON, VT N.T.S. TYPICAL GRAVEL SURFACE SECTION S-004S-004 Gravel Sec12" DENSE GRADED SUBBASE 6" CRUSHED GRAVEL (FINE) SEPARATION GEOTEXTILE COMPACTED SUBGRADE REVISED 11/10/2014 3 1 OR AS SHOWN ON PLANS 4" MINIMUM TOPSOIL, SEED AND MULCH ALL SIDESLOPE - USE EROSION MATTING (WHEN REQUIRED) TO ESTABLISH VEGETATION, PARTICULARLY ON LOW SIDE OF ROADWAY NOTES: N.T.S. TYPICAL STORM TRENCH REVISED 12/08/2016ST-003 D+2'ST-003 Storm TrenchPAVED 6" 6"COVER PER PLANAPPROVED BACKFILL THOROUGHLY COMPACTED IN 8" LIFTS STORM LINE, SEE PLAN FOR TYPE AND SIZE PIPE BEDDING UNDISTURBED SOIL OR ROCK TOPSOIL, RAKE, SEED & MULCH UNPAVED 1. COMPACTION OF BACKFILL AND BEDDING SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 90% (95% UNDER ROADWAY SURFACES) OF MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY DETERMINED IN THE STANDARD PROCTOR TEST (ASTM D698). 2.BEDDING MATERIAL SHALL NOT BE PLACED ON FROZEN SUBGRADE. 3.APPROVED BACKFILL SHALL NOT CONTAIN ANY STONES MORE THAN 12" IN LARGEST DIMENSION (6" IN ROADWAYS, 1 1/2"" MAXIMUM DIAMETER WITHIN 24" OF THE OUTSIDE OF THE PIPE), OR CONTAIN ANY FROZEN, WET, OR ORGANIC MATERIAL. 4.TRENCHES SHALL BE COMPLETELY DEWATERED PRIOR TO PLACING OF PIPE BEDDING MATERIAL AND KEPT DEWATERED DURING INSTALLATION OF PIPE AND BACKFILL. 5.IN TRENCHES WITH UNSTABLE MATERIALS OR HIGH WATER TABLE, TRENCH BOTTOM SHALL FIRST BE STABILIZED BY PLACEMENT OF FILTER FABRIC THEN CRUSHED STONE (3/4" MAXIMUM). 6.THE SIDES OF TRENCHES 4' OR MORE IN DEPTH ENTERED BY PERSONNEL SHALL BE SHEETED OR SLOPED TO THE ANGLE OF REPOSE AS DEFINED BY O.S.H.A. STANDARDS. 7.BEDDING MATERIAL SHALL CONSIST OF CRUSHED STONE, GRAVEL, OR SAND WITH A MAXIMUM SIZE OF 34". SUBMIT A SAMPLE TO THE ENGINEER FOR APPROVAL. D N.T.S. GRASS CHANNEL REVISED 10/07/2015ST-014aST-014a Grass Channel1 3 1 3 EXISTING GRADE PROVIDE 4" TOPSOIL AND GRASS COVER (CONSERVATION MIX) NORTH AMERICAN GREEN S75 EROSION CONTROL MATTING IN ALL GRASSED CHANNELS w/ PROFILE GRADES EXCEEDING 5%. OR WHERE SHOWN ON PLANS. INSTALL PER MFG. RECOMMENDATIONS 12" MIN. REFER TO SITE PLANS FOR BOTTOM WIDTH N.T.S. TYPICAL BIOSWALE DETAIL 6" OF 4" MINUS ROUNDED RIVER STONE 18" OF CONCRETE SAND (ASTM 33) 4" OF 38" PEASTONE 20" OF 34" DRAINAGE STONE DRAINAGE RESERVOIR 4" PERFORATED PVC (SLOPE TO YARD DRAIN) FILTER FABRIC 4" MIN. TOPSOIL 3 1 3 1 3" AVERAGE PONDING (0" AT UPHILL END, 6" AT YARD DRAIN) SOIL NOTES: 1.PLANTING MIX SHALL HAVE A PH BETWEEN 5.2 AND 7.0. 2.CONCRETE SAND AND PLANTING MIX SHALL BE "BUCKET TAMPED" ONLY. DO NOT OVER COMPACT TREE PLANTING SOIL LIMITS 12" MIN.6' 04/07/17 DSM PLAN REVISIONS 307.0 N.T.S. DRIVEWAY YARD DRAIN DETAILS REVISED 08/01/2014ST-008ST-008 Yard Drain18" CAST IRON GRATE INLINE DRAIN SECTION 18" INLINE DRAIN SIZE: AS SHOWN ON PLAN STORM DRAIN GRATE COVER IS REVERSIBLE; ONE SIDE STICKS OUT AS IS SHOWN ON THE RIGHT. ONE SIDE IS FLUSH AS IS SHOWN ON THE LEFT. DRAIN AREA = 98.7 SQ. INCH GRATE HAS H-20 (HEAVY TRAFFIC) DOT RATING QUALITY: MATERIAL SHALL CONFORM TO ASTM A48 - CLASS 30B PAINT: CASTINGS ARE FURNISHED WITH A BLACK PAINT CAST IRON GRATE "X" ADAPTOR ƒ(/%2: TEE RISER ADAPTORS AVAILABLE 4" THRU 18" CAST IRON H-20 RATED GRATE DRAIN BASIN AND INLINE DRAIN BY NYLOPLAST USA, INC. OR APPROVED EQUAL 4" - 18"4"-9"12"N.T.S. BIORETENTION YARD DRAIN DETAILS REVISED 04/07/2015ST-008ST-008 Yard Drain18" CAST IRON GRATE INLINE DRAIN SECTION 18" INLINE DRAIN 6" OUTFALL PVC GRATE COVER IS REVERSIBLE; ONE SIDE STICKS OUT AS IS SHOWN ON THE RIGHT. ONE SIDE IS FLUSH AS IS SHOWN ON THE LEFT. DRAIN AREA = 98.7 SQ. INCH GRATE HAS H-20 (HEAVY TRAFFIC) DOT RATING QUALITY: MATERIAL SHALL CONFORM TO ASTM A48 - CLASS 30B PAINT: CASTINGS ARE FURNISHED WITH A BLACK PAINT CAST IRON GRATE "X" ADAPTOR TEE RISER ADAPTORS AVAILABLE 4" THRU 18" CAST IRON H-20 RATED GRATE DRAIN BASIN AND INLINE DRAIN BY NYLOPLAST USA, INC. OR APPROVED EQUAL 4" - 18"4"-9"12"4" PERF. PVC P:\AutoCADD Projects\2016\16184\1-CADD Files-16184\Dwg\16184 - Details.dwg, 4/7/2017 11:23:42 AM, DWG To PDF.pc3 DSM DSM SAL AS SHOWN 16184 C2.1 FEB., 2017 DETAILS A C E DONALD CUMMINGS 1811 SPEAR STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON VERMONT 05403 PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT 25 HARBOR RIDGE ROAD SOUTH BURLINGTON, VT NOTES: PAVED N.T.S. D D+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 A MINIMUM OF 90% (95% UNDER ROADWAY SURFACES) OF MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY DETERMINED IN THE STANDARD PROCTOR TEST (ASTM D698). 2.BEDDING MATERIAL SHALL NOT BE PLACED ON FROZEN SUBGRADE. 3.APPROVED BACKFILL SHALL NOT CONTAIN ANY STONES MORE THAN 12" IN LARGEST DIMENSION (6" IN ROADWAYS, 1 1/2"" MAXIMUM DIAMETER WITHIN 24" OF THE OUTSIDE OF THE PIPE), OR CONTAIN ANY FROZEN, WET, OR ORGANIC MATERIAL. 4.TRENCHES SHALL BE COMPLETELY DEWATERED PRIOR TO PLACING OF PIPE BEDDING MATERIAL AND KEPT DEWATERED DURING INSTALLATION OF PIPE AND BACKFILL. 5.IN TRENCHES WITH UNSTABLE MATERIALS OR HIGH WATER TABLE, TRENCH BOTTOM SHALL FIRST BE STABILIZED BY PLACEMENT OF FILTER FABRIC THEN CRUSHED STONE (3/4" MAXIMUM). 6.THE SIDES OF TRENCHES 4' OR MORE IN DEPTH ENTERED BY PERSONNEL SHALL BE SHEETED OR SLOPED TO THE ANGLE OF REPOSE AS DEFINED BY O.S.H.A. STANDARDS. 7.BEDDING MATERIAL FOR WASTEWATER LINES SHALL CONSIST OF CRUSHED STONE, GRAVEL, OR SAND WITH A MAXIMUM SIZE OF 34". SUBMIT A SAMPLE TO THE ENGINEER FOR APPROVAL. 8.ALL JOINTS TO BE INSPECTED BY OWNER/ENGINEER/TOWN PRIOR TO BACKFILL. APPROVED BACKFILL THOROUGHLY COMPACTED IN 8" LIFTS 2" RIGID INSULATION WHEN DEPTH OF PIPING IS LESS THAN MINIMUM NOTED 4" WIDE MAGNETIC "SEWER" TAPE INSTALLED APPROX. 2' BELOW SURFACE SEWER LINE, SEE PLAN FOR TYPE AND SIZE PIPE BEDDING UNDISTURBED SOIL OR ROCK TOPSOIL, RAKE, SEED & MULCH UNPAVED REVISED 12/08/2016SWR-001SWR-001 Trench(SEE SITE PLAN)5'-0" MIN. COVER OVER FORCE MAINSN.T.S. SEWER SERVICE CONNECTION REVISED 08/01/2014SWR-003 PLANELEVATION FLOW USE 4"x8' PVC PIPE TO MARK LOCATION AND DEPTH OF SERVICE CONNECTION. EXTEND FROM PLUG TO 6" MIN. ABOVE FINISH GRADE. - CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE 3 LOCATION TIES TO END OF LATERAL TO BE INCLUDED ON "AS-BUILT" DRAWINGS. (IF CONSTRUCTION IS NOT CONCURRENT WITH LATERAL) - SEE TYPICAL TRENCH FOR BEDDING AND BACKFILL REQUIREMENTS. 4" 22 12ƒ25ƒ(/%2: ROTATED AS REQUIRED SEWER MAIN EXISTING SEWER MAIN 4" 22 12ƒ25ƒ(/%2: ROTATED AS REQUIRED 4" MIN. SDR 35 PVC SEWER SERVICE, CONTINUE AS PER PLAN AND INSTALL PVC CAP. SEE SITE PLAN FOR SLOPE AND ELEVATIONS (MIN. SLOPE = 1/4" PER FT.) ƒ:<(6$''/(&211(&7,21 (COORDINATE PREFERRED CONNECTOR w/PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT) (@ EXISTING SEWER MAIN) STAINLESS STEEL CLAMP SWR-003 Service Con-EXN.T.S. TYPICAL CLEANOUT DETAIL REVISED 10/22/2015SWR-007SWR-007 COCONCRETE CRADLE w/ 3 MIL POLYETHYLENE PLACED BETWEEN PIPE & CONCRETE 4" SDR 35 PVC 4" SDR 35 PVC ƒ:<( FLOW *CLEANOUT TO BE INSTALLED AT INTERVALS OF NOT MORE THAN 100 FEET, AND UPSTREAM OF BEND(S) IN BUILDING SEWER(S) WHEN CHANGE IN ',5(&7,21(;&(('6ƒ 86(/21*6:((3 ),77,1*6:+(1(;&((',1*ƒ GRASS PAVEMENT CLEANOUT BOX INDEPENDENT OF PIPE PVC CAP 6" D.I. VALVE BOX TOP SECTION w/ COVER MARKED "CLEANOUT" NOTES: PAVED N.T.S. D D+2' 6" 6" TYPICAL WATER TRENCH DETAIL6'-0" MIN. COVER1. COMPACTION OF BACKFILL AND BEDDING SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 90% (95% UNDER ROADWAY SURFACES) OF MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY DETERMINED IN THE STANDARD PROCTOR TEST (ASTM D698). 2.BEDDING MATERIAL SHALL NOT BE PLACED ON FROZEN SUBGRADE. 3.APPROVED BACKFILL SHALL NOT CONTAIN ANY STONES MORE THAN 12" IN LARGEST DIMENSION (6" IN ROADWAYS, 1 1/2"" MAXIMUM DIAMETER WITHIN 24" OF THE OUTSIDE OF THE PIPE), OR CONTAIN ANY FROZEN, WET, OR ORGANIC MATERIAL. 4.TRENCHES SHALL BE COMPLETELY DEWATERED PRIOR TO PLACING OF PIPE BEDDING MATERIAL AND KEPT DEWATERED DURING INSTALLATION OF PIPE AND BACKFILL. 5.IN TRENCHES WITH UNSTABLE MATERIALS OR HIGH WATER TABLE, TRENCH BOTTOM SHALL FIRST BE STABILIZED BY PLACEMENT OF FILTER FABRIC THEN CRUSHED STONE (3/4" MAXIMUM). 6.THE SIDES OF TRENCHES 4' OR MORE IN DEPTH ENTERED BY PERSONNEL SHALL BE SHEETED OR SLOPED TO THE ANGLE OF REPOSE AS DEFINED BY O.S.H.A. STANDARDS. 7.BEDDING MATERIAL SHALL CONSIST OF CRUSHED STONE, OR SAND WITH A MAXIMUM SIZE OF 34". SUBMIT A SAMPLE TO THE ENGINEER FOR APPROVAL. 8.CONTRACTOR TO INSTALL TRACER WIRE ALONG ALL SECTIONS OF NEW WATER LINE. TERMINATE TRACER WIRE AT ALL VALVE BOXES AND HYDRANTS. COORDINATE INSTALLATION WITH TOWN AND ENGINEER. APPROVED BACKFILL THOROUGHLY COMPACTED IN 8" LIFTS 2" RIGID INSULATION WHEN DEPTH OF PIPING IS LESS THAN 6'-0" WATER LINE, SEE PLAN FOR TYPE AND SIZE PIPE BEDDING UNDISTURBED SOIL OR ROCK TOPSOIL, RAKE, SEED & MULCH UNPAVED REVISED 12/08/2016W-001 D/2 INSTALL UTILITY LOCATOR RIBBON OVER WATER MAIN APPROX. 2' BELOW SURFACE TRACER WIRE (VERIFY TYPE WITH TOWN/ENGINEER PRIOR TO START OF CONSTRUCTION)W-001 Trench(SEE SITE PLAN) N.T.S. WATER SERVICE CONNECTION REVISED 2/23/2015W-006W-006 Serv Con1" MAX.6'-0" MIN.6'-0" MIN.6" MIN. UNDISTRUBED SOIL 4"x8"x16" SOLID CONCRETE BLOCK CURB STOP ADJUSTABLE IRON CURB BOX w/ LID MARKED "WATER" - CONTRACTOR TO COORD. FINAL CURB STOP COVER WITH LOCAL WATER DEPT. PROPERTY LINE OR EASEMENT BOUNDARY STATIONARY ROD INSTALL A GOOSE NECK LOOP WATER MAIN TYPE 'K' COPPER SERVICE OR AS SHOWN ON PLANS CORPORATION (SEE PLAN FOR SIZE) FINISH GRADE NOTE: 1. SEE SPECIFICATIONS FOR ADDITIONAL TAPPING SADDLE, CORPORATION, AND CURB STOP REQUIREMENTS. N.T.S. WATER/SEWER CROSSING REVISED 6/15/2015W-007W-007 Water-Sewer CrossingWATER MAIN PROFILE VIEW18"MIN.18"MIN.GRAVITY SEWER OR FORCE MAIN (JOINTS TO BE ENCASED) GRAVITY SEWER OR FORCE MAIN PLAN VIEW WATER MAIN SEWER MAIN10' MIN.10' MIN.10' MIN.10' MIN.SINGLE 20' LENGTH OF WATER QUALITY PIPE ENCASEMENT IF SEPARATION IS BETWEEN 12" TO 18" THE GRAVITY SEWER or FORCE MAIN JOINTS SHALL BE CONCRETE ENCASED WHEN LOCATED ABOVE THE WATER MAIN REFERENCE: VT. WATER SUPPLY RULE CHAPTER 21, APPENDIX A, SECTION 8.6 NOTES: 1. AT CROSSINGS, ONE FULL LENGTH OF WATER/STORM PIPE SHALL BE LOCATED SO BOTH 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 ON EACH SIDE OF THE WATER MAIN MUST BE CONCRETE ENCASED. SPECIAL STRUCTURAL SUPPORT FOR THE WATER AND STORM PIPES MAY BE REQUIRED. 3.WHERE IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO MAINTAIN THE 18" SEPARATION, THE STORM MATERIALS SHALL BE WATER MAIN PIPE OR EQUIVALENT AND SHALL BE PRESSURE TESTED TO WATER 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 CROSSING REVISED 12/23/2014W-007AW-007A Water-Storm CrossingL/2 POINT OF CROSSING JOINT MINIMUM 18" SEPARATION BETWEEN OUTSIDE OF PIPES WATER OR STORM LINE L/2 L/2 L/2 WATER OR STORM LINE N.T.S. GAS LINE TRENCH DETAIL REVISED 08/01/2014M-006M-006 Gas TrenchGAS MARKING TAPE SHALL BE 12" BELOW FINISH GRADE APPROVED BACKFILL THOROUGHLY COMPACTED IN 8" LIFTS GAS PIPE MIN. 6" SAND OR FINE GRAVEL ON ALL SIDES OF CONDUIT IN AREAS OF ROCKY SOIL24" MIN.36" MIN.N.T.S. ELECTRICAL TRENCH - SECONDARY REVISED 08/01/2014M-008M-008 Elec Trench Secondary24" MIN.24" MIN. 12" MIN. APPROVED BACKFILL THOROUGHLY COMPACTED IN 8" LIFTS ELECTRICAL CABLE MARKING TAPE SHALL BE PLACED 8" TO 12" BELOW FINISH GRADE TELEPHONE CABLE MIN. 4" SAND OR FINE GRAVEL ON ALL SIDES OF CONDUIT ELECTRICAL CONDUIT P:\AutoCADD Projects\2016\16184\1-CADD Files-16184\Dwg\16184 - Details.dwg, 4/7/2017 11:23:48 AM, DWG To PDF.pc3 802-864-2323 FAX: 802-864-2271 web: www.cea-vt.comCIVIL ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC.ACELOCATION MAPNOT to SCALEP1Donald Cummings1811 Spear Street & 25 Harbor Ridge RoadSouth Burlington VermontPLAT of SURVEYRECEIVED FOR RECORDING IN THE LAND RECORDS OF THE CITYOF SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT, AT______________ O'CLOCKON THE ______ DAY OF __________, 20_____.ATTEST: ____________________________, CITY CLERKTo the best of my knowledge and belief this plat depictsthe results of a survey conducted by me as described in"Survey Notes" above, based upon our analysis of landrecords and evidence found in the field. Existingboundaries shown are in substantial conformance with therecords, except as noted. This plat is in substantialcompliance with 27 VSA 1403, "Recording of Land Plats".This statement valid only when accompanied by myoriginal signature and seal.____________________________________________________Rebecca Gilson VT LS 109314ORIGINAL INK on MYLAR SOUTH BURLINGTONSHELBURNE- Survey Notes -1.Purpose of this survey is to retrace, monument and document the boundaries of two existing parcels of landdeeded to Donald Cummings: 1811 Spear Street by Quit Claim Deed dated June 27, 1986 recorded Vol. 211 Pg.255 and 25 Harbor Ridge Road by Warranty Deed dated March 24, 2014 recorded Vol. 1208 Pg. 276, both ofthe City of South Burlington Land Records. Other neighboring property lines and buildings shown MAY beapproximate only, and are shown for information purposes only.2.Field survey was conducted during fall of 2016 and consisted of a closed-loop traverse utilizing a robotic totalstation instrument. Bearings shown are from Grid North, Vermont Coordinate System of 1983, based upon ourGPS observations on or adjacent to the site (Reference Frame NAD83 (2011, Epoch 2010)).3./ƌŽŶƉŝƉĞƐƐŚŽǁŶĂƐ͞ĨŽƵŶĚ͟ĂƌĞƚLJƉŝĐĂůůLJůĂďĞůĞĚǁŝƚŚŝŶƐŝĚĞĚŝĂŵĞƚĞƌ͕ƌŽĚƐǁŝƚŚŽƵƚƐŝĚĞĚŝĂŵĞƚĞƌ͕ƵŶůĞƐƐotherwise indicated. Concrete monuments found were typically 4 inch square unless otherwise indicated.ŽŶĚŝƚŝŽŶŽĨƉŝƉĞƐ͕ƌŽĚƐĂŶĚŵĂƌŬĞƌƐĨŽƵŶĚĂƌĞŐŽŽĚƵŶůĞƐƐŽƚŚĞƌǁŝƐĞŶŽƚĞĚ͘ŽƌŶĞƌƐĚĞŶŽƚĞĚ͞WƌŽƉŽƐĞĚ͟ƐŚĂůůƚLJƉŝĐĂůůLJĐŽŶƐŝƐƚŽĨϱͬϴ͟ĚŝĂŵĞƚĞƌƌĞďĂƌĐĂƉƉĞĚǁŝƚŚĂůƵŵŝŶƵŵĚŝƐŬƐƐƚĂŵƉĞĚ͞ŝǀŝůŶŐŝŶĞĞƌŝŶŐƐƐŽĐƐ͘Ͳsd>^ϱϵϳ͕͟ĂŶĚƚLJƉŝĐĂůůLJƐĞƚĨůƵƐŚǁŝƚŚĞdžŝƐƚŝŶŐŐƌĂĚĞ͘4.Not being within the scope of this survey, Civil Engineering Associates, Inc. has conducted no investigationwhatsoever respecting whether or not the property and each component thereof is in compliance with state orlocal permits.5.Utilities shown do not purport to constitute or represent all utilities located upon or adjacent to the surveyedpremises. Existing utility locations are approximate only. Buried utilities shown are depicted based solely onsurface indications. Actual locations may vary. Contact Dig Safe (888-344-7233) prior to any construction.6.Spear Street is a 66' Right of Way. Harbor Road is a 60' Right of Way.7.Westerly Parcel lies in both the "Residential 1" Zoning District and the "Residential 2" Zoning District. EasterlyParcel lies within the "Residential 1" Zoning Districting. Both parcels are also within the " StormwaterManagement Overlay District".8.Parcels do not lie within any floodplain as determined by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)or as mapped by the City of South Burlington.Cummings, D.1811 Spear StreetVol. 211 Pg. 255n/fMichaelides, C.1809 Spear StreetVol. 1307 Pg. 164n/fFusun T. Floyed Rev. Trust1813 Spear StreetVol. 953 Pg. 31n/fChamplain Water Districtn/fJohn Larkin, Inc200 Allen RoadVol. 733 Pg. 197Cummings, D.25 Harbor Ridge RoadVol. 1208 Pg. 276LEGENDABUTTER PROPERTY LINE (APPROX.)EXISTING UTILITY POLESUBJECT PROPERTY LINEIRON PIPE FOUND/REBAR FOUNDCAPPED REBAR PROPOSEDCONCRETE MONUMENT FOUNDIPF/RBFCRPRIGHT OF WAY LINEZONING DISTRICT BOUNDARYn/f"NOW OR FORMERLY"CMF70050 Sq. Feet1.61 AcresEXISTING DECIDUOUS TREEEXISTING CONIFEROUS TREECALCULATED POINT50630 Sq. Feet1.16 AcresPROJECTLOCATIONn/fAllen Road LandCo. Inc.44 Harbor Ridge Roadn/fAllen Road LandCo. Inc.62 Harbor RidgeRoadn/fSouth VillageCommunities, LLCP:\AutoCADD Projects\2016\16184\1-CADD Files-16184\Dwg\16184 - Plat.dwg, 4/7/2017 11:24:02 AM, DWG To PDF.pc3 802-864-2323 FAX: 802-864-2271 web: www.cea-vt.comCIVIL ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC.ACELOCATION MAPNOT to SCALEP2Donald Cummings 25 Harbor Ridge RoadSouth Burlington VermontSUBDIVISION PLATRECEIVED FOR RECORDING IN THE LAND RECORDS OF THE CITY OFSOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT, AT______________ O'CLOCK ON THE______ DAY OF __________, 20_____.ATTEST: ____________________________, CITY CLERKAPPROVED BY RESOLUTION OF THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD OFTHE CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT, ON THE _____ DAY OF_____________, 20____, SUBJECT TO THE REQUIREMENTS AND CONDITIONSOF SAID RESOLUTION. SIGNED THIS _____ DAY OF ______________,20______.BY ___________________________________, CHAIRPERSONTo the best of my knowledge and belief this plat depictsthe results of a survey conducted by me as described in"Survey Notes" above, based upon our analysis of landrecords and evidence found in the field. Existingboundaries shown are in substantial conformance with therecords, except as noted. This plat is in substantialcompliance with 27 VSA 1403, "Recording of Land Plats".This statement valid only when accompanied by myoriginal signature and seal.____________________________________________________Rebecca Gilson VT LS 109314ORIGINAL INK on MYLAR SOUTH BURLINGTONSHELBURNE- Survey Notes -1.Purpose of this survey is to subdivide a parcel of property known as 25 Harbor RidgeRoad, conveyed to Donald Cummings by Warranty Deed dated March 24, 2014 recordedVol. 1208 Pg. 276, of the City of South Burlington Land Records. Other neighboringproperty lines and buildings shown MAY be approximate only, and are shown forinformation purposes only.2.Field survey was conducted during fall of 2016 and consisted of a closed-loop traverseutilizing a robotic total station instrument. Bearings shown are from Grid North, VermontCoordinate System of 1983, based upon our GPS observations on or adjacent to the site(Reference Frame NAD83 (2011, Epoch 2010)).3./ƌŽŶƉŝƉĞƐƐŚŽǁŶĂƐ͞ĨŽƵŶĚ͟ĂƌĞƚLJƉŝĐĂůůLJůĂďĞůĞĚǁŝƚŚŝŶƐŝĚĞĚŝĂŵĞƚĞƌ͕ƌŽĚƐǁŝƚŚŽƵƚƐŝĚĞdiameter, unless otherwise indicated. Concrete monuments found were typically 4 inchsquare unless otherwise indicated. Condition of pipes, rods and markers found are goodƵŶůĞƐƐŽƚŚĞƌǁŝƐĞŶŽƚĞĚ͘ŽƌŶĞƌƐĚĞŶŽƚĞĚ͞WƌŽƉŽƐĞĚ͟ƐŚĂůůƚLJƉŝĐĂůůLJĐŽŶƐŝƐƚŽĨϱͬϴ͟ĚŝĂŵĞƚĞƌƌĞďĂƌĐĂƉƉĞĚǁŝƚŚĂůƵŵŝŶƵŵĚŝƐŬƐƐƚĂŵƉĞĚ͞ŝǀŝůŶŐŝŶĞĞƌŝŶŐƐƐŽĐƐ͘Ͳsd>^ϱϵϳ͕͟ĂŶĚƚLJƉŝĐĂůůLJƐĞƚĨůƵƐŚǁŝƚŚĞdžŝƐƚŝŶŐŐƌĂĚĞ͘4.Not being within the scope of this survey, Civil Engineering Associates, Inc. has conductedno investigation whatsoever respecting whether or not the property and eachcomponent thereof is in compliance with state or local permits.n/fCummings, D.1811 Spear StreetVol. 211 Pg. 25570,050 Sq. Ft.1.61 AcresRef Plat ASurvey Note 11n/fMichaelides, C.1809 Spear StreetVol. 1307 Pg. 164n/fFusun T. Floyed Rev. Trust1813 Spear StreetVol. 953 Pg. 31n/fChamplain Water Districtn/fJohn Larkin, Inc200 Allen RoadVol. 733 Pg. 197PROJECTLOCATIONn/fAllen Road LandCo. Inc.62 Harbor RidgeRoad5.Utilities shown do not purport to constitute or represent all utilities located upon or adjacent to the surveyed premises. Existing utility locations are approximate only. Buriedutilities shown are depicted based solely on surface indications. Actual locations may vary.Contact Dig Safe (888-344-7233) prior to any construction.6.Harbor Ridge Road has a 60' Right of Way.7.Proposed Parcels lie in both the "Residential 1" Zoning District and the "Residential 2"Zoning District. Both parcels are also within the "Stormwater Management OverlayDistrict".8.Parcels do not lie within any floodplain as determined by the Federal EmergencyManagement Agency (FEMA) or as mapped by the City of South Burlington.9.This subdivision shall be subject to the terms and conditions of a Planned Unit DevelopmentApproval from the City of South Burlington Planning and Zoning Department.10.As part of the conditioned use approval, the limits of the use and dimensional standards forthe Residential 1 and Residential 2 Zoning Districts have been modified as depicted.11.The 1811 Spear Street Parcel has an area of 70,050 sq. ft. all within the Residential 1 ZoningDistrict (Reference Plat A). Per the terms and conditions of the Planned Unit DevelopmentApproval from the City of South Burlington, this area is to be included in the densitycalculations.12.Existing Zoning District Boundary Line is depicted by dotted line.LEGENDABUTTER PROPERTY LINE (APPROX.)EXISTING UTILITY POLESUBJECT PROPERTY LINEIRON PIPE FOUND/REBAR FOUNDCAPPED REBAR PROPOSEDCONCRETE MONUMENT FOUNDIPF/RBFCRPRIGHT OF WAY LINELIMITS OF ZONING DISTRICT USE AND DIMENSIONAL STANDARDSn/f"NOW OR FORMERLY"CMFEXISTING CONIFEROUS TREECALCULATED POINTPROPOSED PROPERTY LINE- Density Calculations -Residential 1 Zoning District Density (Survey Note 11)Existing Residential 1 Area = 89,086 sq ft / 2.045 Ac.Adjustment to Regulations + 5,097 sq ft / 0.117 Ac.Adjustment to Regulations - 5,832 sq ft / 0.134 Ac.Post Approval 88,351 sq. ft / 2.028 Ac.Maximum Allowable Density 1 Unit per AcreMaximum Number of Units Allowed: 2.028Proposed Number of Units = 2Residential 2 Zoning District DensityExisting Residential 2 Area = 31,594 sq ft / 0.725 Ac.Adjustment to Regulations + 5,832 sq ft / 0.134 Ac.Adjustment to Regulations - 5,097 sq ft / 0.117 Ac.Post Approval 32,329 sq. ft / 0.742 Ac.Maximum Allowable Density 1 Unit per 22,000 sq ftMaximum Number of Units Allowed: 1.47Proposed Number of Units = 1EXISTING ZONING DISTRICT BOUNDARYP:\AutoCADD Projects\2016\16184\1-CADD Files-16184\Dwg\16184 - Subdivision Plat.dwg, 4/7/2017 11:24:17 AM, DWG To PDF.pc3 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD 21 MARCH 2017 The South Burlington Development Review Board held a regular meeting on Tuesday, 21 March 2017, 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, F. Kochman, ALSO PRESENT: R. Belair, Administrative Officer; L. Britt, Development Review Planner; M. Sperry, P. Judge, E. Barfed, S. Livofson, A. Rowe, T. McKenzie, K. Braverman, C. Snyder, B. Williams, G. Maille, J. Leinwohl, K. Sturtevant, J. Duncan, J. Pidgeon, A. Gill, M. Waite, S. Rendall, M. Janswold, R. Rushford, J. Desautels, A. Clayton, J. Duncan Mr. Miller provided emergency exit information. 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. Continued Preliminary and Final Plat Application #SD-1703 of Snyder-Braverman Development Company, LLC, to subdivide a 5.15 acre parcel into three lots ranging in size from 12,589 sq. ft. to 183,150 sq. ft., 6 Market Street: Mr. Snyder advised that the right-of-way has been shifted entirely onto the South Burlington City Center parcel. Mr. Parsons said this is what the Board discussed 2 weeks ago. Mr. Sperry, representing the adjacent property owner, requested bonding or other security. He noted that Century Partners gets a lot of cut-through traffic. He hoped the city would extend Market Street to eliminate that. Mr. Judge said it is a safety concern. Mr. Belair said a bond is not required at this level; this is just the creation of 3 lots with no development involved. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD 21 MARCH 2017 PAGE 2 Mr. Kochman added that unless a zoning permit is required, a bond is not required. Mr. Sperry said if the Board says nothing, the applicant can say they weren’t told a bond would later be required. Mr. Belair responded that a bond is always required before a street can be constructed. Mr. Snyder read from the regulation 8.04(A) (2) regarding bonding requirements. Mr. Sperry said he would feel better if something got said about it. Mr. Belair said the city’s attorney says that if something is in the regulations, it does not have to be put in the decision. Mr. Wilking then moved to close #SD-17-03. Ms. Smith seconded. Motion passed 5-0. 5. Appeal #AO-1701-01 of Burlington International Airport (BIA)/City of Burlington (COB) appealing the issuance of Zoning Violation #NV-17-01 by the Administrative Officer alleging a zoning violation at 3060 Williston Road: Ms. Sturtevant, representing the City of Burlington, asked for a continuance to a future meeting. She noted this property has tenants, and the Airport is working with the tenants to resolve the issues, so there may not be a need for a hearing. Mr. Belair noted the site plan had been changed without approval. Violations include the placing of 2 dumpsters, a large storage container and outside storage on the property without approval. Ms. Sturtevant said these items have now been removed. Ms. Clayton added that the tenants were given two options: get site plan approval or remove the items. They removed the items. Mr. Belair noted there may also be some tenants in the building who were not approved as required. Mr. Wilking moved to continue Appeal #AO-17-01 to 2 May 2017. Mr. Parsons seconded. Motion passed 5-0. 6. Appeal #AO-17-02 of Burlington International Airport (BIA)/City of Burlington (COB) appealing the issuance of Notice of Violation #NV-17-02 by the Administrative Officer alleging a zoning violation at Valley Road (quarry north of 3060 & 3064 Williston Road): DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD 21 MARCH 2017 PAGE 3 Ms. Sturtevant asked for a continuance. Mr. Belair explained that there is a provision that requires approval for placing of fill. The placement in this case was more than the allowable 20 cubic yards. That placement has now stopped. Ms. Sturtevant said the fill was placed by the Air Guard without notice to the Airport. The Airport had gone through sketch review to place the fill in the quarry. The placement happened in between. Ms. Sturtevant said they are ready with preliminary and final plat and asked for scheduling as early as possible. Mr. Wilking moved to continue Appeal #AO-17-02 to 2 May 2017. Ms. Smith seconded. Motion passed 5-0. 7. Re-opened site plan review application #SP-16-82 of City of Burlington, Burlington International Airport to amend a previously approved plan for an airport complex. The amendment consists of: 1) relocation of taxiway “G,” 2) new aircraft holding bay, 3) relocation of taxiway “A,” 4) reconstruction of taxiways “M” & “H,” and 5) stormwater improvements, 1200 Airport Drive: Mr. Leinwohl said they have a mitigation plan to address the issues raised by the City. He showed a photo and diagram of the holding area and noted that when a plane is parked there awaiting take-off, there is a jet blast that blows snow onto Airport Parkway. The plan to address this is to build an earth berm, 10 feet high. It would be vegetated with landscaping to improve the public side. This would address the issue at one of the holding bays. The other bay abuts property owned by the City of South Burlington, and the Airport would need an agreement with the City of South Burlington to extend the berm. Mr. Leinwohl showed the boundary of the 35 mph velocity. He noted that the wind in the area dissipates at 15 mph for every 40 feet. Mr. Belair said staff would like to know where the velocity drops to zero. He suggested continuing the hearing to that information can be provided. Mr. Leinwohl said they did that research. The velocity is reduced to zero by the time you reach Airport Parkway. He added that the wind would have to be blowing east to west to impact that, which is very unusual. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD 21 MARCH 2017 PAGE 4 Mr. Wilking noted the berm is very long and asked about truck trips for the building of the berm. Mr. Leinwohl said they haven’t gotten that specific yet. Mr. Wilking said the neighborhood has had a lot of impact from the Airport, and this work could add to traffic, etc. He wanted to know the specifics. Mr. Leinwohl said they can use a lot of material from the construction work to construct the berm, which would reduce trucking. Mr. Wilking asked about the possibility of a blast wall for the entire area. Mr. Leinwohl said that would not be as aesthetically pleasing. Mr. Wilking asked if it could address noise issues. Mr. Leinwohl said it is not a noise controller as it is a different kind of wall. Mr. Kochman questioned the impact on the South Burlington property if the berm is extended or even just from the blast across it. Mr. Wilking said that Cty property is a big gully with not much use. Ms. Clayton said the Airport would love to put a blast wall there, but could do it only if the gully were to be filled in. Regarding traffic during the construction, Mr. Leinwohl showed a plan indicating the project area. He showed the route that trucks would take with material taken out and removed to the quarry. He estimated 5500 truck trips going out in 2017 and 6400 ion 2018. This would average out to 3 trips in and out (round trips) per hour, depending on what phase of building is going on. He showed a graph of estimated truck traffic due to phasing. Regarding materials coming in (stone, pipe, etc.), there are 2 likely routes, depending on which contractor is used (the project has not yet been bid). Traffic would come from either the east or west on Williston Road. Mr. Leinwohl estimated 5 trips per hour through the Williston Road intersection. Mr. Wilking said he would want assurance that the trucks stay on Williston Road and do not go through the neighborhood. Mr. Leinwohl said that will be part of the bidding package. Mr. Kochman asked about night construction. Mr. Leinwohl said there will be night work for one part where the taxiway meets the runway. Ms. Clayton said that will take place between midnight and 5 a.m., when there are no flights. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD 21 MARCH 2017 PAGE 5 Mr. Wilking asked how noise from trucks backing up near homes can be mitigated. Ms. Clayton said they can have a turn-around instead of having trucks backing up. Mr. Leinwohl said this can be done in “vulnerable locations.” Mr. Belair said that can be a condition. Mr. Wilking said it should be anywhere the noise can travel. Mr. Leinwohl said he wasn’t sure that was feasible from the contractor’s point of view. They have to have back-up indicators, but they can talk about how to minimize that. Mr. Wilking stressed that 2-1/2 months of backing up truck noise is not acceptable. Mr. Leinwohl said they will do whatever they can. Mr. Belair noted one issue with the proposed berm. Part of it would be on an adjacent property owned by the City of Burlington, which would have to apply to have the berm on that property. It would have to be a separate application. Ms. Sturtevant cited the need to move forward. She said they can have a revised site plan and a separate site plan for the adjacent property. Ms. Britt said the City does not want to leave anything unsettled. Mr. Belair said he can’t craft conditions until he has specifics. Ms. Clayton said the original hearing was 17 January, and this is a “real heartbreaker” for the Airport, especially regarding their ability to apply for grants. She asked if Phase 1 can be approved separately. Mr. Wilking noted that the problems created were not addressed by the Airport at the time of the hearing. Mr. Belair suggested excluding the holding bay area from the plan and having the DRB approve the rest. Ms. Clayton said that would allow them to proceed in a timely manner. They will need permits in hand by 1 May. DRB members were OK with removing the holding bays from the application. Mr. Belair said there is no decision written, but it can be created and e-mailed to members and try to expedite the process to less than 2 weeks. Mr. Maille, a resident of the area, stressed that blast walls would not provide noise mitigation. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD 21 MARCH 2017 PAGE 6 He also noted that the Chamberlin Neighborhood Airport Planning Committee (CNAPC) had identified a bike path on Airport Parkway. He wasn’t sure of the time frame for this, but the concern is that without a berm, there could be a hazard to pedestrians and bikers when that path is created. A full berm across the area would be needed to mitigate the problem. He suggested the possibility of BTV buying the South Burlington land and filling in the gully to make it conducive to building a blast wall. Regarding noise and traffic, Mr. Maille said that during the 2010 project, the noise was “maddening.” It was hard to sleep between 1 and 5 a.m. He also cited the difficulty of getting out of his street today and suggested that it would help to have a traffic light there, even a temporary light during the construction. No other issues were raised. Mr. Wilking moved to close #SP-16-82 with the condition of removing the holding bays and berm from the application. Mr. Parsons seconded. Motion passed 5-0. 8. Conditional Use Application #CU-17-02 of Champlain Water District for approval to allow an accessory structure (water storage tank) to exceed the height of the principal structure by 32 feet, 403 Queen City Park Road; and 9. Site Plan Review Application #SP-17-12 of Champlain Water District to amend a previously approved plan for a municipal water treatment plant. The amendment consists of: 1) constructing a below grade concrete wet well expansion with a pump room and a pipe gallery, 2) constructing a 1.0 million gallon precast concrete filtered water storage tank, and 3) site modifications, 403 Queen City Park Road: Mr. Duncan explained that CWD is making improvements to the plant. Since they can’t take equipment out of service to make the improvements, they are putting in a duplicate system. He noted that 2 floors of the building are below grade, and only one above grade. One other structure will be visible from the road. Mr. Duncan indicated a parking area and fire access road. The road will be shifted to the east side to accommodate the wet well. Parking will be relocated along the east side. Mr. Duncan showed the location of the new tank and new wet well on an overhead photo and indicated where the road will come. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD 21 MARCH 2017 PAGE 7 Mr. Parsons asked about getting the road aligned with Pine Street. Mr. Duncan said that would require the relocation of 2 poles (Green Mountain Power). He added that the present alignment is more conducive to truck deliveries. Mr. Kochman asked if there are rules for “dog legs.” Mr. Belair said only for streets. He added that Public Works is OK with this alignment. Mr. Duncan noted that the new road will not be for daily use; it will be gated. Mr. Kochman said he doesn’t have a practical problem with it; his problem is with the rules. Ms. Britt said Mr. Conner had no issues with it, and he oversees the writing of the rules. Ms. Lindsey noted that staff did not see a need for conditional use approval and they view this as multiple structures in a complex. This eliminates the need for a height waiver. Mr. Duncan said they will submit a withdrawal of the Conditional Use Application. Mr. Parsons asked about landscaping. Mr. Duncan indicated new plantings. He noted that some scrub brush will be removed and there will be trimming on the other side and under GMP lines. They will screen the dumpsters. No other issues were raised. Mr. Wilking moved to close #SP-17-12. Ms. Smith seconded. Motion passed 5-0. 10. Preliminary & final plat application #SD-17-04 of Synergy Development, LLC, to amend a previously approved planned unit development consisting of three single family dwellings on three lots. The amendment consists of adding one single family dwelling to lot #3, 7 Chaplin Lane: Ms. Britt noted that previous stormwater issues have been resolved. Mr. Kochman noted the applicant is applying for a footprint lot. Ms. Desautels said they will sell with the ability to build a house. Mr. Kochman said he thought that was illegal and will vote against it. Ms. Desautels explained the need for a street sign and said they will get that done. She also noted the new unit will be required to have a sprinkler system. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD 21 MARCH 2017 PAGE 8 Ms. Bartlett, a neighbor to the north, asked about stormwater. Ms. Desautels indicated the location of a swale that picks up drainage. More detail has been added to the swale (it will be constructed in the spring when the ground thaws). New drainage will be directed to the pond. No other issues were raised. Mr. Wilking moved to close #SD-17-04. Mr. Parsons seconded. Motion passed 4-1 with Mr. Kochman opposing. 11. Sketch Plan Application #SD-17-05 of Donald and Sandra Rendall to subdivide a 4.85 acre parcel developed with a single family dwelling into two lots of 3.917 acres (lot #1), and 0.93 acres (lot #2), 51 Old Farm Road: Ms. Rendall said they bought the property in 1993 and now want to downsize and possibly build a smaller house for themselves. Mr. Waite showed the potential building footprint, but this is not now being proposed. They will connect to municipal sewer for both lots. They will not impact the wetland. No issues were raised. 12. Minutes of 21 February 2017: Mr. Kochman moved to approve the Minutes of 21 February. No second was required. The motion passed 5-0. 13. Other Business: Mr. Kochman said he would like to take his proposed amendment to the Planning Commission and would like to say the Board supports this. Mr. Wilking suggested as many members as possible attend the Planning Commission meeting when it is heard. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD 21 MARCH 2017 PAGE 9 Mr. Kochman moved the Planning Commission support his recommended amendment to the Planning Commission. Mr. Parsons seconded. Motion passed 5-0. As there was no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned by common consent at 9:25 p.m. _____________________________________ Clerk _____________________________________ Date DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD 4 APRIL 2017 The South Burlington Development Review Board held a regular meeting on Tuesday, 4 April 2017, at 7:00 p.m., in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset Street. MEMBERS PRESENT: B. Miller, Chair; J. Smith, D. Parsons, J. Wilking, M. Cota, F. Kochman ALSO PRESENT: R. Belair, Administrative Officer; J. Lavanway, C. Plante, T. Lavanway, M. Janswold, K. Barlow, S. Buckley, A. Gill, T. Mackin 1. Directions on emergency evacuation procedures from conference room: Mr. Miller provided directions on emergency evacuation of the conference room. 2. Additions, deletions, or changes in order of agenda items: No changes were made to the Agenda. 3. Comments & Questions from the public not related to the Agenda: No issues were raised. 4. Announcements: There were no announcements. 5. Conditional Use Application #CU-17-03 of Charles R. Farrell to alter a nonconforming single family dwelling by: 1) expanding the third story by 427 sq. ft., and 2) constructing a 29 sq. ft. basement entry, 9 Pavilion Avenue: Mr. Belair advised that the staff has asked for a continuance to 2 May to allow for proper public notification by the applicant. Mr. Cota moved to continue #CU-17-03 to 2 May 2017. Ms. Smith seconded. Motion passed 6- 0. 6. Sketch Plan Application #SD-17-07 or Josef Lavanway to subdivide a 53,696 sq. ft. lot developed with a single family dwelling into two lots of 37,807 sq. ft. (lot #1) and 15,889 sq. ft. (lot #2), 1440 Hinesburg Road: DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD 4 APRIL 2017 PAGE 2 Mr. Lavanway said this is his parents’ property. They are looking to subdivide to provide a house for the parents as they get older. They are considering a 1200 sq. ft. ranch home. They will meet the setback issue (25 feet). The driveway to Highland Terrace can be shown at Final Plat. Mr. Lavanway asked about the energy efficiency regulations. Mr. Belair said he can provide a manual to address that when the applicant applies for a permit to build the house. An energy certificate will have to be recorded when the house is finished. Members briefly discussed the setback issue. Mr. Wilking and Ms. Smith said they would not be opposed to something more than 25 feet. Mr. Belair said the idea is to have a neighborhood feel. No other issues were raised. 7. Final Plat Application #SD-17-08 of O’Brien Farm Ltd. Partnership and O’Brien Home Farm, LLC, to subdivide a 49.58 acre parcel into 11 lots ranging in size from 1.23 acres to 9/74 acres, 255 Kennedy Drive: Mr. Gill explained that the subdivision correlates with the Master Plan the DRB approved. It separates the lands in the Master Plan and other lands owned by the family. This re-aligns the Master Plan border which moved after it was filed. Mr. Kochman said he believes this is not legal. No other issues were raised. Mr. Cota moved to close #SD-17-08. Mr. Wilking seconded. Motion passed 6-0. 8. Preliminary & Final Plat Application #SD-17-06 of Donald R. Cummings for a planned unit development consisting of two lots, each developed with a single family dwelling. The project consists of: 1) subdividing the 1.16 acre parcel into two parcels of 0.6 acres (lot #1) and 0.56 acres (lot #2), and 2) relocating the zoning DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD 4 APRIL 2017 PAGE 3 district boundary between the R-1 and R-2 Zoning districts in conjunction with the Planned Unit development, 1811 Spear Street & 25 Harbor Ridge Road: Mr. Belair advised that the applicant had requested a continuance to 18 April. Mr. Cota moved to continue #SD-17-06 to 18 April 2017. Ms. Smith seconded. Motion passed 6-0. 9. Minutes of 21 March 2017: Due to a server error, the Minutes were not available. 10. Other Business: Mr. Wilking noted that SBBA is working on a safe streets initiative and will be talking about integrating street lights. Members will probably be invited to that discussion. As there was no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned by common consent at 7:22 p.m. _____________________________________ Clerk _____________________________________ Date