The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutBATCH - Supplemental - 1076 Williston Road (2)City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 FAX (802) 658-4748 PLANNING (802)658-7955 November 6, 1998 Mr. Walt Levering Tygate Properties 1076 Williston Road .South Burlington, Vermont 05403 Re: Landscape Bond #S208886 Dear Walt: ZONING (802)658-7958 Be advised that the City of South Burlington hereby authorizes release of the performance bond issued by the National Grange Mutual Insurance Company. Please submit a copy of this letter to Hickok & Boardman Agency. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to call me. Very truly, Richard Ward, Zoning Administrative Officer RW/mep V� 111r. 1076 Williston Road, South Burlington, Vermont 05403 TEL(802) 863-1049 FAX (802) 658-1296 Dec. 18, 1997 City of South Burlington Dept. Planing and Zoning Attn: Dick Ward Re: Landscaping plan at Econo Lodge indoor pool Construction Dear Dick: I agree to complete the landscaping plan as drawn for the area around our new indoor pool or submit a new revised plan as soon as possible for your review. I also agree to post a bond in the amount of $5,000 dollars to assure that the plan present or revised is completed as approved. I also agree that the landscaping will be finished no later than June 1, 1998. If I fail to complete this project as approved, then the City of South Burlington can take the funds and complete the project. Thank you for your understanding in this matter. Sincerely Yours, Walter B. Levering Jr. President Tygate Proper ies (9p National Grange Mutual Insurance Company A Main 5treei America company KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS. THAT WE, LICENSE BOND BOND NO. S�08886 Tygate Motel Corporation, 1076 Williston Road of South Burlington, Vermont as Principal, and NATIONAL GRANGE MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, a New Hampshire Corporation with principal office at Keene, New Hampshire, as Surety, are held and firmly bound unto The City of South Burlington, Vermont in the sum of Five Thousand Dollars '' ******* DOLLARS ($ 5,000.00 ) for. the payment of which sum, well and truly to be made, we bind ourselves, our personal representatives, suc- cessors and assigns, jointly and severally, firmly by these presents. The Condition of this obligation is such, that Whereas Principal is desirous of obtalning a license from The City of South Burlington, Vermont to carry on business W for Landscaping Improvements at 1076 Williston Road in South Burlington, Vermont for the term commencing on the 15th day of November , 19 97 and ending on the 15th day of November 19 98 NOW, THEREFORE, if Principal shall, during the aforesaid term, faithfully observe and honestly comply with such Ordinances, Rules and Regulations, and any Amendments thereto, as require the execution of this bond, then this obligation shall become void and of no effect, otherwise to be and remain in full force and virtue. The Surety may, if it shall so elect, cancel this bond by giving thirty (30) days written notice to the Obligee and the bond shall be deemed cancelled at the expiration of said period; the Surety remaining liable, however subject to all the terms, conditions and provisions of this bond, for any act or acts covered which may have been committed by the Principal up to the date of such cancellation. PROVIDED, HOWEVER, U at this bond may be continued from year to year by cs;tficate executed by the Surety hereon. SIGNED, SEALED AND DATED this COUNTERSIGNED: Laureen S. Mathon 18th day of December 19 97 W1283 (10M) National Grange Mutual Insurance (*VW Comanv �OWEF.OF ATTORNEY ALL MEN BY THESEPRE ENTS: That the National Grange Mutual Insurance Company, a New amps re corporation hav- A Main Str et erica c ing its prtnaparo ice in tKemp fly of Keene, State of New Hamsphire, pursuant to Article V, Section 2 of the By -Laws of said Company, to wit: "Section 2. The board of directors, the president, any vice president, secretary, or the treasurer shall have the power and authority to appoint attorneys -in -fact and to authorize them to execute on behalf of the company and affix the seal of the company thereto, bonds, recognizances, contracts of indemnity or writings obligatory in the nature of a bond, recognizance or conditional under- taking and to remove any such attomeys-in-fact at any time and revoke the power and authority given to them. " Pursuant to said by-law does hereby make, constitute and appoint SCOTT F BOARDMAN, PAUL E PLUNKETT, D. MICHAEL BOARDMAN, STEVEN K.J. GENTILE, its true and lawful Attorneys -in -fact, to make, execute, seal and deliver for and on its behalf, and as its act and deed, bonds, undertakings recognizances, contracts of indemnity, or other writings obligatory in the nature of a bond subject to the following limitation: 1. No one bond to exceed Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($500,000.00). and to bind the National Grange Mutual Insurance Company thereby as fully and to the same extent as if such instruments were signed by the duly authorized officers of the National Grange Mutual Insurance Company, and all the actsco, *d Attorney are hereby ratified and confirmed. O l�J This power of attorney is signed and sealed by facsimile under and by the authority of the following resol opted by the Direc- tors of The National Grange Mutual Insurance Company at a meeting duly called and held on the 2ndday 'of December 1977. Voted: That the signature of any officer authorized by the By -Laws and the company seal may be affixed by facsimile to any power of attorney or special power of attorney or certification of either given for the execution of any bond, undertaking, recognizance or other written obligation in the nature thereof; such signature and seal, when so used being hereby adopted by the company as the original signature of such office and the original seal of the company, to be valid and binding upon the company with the same force and effect as though manually affixed. By execution of this Power of Attorney, National Grange Mutual Insurance Company does hereby revoke, rescind and declare null and void any previous Power of Attorney at any time previouslyiit�;hed to the a('o mid individuals or agencies. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, The National Grange Mutual Insurance Company" ' caused these presents to be signed by its Corporate Secretary and its corporate seal to be hereto affixed this 25TH day of lv1 1995..__ , T11S APPOINTMENT SHALL CEASE AND TERMINATE AUTOMATICALLY AS OF DECEMBER 31S mess soo (✓ybked as provided. NATIONAL GRANGE MUTUAL INSURANCE COMI)MY By: THIS POWER IS INVALID IF RED DIAGONAL IMPRI TIONAL GkXWt MUTUAL INSURANC9 C a HAMPSHIRE " IS NOT SHOWN IN ITS ENTIRE State of New Hampshire, County of Cheshire 3 C',! �_ On this 25TH day of May 1995, before the su scriber a Notary Public of the State of New Hampshiro_%c d for the Count itf= Cheshire duly commissioned and qualified,, came William C. McKenna of the National Grange Mutual Insur . mpany, to\ personally known to be the officer descfib4iierein, and who executed the preceding instrument, and he ackno q i6 of same, and being by me fully swoon deposed and said that he is an officer of said Company, aforesaid: that the > t E•/!i!I t 1111R� preceding instrument is the corporate seal of said Company, and the said corporate seal and his signature as officer weaffixed and subscribed to the sat 'in ,strument by the aQrity and direction of the said Company; that Article `v , Secrron 2 of the By -Laws of said Company is now ' ` e. IN WITNESS WH I havee r� set my hand and affixed by official seal at Keene, New Hampshire this 25TH day of wI 1995. \ cJ Notary Public C,.'• • ••"•^• '•'I'i My Commission Expires: May 1998 T N R r I(�&ry, Assistant Vice President of the National Grange Mutual Insurance Company, do hereby ce ilty that thw above anti-;: .r r foregoing is a true and correct copy of a Power of Attorney executed by said Company which is still in forced 6,ffac IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of pany Keeenne,1Le'ti atlrps tte'lhis��,•'' 18th dayof December 1997 AMt'�. Vice 68-6921.002 CAB WARNING — Any unauthorized reproduction or alteration of this document is prohibited. This power is void unless seals are readable and the certification seal at the bottom is embossed. The diagonal imprint, warning and confirmation must be in red ink. CONFIRMATION Of validity of attached bond, call NGM at: Keene 603-358-1339; Richmond 804-270-6611 ext. 138; Syracuse 315-434-1410. June 23, 2015 Joseph Pierik, Carpionato Group, LLC 1414 Atwood Avenue Johnston, RI 02919 Re: Application Check Return Dear Mr. Pierik: Per your request in an email to Paul Conner, Director of Planning & Zoning dated 6/23/15, enclosed please find check #5521 for $10,357.70 which is being returned to you. Sinc ely, Ra mond J. Belair Administrative Officer 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburi.com Paul Conner From: Joe Pierik <jpierik@carpionatogroup.com> Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2015 11:40 AM To: Paul Conner Cc: Gary Famiglietti; Maria Mignanelli Subject: Follow-up from Joe Pierik @ Carpionato Group regarding Windjammer Development, S. Burlington, VT Paul, Thanks for getting back to me. My apologies we have missed one another over the phone. Carpionato is not moving forward with the Windjammer owner to develop the acreage off Williston Road. I know you reached out to Nate Stearns at Hershenson Carter a while ago about the status of our pending preliminary sketch plan application. Mr. Carpionato has instructed me to request our $10,300.00+ dollar application fee be returned to us. Please send the check to my attention. Thank you for all your assistance. Best, Joe Joseph Pierik Vice President of Retail Leasing & Acquisitions Carpionato Group, LLC 1414 Atwood Avenue Johnston, Rhode Island 02919 Phone: 401.273.6800 ext. 126 Cell: 617.620.1576 1 Fax. 401.751.2479 jpierik@carpionatoaroup.com I www.carpionatogroup.com APlease don't print this e-mail unless you really need to. "Save Trees" 1 � DEVELOPMENT RE41EW BOARD ! 23 SEPTEMBER 2009 PAGE 2 story multi -family dwelling to contain 43 dwelling units, Farrell Street and Bacon Street: Mr. Belair said the plans have been adjusted to read the same information regarding building heights. He now has a complete set. Members asked that Stipulation #4 be amended to read: "The Board grants a height waiver of 19 feet for the 4-story Bacon Street Lofts building and 19.5 feet for the senior housing addition.: Ms. Quimby then moved to approve Preliminary Plat Application #SD-09-35 of F&M Development Co., LLC, subject to the stipulations in the draft motion as amended above. Mr. Farley seconded. Motion passed unanimously. - 4. Sketch Plan Application #SD-09-40 of the New England Expedition --South Burlington for a planned unit development on a 57.26 acre parcel developed with a hotel and restaurant. The project consists of. 1) subdividing the property into four lots, 2) constructing a shopping center to include four buildings totaling 126,800 sq. ft., and 3) constructing 70 residential units, 1076 Williston Road (Whole Foods): Mr. Beaudoin reviewed the history of the project and other projects the company has done. He noted they have been looking for a South Burlington site for 10 years, and in 2008 decided on a portion of the Best Western/Windjammer site. They have been working with neighbors, storm water people (this will be a major issue), wetlands, traffic concerns, etc. The rear of the property is zoned for 90 units of housing, and the front for 130,000 sq. ft. of retail. Mr. Beaudoin then showed the potential location of the Whole Foods market and 3 other retail buildings. There would be parking under one of these buildings. There would also be a connection to the Windjammer property. Loading docks would be placed where they would not impact residential units. The applicant would build a mile -long road to access the development. Mr. Beaudoin reviewed the road elevations and proposed building elevations. There would be a drop of about 50 feet from the beginning of the road almost to Patchen Road. Mr. Beaudoin then showed photos of the inside of a recently built Whole Foods in Massachusetts. This includes in-store dining, sushi bar, etc. He said the company believes in purchasing local produce, when possible. No architect has yet been chosen for the project, but current thinking is to use some type of "barn motif." Mr. Beaudoin said the building will have fuel cell capability. This would take care of most of the power and water, so they would be off the grid. They will also have solar capability. The rejected heat from the refrigeration system would be reclaimed to heat water. The building would also reuse 80% of its waste. The plan is to become LEED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD ' 23 SEPTEMBER 2009 PAGE 3 certified and have and EPA "Green Chill Certificate." The Class 2 wetland would be impacted for 32,000 sq. ft. (19,000 for the building and 13,000 for the road). Two bridges would minimize wetland disturbance. Regarding storm water, Mr. Beaudoin noted that large portions of Centennial Brook Watershed will be impacted by new storm water rules in October. He said they have met with Tom DiPietro to establish a storm water program. They will be able to pick up storm water from other sources to help with problems in the whole area. All lighting would be down -shielded. There would be minimal security lighting at the rear of the building. The location of the rec path is still to be determined. Options include location in the road bed, on each side of the roadbed, a separated multi -use bike/pedestrian path, etc. Mr. Dinklage suggested the applicant meet with the Rec Path Committee to make determinations. In order to be more in conformance with the requirement to have buildings facing the roadway, they will try to move the retail building closer to the road. Regarding traffic, Mr. Dinklage reminded the applicant that their traffic data would be subject to review by the City's consultant. Mr. Smith said they will provide all new data done to Vtrans guidelines. They have not yet considered future conditions, City Center, Market St. effects, Southern Connector effects, and the effects of a possible Exit 12B. Mr. Smith noted that Vtrans uses the 30th highest hour (1230 vehicles per hour). He showed the effect of the connector road if it were to be built today. They feel that eastbound traffic would go down but there would be substantial new traffic because of this development. Mr. Smith also reviewed the general performance of levels of service and showed existing and proposed conditions along Williston Rd., including a second lane to enter the Interstate and another left turn lane onto the connector road. The applicant indicated their next steps include: expansion of the study area, updated traffic counts, Vtrans/CCMPO review, inclusion of other permitted developments, multimodal considerations, Saturday analysis, queuing analysis, and safety analysis. An access and circulation analysis would also be done. Mr. Dinklage noted that staff and everyone else is very much against the proposed road alignment. It violates all zoning. Mr. Knudsen said that connecting the road in an offset manner makes no sense at all. Mr. Behr said he couldn't imagine how a driver would ever figure out the proposed intersection. Mr. Birmingham said he couldn't support it. Mr. Dinklage added that pedestrian crossing at that intersection is already an issue. Mr. Quimby said the proposal scares her and she can't support it. Mr. Stuono said he would be hard to convince. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD � 23 SEPTEMBER 2009 PAGE 4 Mr. Belair reviewed requirement for accesses as stated in the Zoning Regulations. The minimum distance of 400 feet separation is required, 500 feet from a signalized intersection. Mr. Knudsen noted that every Department Head has said this alignment cannot be supported. Mr. Dinklage said the Board would probably also impose technical review of the site plan. He stressed that the city is trying to create an urban environment with pedestrian scale usage, alignment to the street, etc. The planned parking orientation is opposite to what is in the Zoning Regulations. He added that the Board would also want all wetland functions reviewed by an expert. Mr. Conner said that wetlands language requires exploring options to minimize impact. He said that for him that is also a "non -starter." Ms. Johnson said she would want to see the impact of Patchen Road. She didn't feel that road can handle the proposed traffic. Mr. Dinklage felt a signal would probably be needed there. Mr. Wood was concerned with Patchen Rd. traffic as it goes onto Grove Street in Burlington. He didn't feel there was a designation low enough to fit the problems at that intersection. Mr. Wood was also concerned with streams in Centennial Woods. He couldn't see where 90 more units can do anything but make Centennial Brook more impaired. He felt the impact was much broader than what the applicant was conveying. Ms. Emery said a number of people in the neighborhood are very concerned despite positive comments about Whole Foods. She cited recent efforts to improve the watershed, and this project would add a whole lot more parking lot runoff. She felt it was a good project but with location problems. Mr. Bresee was concerned with what happens to pedestrians crossing Williston Road. He felt any study would have to include pedestrian issues. Mr. Precourt asked about stacking. Mr. Smith said they estimate about 100 feet. Ms. Emery asked if the City of Winooski enters into this discussion. Mr. Dinklage said that is a good question. He felt there should be an intersection study, even if the intersection isn't in South Burlington. Act 250 should also consider that. Ms. LaRose noted that the MPO has a copy of the plan. John Moore of CCTA said they are concerned with building orientation and would like buildings as close to the road as possible. Ms. Dooley said building orientation should invite pedestrian travel. She hoped the developer understands the seriousness of the issues. DEVELOPMENT Rh VIEW BOARD 23 SEPTEMBER 2009 PAGE 5 Mr. Stuono asked if they had considered a City Center location. Mr. Beaudoin said they did consider it but turned it down. Mr. Dinklage said the Board would want a development of this size to improve the city not make it worse, which is what the existing traffic study shows. Mr. Dinklage reminded the applicant that staff requires a minimum of one week to review any new documents/plans before a hearing date. Ms. Quimby then moved to continue Sketch Plan Application #SD-09-40 until 3 November 2009. Mr. Farley seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 5. Informal discussion regarding deliberative sessions: Mr. Dinklage said the Board has the option to call a "time out" and discuss issues among themselves with the audience present. They can also formally close a hearing and then deliberate with or without the audience present. Mr. Conner reviewed the Open Meeting laws and confirmed that a deliberative session can be called for at any point. In a closed session deliberation, the Board can return with a decision. They cannot take any new testimony during a deliberative session. Mr. Stuono said some towns have an open deliberative session on a different day. Mr. Dinklage said that could be done. Members felt it could be beneficial, but not in every case. Mr. Knudsen felt it was important for applicants to leave knowing what has happened. Mr. Bresee said the public also benefits from that. He liked the fact that this DRB operates so openly. Mr. Cimonetti felt the Board could benefit from a closed door deliberative session but they would still have to explain their decision and how it was reached. Mr. Stuono asked if the Board ever did site visits. Mr. Dinklage said they have. Site visits must be warned, but individual Board member can visit a site on their own as well. Ms. LaRose said most applicants are willing to let the DRB on the property if the visit is scheduled in advance. As there was no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 9:50 p.m. Clerk Date DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD 1 DECEMBER 2009 PAGE 3 show water and sewer lines to be sure plantings are at least 5 feet clear of lines. He felt the application should be continued so the Board would be voting on a completed plan. After some discussion, the applicant agreed to come back on 15 December with the revised plan. Ms. Brooks asked if they would be breaking into the berm. Mr. Farrell said they will not. A neighbor questioned whether there will be neighborhood noise from the A/C unit on top of the building. Mr..Farrell said he believed there would not. It was noted that if there is noise, it will be a violation. Ms. Brooks noted that stakes have appeared in the middle of her daughter's backyard. Mr. Farrell said they staked the location of the cedar hedge and found the cedars belong to the neighbors. Ms. Quimby continue Final Plat Application #SD-09-49 of F&M Development Co, LLC, to 15 December 2009. Mr. Farley seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 7. Continued Sketch Plan Application #SD-09-40 of New England Expedition - South Burlington for a planned unit development on a 57.26 acre parcel developed with a hotel and restaurant. The project consists of. 1) subdividing the property into four lots, 2) constructing a shopping center to include four buildings totaling 120,800 sq. ft., and 3) constructing 70 residential units, 1076 Williston Road (Whole Foods): Mr. Belair advised that the applicant had asked for a continuance until January. Ms. Quimby moved to continue Sketch Plan Application #SD-09-40 of New England Expedition - South Burlington until 19 January 2010. Mr. Farley seconded. Motion passed unanimously. As there was no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 8:45 p.m. Clerk /D Date Milk, `T south PLANNING & ZONING MEMORANDUM TO: South Burlington Development Review Board FROM: Cathyann LaRose, Associate Planner RE: Agenda Item # 5, Sketch Plan Application #SD-09-40, The New England Expedition DATE: January 14, 2010 The New England Expedition, hereinafter referred to as the applicant, is seeking sketch plan review for a planned unit development on a 57.26 acre parcel developed with a hotel and restaurant. The project consists of: 1) subdividing the property into four (4) lots, 2) constructing a shopping center to include four (4) buildings totaling 126,800 sq. ft and 3) constructing 70 residential units, 1076 Williston Road. The application was initially reviewed on September 23, 2009 (meeting minutes attached) and continued to November 3, December 1, 2009 and again until January 19, 2010 at the request of the applicant. The applicant has informed Staff that they continue to work on their traffic studies and site planning, and will be present before the Board on January 191h in order to provide them with a very brief update on their progress as they continue to work on these issues. The applicant has not submitted revised plans or any further documentation for the Board's consideration. The applicant will be requesting an additional continuation of the application to a later date. 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburl.com DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD 23 SEPTEMBER 2009 PAGE 2 story multi -family dwelling to contain 43 dwelling units, Farrell Street and Bacon Street: Mr. Belair said the plans have been adjusted to read the same information regarding building heights. He now has a complete set. Members asked that Stipulation #4 be amended to read: "The Board grants a height waiver of 19 feet for the 4-story Bacon Street Lofts building and 19.5 feet for the senior housing addition.: Ms. Quimby then moved to approve Preliminary Plat Application #SD-09-35 of F&M Development Co., LLC, subject to the stipulations in the draft motion as amended above. Mr. Farley seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 4. Sketch Plan Application #SD-09-40 of the New England Expedition --South Burlington for a planned unit development on a 57.26 acre parcel developed with a hotel and restaurant. The project consists of: 1) subdividing the property into four lots, 2) constructing a shopping center to include four buildings totaling 126,800 sq. ft., and 3) constructing 70 residential units,1076 Williston Road (Whole Foods): Mr. Beaudoin reviewed the history of the project and other projects the company has done. He noted they have been looking for a South Burlington site for 10 years, and in 2008 decided on a portion of the Best Western/Windjammer site. They have been working with neighbors, storm water people (this will be a major issue), wetlands, traffic concerns, etc. The rear of the property is zoned for 90 units of housing, and the front for 130,000 sq. ft. of retail. Mr. Beaudoin then showed the potential location of the Whole Foods market and 3 other retail buildings. There would be parking under one of these buildings. There would also be a connection to the Windjammer property. Loading docks would be placed where they would not impact residential units. The applicant would build a mile -long road to access the development. Mr. Beaudoin reviewed the road elevations and proposed building elevations. There would be a drop of about 50 feet from the beginning of the road almost to Patchen Road. Mr. Beaudoin then showed photos of the inside of a recently built Whole Foods in Massachusetts. This includes in-store dining, sushi bar, etc. He said the company believes in purchasing local produce, when possible. No architect has yet been chosen for the project, but current thinking is to use some type of "barn motif." Mr. Beaudoin said the building will have fuel cell capability. This would take care of most of the power and water, so they would be off the grid. They will also have solar capability. The rejected heat from the refrigeration system would be reclaimed to heat water. The building would also reuse 80% of its waste. The plan is to become LEED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD 23 SEPTEMBER 2009 PAGE 3 certified and have and EPA "Green Chill Certificate." The Class 2 wetland would be impacted for 32,000 sq. ft. (19,000 for the building and 13,000 for the road). Two bridges would minimize wetland disturbance. Regarding storm water, Mr. Beaudoin noted that large portions of Centennial Brook Watershed will be impacted by new storm water rules in October. He said they have met with Tom DiPietro to establish a storm water program. They will be able to pick up storm water from other sources to help with problems in the whole area. All lighting would be down -shielded. There would be minimal security lighting at the rear of the building. The location of the rec path is still to be determined. Options include location in the road bed, on each side of the roadbed, a separated multi -use bike/pedestrian path, etc. Mr. Dinklage suggested the applicant meet with the Rec Path Committee to make determinations. In order to be more in conformance with the requirement to have buildings facing the roadway, they will try to move the retail building closer to the road. Regarding traffic, Mr. Dinklage reminded the applicant that their traffic data would be subject to review by the City's consultant. Mr. Smith said they will provide all new data done to Vtrans guidelines. They have not yet considered future conditions, City Center, Market St. effects, Southern Connector effects, and the effects of a possible Exit 12B. Mr. Smith noted that Vtrans uses the 30`h highest hour (1230 vehicles per hour). He showed the effect of the connector road if it were to be built today. They feel that eastbound traffic would go down but there would be substantial new traffic because of this development. Mr. Smith also reviewed the general performance of levels of service and showed existing and proposed conditions along Williston Rd., including a second lane to enter the Interstate and another left turn lane onto the connector road. The applicant ind'cated their next steps include: expansion of the study area, updated traffic counts, Vtrans/CCMPO review, inclusion of other permitted developments, multimodal considerations, Saturday analysis, queuing analysis, and safety analysis. An access and circulation analysis would also be done. Mr. Dinklage noted that staff and everyone else is very much against the proposed road alignment. It violates all zoning. Mr. Knudsen said that connecting the road in an offset manner makes no sense at all. Mr. Behr said he couldn't imagine how a driver would ever figure out the proposed intersection. Mr. Birmingham said he couldn't support it. Mr. Dinklage added that pedestrian crossing at that intersection is already an issue. Mr. Quimby said the proposal scares her and she can't support it. Mr. Stuono said he would be hard to convince. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD l 23 SEPTEMBER 2009 PAGE 4 Mr. Belair reviewed requirement for accesses as stated in the Zoning Regulations. The minimum distance of 400 feet separation is required, 500 feet from a signalized intersection. Mr. Knudsen noted that every Department Head has said this alignment cannot be supported. Mr. Dinklage said the Board would probably also impose technical review of the site plan. He stressed that the city is trying to create an urban environment with pedestrian scale usage, alignment to the street, etc. The planned parking orientation is opposite to what is in the Zoning Regulations. He added that the Board would also want all wetland functions reviewed by an expert. Mr. Conner said that wetlands language requires exploring options to minimize impact. He said that for him that is also a "non -starter." Ms. Johnson said she would want to see the impact of Patchen Road. She didn't feel that road can handle the proposed traffic. Mr. Dinklage felt a signal would probably be needed there. Mr. Wood was concerned with Patchen Rd. traffic as it goes onto Grove Street in Burlington. He didn't feel there was a designation low enough to fit the problems at that intersection. Mr. Wood was also concerned with streams in Centennial Woods. He couldn't see where 90 more units can do anything but make Centennial Brook more impaired. He felt the impact was much broader than what the applicant was conveying. Ms. Emery said a number of people in the neighborhood are very concerned despite positive comments about Whole Foods. She cited recent efforts to improve the watershed, and this project would add a whole lot more parking lot runoff. She felt it was a good project but with location problems. Mr. Bresee was concerned with what happens to pedestrians crossing Williston Road. He felt any study would have to include pedestrian issues. Mr. Precourt asked about stacking. Mr. Smith said they estimate about 100 feet. Ms. Emery asked if the City of Winooski enters into this discussion. Mr. Dinklage said that is a good question. He felt there should be an intersection study, even if the intersection isn't in South Burlington. Act 250 should also consider that. Ms. LaRose noted that the MPO has a copy of the plan. John Moore of CCTA said they are concerned with building orientation and would like buildings as close to the road as possible. Ms. Dooley said building orientation should invite pedestrian travel. She hoped the developer understands the seriousness of the issues. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD 23 SEPTEMBER 2009 PAGE 5 Mr. Stuono asked if they had considered a City Center location. Mr. Beaudoin said they did consider it but turned it down. Mr. Dinklage said the Board would want a development of this size to improve the city not make it worse, which is what the existing traffic study shows. Mr. Dinklage reminded the applicant that staff requires a minimum of one week to review any new documents/plans before a hearing date. Ms. Quimby then moved to continue Sketch Plan Application #SD-09-40 until 3 November 2009. Mr. Farley seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 5. Informal discussion regarding deliberative sessions: Mr. Dinklage said the Board has the option to call a "time out" and discuss issues among themselves with the audience present. They can also formally close a hearing and then deliberate with or without the audience present. Mr. Conner reviewed the Open Meeting laws and confirmed that a deliberative session can be called for at any point. In a closed session deliberation, the Board can return with a decision. They cannot take any new testimony during a deliberative session. Mr. Stuono said some towns have an open deliberative session on a different day. Mr. Dinklage said that could be done. Members felt it could be beneficial, but not in every case. Mr. Knudsen felt it was important for applicants to leave knowing what has happened. Mr. Bresee said the public also benefits from that. He liked the fact that this DRB operates so openly. Mr. Cimonetti felt the Board could benefit from a closed door deliberative session but they would still have to explain their decision and how it was reached. Mr. Stuono asked if the Board ever did site visits. Mr. Dinklage said they have. Site visits must be warned, but individual Board member can visit a site on their own as well. Ms. LaRose said most applicants are willing to let the DRB on the property if the visit is scheduled in advance. As there was no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 9:50 p.m. Clerk Date 1h sour PLANNING & ZONING MEMORANDUM To: South Burlington City Development Review B rd From: Raymond I Belair, Administrative Officer Date: November 25, 2009 Re: New England Expedition — Whole Foods Staff has not received new information or plans from the applicant and is requesting a continuance of this application to a later date. 575 Dorset Street South ButHngton, VT 05403 tel 802.846.410E fax 802.846.4101 www.sburl.com I � south P L A N N I N G & Z ON ING MEMORANDUM To: Raymond J. Belair, Administrative Officer From: Bill Szymanski, City Engineer Date: September 17, 2009 Re: Comments — The New England Expedition, Williston Road 1. Adding a 5 lane intersection at the proposed location should not be allowed. It creates a complicated traffic flow to a busy existing intersection. Windjammer was denied access at this location in their original submission about 25 years ago. Access to this property should be limited to the existing Windjammer entrance and Patchen Road. 2. New street should include concrete curbs, sidewalk, street lights, drainage. 3. Work on the Interstate Highway will require a permit from State Highway Dept. 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4106 fax 802.846,4101 www,sburt.com K j4if,1 i , s 7'p r7 f�G fi� (�c�GJ 1 i� G� .5 /air e �r�eY.SCcv<7 a��1 V�`5e� -/"z L"> 7 In c_v cc�io�-+. 1X//,�rd tl-0rn m e r wc�.s S 4?/tt� /,7 G/ 7" �'nJ / n a vdJ��,SS1vr7 �'!!vU ZS' ► Gf/k-5 u b ♦ Acce.s� �C7 ��YQ CY7 ��O�le ex 1 S �ty) r�l1,��,/4(r7r"I V Cl 5h0vIe 1/2Gl/veld- GvnC GvY,bS� S�lr/e �v�l 1�C1 rJ4Y«-4 J r-d1), /e. 7 re 'WO Y,C 0, 74 � rs � e c��4 w 1 l vv •� yy Page 1 of 1 Jana Beagley From: ray Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2009 12:41 PM To: Jana Beagley Subject: FW: Whole Foods Project Hi Jana, Please include this email in the Nov. 3rd packets. Ray Belair Administrative Officer City of So. Burlington 802-8464106 From: genebeaudoin@comcast.net [mailto:genebeaudoin@comcast.net] Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2009 12:40 PM To: ray Subject: Whole Foods Project Ray, We would like to be fully prepared for the continued sketch plan meeting of the DRB. We will not be ready by 11 /3 and would like to have the meeting continued to the next DRB meeting. Thanks, Gene beaudoin 860-651-145 5 10/27/2009 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD 3 NOVEMBER 2009 PAGE 3 November. Ms. Quimby moved to continue Site Plan Application #SP-09-63 of Burlington International Airport until 17 November 2009. Mr. Farley seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 7. Continued Sketch Plan Application #SD-09-40 of New England Expedition -South Burlington for a planned unit development on a 57.26 acre parcel developed with a hotel and restaurant. The project consists of: 1) subdividing the property into four lots, 2) constructing a shopping center to include four buildings totaling 120,800 sq. ft., and 3) constructing 70 residential units, 1076 Williston Road (Whole Foods): Mr. Belair advised that the applicant had asked for a continuance until 1 December. Ms. Quimby moved to continue Sketch Plan Application #SD-09-40 of New England Expedition -South Burlington until 1 December 2009. Mr. Farley seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 8. Review of Previous Decisions: Mr. Board reviewed previous decision motions that had not been available at the meeting of 20 October due to illness in the Planning Department. No issues were raised. Members briefly discussed the upcoming schedule and agreed to meet on 1 and 15 December. As there was no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 8:30 p.m. - A_4,,,,� � Clerk Date TITAN MAMfALTUUYL OR EQUAL MORL p-n prISL, 5' F TY POWDER C TT - COLOR TO RESUI DET[PJRCD ONE —T "At WOOD PLASH -FACTORY AM5[D rAraess sreeL Anu,oR eoLrs a slR,s 5' TIMLK - V-1. clAss A PORTLAND CEMENT LOIM'RETE EN�!pry� TAMRp PATTERN 1�S�TMPED - BOMANIF STSi@i OR EWAE SM,ALT TREATED FELT EIIPAN51OH 1ONT RI.CR AT LONSTRULI,ON JOINTS AND/OR AN),TNO STRULTI.RES LONINVOUS ,OXIMN, OA. wwr 5U4.ORRD 2' PROM "TTON .. - SMMIAY DCPif504E MSEI•..,.,,�:R(;. 5' 0-1 R NO TREE ROOTS ARE CXLAVATCD ,1 INSTALL AS PER STRWTIRAL 5M VENOOR TAeEUlES S MSASE PRRARE A5 PER SIRTLTLRN. Sd. VCNDOR TAOEUCS 2 co�nUAWI It - 71R = StA M Proper Tree Planting Diagram R4NMnW NRN11L prRRI BrcMWMlyt I" RRIThft MIW bMtWl '� r. .,1 M� • -� hn IKI^ u� ar:t h•la fl- I n - r:.k:el Rr- auaaKl ,rlrA+ L, .ill? Hla � tLn lie., 1k K. o>cr ftDl.:p Irar + :I.•p ::: ' r:tl. BuA 9raN. L :IV, mn.•x .d loft ,Kc Raul waR .+T.RI h 2 4' Nparb > �.Hp•.: NvclK:. .pA:ir •.lid+, •I r•kM.I -art. RReoWt MElif }pa SCMn rir U.ir I.11'r � ( t.Tt of rnl rl vAr.1. LI •. 1 1 1 &,� q O i 17`` �5 'h-yL11: FAY r V. T\ , ski" 5dI ...h. bIr lrlAeturb5d d ttr , hal. ,dc do r.r4.. nb -.n super+ h,n N� �f rrshnK o1. :D., .arm �•r:.k.� - S tare► bW aWRnor — K aD .ri IN, N 1a 1 d l ll 4 Y n r 4 wW lhr rYT FF,I rly rl IagMldv 1 .1 r!• , ,T n, .. ,. r_1 rcr.Teic Aul.n d'c.Rror �. •• IvnMrnK, fy 1.; rn. 3 50U1H Oq lLAN1NG DETAL ULARETTE UZN Rcw concREre WAlm4r TNRD Ar® sTAfrED coNCRETe DECIOIO PAITEWN NOT". WInM "W OF EX lS TREE NOTSTR TUBA NON NEEDED TO -TALL WAU(WAY . STRUOTLRAL SOL BASE DO NO EMOAROOTL OUT El0.05Ep ROOTS WIR, A COPPER OR $AW - W NOT RP ROOTS RROND WMAi IS NC[DED TO NSTALL WAUlW4Y- aNMIgIR *►�� st m rs1 t or NEW IuaaL Mfarllnl ww a1 Male awns ImaK wMM" l VJWAl ow "I= soo4m qu 700-aaa o mw $NAM ss td► 1st 11a1 me am wo on IlronlrBt OaaaraY M araaE AID auBlalr araBlM QUANTITY COMMON NAME 50TAM NAME SIZE CONDITION 4 DWARF KOREAN ULAG Syringe —y-I T°ebW" 5 GALLON TREE FORM 15 ENDLESS SUMMER MYPRAKGEA Hydrangea mecrophylp T d.. SIp ' J GALLON CONTAINER 7 ICEBERG ROSE Rosa FbrbW iceberg' 2 GALLON TREE FORM 7 CAREFREE WONDER ROSE Rosa META , G—Free Wonder' 2 GALLON CONTAINER T• TK Landscape Architects nrrarslrnrarw+Marc + � MIrN111ORYnL�n�LI�►4 11aR>r DfRNIL, ce1TER. VERM)NT rG-8941805 PROXIT ARGn 01 TIANN l4rNKK AROMIIELiS U SOUIH PAAr pRVC PUn!'aIER VERNOM 05N0 TIR rOO1PRN1 SHOWN on 11ns DRAWNG A cOMP0511E ABASE SUYIRD THE ARrkREOT AND 1RNO5 AT THE — BfiRAfILE. OUT SM'-S 5ElEGiidf eY KT —CR Ref At0 STAPF. F.A.Tn -as NIEr carmITlafs ,-,4-oa SE PGWiNO P V TO SNOW '&1LT' F11111NG5 424-06 Landscape rovements WiImpnd1'ammer Best Western SOUTH BURUNGTON. VERMONT Landscape Plan TK PROJECT 0705 5-15-07 5GALE AS SHOWN L1 r southburlington PLANNING & ZONING September 30, 2008 George Roy Windjammer 1076 Williston Road South Burlington, VT 05403 Re: Site Plan Application #SP-08-94 Dear George: Enclosed, please find a copy of the Findings of Fact and Decision rendered by the Administrative Officer on September 30, 2008 (effective September 30, 2008). Please note the conditions of approval including that a zoning permit must be obtained within six (6) months. If you have any questions, please contact me Sincerely, Betsy McDonou h Brown Planning & Zoning Assistant Encl. 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tell 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburi.com � I Site Plan Application ►\ mr�0 :Pfi�lt southburlington PLANNING & ZONING Permit Number SP- 66 - ' V APPLICATION FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW All information requested on this application must be completed in full. Failure to provide the requested information either on this application form or on the site plan will result in your application being rejected and a delay in the review before the Development Review Board. 1. OWNER OF RECORD (Name as shown on deed, mailing address, phone and fax #): I n,,Aa Levenlco,. t� '/li"o e iI IDALo R.Mftoa,t95i-00034 2. LOCATION OF LAST RECORDED DEED (Book and page #): 3. APPLICANT (Name, mailing address, phone and fax #): 4. CONTACT PERSON (person who will receive all correspondence from Staff. Include name, address, phone & fax #): _ Rom I64 (c 04\4 t6c"I.Al.u,o G"i� 1• I,folni.� a. Contact e-mail address: 5. PROJECT STREET ADDRESS: 6. TAX PARCEL ID # (can be obtained at Assessor's Office): 191b T ol0Vo 7. PROJECT DESCRIPTION General project description (explain what you want approval for): I_ - 1 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburl.corn Site Plan Application b. Existing Uses or;�Property c. Proposed Uses on prop uses to remain): ing description and size of each separate use): (include descriptio and size of each new use and existing d. Total building square footage on property (proposed buildings and existing buildings to remain): 0�&tk,yL e. Height of building & number of floors (pro specify if basement and mezzanine): buildings and existing buildings to remain, f. Number of residential units (if applicable, new units and existing units to remain): the g. Number of employees & companv vehicles (existing and proposed, note office versus non - office employees): iv-, r h. Other (list any other information pertinent to this application not specifically requested above, please note if Overlay Districts are applicable): 8. LOT COVERAGE Total Parcel Size: a. Building: Existing % Proposed Sq. Ft. sq. ft. sq. ft. b. Overall impervious coverage (building, parking, outside storage, etc) Existing % / sq. ft. Proposed % / sq. ft. c. Front yard (along each street) Existing % / Proposed % sq. ft. sq. ft. 2 Site Plan Application d. Total area to be disturbed during construction (sq. ft.) * Projects disturbing more than one-half acre of land must follow the City's specifications for erosion control in Article 16 of the Land Development Regulations. Projects disturbing more than one acre require a permit from the Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation. 9. COST ESTIMATES a. Building (including interior renovations): $ b. Landscaping: $, a Ub c. Other site improvements (please list with cost): 10. ESTIMATED TRAFFIC a. Average daily traffic for entire property (in and out): fin `kdtow b. A.M. Peak hour for entire property c. P.M. Peak hour for entire property 11. PEAK HOURS OF OPERATION: 12. PEAK DAYS OF OPERATION: 13. ESTIMATED PROJECT COMPLETION DATE:^�1 14. ABUTTERS (please list all abutting landowner. Include mailing address. Also include those across a street or right-of-way. You may use a separate sheet if necessary) 3 Site Plan Application 15. SITE PLAN AND FEE A site plan shall be submitted which shows the information listed on Exhibit A attached. Five (5) regular size copies and one reduced copy (11" x 17") of the site plan must be submitted. A site plan application fee shall be paid to the City at the time of submitting the site plan application (see Exhibit A). Lard5ca- ja % m p(Dk iv eh45 4b Ulf iJ,-e-M "Q-A dl aW Q04410$ b-� Tv", i-O.rdsc� Q.rcl\i4f-c5 , 4 Site Plan Application I hereby certify that all the information requested as part of this application has been submitted and is accurate to the best of my knowledge. ,SI(YN4TMRE OF -APPLICANT PRINT NAME Do not write below this line DATE OF SUBMISSION: REVIEW AUTHORITY: ❑ Development Review Board Administrative Officer I have reviewed this site plan application and find it to be: I , Completer, ❑ IncomnlPtP Dike- �tor of Planning & Zoning or Designee Date j A 09/28/2008 SUN 21:41 FAX 8026510640 Windiammer Group z oo1/001 Sep 18 08 01:43p TK 802-864-7843 p.1 T'K September 17, 2008 Ray Belair, Zoning Administration Officer Planning & Zoning Department City of South Burlington 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, Vermont 05403 Re: Windjammer Planting Plan Ray: At your request, the Windjammer / Best Westem is resubmitting the "as -built" Planting Plan for the entrance to the Windjammer Restaurant, TK Landscape Architects prepared a plan titled "Landscape Improvements Windjammer I Best Western dated 5-15-07, In May 2008, the Windjammer owner and staff purchased plants locally and planted the entrance area using plants and layout that were different than that shown on the original plan. Last week, the Windjammer asked me to review the `as -built' plantings and prepare a revised plan that shows these Owner installed plantings for your files. This plan is attached and is dated 9-17-08• I compared the value of the woody plants that are now in the ground to the value of the plants in the original submittal. I did not include any of the annual or perennial flowers in either plan for comparison purposes. The costs for the original plan were based on industry averages and the total installed costs for the woody plants was $3,840. The costs for the "as -built' plantings were based on actual nursery purchases plus an industry average markup to cover the costs of labor, topsoil, soil arriendments, mulch, and labor during the grow -in period. The value of the "as -built" woody plants is $3,218. Cost of "As -built" Plan dated 9-17-OR anti Plant Name Unit Price Price 4 , 15 _ Korean lilac - Tree Form Endless Summer H drangea f y $3flq $98 $1,216 $1,470 7 7 Iceber Rose Carefree Wonder Rose $38 - $38 $266 $266 Total Cost of Woody Plants $3,218 Sincerely, Terry Krinsky, ASI..A Landscape Architects Cc: George Roy, Windjammer / Best Western ESTIMATE OF THE PROBABLE COST OF PLANTING WINDJAMMER / BEST WESTERN TK LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS 5-15-07 PLANT SCHEDULE QUANTITY COMMON NAME BOTANIC NAME SIZE CONDITION UNIT PRICE PRICE 4 IVORY SILK JAPANESE TREE LILAC Syringa retlailata Ivory 5&' 2.5" CAL. BBB. MATCHED G25 2500 10 DENSE SPREADING YEW Taxus 'Densiformis' 24" BBB SO 800 4 DWARF FOTHERGILLA Fothergila gardenll 24" BBB OR GONT 80 320 9 SIBERIAN CARPET Microblota decussata 3 GALLON CONTAINER GO 540 110 ANNUAL FLOWERS To be determined 4" POT --- 5 IG50 NOTE, ANNUAL FLOWER DISPLAY TO BE CHANGED OUT THREE TIMES PER YEAR APPROXIMATEL DATES, MOTHERS' DAY / MID-JUNE / LABOR DAY UNIT PRICE 15 $5 PER PLANT / $15 PER YEAR PER PLANT TOTAL PROBABLE COST OF PLANTING $5.810 1 ®PER 1-1 southburlington PLANNING & ZONING April 21, 2008 George Roy Windjammer 1076 Williston Road South Burlington, VT 05403 Re: Site Plan #SP-08-29 Dear Mr. Roy: Enclosed, please find a copy of the Findings of Fact and Decision of the above referenced project approved by the South Burlington Administrative Officer on April 21, 2008. Please note the conditions of approval including that a zoning permit be obtained within six (6) months. Should you have any questions, please contact our office. Sincerely, 4&- Betsy Mc rnough Brown Planningng Assistant Encl. 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburi.com � 1 ,1 �K Site Plan Application �50 southburlington PLANNING & ZONING Permit Number SP- Da _ APPLICATION FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW All information requested on this application must be completed in full. Failure to requested information either on this application form or on the site plan will result yo r the in application being rejected and a delay in the review before the Development Review Bo ard. 1. OW R OF RECORD (Name as shown on deed, mailing address, phone and fax --- 2. LOCATION OF LAST RECORDED DEED (Book and page #): 3. APPLICANT (Name, mailing address, phone and fax #): 4. CONTACT PERSON (person who will receive all . correspondence from Staff. Include address, phone & fax ude name, a. Contact e-mail address: 5. PROJECT STREET ADDRESS: g1 6. TAX PARCEL ID # (can be obtained at Assessor's Office): 7. PROJECT DESCRIPTION a. General project description: l� t 90 1 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 te1 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.sburl.com Site Plan Application b. Existing- Uses on Property (including description and size of rate use): i : a ►i-7' c. Proposed Uses on pro erty (i clude description and size of each new use and existing uses to remain): / d. Total building square footage on property (proposed buildings and existing buildings to remain): /" "2 .-,I 5 :_ e. Height of building & number of floors (proposed buil dings and existing buildings to remain, specify if basement and mezzanine): ,t ; f. Number of residential units (if applicable, new units and existing units to remain): g. Number of employees & company vehicles (existing and proposed, note office versus non - office employees): h. Other (list any other information pertinent to this application not specifically requested above, please note if Overlay Districts are applicable): P-1 .,r. 8. LOT COVERAGE Total Parcel Size: a. Building: Existing % Proposed % / Sq. Ft. i 0 C sq. ft. sq. ft. b. Overall impervious coverage (building, parking, outside storage, etc) Existing % / sq. ft. Proposed % / sq. ft. c. Front yard (along each street) Existing % / sq. ft. Proposed % sq. ft. 2 Site Plan Application d. Total area to be disturbed during construction (sq. ft.) * Projects disturbing more than one-half acre of land must follow the City's specifications for erosion control in Article 16 of the Land Development Regulations. Projects disturbing more than one acre require a permit from the Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation. 9. COST ESTIMATES a. Building (including interior renovations): $ 13�p,yU� b. Landscaping: $ 0_ c. Other site improvements (please list with cost): 10. ESTIMATED TRAFFIC a. Average daily traffic for entire pro[ b. A.M. Peak hour for entire property c. P.M. Peak hour for entire property 11. PEAK HOURS OF OPERATION: 12. PEAK DAYS OF OPERATION: 13. ESTIMATED PROJECT COMPLETION DATE: Gj -- 14. ABUTTERS (please list all abutting landowner. Include mailing address. Also include those across a street or right-of-way. You may use a separate sheet if necessary) 3 Site Plan Application I hereby certify that all the information requested as part of this application has been submitted and is accurate to the best of my knowledge. SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT OF PROPERTY OWNER Do not write below this line DATE OF SUBMISSION: V100 REVIEW AUTHORITY: ❑ Development Review Board 4dministrative Officer I have reviewed this site plan application and find it to be: 11 Complete, L] Incomplete r of FWning & Zoning or Designee 5 Permit Number SP- 4� -J�— CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON APPLICATION FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW All information requested on this application must be completed in full. Failure to provide the requested information either on this application form or on the site plan will result in your application being rejected and a delay in the review before the Development Review Board. 1) OWNE,R1 OF RECORD (Name as showI1 wn on deed, mailing address,r `phone ,land fax #) W 1 JC V. a (� OS O 1 T ,' 4 YO h D 1,076 802.- 19G3- 1 9ZZ. — 2) LOCATION OF LAST RECORDED DEED (Book and page #) 3) APPLICANT (Name, mailing address, phone and fax #) Caf A ,,rs, Q c7 17 I? t-1.. 1,.1 I Ci-,,, 04., o s y 9 o Xa z. - 8 -! Y40 4) CONTACT PERSON (person who will receive all correspondence from Staff. Include name, address, phone & fax #): I - C424 i 5) PROJECT STREET ADDRESS: / 0 7 I Qo j- 6) TAX PARCEL ID # (can be obtained at Assessor's Office) 7) PROJECT DESCRIPTION a) Existing Uses on Property (includi`ng` description and size of each separate` use) t'l � PeA,-, . r 'F. st o -3 s.&:e. o K d ��-i o , , b) Proposed Uses on property (include description and size of each new use and existing uses to remain) 1'I Z PA-- �_ _! t - 1 � _ � it � � c) Total building square footage on property (proposed buildings and existing buildings to remain) d) Height of building & number of floors (proposed buildings and existing buildings to remain, specify if basement and mezzanine) f). N tnir e) Number of residential units (if applicable, new units and existing units to remain) N O,n *-- 06 f) Number of emplo ees & company vehicles (existing and proposed, note office versus non -office employees): � o .o g) Other (list any other information pertinent to this application not specifically requested above, please note if Overlay Districts are applicable): 8) LOT COVERAGE Total Parcel Size: a) Building: Existing (.8J % / Proposed ►. 8 9 % / sq. ft. sq. ft. Sq. Ft. b) Overall impervious coverage (building, parking, outside storage, etc) Existing (l. % / sq. ft. Proposed 1 f . r % / sq. ft. c) Front yard (along each street) Existing —% / sq. ft. Proposed % sq. ft. d) Total area to be disturbed during construction (sq. ft.) * Projects disturbing more than one-half acre of land must follow the City's specifications for erosion control in Article 16 of the Land Development Regulations. Projects disturbing more than one acre require a permit from the Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation. 9) COST ESTIMATES a) Building (including interior renovations): $ — b) Landscaping: $ s y o 0 c) Other site improvements (please list with cost): 10) ESTIMATED TRAFFIC a) Average daily traffic for entire property (in and out): b) A.M. Peak hour for entire property (in and out): c) P.M. Peak hour for entire property (In and out): 11) PEAK HOURS OF OPERATION: 2 12) PEAK DAYS OF OPERATION: 13) ESTIMATED PROJECT COMPLETION DATE: C. -,V 1`}-` 14) ABUTTERS (please list all abutting landowner. Include mailing address. Also include those across a street or right-of-way. You may use a separate sheet if necessary) 15) SITE PLAN AND FEE A site plan shall be submitted which shows the information listed on Exhibit A attached. Five (5) regular size copies and one reduced copy (11" x 17") of the site plan must be submitted. A site plan application fee shall be paid to the City at the time of submitting the site plan application (see Exhibit A). �� t�4t�aeRe� _J .,,rro�¢rkeri�s _ J�w.,�.e. -De�'� 4�e.�T*+•�.� ��c� S—/I�'�°7 67 j k R�•.13 c.�/� A�'c�►,cc 3 I hereby certify that all the information requested as part of this application has been submitted and is accurate to the best of my knowledge. SIGNATURE OP APPLICA T SI AT OF PROPERTY OWNER Do not write below this line DATE OF SUBMISSION: 41� v REVIEW AUTHORITY: ElDevelopment Review Board Administrative Officer I have review this site plan application and find it to be: Complete ) I /�] Incomplete & Zoning or Designee Date 4 ORION. IN � southburlingtou PLANNING & ZONING February 19, 2008 Bill MacDonough Cornerstone Construction, Inc. PO Box 178 Underhill Center, 05490 Re: Site Plan Application #SP-08-11 Windjammer Dear Mr. MacDonough: Enclosed, please find a copy of the Findings of Fact and Decision of the above referenced project approved by the South Burlington Administrative Officer on February 15, 2008. Please note the conditions of approval including that a zoning permit obtained within six (6) months. 9 p mlt be Should you have any questions, please contact our office. Sincerely 6f jk� Betsy onough Brown Plannin Zoning Assistant Encl. 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.470, www.s burl.com TITAN NAN.FAGnATNG OR EOUAL MODEL SOXAt S POLY POWSOWO Et COAT - COLOR TO IK OCTEIeIIOT R WOOD SLAi6 ONE GOAT CLEAR51TTL AHCFI FNOL - FACTORY ARIID 6TANE55 9lLEL ANCHOR DOLTS + SHMS 1 BENCH MODEL B-7G 53"5 pTT"pC&CSASR VAATDR.T.. CLASS A POPND IACEQIT _-STANF'ED RTIM TINTED +`STI/TLD - EpAME SYSTEM OR fo-LL ASPHALT TREATED FELT OTANNON JOINT FLLZR AT GCNST%rTION JOINTS AND/OR AWFTHG STRILCTUES CONTINJOLJS 1OnoR1O GA. dA•PORIM 2' ROM BOTTOM , 4". . fO STRIZILIRAL SOL BASE .• MNAI DEPTH A' ' 6' DE M F NO TRU ROOTS AW EXCAVATED INSTALL AS FIXSTRLACTIRAL SOL VENDOR ODUMS SL66A5C f1EPAW AS P[R 6TRILILRAL 50l VOIDER ODElIb 2 GONGRETE FLATWORK — TINTED STAMPED Proper Tree Planting Diagram ReHI6w tATFwlt 6u.Nd �+Nt LDW OrWrloheR yAm temporwL�L hll. hNp CommA11p ul lbkl _ "word A"d arks. r uL wp And bid F6 dOAn N the pIL APl.er da bi. br d" or ppaaeHNOHN� ArN 1 fbo eA rlorU i AANro xl. halMm. Cul. anA Fold plmtky Ume. down 6uA.p firm uppa1/2 M bAl. DRY �R15 Lol AM ICIM.0 All pob Tbs. RDBD o61r dull be Ab 2 - AY' d 1NTNIAI wbote Bllehed grade. osRIL'Ir d Bol 1, ReWOw Mwo we f, hipN, ehrB lAoA bw�_1 � top of BAD N roeARd. or Nmliwr mulch Ube eKIAUns - --• -,.-• `.-• - - - ONARk AIeRP 1VRLer did �� awboAtIld N1CI d py itnmuWhly w to eLARport rmt bwl NIA ids wrnT dimlrnraRllao LSdMloe Neu" bAckfllkg tanpi 3 Skm kd AYNN W ,twkr Orly if you have to. Uee 3"-Wlelewebb4y A. Tha wh a Should be Rst bl.oRTJdraWA oWg=11'wlirgroRoeLAat rfsromto tehLeaksatae kweitAhlld It frog Akdkl j dawn W. tree. Do not stake IShOy -t,voo gwlrl Rtrangth from nww t. Rvm , AI stakes ftor mA" 'se of troe YAap IR sat racommerded, we It 4mU A rwmber of PrMMo— for the tree. W' :rR�itl�G: �F.Rry SOUTH BLJRL14GTON PLANTING DETAIL J I I I o I I 4 J I I 1 JNP AMSE TIME IZAG I v I I I ' I I I I I I , I Eu6TING 5' CRA6APLL TO RDIW I I i I IfN 40 „� 6OC RADLA, F!" 4111ABT GEOPYTRY Frr AS-tl1T R7S CONDIIpNS II L T .WAWYd' 11111 O-D T JAPAWSE TRU LIAG EASTNG IJOn TOOO�ILRDAN IL.71 I S. 3' ON i n I II I II I-_ <\ \ tr� mv 1 0 ROPOSEO ADornom REM TO WEN" LAMPHW ArX41MTS RAND TO Yr W A' ON UNTO r M CMWM Will RESTAURANT JARNESE TRU LLAC P TLAE OEM PNSTAIl 2 NCH PVC SCAT /0 SLf1l FISTING FOR IIBBUITION AND SEASONAL LOTTING TWO 5LUWS UDQ 6' WALKWAY AND TO RD M TWO 6LRK6 UNDER 9 WALKWAY NOTE TEMPORARY M ROTECTION FIE UUM. Lx. FERTM. SLED. + Ml PRIOR TO M START OF CON57XZTION ALL ppnAM® AREAS INSTALL TETORMY FENCING AROID CH EATRQ MY 16 SGCDIRED 70 REAN LOCATE FEDE APROSATELY UY OFFSET FR Till DO NOT STOW NATMALS OR P#W VFICLES WITHIN TIS6 ZONE. �>NG To Re"N, Ior WW CONGWIC WALKWAY T71RD AND STAMPED C40HCWZ DEONG FATICRN NOTE, WTIMI ORRNC Of MTNC 71EC USE N EIILAVATION HMO TO NSTALL WALKWAY INSTALL ST"YUAL SOL SASE O{RING EXCAVATION. CAR MO= ROOTS WITH A LOPPM OR SAW - DO NOT RP ROOTS BEYCD WNAT 0 W ED TO INSTALL WALKWAY. CATAMOUNT SL1l NQ 51XD NANE Z OF HKBZE M67N fdAWTION UNRTY RNTUCKY NliOA55 25Z-30i 85% VICTORY CIWWNGS rl C ZOX-0OZ 55Z CARTEL PEROIML WMGA65 2OL4Oi ADZ SPARTAN HARD PEU2l 25Z-23Z 9DZ PERT MATTIM LESS n 3Z WRD SEWS LESS n O.TZ EDOPIPTE oPWICLD FOR LNSECT AND LYSEASE WSISTANCZ PLANT 50HEDLLE QLAKMY CONOR kw BOUC NANE SEE CONDITION / NORM 6LX "NesE TREE MAC SI+R} MwANA WwY 5I' 2.5' CAL 5M VATODD O OOIGC Sriffil YEW Ta 'DArYaRN' 24' 6+5 9 Bill CARrET H r bWW dKI ..tR 3 O.ALID N CONTMER 225 ANNUAL FIDW[RS T. W dRt r."d ♦' POT _- NOR- AURAL FLOWER DISPLAY TO BE OWNiD OUT TMER MS PER YEAR APPit,wi C DA1Eb wrNo s' LAY / roI OF JLLY / LASER DAY T•K TX Landscape Architects LYprYEmonefter + on PALM 133 ELAImY ROAD. SIlTE 203 OOLC/ill Vol 054" VOLE + FAX- SO 664-71143 E-PAL- terry-U"dr O caroR m n a.rAaR avNr. K t PNOR TO CONSTRUCTION M CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT gO-SM . ti-0I 6SfrSAFE AND M ROJWT OWWR To Vowy M '46-0U.T' LOCATONS OF 1!O@tltOl1O UTUXS. M CONTRACTOR SMALL NOTIFY M L.11DSCAM AKGIFRCT OF ANY CONFLICTS arrwnH M FROM CONSTRUCTION AND ORSTNO COWIIIONb. M LANDSCAPE ARGOCCT MAIL RrXW ROFO6l9 NODFICATION6 TO THIS RAN AND TIN¢ NECOIKWATIO/IS AS WOW TO AVOID CONFLICTS 6[1WCCN M PROPOSED CONSTRIX.TICH AHD E0STNG SIDE CONDITIONS. 2. CONTRACTOR GOINMTOW CONSTRICTION P.O. BOX 176 602-M4-1600 3 RO.LCT AWUMrT- WQWN LAMPLRC ARCNTEGT5 30 SOUTH PARK OWE GOLIESTEL `QRMONT 0544G +. M FOOTPRINT SHOWN ON TT16 DRAWING IS A 00HIl R OF A BASE SURID BY M ARCMfEDT AND FlMD RECONNAISSANCE BY TRA MAY 2001 RLWYd14 ® RCW6E PAN CON616TEM WPM 'A6 Ali' CONDITIONS 1-14-06 O 6' 1G' Landscape Improvements Windjammer Best Western SOUTH DUi1lIGTON. VFWONT Landscape Plan TK PROJECT 0705 7-15-07 SCALE AS SHOWN L1 WILLIST❑N ROAD ■rrrrrrrrr r.. iill�ll�lllll'a IINIIIIIIIIIIN�J IYIIIIIIl1111 D ok "U � m o Windjammer Restaurant RENOVATIONS TO EXISTING FACILMES Wlema.nn•iampnere architecture engineering planning ws.ea s... on.. aw. a ra.a..r... rrnrue 15 o 1 $ South Burlington Vermont V i �i31 JC; �- w I i I I I I WILLISTON ROAD I , M A 1 fr' C 3 j o TO m rN, ;on �o x0IM I din 4 8 � . f y� � I 1 za— r z m-40 MR I� Q 1 Z v 7M MP If N0 m IS r 101 0 0 (Zj m D + IV a ;0 m v O _ m Z to J a ■ 3I I �, i ; • ,� � . \ -� .._ is CD 1 cn m F z m a Windjammer restaurant RENOVATIONS TO EXISTING FACILITIES South Burlington Vermont wlemarin�lam here architecture engineering planning IIJ,Cwr,A➢W t),Ivr .WLr Yl Co4#..a4+. 3'f l/J�IE '7.5711 tt l y'\a"'% i'� ON ME zz zA �r11rM/AOMAO DM [aML I —or —I ae co►T arre ■oo➢ raf■I - rAerae AIYrm sTitess stm AKllat san r M■M �� EDlpi MOOp, d—T6 _ MArM Y -Tp a. A MRIIAM f�Mr OQG[R• �TMFm wYIOM • •tt1Ta Ot IeeMl AT C 1•T1■F.T10MT ■I JAIr•jam � AMM �67■LRR• _ cOM■Orl• faOdoO fiA ■R - ■eroerm r F"M sonar _ •Y■A:rlwr •n MASF : r■ssM LVTn r '• r TO r la O MOOR• Ar■ p - LMTAu u r9r sT■.CMMAL sn YOMM ■LYt Qtmxs •(� • rsAsc rlvAa u rQ snw■srrl sn tTMI1ae amaa & GONGRITE FUTiNO — 7NTW + STAIT V Proper Tree Planting Diagram FgMDr• 1wDNG Ou.'J R/11r1• Mro bAfLMla � ` , nr. n w.. '� -' 1'IA irl. . ..1 ul:i th.l.l •fl- 'ir r... a Yk'.1 0:.. .uM.:ard .xM F,a led: y�,r mu•k L•xd:+ .. ).flr^Y Il xN hIA x FLr11MM 1Y C. r. dopn•I dufirst Z �• ti1�nNR'I1�YtAM r LW •rldl. Pd;' vrn. [ses caNer rrdl hr 2-V'MuwtYAl �karl crow ■uMk �f mA ahotr nrlrlrr .pxar A:Ih A'AAA I.M. KDegl■ ow" fYe t y� n r •11IMxr xrf L'M ,' x.>{ ul h.A I r,Y1 LL Lr h 1 Ocx r. •. _r.., ::c. •. . 'ram. "�.....�'.,: d ex t. 1♦r s...yry rs 9D! DIIA1or YRi Mi:.tlrbW RUrs xi tM cl:iwa- i _. zrr.•r•.r+ . hdl ar hAs Nc- tw�. rot vµ• 61ara� Dr MAlletfr--►I la aJ. +r hat rc —3. :k::d+.y,�rrrr .:A cY art to xrJ^w N•I. o:yr,Hr IM. .el —Mk .,16 ::IIr rAxn nx ar'irre l'M .tar• 3,nq Y.F•ra:rrrrmg,r 1—dMbwl&m .he >err, Do: rr.rd: A" ib 1 .4.1—.11'. a+ ,'— d �,... nt1 1-1 m-a-hA. re r cMMm . nr.N-. ..: F rF '- fa 1 r .'.— %�SOIJRf EUlLNGTON N AN1iiG MTAL naosA ALw.a1 ��LIIrlroleFl� AMOM161• /IMM » m r aM om■r *am ro rpm roar, a a/11! 1� ■Y M•TNa a LOI r1T. ql q Mato Gf•■Y rQ AGlla1 Ai M' MML IlM■C RAMM■ � T■o taro IMIDt r Are■AT AI■ To e■sw ,.o rates IMM■ r AIItMT me= o w MMY TAa r■OOOU11 rs MY■L • 10 ro Yr■ w, d cO11•TIim AIL D■t11■m AWA• Q MTMDfTNI.IOfOMrer r0p MaaD M[r l� LOG^e rCQ M7'RO■MAT 1D• ORrFT rlal 1rM( DO MDT WM MTOML• Ol FVK 1,EAL AIM DMI IOC MT= taft ro A■M 1MRD AA •T= OOAMR NLUST MwM/r![ p 9M1O I= Ilf[ INIM Gr/WA1W M99A M M•TM MTAr s A MAM: M 0• wn DI■ a1D'O•A MOM• I A L on fAI - M MDr R MOM• Orrew I Y M HMO TO M0 ■reMT. MTAMMMT VAMM MI ® wK a O' I■MLC mom ®MO01 IAR1T MarWY ■1CQu• zft A MM. tCTDlff OIM"R1aL ec400e MM alTla FlAMML ereAA•• fDQ.00M b{ sARTAM I\MD rOfAC IW Lz war wTlne 11 M ML ® s®s 10• tLMM oa e■ammle IMIW[O roe MaGT AND M•GYF 1■al•Le[e MART SCHERU MMAIr wfc � caaMor ♦ MatY Ye .IVere>< "m VAc %,2w r♦IdMrr y y Mr 2J r Ol •rl wYr>a w DOW SWAM VM T— 11ArAf r• eC sfs ♦ Dow raLAIMLA r♦YMw @.*a DC sfs Or GaM 4 G■FeT a s.,nr oDMUMee m AMLML rLOMMs T w ArsMAw 4. rw — HMO AIAeMt noa ■■tAY To w CHARM art MM IM[• Fa ,rnr AMMO RWIL MTer ""OW MT , MO•JMC , LOMt MT EK TKl.uvlsca Archilrrl� •AA■■ � ♦ s MIA. � 10 saeM FrM orrrF l M roomw MSOMI - 1 09"M M A COrOMR - A MU ■fn n Ar A■ MM Aw r6D 6OeIIMMIe■ n 1■A wT ■1M r-61w Landscape Improvements Windjammer Best Western SOUMR SUMNGTOK VU7fOMf Landscape Plan TM MtO1=T 07M 5-15-M WALE AS MOM L1 CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 (802) 846-4106 FAX (802) 846-4101 June 5, 2007 Bill MacDonough Cornerstone Construction, Inc. PO Box 178 Underhill Center, VT 05490 Re: Site plan application #SP-07-39 Dear Mr. MacDonough: Enclosed, please find a copy of the Findings of Fact and Decision of the above referenced project approved by the Administrative Officer on June 5, 2007. Please note the conditions of approval including that a zoning permit be obtained within six (6) months. Should you have any questions, please contact our office. Sincerely, `-�—i Q/��k Betsy McDonough Planning & Zoning Assistant Encl. Permit Number SP- di- - 37 CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON APPLICATION FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW All information requested on this application must be completed in full. Failure to provide the .requested information either on this application form or on the site plan will result in your application being rejected and a delay in the review before the Development Review Board. 1) OWNER OF RECORD (Name as shown on deed, mailing address, phone and fax #)_____ hi( e7rn( 2) LOCAT.ION OF LAST RECORDED DEED (Book and page #) 3) APPLICANT (Name, mailing address, phone and fax Po Bok 17 8 u...a..��.�1t Cam..,' _ Ji-, OS"y'yo XDL- M -I Bar F rat:8Y9-1y0.4 4) CONTACT PERSON (person who will receive all correspondence from Staff. Include name, address, phone & fax #): 5) PROJECT STREET ADDRESS: `o6 &) dZL) , '„i 6) TAX PARCEL ID # (can be obtained at Assessor's Office 7) PROJECT DESCRIPTION a) ExisDting Uses on Property (including description and size of each separate use) b) Proposed Uses on property (include description and size of each new use and existing uses to remain) 5.�..a.----- %J c) Total building square footag.1 on property (proposed buildings and exist�'rrg buildings to remain) -- R-,�. �.,: . - 1 �? L�osC-Z 71 * * � 6 1b = 1022 d) Height of building & number of floors (proposed buildings and existing buildings to remain, specify if basement and mezzanine) E� _ ,Z S ,.y o ' y It 1su e) Number of residential units (if applicable, new units and existing units to remain) n f) Number of employees & company vehicles (existing and proposed, note office versus non -office employees): /J o 1.,0..,,Q e v g) Other (list any other information pertinent to this application not specifically requested above, please note if Overlay Districts are applicable): 8) LOT COVERAGE Total Parcel Size: Sq. Ft. a) Building: Existing -% / sq. ft. Proposed % / sq. ft. b) Overall impervious coverage (building, parking, outside storage, etc) Existing % / sq. ft. Proposed _% / sq. ft. c) Front yard (along each street) Existing % / _ sq. ft. Proposed % d) Total area to be disturbed during construction (sq. ft.) t q z- S * Projects disturbing more than one-half acre of land must follow the City's specifications for erosion control in Article 16 of the Land Development Regulations. Projects disturbing more than one acre require a permit from the Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation. 9) COST ESTIMATES a) Building (including interior renovations): $ b) Landscaping: $ c) Other site improvements (please list with cost): 10) ESTIMATED TRAFFIC d aoa a) Average daily traffic for entire property (in and out): b) A.M. Peak hour for entire property (in and out): c) P.M. Peak hour for entire property (In and out): 11) PEAK HOURS OF OPERATION: 2 I hereby certify that all the information requested as part of this application has been submitted and is accurate to the best of my knowledge. SIGNATURE OF A PLICAN/T� _ f I TiJ PROPERTY OWNER Do not write below this line DATE OF SUBMISSION: S REVIEW AUTHORITY: ❑ Development Review Board � 'Administrative Officer I have reviewed this site plan application and find it to be: E3 Complete 4 I � CI1r) OF SOUTH BURLINGZ 3N DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 (802) 846-4106 FAX (802) 846-4101 December 21, 2006 Annette Cabe The Planning & Zoning Resource Corp. 100 NE 5th Street Oklahoma City, OK 73104 Re: 1076 Williston Road Dear Ms. Cabe: This is in response to your letter of December 15, 2006 requesting information regarding the above referenced property. My responses are as follows: 1. The property is currently located within the Commercial 1 - Residential 15 and Residential 4 Zoning Districts. 2. The property is located in the Traffic Overlay District Zone 2C & Interstate Highway Overlay District. 3. The abutting zoning designations to the property are to the north Commercial 2, to the south & west Commercial 1, and to the east is Commercial 1 & Residential 4. A copy of the tax map for this area is enclosed. 4. This property has not been approved as a PUD. 5. A variance was approved on 10/15/84 for an indoor recreational facility, but a zoning permit was never issued and the variance has since expired. 6. Many site plans were approved for the property beginning in 1976. I do not have the time or staff to do the research for you. If you want to research it yourself, we would be happy to direct you to our files. 7. There are no legal nonconforming issues that I am aware of. 8. There are no unresolved zoning violations. 9. Copies of the Certificates of Occupancy are enclosed. Certificates of Occupancy are required for any change in use, expansion, addition, or change to the property which modifies an approved site plan. If you require any additional information, please feel free to contact me. Sinc , y Be it Administrative Officer The Planning & Zonin Resource Corporation 100 NE !�' Street • Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73104 Telephone (405) 840-4344 • Fax (405) 418-2646 Toll Free (800) 344-2944 • Toll Free Fax (888) 523-9008 To: Ray Belair Date Subject: Re: December 15, 2006 Zoning Verification Letter Variances Zoning and Building Violations Certificate of Occupancy Site Plan Best Western Windjammer Inn- 1076 Williston Road We have been engaged to prepare a Zoning and Site Summary Report for the above mentioned site. Please consider this a formal request for a letter outlining the following information: * What is the current zoning of the property? * Is the property in any special, restrictive or overlay district? * What are the abutting zoning designations to the north, south, east and west? Is there area property map available? If so, can we have a copy? * Was this a Planned Unit Development? If so, can we please get a copy of the PUD, specifically what was approved for parking, setbacks, height and density? * Was this property granted any variances, special exceptions, or conditional use permits or zoning relief of any kind? If so, can we please get a copy of them? If these are not available, would you briefly outline the conditions of the applicable document? * Was site plan approval required? If so, can we get a copy of it and or the conditions? * Are there any legal nonconforming issues? * To the best of your knowledge, do your records show any unresolved Zoning or Building Code Violations? * Were Certificate of Occupancies issued? If so, can we obtain theses copies or could you please fill out our attached form letter? Please sign and return by fax to me at the number listed above. * How are Certificates of Occupancy issued for this particular site? (For instance, are Certificates issued for building shells, for each tenant or for both? Are Certificates issued any time a use, tenant improvement or owner is changed?) If there are any questions you are unable to answer, please let us know whom we should contact. We are working on a very strict time line, we further request a faxed copy of the letter prior to being mailed. Our client has asked that we gather this information as quickly as possible so any help would be greatly appreciated. It is my understanding that there is a $25.00 fee associated with this request, not to exceed $25.00. Please advise me immediately if this is incorrect. Thank you in advance for your time and consideration on the above matter. If you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to telephone at the toll free number above or email at annettec@pzr.com. Sincerely: Annette Cabe Information Specialist Ext. 3350 (Please copy onto your letterhead) Planning and Zoning Resource Corporation 100 NE Sth Street Oklahoma City, OK 73104 To Whom It May Concern: Based on our records [choose one]: A valid final certificate of occupancy has been issued and is now outstanding for the Project. (See Attached Copy Issued) Certificates of Occupancy for projects constructed prior to the year are no longer on file with this office. The Project was constructed in The absence of a certificate of occupancy for the Project will not give rise to any enforcement action affecting the Project. A certificate of occupancy for the Project will only be required to the extent of any construction activity (such as restoring, renovating or expanding the Project or any part thereof). We are unable to locate a certificate of occupancy for the Project from our records. We have evidence in our records, however, one was issued and has been subsequently lost or misplaced. The absence of a certificate of occupancy for the Project will not give rise to any enforcement action affecting the Project. A certificate of occupancy for the Project will only be required to the extent of any construction activity, restoring, renovating or expanding the Project or any part thereof. This site is still being constructed. The absence of a certificate of occupancy for the Project will not give rise to any enforcement action affecting the Project. A certificate of occupancy for the Project will only be required to the extent of any construction activity either restoring, renovating or expanding the Project or any part thereof. Please call the undersigned at if you have any comments or questions. Sincerely, Name: 1 i CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DE:PARTMEW OF PLANNING & ZONING 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 (802) 846-4106 FAX (802) 846-4101 December 12, 2006 Laura Levering O'Connell The Windjammer Hospitality Group 1076 Williston Road South Burlington, VT 05403 Re: Notice of Violation Withdrawal Dear Ms. O'Connell: Your letter of December 7, 2006 to Juli Beth Hinds was forwarded to me. The information contained therein indicates to me that you have complied with the agreement we made at our meeting of April 16, 2003 to correct your violation. Therefore, please be advised that the Notice of Violation #NV-02- 41 dated 11/25/02 is hereby withdrawn. If you have any questions, please let me know. Wam , r d J. i Administrative Officer IIWi6diammer ,H O S P I TA L I T Y G R O U P, December 7, 2006 Ms. Juli Beth Hinds Director of Planning and Zoning City of South Burlington 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 Dear Ms. Hinds, 1076 Williston Road, So. Burlington, VT 05403 Tel (802) 863-1125 Fax (802) 658-1296 www.windjammerrestaurant.com www.bestwestern.com/windjammerinn It was just brought to my attention by our attorney, while doing work on a title search for our refinancing, that we are out of zoning compliance with the City of South Burlington. Mr. Belair told our attorney that it was because we cut down trees in 2003 and never got back to the city about the landscaping we did to replace the value of the trees that were cut on our property. I apologize for any miscommunication. I do remember calling Mr. Belair and letting him know that our landscaping project was complete in the fall of 2003 and he could come see it at any time. It seems that he never received that message. I was able to go to our storage unit and pull out the invoices of what we bought at Claussen's for that project. The trees and shrubs were purchased at Four Season's Garden Center on a Company credit card and finding the detail of that so many years ago would prove to be quite difficult. The invoices from Claussen's more than covers the $251.00 we needed to replace. The landscaping plan that we used for this project is also included. I have also copied a letter I wrote to Mr. Hafter in 2003 as a point of reference for you. I hope this clears up any violation we have on the books. This landscaping is still in place and we have added even more since 2003. Again, I apologize that this violation went on for so long. I had no idea this was still outstanding. Please let me know if anything else is needed to take care of this matter. I can be reached at 651-0637. Sincerely, Laura Levering O'Connell President The Windjammer Hospitality Group Cc: Mr Raymond Belair The WINDJAMMER H o s P I T A L I T Y G R O U P May 2, 2003 Charles Hafter City Manager City of South Burlington 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 Dear Mr. Hafter, At our meeting with Ray Blair on April 16, 2003 we agreed that I would find out the value of the trees that the city believes were cut in violation. We also agreed that I would submit a landscaping plan to the city for our property at 1076 Williston Road. Once we had planted the trees or shrubs that had the same value as the trees cut Ray Belair would come and verify that and The Windjammer Hospitality Group would no longer have a violation with the City of South Burlington. I have included that values that Alex Hudak gave us for the eight trees in question. The total value is $251.00. We are half way through the process of adding new garden beds with perennials and flowering trees and shrubs in our courtyard. We also have plans to add a hedge of trees along our property line next to the Holiday Inn as they have removed their fence and we want a visual separation between the properties. I am in the process of talking to a landscaper in order to find out which type of tree will best fit our needs for that project. I know that both of these projects will cost much more than $251.00. I will call your office when we are finished with one of them and I will also have the invoices ready to show you what we spent on the project. I hope to have the courtyard project finished by the middle of June. I will get in touch with you at that time. In the meantime if you have any questions or concerns please feel free to reach me at 651-0637. Sincerely, 6 G aura L ering 'Connell President The Windjammer Hospitality Group Best Western Windjammer Inn & Conference Center • Windjammer Restaurant 1076 Williston Road, South Burlington VT 05403 • Tel (802) 863-1125 Fax (802) 658-1296 Project: wl c 1: A A-IXC��C OKC �`ji a t -M � - �A `f i.► U �5 -�t5� i RCN #VACLA fM&f I Ot, gAlb 1 P�LE • AM --PA-JUL#t5, VOTA -I?F b" btTi Gy l%T 1Vh PEICG l✓ I A l� L1 3 R f aE ` L I 1 V j - - --- --------- m CLAUSSEN ENTERPRISES, IN . 187 Main Street, Route 2A Colchester, VT 05446 802-878-2361 Invoice # 37290 Invoice Date 9/09/03 Page 1 Bill To: Windjammer Hospitality Deliver To: Deliver at 10:30 amto Wil1iston Road Locatzon Attn: Laura O'Connell South Burlington, Vl 1076 WiI1iston Road co Bur1ington, VT 05403 Account #: 339 Terms: Net 15 Days Sales person: cjc --------------------------- ---------------------------------��--------- -------- Qt' Unit Discount 'P i Amount 'Total Item-# Description Ord ____r_ce_______________________ -------------------------`- �� --------------------- 500.10( PERE6 Perennial 6" 100 . 5.00 Daylilies Assorted ^ ' 400 0( PERE6 Perennial 6" 100 `4.00 . Hosta Assorted 200 0| PERE6 Perennial 6" 50 4.00 . Rudbeckia ^ ` 0 PERE6 Perennial 6" 50 4.00 ' 200 . Echinacea Purple 200 0 PERE6 Perennial 6" 50 4.00 . Monarda Bee Balm 123 7 PERE4 Perennial 4" 75 45 2.. Sedu III A er ' GroUP dba Best V��annA,,lr)diSubtotal 1, 623^ 7 Onto ' ~~'-=- ^ Delivery 10.[ Account / Tax 81.� TOTAL DUE 1,715.' Accounting- Vendor #!�!� Enteredc-�—� Payment date: Check #: Amount: Payment on account: Check #: Amount: CLAUSSEN ENTERPRISES, INC. 187 Main Street, Rotate 2A Colchester, []VT 05446 802-878-236 1 Invoice 0 Invoice Date 9!0:5!03 Wage i Bill To: Windjammer Hospitality Attn: Laura O'Connell 1076 Williston Road Sc Burlington, VT 05403 Deliver To: Windjammer Hospitality Attn: Laura O"Connell 1076 Williston Road So Burlington, VT 0540. ; Sales person: .3M Account #: 339 Terms: Net 15 :lays. Item—#$ ----.---•-- DescriptionOrd ---------------6---------c-----•------•----- OtY . Unit Disc+3u��- , Price Amount .- ------- Total CHRYB Chrysanthemum 8 -- 5.95 •---•---- 154+. 70 CHRY4 Chrysanther:,i.AR 4. 15," 6 t. 99 23. 94 CHRY4 Chrysanther,Um 4.5" :4 3.99 351.76 CHRY6 ChrySant heriLim 6" 6 4.99 29.94 MISC:HS Miracle Grt w 1 12.99 12. 99 RECEIVED BY: Payment date:/ Payment on accot.:nt : es PGC0Ur,tfr,g V ` Check #; Check #k: Subtotal .? i i'. 33 C!iscount- 47. 60 Tax I---% 49 TOTAL DUE E83. S2 Amount: Amount: ~ ' . � ! � v ' ERPRISES INC CLAUSSEN E \ , . 18� Main S reet, Route 2A Colchest�r, VT 05446 802878-2361 it 37336 / Invoice Invoictee Da9/10/03 Page 1 To: Windjammer Hospitality Attn: Laura O'Connell 1076 Williston Road _ -� Hospitality D liver To: Windjammer 1l � Attn: Laura O'Conne / 1076 Williston Road Go Burlington, VT 05403 -- - t VT 05403 ' -- So BurIing on, ` Terms: Net 15 Days Account it 339 Sales person: LB _____________________ ------------ Di count _----~---------------------- ` i Qty Unit s Tot ' Ord Price Amount Item-# DescriPtio» � '__---------------------------- 60 -----------------------� 5 95 10.71 . --------------- " 12 , CHRY8 Chrysanthemum 8 44 ' ) 15 3.50 7.88 . CHRY4 Chrysanthemum 4.5' '. , 105 Subtotal ^^ ' o Tax TOTAL DUE 110 RECEIVED BY ' CAmount: heck #: ................... .. t�� _� Amount: / t on account: Check #:___________ Paymen �6= -^ � The WINDJAMMER H O S P I T A L I T Y G R O U P May 2, 2003 Charles Hafter City Manager City of South Burlington 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 Dear Mr. Hafter, At our meeting with Ray Blair on April 16, 2003 we agreed that I would find out the value of the trees that the city believes were cut in violation. We also agreed that I would submit a landscaping plan to the city for our property at 1076 Williston Road. Once we had planted the trees or shrubs that had the same value as the trees cut Ray Belair would come and verify that and The Windjammer Hospitality Group would no longer have a violation with the City of South Burlington. I have included that values that Alex Hudak gave us for the eight trees in question. The total value is $251.00. We are half way through the process of adding new garden beds with perennials and flowering trees and shrubs in our courtyard. We also have plans to add a hedge of trees along our property line next to the Holiday Inn as they have removed their fence and we want a visual separation between the properties. I am in the process of talking to a landscaper in order to find out which type of tree will best fit our needs for that project. I know that both of these projects will cost much more than $251.00. I will call your office when we are finished with one of them and I will also have the invoices ready to show you what we spent on the project. I hope to have the courtyard project finished by the middle of June. I will get in touch with you at that time. In the meantime if you have any questions or concerns please feel free to reach me at 651-0637. Sincerely, aura L ering C('Connell President The Windjammer Hospitality Group Best Western Windjammer Inn & Conference Center • Windjammer Restaurant 1076 Williston Road, South Burlington VT 05403 • Tel (802) 863-1125 Fax (802) 658-1296 Cathy O'Brien Wetland Consulting 839 Oak Hill Road, Williston, VT 05495 (802) 878-6022 November 18, 2002 Ray Belair City of South Burlington 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 RE: Findings on Logging Job, Patchen Road, So Burlington Dear Ray: On November 14, 2002 we conducted a site visit to the logging job on Patchen Road in South Burlington, Vermont. At that time, we found 8 trees that had been cut down in connection with the logging job within the Conservation District. A description of these trees is below with approximate diameters at the base of the trees. 1. Hemlock on eastern edge of wetland, 2.5 feet at base, 2. White Pine within 50 feet of wetland, 10 inches at base, y 3. White Pine at edge of wetland, approximately 100 feet from Tree #1, 2.5 feet at base, 3 c 4. White Pine at edge of wetland, 40 feet southwest of Tree #3, 2.5 feet at base, -CG 5. White pine within buffer knocked over by skidder, 10 inches at base,c� 6. White pine at edge of wetland, south of Tree #5, 2 feet at base, ZC 7. Black cherry 35 feet from wetland edge in eastern drainage, 2.5 feet at base, and -i ` ' s` 8. White oak 15 feet from wetland edge in eastern drainage, 2.5 feet at base. In addition, logging equipment crossed the wetland, making ruts deeper than 6 inche The tops of many trees were felled and left in the wetland and 50 foot buffer zones. Please call me if you have any questions or comments on this matter. flz Sincerely, G� I Cathy O'Brien ,s 1 The 77, ND. March 26,2003 HOsPITALITY GROUP Charles Hafter City Manager City of South Burlington 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 Dear Mr. Hafter, I am writing to you in hopes that the matter of The Windjammer Hospitality Group being in violation of city zoning regulations can be cleared up. I feel that this has snowballed into something that could have been avoided with better communication. In the fall of 2002 we were approached by a Alex Hudak, a forester, to see if we were interested in having him selectively remove a small amount of trees from our land for the lumber trade. At first I was skeptical so we hired an environmental engineer with SE Group to walk the land with us and Alex Hudak. We wanted it to be clear which trees would be removed and that it would not be harming the environment of our land. The engineer approved of our plan. In November Alex started to selectively remove trees from our land. During this time Ray Belair from the city came and walked the land with John Welch our maintenance engineer and at that time never mentioned to John that we were in any violation of the city. He said nothing. When I returned from the Thanksgiving holiday we received a letter from Ray Belair stating we were in violation because "based on information available to the City we had commenced land development on our property... without obtaining a permit and that we had removed trees within the Conservation and Open Space District." The next day I received a copy of the Vermont Agency of Natural Resources AMP Inspection Report that the City of South Burlington requested. It stated that we were not in violation of cutting trees in a wetland area. I then called William Baron, the State of Vermont Forester and spoke at length with him about the letter we had received from the city. He explained to me that forestry is a permitted use and it does not require a review. I then called Ray Belair and left him a voice mail message stating that we had received a copy of the inspection report, he had asked for, and it stated we were not in any violation. I then told him in my message that I believed everything was all set and to please call me if I needed to do anything else to take care of this matter. Ray Belair never returned my call or my father's. At that point I had no idea the city was waiting for anything from us. On March 19th I received a letter from some lawyer hired by the city stating we were still in violation. She cited we were in violation of Section 27.10 of the City Zoning Regulations. Again, we were not developing any land. I called this lawyer immediately and tried to explain the above. She told me she would contact the city and call me back. She never called me back. She sent another letter which explained with more detail what the city wants us to do. She then suggested Best Western Windjamuaer Inn & Conference Center • Windjammer Restaurant 10'6 Williston Road, South Burlington VT 05403 z Tel (8V) 863-1.125 Fax (802) 658-1296 J that I look at section 3.106 in the city Zoning Regulations. I did that. I also read all of Article III Conservation and Open Space District (CO). In section 3.2 and specifically 3.201 it states that forestry is a pennitted use. Section 3.404 also states that "The cutting or removal of trees ...shall be allowed only to the extent necessitated by a permitted or conditional use". According to your regulations forestry is a pennitted use. I feel all of this could have been avoided if someone from the city had called us and asked us what our intentions were. We were not developing the land and we were not clear cutting the land. We were executing a healthy forest management plan on our property. We have always conducted our business legally and have every intention to continue to do so. We pay our tax bills to the city on time and in full. We give back to this community in many ways. Rather than having city officials work with us, one, in particular always seems to be out to get us. Interesting as it is our tax dollars that pay his salary. I have since talked to William Baron, the state Forester at length about what the City would like us to do as far as a mitigation plan. He explained to me that what we did with the selective removal of the trees in this area was a very healthy thing for the environment on our land. He stated that Alex Hudak has an excellent reputation with the state as far as being extremely environmentally friendly. He feels that therewas plenty of distance between the harvest operation and the wetlands and that we cut in accordance to the wetland rules and regulations. It was proper vegetative management and good for early succession growth. When I explained to him that the City wanted us to replace 150 to 190 inches of tree diameter he then explained to me that it would be virtually impossible to do that. First of all you c�n'not replace trees of that size, and second of all smaller growth trees would not live as it is a forrested area and there is not ample sunlight for their survival. I also spoke with April Moulaert who is a wetland specialist with the state of Vermont and she reiterated Bill Barons comments. Please know that it was not our intention to do anything illegal according to the City and we know that we have not done anything wrong according to the state. We were not starting land development. We had no plans for developing that land. We believed we were going about this responsibly. It is upsetting, as a tax payer, in this city that the city officials are wasting valuable tax dollars by hiring a lawyer rather than picking up the phone and communicating with its citizens. I would like to find a conclusion to this matter that meets both the City and our expectations. I would be happy to meet with you to discuss this matter further at any time. I can be reached at 651-0637. I look forward to hearing from you as soon as possible so that we can put this matter to rest once and for all. Respectfully yours, �Uura Leering O'Connell President The Windjammer Hospitality Group VERMCNT AGENCY OF NATURAL RESOURCES AMP INSPECTION REPORT Background Information AMP No. Person Receiving Complaint Co plainant: To Remain Anon ym—cus-YE§61 Name Mailing Address: 1179zAk S 7A � 7, A WAIA, "5794,�a x L? all Nature of Complaint: Date Received I Time ////,-1/6-z one) -------------- Telephone Complainant Contacted By: Title: Date: me: am/pm (Votes: Logging Contractor Mailing Address Telephone 7- Telephone Telephone Subcontractor Mailing Address VO/A) 41,4Z01,5 Landowner Mailing Address 3 Forester Mailing Address Telephone InHiml 4z;#,n Town .vim County e Date -Watershed 0u)21_� 7O-V Location/Directions: T.A.T. Members Present Findings/Evaluation Recommended AMPs/ActionsTmetable to Eliminate Discharge Mailed and Delivered (circle one) - I Date: 11 z71 z. Site Reinspection T.A.T. Members present: Date: Time: am/pm Findings ,✓� Further Actions Recommended .✓� . ,ase Closed/Date # i�s`o.z :ase Referred to enforcement: Date f A.M.P. In ;opy to: o erg andowner/ ent VFPA ANR Enforcement Officer �Foreste STITZEL, PAGE & FLETCHER, P.C. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 171 BATTERY STREET P.O. BOX 1507 BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05402-1507 (802) 660-2555 (VOICE/TDD) STEVEN F. STITZEL FAX (802) 660-2552 or 660-9119 PATTI R. PAGE* E-MAIL(FIIt1vI2555@FIRMSPF.COM) ROBERT E. FLETCHER WRITER'S E-MAIL (ALAFFERTY@FIRMSPF.COM) JOSEPH S. McLEAN WRITER'S FAX (802) 660-2552 TIMOTHY M. EUSTACE (*ALSO ADMITTED IN N.Y.) March 21, 2003 Windjammer Hospitality Group, LLC c/o Walt Levering, Registered Agent 1076 Williston Road South Burlington, Vermont 05403 Re: Notice of Violation dated November 25, 2002 Dear Mr. Levering: AMANDA S.E. LAFFERTY EDWARD G. ADRIAN I am writing on behalf of the City of South Burlington to provide information regarding the mitigation plan that the Windjammer Hospitality Group, LLC (hereinafter "Windjammer") must submit to the City and implement on the above -referenced property. It is the City's policy that the number of inches of tree diameter that Windjammer cut and removed in violation of the City Zoning Regulations must be replaced. It is the City's understanding that Windjammer cut and removed 150 to 190 inches of tree diameter. Therefore, Windjammer must submit a plan to plant trees, the total diameters of which must total the number of inches removed, in the area(s) from which Windjammer removed the trees. In my phone conversation with Laura O'Connell, she did not know the location of the City's Conservation and Open Space District. The boundaries of this Overlay District include "[a]11 wetland areas, whether identified on a map entitled "Wetlands Map" or identified through site inspection, and including a buffer area 50 feet in width surrounding any such wetland." See the South Burlington Zoning Regulations, Section 3.106. It is the City's position that the City has provided Windjammer with the required notice of the violation as well as Windjammer's appeal rights. In addition, the City does not agree that any of its officials failed to respond to contacts by Windjammer representatives. Finally, it has been the City's understanding for several months now that Windjammer intended to submit the required mitigation plan. In light of the time that has passed since the Administrative Officer issued the notice of violation as well as the approach of spring, please submit the Windjammer Hospitality Group, LLC March 21, 2003 Page 2 required mitigation plan no later than April 1, 2003. If Windjammer fails to take this action by this date, the City will take such further action as it considers necessary and appropriate. Sincerely, Amanda S. E. Lafferty ASEL/jp CC: Charles Hafter, City Manager Raymond Belair, Administrative Officer son522.cor STITZEL, PAGE & FLETCHER, P.C. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 171 BATTERY STREET P.O. BOX 1507 BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05402-1507 (802) 660-2555 (VOICErrDD) STEVEN F. STITZEL FAX (802) 660-2552 or 660-9119 AMANDA S.E. LAFFERTY PATTI R. PAGE* E-MAI1(FIRM2555@FIRMSPF.COM) EDWARD G. ADRIAN ROBERT E. FLETCHER WRITER'S E-MAIL (ALAFFERTY@FIRMSPF.COM) JOSEPH S. McLEAN WRITER'S FAX (802) 660-2552 TIMOTHY M. EUSTACE ("ALSO ADNUTTED IN N.Y.) March 17, 2003 Windjammer Hospitality Group, LLC c/o Walt Levering, Registered Agent 1076 Williston Road South Burlington, Vermont 05403 Re: Notice of Violation dated November 25, 2002 Dear Mr. Levering: I am writing on behalf of the City of South Burlington. The City Administrative Officer has brought to my attention that Windjammer Hospitality Group, LLC (hereinafter "Windjammer") has commenced land development on property located at 1076 Williston Road in South Burlington without first obtaining a zoning permit, in violation of Section 27.10 of the City Zoning Regulations and 24 V.S.A. section 4443(a)(1). Specifically, Windjammer has commenced the cutting and removal of trees within the Conservation and Open Space District(hereinafter the "CO District") without first obtaining a zoning permit. It is my understanding that this violation was brought to your attention by Notice of Violation dated November 25, 2002. Further, I understand that you have not appealed the Notice of Violation to the City Development Review Board and that the time for taking such an appeal has passed. I have been asked by City officials to attempt to obtain Windjammer's cooperation in complying with the City Zoning Regulations. Accordingly, no later than March 25, please submit to the City a proposal to mitigate the unpermitted cutting and removal of trees in the CO District. If my efforts to obtain Windjammer's compliance should fail, I have been asked to take such further action as is necessary and appropriate, including the commencement of an enforcement action in Environmental Court. Sincerely, Amanda S. E. Lafferty ASEL/jp cc: Raymond Belair, Administrative Officer son520.cor MEN P TO: Amanda 5.E. Lafi , , E,0a. FROM: Raymond J. Belak P niotrative Officer DATE: March 11, 2003 RE: Notice of Violation, Windjammer Hospitality Group, LLC Enclosed 15 a copy of Notice of Violation #NV-02-41 issued to Windjammer Hospitality Group, LLC on 11/25/02. City Manager Chuck Hafter Spoke to Walt Levering about this violation around the first of the year. Mr. Hafter was told that Windjammer would Submit a plan to mitigate the tree cutting for the City to review. This plan has not been received and Mr. Levering has not returned Mr. Hafter'a last phone call. Windjammer did not appeal the N.O.V. Would you please send Windjammer a letter giving them two (2) weeks to Submit a plan to mitigate the illegal tree cutting or we will file a complaint. Thank you for your help in this matter. VIA/ V -�J- '�l ( CITE' OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMOVT 05403 (802) 846-4106 FAX (802) 846-4101 November 25, 2002 Windjammer Hospitality Group, LLC C/O Walt Levering, Registered Agent 1076 Williston Road S. Burlington, Vermont 05403 Re: Zoning Violation, Behind 397 Patchen Road (Tax Parcel ID# 1810-01076-L) Dear Mr. Levering: Please be advised that based on information available to the City, you have commenced land development on your property at the above address without obtaining a permit from the City as required by Section 27.10 of its Zoning Bylaws and 24 VSA 4443 (a) (1). Specifically, you have initiated the following activities on the above -described property. The cutting and removal of at least eight (8) large trees within the Conservation and Open Space District. The zoning regulations provide that such activities are either not allowed in the Conservation and Open Space District or that you must obtain a permit for such activities. You have seven (7) days from the date of this letter to discontinue this violation and take appropriate remedial action. Specifically, you must accomplish the following: Cease the cutting and removal of vegetation within the Conservation and Open Space District, and submit a mitigation plan, and put plan into place for approval by the City to mitigate the damage done by the illegal cutting operation. If you do not accomplish the actions directed in this letter within seven (7) days of the date of this letter the City may pursue this matter is court. In such court proceeding, the City will be entitled to seek appropriate injunctive relief and fines of up to $100.00 per day for each day your violation continues beyond the seven (7) day period provided in this letter. If the violation described in this letter occurs within twelve (12) months of the date of this letter, you will not be entitled to receive a further Notice of Violation from the City before the City pursues further enforcement proceedings. You may appeal this Notice of Violation to the Development Review Board by filing a written notice of appeal (see enclosed) and eighty five ($85) dollars within fifteen (15) days of the date of this letter with the Clerk of the Development Review Board at the following address: 575 Dorset Street, South Burlington, Vermont 05403. Sincerely, Raymond 3. Belair Administrative Officer Encl. CC: Amanda S.E. Lafferty, Esq. Certified Mail Receipt: 7002 0510 0001 5466 0876 Cathy O'Brien Wetland Consulting 839 Oak Hill Road, Williston, VT 05495 (802) 878-6022 November 18, 2002 Ray Belair City of South Burlington 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 RE: Findings on Logging Job, Patchen Road, So Burlington Dear Ray: On November 14, 2002 we conducted a site visit to the logging job on Patchen Road in South Burlington, Vermont. At that time, we found 8 trees that had been cut down in connection with the logging job within the Conservation District. A description of these trees is below with approximate diameters at the base of the trees. l . Hemlock on eastern edge of wetland, 2.5 feet at base, 2. White Pine within 50 feet of wetland, 10 inches at base, 3. White Pine at edge of wetland, approximately 100 feet from Tree # 1, 2.5 feet at base, 4. White Pine at edge of wetland, 40 feet southwest of Tree #3, 2.5 feet at base, 5. White pine within buffer knocked over by skidder, 10 inches at base, 6. White pine at edge of wetland, south of Tree #5, 2 feet at base, 7. Black cherry 35 feet from wetland edge in eastern drainage, 2.5 feet at base, and 8. White oak 15 feet from wetland edge in eastern drainage, 2.5 feet at base. In addition, logging equipment crossed the wetland, making ruts deeper than 6 inches. The tops of many trees were felled and left in the wetland and 50 foot buffer zones. Please call me if you have any questions or comments on this matter. Sincerely, C�a Cathy O'Brien Vermont Secretary of State - I T ,C Article9 Page 1 of 1 , , + 0THER PROFESSIilNA aRXJ MES CORNnRtTTUi;5 ELECr NS PROGRAMS RRGnT.ATMN� Limited Liability Company Information Term Company? YES Expiration of Term: 12/31/2047 LLC Name WINDJAMMER HOSPITALITY GROUP, LLC STATUS ACTIVE File Number L0000683 Type Domestic State of Origin VT Origin Date 12/18/1997 Fiscal Year End 12 Registered Agent WALTER LEVERING Address 1076 WILLISTON RD City State Zip S BURLINGTON VT 05403- Term Company? YES Expiration of Term 12/31/2047 Principal Address 1076 WILLISTON RD City State Zip IS BURLINGTON VT 05403- Last Annual Report Date 12/3 1/2001 Infonnation Contitct Horne I Site Search I Help Vermont State Page I Contact I Disclaimer This Web Page is DMYu iMMM SECREIA DES Ilup:i/ cgl. sec. stale. V L. usrcgl-siwiulayt;r. exC I I i 1.3iZvvZ E CANHY 0'33UZBT WETLAND CONSULTING 3390AX 1317,11- RGAD,MLLZST0N, VERMONT 05495 q302) 873-6022 INVOICE NO. 0 � - �� DATE TO: Ray Belair City of South Burlington 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 RE: Logging Job, Patchen Road, South Burlington DATE DESCRIPTION PRICE 1. 11/14/02 Site visit w/ Ray Belair 1.0 hr @ $40/hr* $ 40.00 Travel time .5 hrs @ $35/hr $17.50 2. 11/13/02 Write findings and send to R. Belair (email and regular mail) .5 hrs @ $40/hr $ 20.00 T07AL * Municipal Rate Please make checks payable to Catherine O'Brien For Payments Received Within 10 Days, Deduct 5 Percent $77.50 Merriam -Webster Online Page 1 of 1 Main Entry: forest-ry C Pronunciation: ' for-&-StrE, 'far - Function: noun Date: 1823 1 : FORESTLAND 2 a : the science of developing, caring for, or cultivating forests b the management of growing timber IlLtp:// W W W.III-W.CU111/Cgl-UIIUUICLIOIldl y 1 1/G0/GVVG I CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 (802) 846-4106 FAX (802) 846-4101 September 16, 2002 Ms. Penelope Anne Magarine 53 Kirby Road S. Burlington, Vermont 05403 Re: Zoning Violation Dear Ms. Magarine: It has been brought to my attention that either yourself or someone in your household is parking a commercial vehicle (truck) in your driveway overnight. Please be advised that your property is located in a residential zoning district which does not allow commercial uses. The storage of a commercial vehicle is a commercial use. You must therefore cease the use of your property for the storage of a commercial vehicle immediately. Failure to do so may result in legal action and fines of up to $100.00 per day for each day the violation continues. Your cooperation in complying with the zoning regulations would be greatly appreciated. Sincere , e R4 nd 3. Belair Administrative Officer Merriam -Webster Online Page 1 of 1 One entry found for forestry. Main Entry: for•est•ry 4a} Pronunciation: ' for-&-strE, ' far - Function: noun Date: 1823 I: FORESTLAND 2 a : the science of developing, caring for, or cultivating forests b the management of growing timber http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary 4/3/03 Merriam -Webster Online l Page 1 of 1 One entry found for cultivate. Main Entry: cul•ti-vate 14)) Pronunciation: ' k&1-t&-"vAt Function: transitive verb Inflected Form(s). -vaned; -vat-ing Etymology: Medieval Latin cultivatus, pp. of cultivate, from cultivus cultivable, from Latin cultus, past participle of colere Date: circa 1655 1 : to prepare or prepare and use for the raising of crops; also : to loosen or break up the soil about (growing plants) 2 a : to foster the growth of <cultivate vegetables> b : CULTURE 2a c : to improve by labor, care, or study : REFINE <cultivate the mind> 3 : FURTHER, ENCOURAGE <cultivate the arts> 4 : to seek the society of : make friends with - cul-ti•vat-able 4)) /-"vA-t&-b&1/ adjective http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary 4/3/03 � �/� � L A") 9 A&ENA City of South Burlington bevelopment Review Board City Hall Conference Room 75 Dorsek 5tr et 'Tuesday, April 15, 2003 Regular Meeting at 7:30 PM 7.30- Cali to order. Additions toldeletions from the Agenda 7:3Z Other Business. .7 40 Minutes of March 4, 2003. 7:45 1) Revised Final Plat Application .5®-0 -06, White Rock De"els pment LI C, Applicant (Continued from March 4, 2003). The a plicant is requesting revised final approval for a 30-lot subdivision on 14.68 acres The a ndment consists of allowing on going cutting of vegetation within the Consery and pen Spac istrict at 620, 636, and 654 Country Club Drive. 7:55 2) Pre/imin 'P/at Application5P-03-16, Marie L requestin preliminary approval for a Mot subdivision bound ry line adjustment with Lot 8 of the pre viou. The ' ct property is located in t e Southeast Q Port ons o subject property fa within the C e, Sc nic I/!ew Protn Over/ay (5l�f) Districts. 8:15 1) Conditional Use App/icy ;requesting conditional use subject property contains District. ois, Applicant. The applicant is 5.906 acres The proposal involves approved Butler Farm subdivision. nt (SEQ) off of Butler Drive. tion and Open Space (CO) and 96,Amy Vaud�°euil, Applicant. The applicant is accessory apartment at 78 Oakwood Drive. The <7acres and falls within the Residential 4 (R4) 8:2 4) Sketch Plan Application ® 03-17 North r Sa s Sank Applicant. The applicant is requesting sketcreview for a h 2,568 sq. ft. bank with a driv McIntosh Avenue.. The subje the Commercial I (CI) Distric Overlay (TO) District 8:35 5) Conditional Use Applica "on U-03-07 Timothy Cork, Applicant. e applicant requesting conditional use a pr #`Cval for a front porch at 15Lindenwood Oriv to extend 2 feet beyond the limit set f th Section 25118(h) of the Zoning Regulations and Section 3.06 of the proposed Land evel went Regulations The subject property cogains approximately 0.64 acres a d fallsvithin the Residential4 (R4) District. 8:45 6) Site Plan Application � requesting site plan approi subject property contains and Commercial (IC) Distr and Open Space (CO), Floc Districts 9.55 Adjournment. l rough facility at the corns She Road and n Planne it De went consisting of a ne property contains approximately 79 acr nd is located in .I Portions of the subject property als all withhe Traffi r c 0 03-09;", oveable Peaks, 1'nc., Applicant. The aIner lical for a p�rve rkin g lot expansion at 14 Berard DrivThe 7roximate/y 3. acres and is located in the Mixed dust Portions of the s ectproperty fall within the Covc lain Overlay (FO), a ort Approach Overlay (AO) Respectlly submitt 6 R ymon p.T Be/air, Administrative Officer *AIOK-'- mimes are advisory only and subject to change. is Cathy O'Brien Wetland Consulting 839 Oak Hill Road, Williston, VT 05495 (802) 878-6022 November 18, 2002 Ray Belair City of South Burlington 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 RE: Findings on Logging Job, Patchen Road, So Burlington Dear Ray: On November 14, 2002 we conducted a site visit to the logging job on Patchen Road in South Burlington, Vermont. At that time, we found 8 trees that had been cut down in connection with the logging job within the Conservation District. A description of these trees is below with approximate diameters at the base of the trees. 1. Hemlock on eastern edge of wetland, 2.5 feet at base, 2. White Pine within 50 feet of wetland, 10 inches at base, 3. White Pine at edge of wetland, approximately 100 feet from Tree #1, 2.5 feet at base, 4. White Pine at edge of wetland, 40 feet southwest of Tree #3, 2.5 feet at base, 5. White pine within buffer knocked over by skidder, 10 inches at base, 6. White pine at edge of wetland, south of Tree #5, 2 feet at base, 7. Black cherry 35 feet from wetland edge in eastern drainage, 2.5 feet at base, and 8. White oak 15 feet from wetland edge in eastern drainage, 2.5 feet at base. In addition, logging equipment crossed the wetland, making ruts deeper than 6 inches. The tops of many trees were felled and left in the wetland and 50 foot buffer zones. Please call me if you have any questions or comments on this matter. Sincerely, Cathy O'Brien L01� "M , DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOAC. 3 LIZ 3 OCTOBER 2006 Mr. Moody said he did a survey, and there are 800-900 housing units within 3 field lengths of the school field. Ms. Quimby moved to approve Conditional Use Application #CU-06-04 and Site Plan Application #SP-06-52 of South Burlington School District subject to the stipulations in the draft motion. Mr. Farley seconded. Motion passed 5-0 with Mr. Knudson abstaining. 6. Miscellaneous application #MS-06-09 of Technology Park Partners to alter the existing grade by extending an existing berm by approximately 60 feet, 30 Community Drive: Mr. McKenzie noted that on the north side of the property there is some equipment. They have a requirement for some new tenants for more equipment (fuel tank and hydrogen tank), so they want to extend the berm. Mr. Belair said it looks like this has already been done. Mr. Behr asked if any new landscaping is proposed. Mr. McKenzie said no. Mr. Dinklage reminded the applicant that any time there is a change to a site plan, they have to come to staff and to the DRB. Mr. McKenzie said they didn't realize they needed approval and have since stopped work to wait for an approval. Ms. Quimby moved to approve Miscellaneous application #MS-06-09 of Technology Park Partners subject to the stipulations in the draft motion. Mr. Farley seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 7. Public Hearing: Final Plat Application #SD-06-81 of Precourt Investment Co, LLC, to amend a planned unit development consisting of three buildings of 9800 sq. ft., 6800 sq. ft., and 4500 sq. ft. for a multiple number of tenants and a multiple number of uses. The amendment consists of. 1) adding an access drive to 1076 Williston Road, 2) expanding the parking area for 1150 Williston Road by 20 parking spaces, and 3) merging 1150 Williston Road with 1160-1174 Williston Road, 1174 Williston Road: Mr. Precourt showed the location of the property. They are eliminating the property line between the old Bernie's parcel and the other 2 properties. They propose to turn one access to a one-way entrance only and put a better access behind the Starbucks building that would be 2-way. This will improve internal circulation. They will post signs. Mr. Precourt also showed where additional parking would be located in the rear of the property. Mr. Dinklage noted it is more difficult now to turn into Double Tree because of the bank next door. t� DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOAR 3 OCTOBER 2006 Mr. Belair said no landscaping is shown on the plan. There is no minimum requirement, but there should be landscaping shown. There is now a berm with landscaping that will disappear. He asked if it will be replaced. Mr. Precourt showed where it might go, but he was not sure. Ms. Quimby moved to approve Final Plat Application #SD-06-81 of Precourt Investment Co., LLC, subject to the stipulations in the draft motion. Mr. Farley seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 8. Public Hearing: Final Plat Application #SD-06-82 of Windjammer Hospitality Group to amend a previously approved plan for a 159 room motel and a 250 seat standard restaurant. The amendment consists of adding an access drive to serve the adjacent property at 1150 Williston Road, 1076 Williston Road: Mr. Dinklage noted this application is related to the previous one. The only change here is to achieve the connection shown in the previous plan. Mr. Precourt said nothing new is being added to this property. Ms. Quimby moved to approve Final Plat Application #SD-06-82 of Windjammer Hospitality Group subject to the stipulations in the draft motion. Mr. Farley seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 9. Public Hearing: Preliminary Plat Application #SD-06-83 & Final Plat Application #SD-06-84 of Logic Supply, Inc, for a planned unit development to construct a 30,000 sq. ft. light manufacturing facility in two 15,000 sq. ft. phases, 35 Thompson Street: Mr. Rabideau said there have been few changes since sketch plan. The applicant assembles pre -manufactured computer parts. No metal is melted. No noxious odors. The building will be 2 stories, 30,000 sq. ft. It will be aluminum skinned or galvanized steel with a flat roof. It meets the height limit. The applicant would prefer not to pave the parking lot, but the Fire Chief has a problem with unpaved lots. Mr. Rabideau said he would like a chance to sort something out with the Chief. The approval motion was amended as follows: Stipulation #3 was changed to eliminate all wording after "Fire Department" and add "to the mutual satisfaction of staff and Fire Chief and that the required paved area should be shown on the revised plan. -5- i SOUTH BURLINGTON PLANNING & ZONING 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VT 05403 (802)846-4i06 October 19, 2006 Laura O'Connell Windjammer Hospitality Group 1076 Williston Road South Burlington, VT 05403 Re: DRB Minutes - Precourt/Windjammer Dear Ms. O'Connell: For your records, enclosed is a copy of the approved minutes from the October 3, 2006 Development Review Board meeting. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Betsy Mc - onough Planning & Zoning Assistant Encl. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 (802) 846-4106 FAX (802) 846-4101 MEMORANDUM TO: South Burlington Development Review Board FROM: Cathyann LaRose, Associate Planne DATE: September 29, 2006 CC: Brian Precourt, Precourt Investment Co., Applicant Laura O'Connell, Windjammer Final Plat Application #SD-06-82 Meeting Date: October 3, 2006 Agenda # 8 Final plat application #SD-06-82 of Windjammer Hospitality Group to amend a previously approved plan for a 159 room motel and a 250 seat standard restaurant. The amendment consists of adding an access drive to serve the adjacent property at 1150 Williston Road, 1076 Williston Road. Staff finds that this proposal leads to no adverse impacts for the subject property or the adjoining property at 1150 Williston Road; rather it creates better circulation for both sites. Staff recommends that the Development Review Board approve Final Plat Plan Application #SD-06-82. (.V2632 58'L) I � (ISOOJ �-r 13 �11 j _ I II $ UTILITY p II BOX 2 h �.I N26'32'58"E DETAIL A 1 1'=10' 75, BY 50, EASEMENT AGREEMENT TYGATE PROPERT1ES TO COUILLARD VOLUME 311 PAGE 51-59 gill T-BAR N56119'f2'! I FD. i 50 00 �� 221 SOUARE FEET I i 1/2" IRON 15, BY is' ROD SET ARELE 7O BE £ (1{� THE INNOwANNER —T— HOSPITAUTY GROUP, LLC I Q I SEE DETAIL A ABOVE Q Ir 15' BY 70' FASEMEN T FOR I Z l INGRESS do EGRESS OF VEHICULAR TRAFFIC TO C77Y SO. BURLINGTON W D. VGL. 211 PG. 165 I J I1 \ l' IPF i FLUSH N55S137"W i 271.36' 5' BY 20' n EASEMENT FOR N.E.T. -r- — VOL. 157 PG 276 EASEMENT FOR G.M.P. VOL. 101 PG 273 _ EASEMENT TO CITY SO. BURLINGTON VOL. 78 PC. 239 — PLAN VOL. 82 PG. 28 1 1142 WILLISTON ROAD V�,O= DALE TOUTANT TRUSTEE DEED WLUME 547 PAGE 307 REFER TO LOT 6 PLAN VOLUME 11 PAGE 52 RIGHT OF IYAY TO BE CONVEYED 70 PREOOURTINVESTMENT 1-1/4' IPF. COMPANY, LLC Et:�]h20'3 1' IPF ®138•�a• 1277151.300'34'E 1 1 r 1 /EXIS77NO BLOLD1NG m I� PAVED PARKING DRAINAGE - RIGHTS V.50 P.515 I I 1076 WiLUSTa'V ROAD NINDJAMMER HOSPITALITY GROUP, LLC EXECUTORS DEED VOLUME 529 PAGE 23-28 T1-26-2001 REFER TO A DROPERTY PLAN FOR EVELYN LAMPLOUGH BY WEBSTER MARTIN, INC DATED DEC. 7977 RECORDED IN PLAN VOLUME 107 PAGE 1.55 GARAGE PARKIIRA NG PARNG REFER TO A SURVEY FOR WJt & £VELM W LAMPLOUGH / U AND, ME. do .CNN'E A. CUS-114G DATED S£PTEMPER 6, 1946 3Y HOAG, STONE & ASSOCIATES RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 11-1 PAGE 56 SUDE {3 REFER 70 QUIT CYA/M DEEDS RECORDED III VOLUME 22 PAGES 43, 44 Ai=' SEPTEMBER 9, 1946. `. N71 %17'17 f 5677930 F 31.10, GRAVEL 60 00' I PARKING 1-1/4' 1PF -� ' �4 PINCH TOP 8" A.G. —_ 4 3030'E N22 183.35 a 1-1/4- IPF FLUSH PERP£PJAL EASEMENT DEEDED FROM COUILLARD TO THE CITY OF SO. SURUNG TON VOLUME 78 PAGE 250 PLAN IN VOLUME 82 PAGE 24 1-1/4" IPF PINCH TOP 8" A.G. 1150-1174 WILUSTM ROAD PRECOURT INVESTMENT COMPANY, LLC f GUIT CLAIM DEED / VOLUME 675 PAGE 49-54 12BA.R WARRANTY DEED ? F. VOLUME 675 PAGE 18 a AREA 6.00 ACRES _ - ---- i PERPF7UAL EASEMENT 20'-- DEEDED FROM NORTHERN TERMINALS, NC. TO THE CITY OF SO. BURLING70N T— VOLUME 78 PAGE 464-5 I vI I PAVED PLAN /N VOLUME 82 PAGE 27 A U7ILITY EXIS77NG BUILDING PARKING 1-06 5p 3 95 16 fANHOLE , ( DRAINAGE EASEMENT 30• CMP 1166 W7LUSTON ROAD I 16' X 200' ✓0l. 69 PG 11 CHARLES N. do ✓ANET B. PERKINS WARRANTY DEED I _ _❑� VOLUME 282 PAGE 594 REFER TO A SURVEY BY WEBSTER MARTIN, !NC. DATED NOVEMBER 1973 RECORDED IN MAP VOLUME 107 PAGE 165 ri I!\ �. � 1' IPF dew fLUSH EXISTING BUILDING �.e'S6W , / `6 15.10, aLS28-32'36`W 1 } 1 3/4" IPF 3/4' IPF 1f84 INLUSTON ROAD FLUSH CHARLES do JA.NET PERKINS WARRANTY DEED I FLUSH , VOLUME 66 PAGE 23 WARRANTY DEED VOLUME 94 PAGE 246 REFER TO A SURVEY FOR CIROUX & PERKINS BY RM TARTE DATED SEP7EMBER. 1967 RECORDED IN MAP VOLUME 80 PAGE 73- LEGEND I" IRON PIPE SET IRON PIPE FOUND CATCH BASIN FIRE HYDRANT LIGHT POLE SEWER MANHOLE U77L77Y POLE • A.G. = HEIGHT ABOVE GROUND m •n. SCALE : 1 INCH = 40 FESI' . I 40 0 20 a0 80 160 I CERTIFY THIS PLAT 7S BASED UPON A TOTAL STA770M SURVEY, RECORD RESEARCH, EXIS77MC FIELD EVIDENCE PREVIOUS PLANS AS NOTED, AND INFORMA770N PROVIDED BY BR..AN PRECOU.RT OFiwwK v0yr wwwo E -nprk V. G✓,4 !PF P1NCH TOP 4" A.G. NOW OR FORMERLY TYGAIE PROPERTIES "q WARRANTY DEED VOLUME 281 PAGE 522 REFER TO A FINAL PLAT FOR SUMMER WOODS BY KREBS & LANSING COIVSUL77MG ENGINEERS INC LAST REVISED MAY 25, 1989 RECORDED IN MAP VOLUME 252 PAGE 1ST. SUMMER *VODS BOUNDARY SURVEY PRECOURT INVESTMENT COMPANY, LLC 1150— 1174 WILLISTON ROAD SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 4050 WILLISTON ROAD, SUITE 112 SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT. 05403-6063 (802) 862-5651 DATE 6-21-2001, 12-10-03, 10-5-04, 12-14-04, 9-7-06 SURVEYED _M. W. & B. H. I DRAWN BRADFORD L. HOLDEN PROJECT CHECKED MARK V. WARD 2116 CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 (802) 846-4106 FAX (802) 846-4101 October 4, 20o6 Laura O'Connell Windjammer Hospitality Group 1076 Williston Road South Burlington, VT 05403 Re: Windjammer/Precourt Dear Ms. O'Connell: Enclosed, please find a copy of the Findings of Fact and Decision of the above referenced project approved by the South Burlington Development Review Board on October 3, 20o6 (effective 10/3/o6). Please note the conditions of approval, including that the amended final plat plans must be recorded in the land records within 18o days (must be submitted & recorded by March 30, 2007) of this approval or this approval is null and void. If you have any questions, please contact me. Sincerely, Betsy cDonough Planning & Zoning Assistant Encl. cc: Brian Precourt CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT 7005 3110 0004 4484 6531 CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 (802) 846-4106 FAX (802) 846-4101 September 28, 2006 Laura O'Connell Windjammer Hospitality Group 1076 Williston Road South Burlington, VT 05403 Re: 1076 Williston Road Dear Ms. O'Connell: Enclosed is the agenda for next Tuesday's Development Review Board meeting and staff comments to the Board. Please be sure that someone is at the meeting on Tuesday, October 3, 2006 at 7:30 p.m. at the City Hall Conference Room, 575 Dorset Street. If you have any questions, please give us a call. Sincerely, Betsy McDonough Planning & Zoning Assistant Encl. cc: Brian Precourt U PUBLIC HEARING SOUTH BURL- INGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD The South Burlington De- velopment Review Board will hold 4. Preliminary Plat application a public hearing at the South #SD-06-83 and Final Plat applica- Burlington City Hall Conference tion #SD-06-84 of Logic Supply, Room, 575 Dorset Street, South Inc. for a planned unit develop - Burlington, Vermont on Tuesday, ment to construct a 30,000 SF October 3rd, 2006 at 7:30 PM to light manufacturing facility consider the following: 1. Condi- in two (2) 15,000 SF phases. tionaL Use application #CU-06-04 Physical Address: 35 Thompson of the South Burlington School Street. District seeking permission to I Copies of the applications are install four (4) eighty foot (80') available for public inspection high pole Lights at the South at the South Burlington City Burlington High School. Physical 1 Hall from 8:00 AM to 4:30 PM, address: 550 Dorset Street 2. I Monday through Friday. Final Plat application #SD-06- September 13, 2006 81 of Precourt Investment Co., John Dinkalge, Chairman LLC to amend a planned unit South Burlington Development development consisting of three Review Board. (3) buildings of 9800 SF, 3800 PUBLIC HEARING SF and 4500 SF for a multiple SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOP - number of tenants and a multiple MENT REVIEW BOARD number of uses. The amendment The South Burlington Develop - consists of (1) adding an access ment Review Board will hold drive to 1076 Williston Road, (2) a public hearing at the South expanding the parking area for Burlington City Halt Conference 1150 Williston Road by 20 park- Room, 575 Dorset Street, South ing spaces, and (3) merging 1150 Burlington, Vermont on Tuesday, Williston Road with 1160-1174. October 3rd, 2006 at 7:30 PM to Physical Address: 1174 Witliston consider the following: Road.3. Final Plat applica- Final Plat application #SD-06-85 tion #SD-06-82 of Windjammer of Jeffrey & Elizabeth Goldberg Hospitality Group to amend a for a two-year extension to a previously approved plan for a previously approved five (5) lot 159-room motel and 250-seat residential subdivision expiring restaurant. The amendment con- October 7, 2006 pursuant to Ar- sists of adding an access drive ticle 15 of the South Burlington to serve the adjacent property Land Development Regulations. at 1150 Williston Road. Physical Copies of the application are Address: 1076 Williston Road, available for public inspection at the South Burlington City Hall from 8:00 AM to 4:30 PM, Monday through Friday. September 13, 2006 John Dinkalge, Chairman South Burlington Development Review Board. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VT 05403 (802)846-4io6 September 18, 2006 indjammer Hospitality Gr Laura O'Connell 1976 Williston Road South Burlington, VT 05403 Dear Property Owner: Enclosed is a copy of a public notice published in Seven Days. It includes an application for development on your property. This is being sent to you and the abutting property owners to make aware that a public hearing is being held regarding the proposed development. Under Title 24, Section 4471 of State law, participation in a municipal regulatory proceeding is required in order to preserve your right to appeal a local development approval to the Vermont Environmental Court. State law specifies that "Participation in a local regulatory proceeding shall consist of offering, through oral or written testimony, a statement of concern related to the subject of the proceeding." Please call our office at 846-4106 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Betsy McDonough Planning & Zoning Assistant Encl. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VT 05403 (802)846-4106 September 18, 2006 Champlain School Apt. Partnership 410 Shelburne Road South Burlington, VT 05403 Dear Property Owner: Enclosed is a copy of a public notice published in Seven Days. It includes an application for development that abuts your property. This is being sent to you to make you aware that a public hearing is being held regarding the proposed development. You will not receive this notice if any subsequent or continued public hearings for the same applications are required. Under Title 24, Section 4471 of State law, participation in a municipal regulatory proceeding is required in order to preserve your right to appeal a local development approval to the Vermont Environmental Court. State law specifies that "Participation in a local regulatory proceeding shall consist of offering, through oral or written testimony, a statement of concern related to the subject of the proceeding." If you would like to know more about the proposed development, you may call this office at 846-4106, stop by during regular office hours, or attend the schedule public hearing. Sincerely, '&i�q ��M, '� -L-. Betsy McDonough Planning & Zoning Assistant Encl. Permit Number SD- CITY OF SOUTH BUMANGTON APPLICATION FOR FINAL SUBDIVISION PLAT REVIEW All information requested on this application must be completed in full. Failure to provide the requested infonnation either on this application form or on the plans will result in your application being rejected and a delay in the review before the Development Review Board. 1) OWNER OF RECORD (Name as shown on, deed, mailing address, phone and fax #) 2) LOCATION OF LAST RECORDED DEED (Book and page #) 3) APPLICANT (Name, mailing address, phone and fax #)�� r,,,r--}- /� 9155 z�56 4) CONTACT PERSON (Person who will receive all correspondence from Staff. Include name. Contact email address: i7r-e , --)T z�'„ I::; v1 , vi e— ' 5) PROJECT STREET ADDRESS 6) TAX PARCEL ID # (can be obtained at Assessor's Office) 7) DETAILED PROJECT DESCRIPTION a) Existing uses on Property (including description and size of each separate use) . A , i i i b) Proposed uses on property (include description and size of each new use and existing uses to remain) ��e_� L�S� �., ,... �- -0 .G A- _ c) Total building square footage on property (proposed buildings and existing buildings to remain) d) height of building & number of floors (proposed buildings and existing buildings to remain, specify if basement and mezzanine) `17 ZZ.Z e) Number of residential units (if i f) Number of employees employees) /A new units and existing units to remain) vehicles (existing and proposed, note office versus non -office g) Other (list any other information pertinent to this application not specifically requested above, please note if Overlay Districts are applicable) h) List any changes to the subdivision, such as property lines, number of units, lot mergers, etc. l,J 8) WETLAND INFORMATION a) Are there any wetlands (Class I, II, or III) on the subject property? b) If yes, is the proposed development encroaching into any of these wetlands or their associated 50' buffers? c) If yes, this project MUST be reviewed by the Natural Resources Committee prior to review by the Development Review Board. Please submit the following with this application: ',I. a site specific wetland delineation of the entire property or a written statement that the applicant is relying on the City's Wetlands Map. 2. response to the criteria outlined in Section 12.02(E) of the Land Development Regulations (applicant is strongly encouraged to have a wetland expert respond to these criteria). 9) LOT COVERAGE (ALL information MUST be provided here, even if no change is proposed) a) Size of Parcel: ,_�2 Z 3 (acres /sq. ft.) b) Building Coverage: e7/7 2Zz-- Existing square feet Proposed �}%quare feet �_�� °/o c) Overall Coverage (building, parking, outside storage, etc): 2 Existing Z$(q $?square feet J _� % Proposed Z, square feet / / , 5 Z- % d) Front Yard Coverage(s) (commercial projects only): Existing 2-0:S 5 square feet M , / _ % Proposed Zs:!� sgLiare feet _/ I&------- % 10) AREA DISTURBED DURING CONSTRUCTION: 2-gOC) sq. ft. * *Projects disturbing more than on -half acre of land must follow the City's specifications for erosion control in Article 16 of the Land Development Regulations. Projects disturbing more than one acre require a permit from the Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation. 11) WAIVERS REQUESTED a) List any waivers from the strict standards in the Land Development Regulations (e.g., setbacks, height, parking, etc.) that the applicant is seeking _AA yxr2- _ 12) COST ESTIMATES a) Building (including interior renovations) $ _ b) Landscaping (see Section 13.06(G) of the Land Development Regulations) $ c) Other site improvements (please list with cost) _ 13) ESTIMATED TRAFFIC a) Average daily traffic for entire property (in and out) b) A.M. Peak hour for entire property (in and out) c) P.M. Peak hour for entire property (In and out) 14) PEAK HOURS OF OPERATION 15) PEAK DAYS OF OPERATION 16) ESTIMATED PROJECT COMPLETION DATE 3 17) ABUTTING LANDOWNERS — please list abutting landowners, including those across any streets. You may attach a separate sheet. 16) PLANS AND FEE Plat plans shall be submitted which shows the information listed on Exhibit A attached. Five (5) regular size copies and one reduced copy (I I" x 17") of the plans must be submitted. A subdivision application fee shall be paid to the City at the time of submitting the final plat application (see Exhibit A). I hereby certify that all the information requested as part of this application has been submitted and is accurate to the best of my knowledge. 1---) Do not write below this line DATE OF SUBMISSION: I have reviewed this preliminary plat application and find it to be: Complete ❑ 9-- ysll/ of Planning & Zoning or Designee 4 ATTACHED TO CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON Subdivision Application - FINAL Windjammer Hospitality Group LLC Precourt Investment Company LLC 12) Champlain School Apt. Partnership 410 Shelburne Road South Burlington, VT 05403 (1068 Williston Road) Frank J. and Anna G. Cota 397 Patchen Road South Burlington, VT 05403 (397 & 401 Patchen Road) Francis E. Quigley 353 Patchen Road, #1 South Burlington, VT 05403 David Burns 353 Patchen Road, #3 South Burlington, VT 05403 Russell Todd 353 Patchen Road, #4 South Burlington, VT 05403 Geoffrey & Arlene Bricknell 355 Patchen Road, #5 South Burlington, VT 05403 Liam McCaffrey Meghan Fay 355 Patchen Road, #7 South Burlington, VT 05403 Adam Quick 355 Patchen Road, #8 South Burlington, VT 05403 Robert A. & Linda Graham 361 Patchen Road South Burlington, VT 05403 Susan Heiser 339 Patchen Road South Burlington, VT 05403 Shannon K. Sheehan 353 Patchen Road, 42 South Burlington, VT 05403 Northfield Savings Bank 1143 Williston Road South Burlington, VT 05403 Larkin Tarrant HoeHL Partnership 410 Shelburne Road South Burlington, VT 05403 (5 Dorset Street) James Boyd 355 Patchen Road, #6 South Burlington, VT 05403 Wesco, Inc. PO Box 2287 South Burlington, VT 05407-2287 (1108 & 1118 Williston Road) Kenneth A. Kero 1128 Williston Road South Burlington, VT 05403 Champlain Oil Co., Inc. PO Box 2126 South Burlington, VT 05407-2126 (1055 Williston Road) Charles N. and Janet B. Perkins 80 South Cove Road Burlington, VT 05401 (1087 Williston Road) Lodging North, Inc. Gary N. Farrell 870 Williston Road South Burlington, VT 05403 (1117 Williston Road) Toni Lisman 32 Larch Road South Burlington, VT Arthur C. Toutant, Trustee 1398 Hinesburg Road South Burlington, VT 05403 (1140-1142 Williston Road) State of Vermont Vermont Agency of Transportation Attn: Scott Whitted, Esq. 133 State Street Montpelier, VT 05633-0001 Windjammer Hospitality Group LLC 1076 Williston Road South Burlington, VT 05403 Carolyn Leavitt 34 Larch Road 05403 South Burlington, VT 05403 Gregory Sinclair 36 Larch Road South Burlington, VT 05403 Jack Russell Jack Associates 1161 Williston Road South Burlington, VT 05403 CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMEINT OF PLANNING & ZONING 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 (802) 846-4106 FAX (802) 846-4101 August 24, 2005 Laura L. O'Connell Best Western Windjammer Hotel 1076 Williston Road South Burlington, VT 05403 Re: Site Plan Application #SP-05-38 Dear Ms. O'Connell: Enclosed, please find a copy of the Findings of Fact and Decision of the above referenced project approved by the Administrative Officer on August 24, 2005 (effective August 24, 2005). Please note the conditions of approval, including that You must obtain a zoning permit within six (6) months. If you have any questions, please contact me. Sincerely, Betsy McDonough Planning & Zoning Assistant Encl. Permit Number SP- - c/ b CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON APPLICATION FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW All information requested on this application must be completed in full. Failure to provide the requested information either on this application form or on the site plan will result in your application being rejected and a delay in the review before the Development Review Board. 1) OWNER OF�ECORD Name as shown on deed, mailing address, phone Aid fax 2) LOCATION OF LAST RECORDED DEED (Book and page #)_Yalu(ne, t 3) APPLICANT (Name, mailing address, phone and fax a-kc-u-C 4) CONTACT PERSON (person who will receive all correspondence from Staff. Include name, address, S) PROJECT STREET ADDRESS:'/, kd.. n4j X ��ull�hri iL�n. J4 tmh2 6) TAX PARCEL ID # (can be obtained at Assessor's Office) 1 �f D - C-, l (--Ito 7) PROJECT DESCRIPTION a) Existing Uses on Property (including description and size of each separate use) b) Proposed Uses on property (include description and size of each new use and existinjuses to remain) n p /i i /,+j c) Total building square footage on property (proposed buildings and existing buildings to remain) d) Height of building & number of floors (proposed buildings and existing buildin s to remain, specify if basement and mezzanine) q j_ —V � ram, "4 n I-(M 14 }n e) Number of residential units (if applicable, new units and existing units to remain) 1 f) Number of employees ,& company vehicles (existing and proposed, note office versus non -office employees): (I � � 1 h (, ,I e s g) Other (list any other information pertinent to this application not specifically requested above, please note if Overlay Districts are applicable): 8) LOT COVERAGE Total Parcel Size: (�, 35j 9, �41) Sq. Ft. a) Building: Existing % / 41 3-1a sq. ft. Proposed % / Is sq. ft. b) Overall impervious coverage (building, parking, outside storage, etc) Existing -'r5 % / 990.914 sq. ft. Proposed_,?- 5 % / 16 sq. ft. c) Front yard (along each street) Existing ©9, % / 0 ' sq. ft. Proposed-_, Q %�qq V sq. ft. d) Total area to be disturbed during construction (sq. ft.) S �; I (, 'k * Projects disturbing more than one-half acre of land must follow the City's specifications for erosion control in Article 16 of the Land Development Regulations. Projects disturbing more than one acre require a permit from the Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation. 9) COST ESTIMATES a) Building (including interior renovations): $ b) Landscaping: $ c). Other site improvements (please list with cost):��f-,/ U 97 Q Qd Al-# r 10) ESTIMATED TRAFFIC © a) Average daily traffic QO c for entire property (in and out): U Yo" b) A.M. Peak hour for entire property (in and out): : 06 a*u c) P.M. Peak hour for entire property (In and out): 11) PEAK HOURS OF OPERATION:- A 2 12) PEAK DAYS OF OPERATION: •-r CAW 6 a (Jp hj - v 13) ESTIMATED PROJECT COMPLETION DATE: Q.t). � bt�5 14) ABUTTERS (please list all abutting landowner. Include mailing address. Also include those across a street or right-of-way. You may use a separate sheet if necessary) 8Am L go, 0; Lo 111151DI) Rd Poaj - ` a jd"7 15) SITE PLAN AND FEE A site plan shall be submitted which shows the information listed on Exhibit A attached. Five (5) regular size copies and one reduced copy (11 " x 17") of the site plan must be submitted. A site plan application fee shall be paid to the City at the time of submitting the site plan application (see Exhibit A). 3 I hereby certify that all the information requested as part of this application has been submitted and is accurate to the best of my knowledge. SIGNATURE OF PROPERITWOWNER Do not write below this DATE OF SUBMISSION: REVIEW AUTHORITY: ❑ Development Review Board ❑ Dftrutar, I have reviewed this site plan application and find it to be: eComplete ❑ Incomplete Direvor o o lanning & Zoning or Designee Date 4 July 12, 2005 Parking light replacement George Roy Tygate Hotel Corporation 1076 Williston, 05403 Vermont Dear Ray It is our desire to up grade the lights in the parking area of the Best western and Windjammer. This will be the number of existing poles only on property, which will consist of new bases, conduit, wire, poles and fixtures. Thank you for your time. George Roy Property/ Maintenance Manager RM IJVkJL�& Type: Job: STANDARD FEATURE! AL3 (Spectra Ifl, 18"Housing) SPECTRA SERIES ARM MOUNT Shown with Flat Glass Lens .t POST TOP YOKE MOUNT Shown with Sag Glass Lens VOLTAGE O 120 O 208 ❑ 240 O 277 O 480 ;t QV MOUNTING OPTIONS AL3 aPECTRA III AREA LUMINAIRES PAY 5 Bulletin No. AL3-110504 (4 � eac_V+ Page 2 of 6 SEKIGzx Metal Halide Pulse Start Metal Halide ❑ AL31111-1000 (3) ❑ AL3P-1000 (3) ❑ AL3111I-400 ❑ AL3P-450134) ❑ AL31111-250 ❑ AUP-400 5k AL31111-175 ❑ AL3P-350 ❑ AL3P-250 (1) M = Metal Halide; P = Pulse Start Metal Halide; S = High Pressure Sodium. (2) 70-40OW allows 10" deep housing; 450-I000W requires 12" deep housing. DISTRIBUTION VERTICAL Lamp Optics Full Cutoff, Flat Glass Lens Available for Metal Halide and Pulse Start Metal Halide only. Limited to 40OW and below. ❑ 2F = Type II X 3F = Type III ❑ 4F = Forward Throw ❑ 5F = Type V Square HORIZONTAL Lamp Optics Full Cutoff, Flat Glass Lens ❑ 2H = Type II ❑ 3H = Type III ❑ 4H = Forward Throw ❑ 5H = Type V Square High Pressure Sodium ❑ AL3S-400 ❑ AL3S-250 ❑ AUS-150 (3) 2H Reflector not available. (4) Not available in Horizontal Burn Lamps at time of printing. Cutoff/Semi-Cutoff, Sag Glass Lens Lower wattage (175-40OW) achieve Cutoff distribution. Higher wattage (450-1000149 achieve Semi-Cutof'distribution. ❑ 2V = Type II ❑ 3V = Type III ❑ 4V = Forward Throw ❑ 5V = Type V Square DISTRIBUTION PATTERNS Forward Type II _ Type V Square /1. Type III J( SS = Surface Arm Mount to Square Pole Vp (Standard) ❑ SA2 = Adjustable Arm Mount to Square Pole For use with the following mounting configurations only: ❑ RTA.(X)-(Y) _ Round Pole Q„ Tenon o Adapter(e r) ❑ WB = Wall Mount Bracket 0 (Includes transition plate) (Slip(itter for ° Round pole, 9"arm included) A O SR(X) = Surface Arm Mount to Round Pole 15) ❑ WBA = Wall Mount Bracket 9" Arm (Mounting edge of Arm is contoured with to match pole radius) -' ❑ MA2 = Adjustable Mastfitter Mount to 2-3/8" OD tenon — ❑ SPTA-(X)-2.375 = Square Pole Tenon e Adapter (s) m (Includes transition plate) ❑ PT(XY) = Post Top Yoke Mount (8) } t:12 (Slipfitter for Square pole with 2.375" OD x 4"tall tenon. 9" arm included. Available in 90° 180° ❑ DM = Direct Mount to Square Pole Luminaire housing mounts flush to pole, without the use of mounting arm(s). and For use with the following mounting configurations only: 1@90° or 2@180°. Mounting Configurations only.) (5) X = Specify pole size: (3.5 / 4)" OD; (4 / 5)" OD. (8) XY = Specify pole size and type: 4S, 5S, 2.375R, 3R, or 4R. (6) X = Specify configuration: 1 @ 90°; 2 @ 90°; 3 @ 90 4 @ 90°; 2 @ 180'; 2 @ 120°; 3 @ 120°. Note: X and Ycomponents of order sequence to be manually entered in part number on page 1 (7) Y = Specify tenon size: 2.375" OD x 4" tall; 3 / 3.5" OD x 6" tall; 3.5 / 4" OD x 6" tall. after Mounting Option is selected. Wide-Lite a t>ENLYt=— company I' r�Y� P.O. Box 606 •San Marcos TX 78667-0606 It www.wide-lite.com �� ry (512)392-5821 • Fax (512) 753-1122 CATALOG KEYWORD: AL3 Specifications and dimensions are subject to change without notice. img L MT L 0 LL !W", 1 ) AL3 SPECTRA III AREA LUMINAIRES Bulletin No. AL3-110504 Type: Job: 1 `?L 'IS 3" y ea C'VA Page 2 of 6 STANDARD FEATURES AL3 (Spectra Ill, 18" Housing) SPECTRA SERIES ARM MOUNT Shown with Flat Glass Len; POST Top YOKE MOUNT Shown with Sag Glass Lens VO LTAG E O 120 O 208 O 240 13 277 o 480 7 QV MOUNTING OPTIONS SERIES (1.2) Metal Halide Pulse Start Metal Halide High Pressure Sodium Cl AL31111-1000 (3) O AL3P-1000 (3) O AL3S-400 O AL3M-400 O AL3P-45013 "I O AL3S-250 O AL3M-250 O AL3P-400 O AL3S-150 PL AL3M-175 O AL3P-350 O AL312-250 (1) M = Metal Halide; P = Pulse Start Metal Halide; S = High Pressure Sodium. (3) 2H Reflector not available. (2) 70-40OW allows 10" deep housing; 450-1000W requires 12" deep housing. (4) Not available in Horizontal Burn Lamps at time of printing. DISTRIBUTION VERTICAL Lamp Optics Full Cutoff, Flat Glass Lens Available for Metal Halide and Pulse Start Metal Halide only. Limited to 40OW and below. D 2F = Type II O 3F = Type III O 4F = Forward Throw A 5F = Type V Square HORIZONTAL Lamp Optics Full Cutoff, Flat Glass Lens O 2H = Type II O 3H = Type III O 4H = Forward Throw O 5H = Type V Square Cutoff/Semi-Cutoff, Sag Glass Lens Lower wattage (175-400W) achieve Cutoff distribution. Higher wattage (450-1000W) achieve Semi -Cutoff distribution. O 2V = Type II O 3V = Type III O 4V = Forward Throw O 5V = Type V Square DISTRIBUTION PATTERNS Forward Throw Type II Type V .1Type Square. III � . P SS = Surface Arm Mount to Square Pole (Standard) _ O SA2 = Adjustable Arm Mount to Square Pole For use with the following mounting configurations only: O RTA-(X)-(Y) = Round Pole Tenon o Adapters n o O WB = Wall Mount Bracket o (Includes transition plate) (Slipfitter for Round pole, 9" arm included) O SR(X) = Surface Arm Mount to Round Pole (5) O WBA = Wall Mount (Mounting edge of Arm is contoured Bracket with 9" Arm to match pole radius) nto 0 MA2 = Adjustable 2-3/ Mount to 2-318" OD tenon O SPTA-(X)-2.375 = Square Pole 0 Tenon ° Adapter (6) 0 - ..... (Includes transition plate) o' (Slipfitter for Square pole with 2.375' OD x 4" tall tenon. 9" arm included. Available O PT(XY) = Po 8t Top Yoke Mount 7. _ O DM = Direct Mount to Square Pole Luminaire housing mounts hush to pole, without the use of mounting arm(s). For use with the following mounting configurations only: 1@90° or 2@180°. $ ;•• :. in 90° and 180° Mounting Configurations Doty) (5) X = Specify pole size: (3.5/4)" OD; (4 / 5)" OD. (8) XY = Specify pole size and type: 4S, 5S, 2.375R, 3R, or 4R. (6) X = Specify configuration: 1 @ 90°; 2 @ 90°; 3 @ 90°; 4 @ 90°; 2 @ 180'; 2 @ 120°; 3 @ 120". Note: X and Y components of order sequence to be manually entered in part number on page 1 (7) Y = Specify tenon size: 2.375" OD x 4" tall; 3 / 3.5' OD x 6" tall; 3.5 / 4" OD x 6" tall. after Mounting Option is selected. �y�pEL/TF Wide-Lite , a Gamff? company r www.wide-Iite.com �L • P.O. Box 606'San Marcos TX78667-0606 � , ,�� (512) 392-5821 Fax (512) 753-1122 CATALOG KEYWORD: AL3 �8001 P5ry Specifications and dimensions are subject to change without notice. Series / Wattage) Distribution I Lamp Position Voltage Mounting Options Options (Factory Installed) Finish ❑ AL2M-175 ❑ 2H = Type II, Horizontal Lamp, ❑ 120 SS = Arm Mount to ❑ F1 = Fusing, specify ❑ DB = Dark Bronze ❑ AL2M-150 Flat Glass, Full Cutoff / Square Pole 120 or 277V (standard) ❑ AL2M-100 AL2M-70 3H = Type III, Horizontal Lamp, ❑ 208 ❑ SR(X) = Arm Mount to Round Pole (2) ❑ F2 = Fusing, specifyp 208, 240 480V ,gy❑ TBK = Textured Black or GR = Gray Flat Glass, Full Cutoff ❑ 240 ❑ SA2 = Adjustable Arm ❑ LQ = Hol/Cold Quartz ❑ GN = Textured Green ❑ AL2P-200 Mount to Square Pole, Restrike U SA = Satin Aluminum ❑ 4H = Forward Throw, ❑ 277 includes transition plate ❑ CSR = Hot Quartz Restrike ❑ WHT = White ❑ AL4S-150 Horizontal Lamp, U MA2 = Adjustable ❑ TLR = Twist Lock ❑ RAL(*) = DrylacO Powder ❑ AL2S-100 Flat Glass, Full Cutoff U 480 Mastfitter Mount to Photocell Receptacle Coat Finish, specify RAL ❑ AL2S-70 /� 2-3/8" OD tenon, ❑ TLR-PC = Twist Lock custom chart color ❑ 5H = Type V Square, 4'� includes transition plate Photocell Receptacle with Horizontal Lamp, /7 ❑ RTA-(X)-(Y) = Round Photocontrol, specify voltage Flat Glass, Full Cutoff Tenon Adapter, 9" arm(s) ❑ PCB = Photocell Button, included (3) specify voltage (4) NOTES: 1) M = Metal Halide P = Pulse Start Metal Halide S = High Pressure Sodium. See Lamp Envelope Guide at right. 2) (X) = Specify pole size. (3.5 / 4)" OD, (4 / 5)" OD. 3) (X) = Specify configuration 1 @ 9o- 2 @ 90°, 2 @ 120•, 2 @ 180- 3 @ 90`, 3 @ 120° 4@90° (Y) = Specify tenon size: 2.375" OD x 4" (3 1 3.5)" OD x 6" (3.5/4)"ODx6" 4) PCB option not available with 480V. 5) Replace (-) with Reflector type: 2H, 3H, 4H, 5H. SPECIFICATIONS ❑ SPTA-(X)-(Y) = Square Pole Top Adapter (3) U WB = Wall Mount Bracket ❑ WBA = Wall Mount Bracket, 9" arm included Distribution Patterns Type II Type III Forward Throw I Type V Square HOUSING Formed aluminum sheet metal housing and top. The sides and top shall be mechanically and chemically sealed to ensure a rain -tight seal. OPTICAL MODULE Rotatable multi -faceted segmented reflectors shall be made from high purity anodized aluminum. Optical assemblies shall be field rotatable and interchangeable. LAMP ACCESS Door frame shall be mitered anodized aluminum extrusion, gasketed to ensure a positive seal to the housing, with a flat glass lens. LENS Lens shall be tempered glass to withstand thermal and physical shock. SOCKET A porcelain, 4KV pulse rated, mogul or medium based socket shall be used to prevent tamp loosening and to maintain proper lamp positioning. BALLAST Ballast shall be high power factor with reliable starting down to -20°F for Metal Halide, -30°F for Pulse Start Metal Halide, and -40*F for High Pressure Sodium. Ballast coil windings shall be copper with minimum loss H (180*) rated insulation. AL2M-175 AL2M-150 AL2M-100 AL2M-70 AL2P-200 AL2S-150 AL2S-100 AL2S-70 Accessories (Shipped Separately) ❑ IF1 = Inline Fusing, specify 120 or 277V ❑ IF2 = Inline Fusing. specify 208, 240 or 480V Lamn Fnvelone Guide Horizontal ED-28 ED / BT-17 ED I BT-17 EDIBTI7 ED-28 ED-23 5 ED-23.5 ED-23.5 (5) ies file name al2m 17(*).ies al2ml5(*).ies al2m 10(*). ies al2m7(*) ies al2p20(*),ies al2sl5(*).ies al2s10(*).ies al2s7(*).ies MOUNTING Surface arm mount (field installed) shall be of heavy gauge extruded aluminum. Threaded tension rods shall be used to bolt to square or round poles. FINISH Standard finish shall be "UltraClad" polyester powder electrostatically applied and oven cured to ensure extreme durability and high quality appearance. Dark Bronze Finish color is standard. LISTINGS UL and cUL Listed for wet locations. Luminaire to be manufactured in an ISO 9001 certified facility. WARRANTY Mechanical, finish and electrical shall be covered by limited 3 year warranty. All sales of items in this catalogue shall be subject to Wide-Lite's Standard Terms and Conditions of Sale current at the time of shipment. If you do not have a copy of Wide-Lite's Standard Terms, please contact the factory forsame prior to ordering. Specifications and dimensions are subject to change without notice P. 0. BOX 606 �1DE-UTF SAN MARCOS TX. 78667 TELEPHONE: 1 (800) 235-2314 DIRECT: (512) 392-5821 V%kcfte Go FAX: (512) 753-1122 So9oo1 P5ti^ ilfF�THOMAB www.wide-lite.com BULLETIN NO 0782-0803 T b.9 5.4 S.t--•',.e 1 n Y.z b.9 1.z S.e Y:1 1.e 1.r Y.o 5., Ls l.e'--'S.9 1.e 1.3 l.o Y.3 1.9 k'd 7.9 1.s 1 n 1., 1.c 7.�"'ri.9 1., 1.5 b.c D., b., b.9 1.� 1.s 1.1 1.5 1.e 7.3 S.c 1.c 7A L4 7n 7.1 L4 1., 1n ',n 1.9 'z., ',.s '1.4 1.1 7.4 7.5 ',.a 1n 1.4 't.0 l.z b.n '0.6 *0 1.: 1.n 1 }.� 5., 1.� 5.•: 1.o b.9 fi.e D.9 b.e 1.z 7.4 1.9 1.4 1.a b.e ).t 1.2 1.7 1 n 1.2 l.0 I A %.0 1.2 1.7 l.. l.s 1.3 %., t.z 1.t 1.2 1, 1., b.s b.4 b.s b.e 1.5 1.9 1.3 'n., b.s b.4 1.a S.a 1.0 %.0 b.c b.1 *0 Lc 1 n 1.s 1.x 1.0 1.3 1.5 1.2 b.9 11.9 l.z Y., 'o.c 10.4 b.3 b.3 b.4 b.c 1.z ,� 1.e b.s b.4 0.4 b.9 S #.9 b.9 b.4 b.4 b.s 1.z 7.3 '1.5 ',.z '0.e '0. b.z b.z b•z b.3 S.c 7.4 b.3 b.3 b.3 b.4 1. V. b.x '.z b.z b.3 b.9 L�J--- 1.n V. b.9 7.5 7.5 U.8 •a. 1.5 'x.x S.. 7., • .9 .0 1.3 ,.4 1., b., b. S 9 1.e 1.4 1.s 1.c 1.9 % 1.i�,a '0.4 R }.n .. .., t.c I- .4 b. 1.3 -.. .4 ).t 1.4 i 4 b.c 1.4 1.a < b., 1.t 1., ' 0 '1 .7 S 4 b.e 't.c 1.9 1.3 1.1 7.3 ' .a .a 1,.9 •,.5 1.5 'n.e 7 , 7.9 •,.e 1., ].t • .9 ;�7 b.a b.4 b. b .3 1.r. 13 •n.9 0.5 b, S, 1n b.e 1., )., 1.4 S.a b.e b. S.c 7.a b.e b.9 b.e l., 1.4 1.3 b.e b. 2 0 1 .3 b.4 b.4 b.4 b.5 b.e 5.2 7.+ 1.3 .o '� � 1.,• 1.s '0.9 b.a b. 3 b.4 b.4 b.3 b.3 b.3 b.s b.e 1.4 b.x b.t b.x b1 b.1 'o.z b.s fi.s b.3 k.3 b.3 1,.- bn 1i., t�.t i:.t o.v 1- b.0 'o.o b., b.3 b.z b.1 b.x b.z o.4 b,3 b.x D.: t.3 7., b.n b.4 L.3 L., .. ,. 1.- 'is 5.9 i.9 L.s b.s .4 b.3 b.z b.x b.t b., b.o b.a b.a b.o b., b.z b.s o.e b.s .0 1.0 b., b.4 b.3 b.3 b.4 S.c 7.v b.s b.4 b.3 Us b. 5.4 ... '�.•'� 4 rA 4 b.9 b.s 0.4 b.3 1.2 b.e b 7 b.c b.5 b.4 bn 1.0 7.3 Y.4 ' .t .5 'o.e 1.0 1.1 1.0 1.3 1.1 b.c b.4 L.3 b.z b.t a,, b.t b.i b.t b.z 1.5 1.5 12.2 7.5 1.3 l.z 7.4 S.e i.9 S.9 S.z Y.3 b., b.4 b.3 b.3 b.3 b.4 b.5 b.s %.1 7 a 1.s 1, b.9 .c b.3 b.4 7.3 L< L4 1.o b., b.4 b.3 b.x b.z 10.1 10.1 b.1 b.z b.3 b.c b.9 S.x to 1.9 S.x 1.3 S a 1.9 S.< b.9 b.4 b.3 b.x b.z b.3 b.c % 1.ey,S^,ten 1.e 5.5 b.e .4 b.s b.4 b.3 b.z b.1 b.t b.z b.z b.4 b.s b.c 7.0 7.< .a 1.e 1.9 9 7.4 b.e b.5 b.4 b.4 b.4 b.4 b.s b.e 1. j l e 1.t b.4 S.cs'3.I 1._ n b.s b.3 b.3 b.z b.3 b.z b.z b.t b.3 b.4 b.c 1.o t., .9S'z.o 1.o Sa l.s b.e b.s b.4 b.3 b.4 b.s b.9 1.s j'-•;o�3In 1.z L.,. .. .3 .., :,.,D\.3 b.3 b.z L.t L.x b.3 b.3 b.4 L.5 bn 1.0 L4 5.4 5.c 'a.o S.v 1.4 7.5 7.4 L.9 L.� Ls b.4 b.4 L.s L.c L.9 '1.3 '1 . 1.9 b.s b.4 L.4 b. b.4 b.4 'o.x b.3 b.4 b.4 b., l.o I, b.9 1.o 7n 1.1 7n 1., 1.3 1., 1.1 b.9 1.0 'u.9 bn b.s 11.4 b.3 %A %.4 1),1 b.3 b.3 b. b 7 L., b.s b.4 b.< V. l.z 1" 1.3 1.1 l.o 1.2 1.4 7.e %.e 1.4 1.2 7.0 ).1 1.4 1.6 ',., b.9 b.s b.9 1- 1.0 L.a 1.,4 b.4 1L4 L.t Ln Dn bn b.z b.3 b.4 b.3 b.z b.z b. b 7 b.9 1.1 7., 1.0 1.4 l.s S., 7.6 Ls 1.2 1.6 1 n %.e 1 n 7.7 1.5 S.3 1.c 7.4 S.e 1.5 7.5 S 1 1.3 1.2 1.0 b.e b.4 b.3 b.z b., bn b.i b., b., b.z b.3 b.z b.i b., b.4 b.9 ',.< 1.e 1.6 },0 1.4 7 .1 1.5 1.t S., S., 1.e 1.3 1.3 1.9 1.0 1.7 S -1 1 w S.t 7.5 S.t 7 7 1.9 Lc b.9 '0.5 1.3 b.z b., a o a.0 b.a fin b.t b., b.z b.t b.t b.t b... n R R R C S -CH=Ghan9e AD=Add---- I -- -- a- Chuck Polas 802-7389173_cpolas@genlyte.com Mike King 207-839-5990, mking@genlyte.com I — Fixture Schedule -- I ---- WIND JAMMER SITE UGHTING REV 1 change Type Manufacture S WIDELITE i CITY 19 Catalog Number AL3M175P 3F QVSSTBK SS42oD180BK 1 Lamp CITY Lamp Part Number I Lamp Life Fixture Watts Fixture Description 1 Mounting 1 175ED17PMA 15,000 210 SHOE BOX TYPE 3 POLE VERTICAL LAMP ARM FULL CUT OFF MOUNT @ 23' - - i WIDELITE 4 AL3M175P 5F QVSSTBK/ SS420D180BK 1 175ED17PMA 15,000 210 SHOE BOX TYPE 3 VERTICAL LAMP FULL CUT OFF POLE ARM MOUNT @ 23' WIDELITE 11 AL2M703H QV SSTBK/SS410D180BK 1 70ED 17 MH i 10,000 I 110 SHOE BOX TYPE 3 HORIZANTAL LAMP FULL CUT OFF POLE ARM MOUNT 12' uai zai uo rxi i r : uu rt�a SERIES POLE HEIGHT=20' �'�a• "�i�; BASE HT . =30" yy � yr PR2440—M & AC2440-M 6" DIRECT MOUNT ELEV VI oM' o_a O.D o_a PAVED AREA o.a Illuminance Values(Fc) L -° Averaoe =2.42 I POLE HEIGHT= 2 0 ' ',r�f BASE IV . = 3 0 " J oo/z«/vn zuo zw:oo FAX mo ppo wk-Ae& �� 7\ �^ 'A. �]��h -�� ~� ��~� " .��~,`._' =* w w� ~ — o_o 0.0 b_U o_U b.o b.o W_J V V 0 Maximum =7.8 Minimum =0.1 Avg/Min Ratio= 24.20 Max/Min Ratio=78.00 HEIGHT TO BOTTOM OF FIXTURES: 22.5' AFG PROPOSED POLES MEET 120 MPH SUSTAINED WINDS EXISTING POLE BASES b_o ADDITIONAL REQUIRED EQUIPMENT: 0,0 (28) — PS4S20C1 BZ (29 X 4" SQUARE STEEL POLES, SINGLE MOUNT) o_o (5) — PS4S20C2BZ (20' X C SQUARE STEEL POLES, TWIN 180° MOUNT) (4) — PS4S20CTBZ (20' X 4" SQUARE STEEL POLES, TENON MOUNT) 0.0 331 UD LIGHTING f USA <www.ruudlighting.00rn> 905_671.1991 CAN is shown on tMs lighting design are based on project parameter - I Lighting used in conjunction with luminaire test procedures laboratory conditions. Actual project conditions dKering from ametem may affect field results. The customer is responsible pllance with any applicable electrical, lighting, or energy code. Date:325/2005 ! Scale: 14'=40' 1 Layout by: MARK JANAKY Project Name: BEST WESTERN LOT Filename: 50324RE1 MDJ.a32 FOOTCANDLES CALCULATED AT GRADE USING MEAN LUMENS Numeric Summary Project: All Projed s Label Avg Max in AvglMin Max/Min SITE 10.94 9.0 O.b O.OD 0.00 L I 4-IJ V U L FT- *0 0.o b.n u_o b.o o_o ) 0.0 b.o a,o o_o b.o a_o b.o 0_0 b.0 b.0 0.0 b.o o.o a_p o.0 0.o a.e 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 0.0 b.0 0.0 0.0 0_0 *0.o 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 O,U 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 o.o o.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 u_0 b.o o_o o.o a_o b.o 0_0 0.0 0_o o.a '0.0 0.0 0.o b.o 0_0 0.o 0.0 0.0 b.o o.[ 0.a b.o 0_0 0.o a_u o,o o_o o.o o.a 0.0 o_0 0.0 0.0 0_0 0.0 0.0 0.a 0_0 0.0 o.0 o,o o.0 0.0 0.0 o.c 0_o 0.0 0.0 b.n a_0 b.p o_a 0.0 0_a 0.0 b_a 0.0 0_0 0.0 b.o 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.0 0.0 0.0 0-0 0.0 0.0 b,C 0_0 0.0 b.0 0.0 O.q 0_o b.1 0.1 0.1 a_1 0.1 a_1 b.1 0.1 0.1 0.7. a,1 b.l 0.1 b.0 1-0 0.0 0.0 0,0 b_C 0_0 b,a o_n 0-❑ O.Y b.1 o_1 o.x 0.2 0.2 0.7 b.z 0..Z a_2 O.Z 0.2 0.2 a_2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0_0 0.0 0_a 0-C 0.0 0.0 o.1 o_Y 0.2 0.3 0_d b.9 0.5 O.s 0.5 0.5 0.5 U.5 o.s 0.5 0.5 O_d 0.9 a.3 b.Z o_1 b.l 0.0 0.0 0_o b.0 o_1 O.A a.-/ 0.8 0.0 i_0 1.1 1.4 1.5 1.2 1.2 1.Z 1.4 1.9 1.2 1.0 o_B b.e O.7 0.8 0.1 0_a 0-C o.a 0.0 0.a 0.5 1.0 1.0 1.5 2-7 i.9 2.0 2.1 1.9 2.3 2.1 2.2 2.2 2.1 2-7 1.8 1.0 i_1 0.5 0.1 0.0 0-a 0.0 U_U 0.1 a.9 i_a 1.4 2.4 2.3 3-1 3.9 3.5 2.7 2.E 3.4 3.8 Z.6 i.4 1.0 0-3 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 b.n o_1 0.5 1.9 3.0 1.9 3.6 3.3 14-6 6.9 3.3 3_8 3-7 5.1 1.2 3.6 73.-1 2.8 2.7 1.8 0.5 a_1 0.1 0-i b.o 0.0 0.1 0.5 2.0 3.5 4.9 '7.9 5-4 3-4 b.6 5.3 �I.B 5.9 6.3 0.3 s_7 2-8 a.8 3.5 1.9 a.L 0-2 O.Z 0.3 O.p 0.0 0.1 0.5 1.9 3.4 1 79.0 3.9 'S.1 5.3 3.4 3-1) 6.6 3.8 1-6 6.3 0.0 3.o 3.3 %,a 0.5 0.2 a.2 b.i b.0 0.0 b.l -5 2.0 3_9 3.5 '1.9 3.9 3.6 b.8 14-3 3.2 +1.9 4-3 6.5 4.3 5.1 3.6 3-s 2.0 b.5 o_Z 0.4 b.i 0.0 0_0 0.1 0.h 1.3 i_B 3.5 4.4 3.9 3.1 '�-i 3.6 4.5 4.2 3.5 3.h 14.2 a.5 3.5 1.0 1.3 a.A 0.3 0.6 a_5 o.p 0.0 b.1 o_a 0.9 1.1 i_9 2.7 2.3 2.0 2.0 2.3 2.9 2.5 2.3 2.2 2.5 1.0 i_9 1.1 0-9 0.5 0.3 0.5 1.1 0.0 O.0 0.1 0.5 1_i 0.9 1.0 1.3 1.a 2.0 i.o 1.5 1.6 1.0 2.1 2.0 i-6 '1.4 1.o 0.9 1.2 0.A 0.4 0.5 '1-1 0.0 b.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.A O.s b.e 0.7 0.7 0.-7 a_7 'b.7 0.6 o-B 0.8 b,8 o.G a.5 b.s a_a O.fl b.4 o_p 0.0 b.p b.1 O.Y 0.1 0.7 0.2 0.3 a.2 0.2 b.3 a.'s b.3 b.3 a_3 0.3 b.3 a_2 0.2 b.2 0.3 0.5 b.7 i_C 0.0 0.0 0_p 0_o b.0 0.l 0_Y b.l 0.1 0.1 b.l 0.1 %-1 o.1 0.7 0.1 b.l 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.5 b,e 1-2 1.: 0.0 0.0 0.0 b.0 O.o 0.0 b.o 0_0 0.o 0.0 a_u 0.1 b.l 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.7 0.1 0.1 0_1 0.3 b.7 1_3 i.9 2 b.o 0.0 b.0 o_u 0_o o.p o.a b_0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 o_0 b.0 o_u b_0 0.0 a_1 0.1 0.3 0.-1 1.5 2.9 3.0 b,0 o_a 0.0 0.0 'D-a 0.0 0.0 0-U o.a 0.0 o.o b_0 0.0 o_p 0_a 0.a a_0 0.0 O.1 0.1 0.3 0.7 1-3 2.2 3.3 0.0 b,n o.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 b.0 0.0 0.0 O.p a_0 0.0 0.0 o_p 0.0 O.a a.p 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.7 1-9 2.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 o.a 0.0 O.0 a.a o_0 0.0 0_u o.a o.n a.a 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 b,0 0.1 0.2 7 A a.9 1,7 0.0 b.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 a.0 %,a o.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 o.0 0.0 0.0 0_0 b.0 a.o a_0 0.1 a-7 a.d 0.9 1.7 2.3 2.1 0.o b.0 0,0 0.0 0,0 0.0 b.o O.a 0.0 0.0 0_0 0.0 b.0 a_0 0.0 0.0 a_0 b.0 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.9 1,7 2.3 2_Y 0,0 a.0 0.0 o.a a_u 0.p a_o 0.0 b.o o_a 0.0 0,0 0.0 a 0 0,0 o.0 0.0 O,o o_Y 0.2 0.4 1.0 1.8 2.5 0.0 0_0 0.a Ina o.0 0.0 b.a a.0 b.0 b,a 0.0 0.0 a.a 0.o b.n a_o 0.0 b.0 o.1 0.2 b.4 6.0 0.0 0.0 '0.0 b.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 o_U 0.0 o.a 0.0 b.0 a_p 0.0 b.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.1 0_0 0.0 0-0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0_0 b.o b.0 0.0 0.0 o_a 0.0 '0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 b.d b.8 i_c `2.6 3-R b-U 0.0 o,U 0.0 0.0 O.o b.0 b.0 a.0 0.0 b,o b_0 0.0 0.a 0.0 0.0 %.0 b.0 o-1 0.2 .9 0_B 1.6 1,2 *2 b,0 o_u 0.0 0.0 o.0 0.0 b,0 a.a 0.0 0.0 0.0 b.p o.o 0.0 b.0 a.0 0.0 0.a a-1 0.1 .3 0.7 1.3 1.7 j r ` 0.0 '0.0 0.0 U.0 a,D 0.0 0.0 0. ❑ 0.0 0.0 0.00.0.0 0.0 b.o %.o 0.0 `0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 i b.0 b.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 0.0 0_0 0.0 10.0 0.0 0.Q 0-0 0.0 0.1 0"t 0.1 0.? 0.2 0-2 0.2 0.5 } a_0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 b.o -0.0 -0.0 -0.0 0.0 o_0 0.0 o_0 0.1 o.7. 0.1 b_z 0.2 b.d 0.2 o.2 0.3 o.s 0-7 0.9 l b,0 a_0 b.o o.0 0.a 0.0 b.0 0_0 0.0 0.?. 0.1 0.1 a_1 b,l 0.2 O.t b.3 b.6 0.7 -0-50.4 6.1 0.7 1_U 1.6 2-3 ' b.p o_0 0.0 o_a 0.0 b_1, U_1 0.] a_2 0.2 a_2 0.2 b_z 0.3 n_4 a_fi 0,9 i.0 1.0 0.9 0.8 b.a 1_4 " "r 0.0 o.0 o.0 0.1 0.1 o.2 a_4 b.3 b_s 0.4 b.4 0.3 b.3 0.5 0.8 1.3 2.a 3-D 2. 1.9 l a 2.7 3-1 'A.1 t n.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.7 1..0 1.0 1.0 0.9 b.7 a.6 1.1 .0 4.3 .0 �1.1 3.1 2.4 2-% 2.5 2.8 4.2 0.0 O,n 0.1 0.2 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.6 3.0 2- * -A l.7 2.2 2.7 4.P. 3.8 4.0 3_8 2.9 ;-4 3.8 3.1- f�1r 0.0 0.1 0 2 0_4 1.1 '.- 2.3 4. 4_G 2.s 3-2. 2.2 2.13 2.2 2.5 3.3 b.2 4.8 3.9 4.2 4.4 4-4 5.0 7-B 2.9 1 b.l 0.7. U_4 *0 7 i.5 2.8 2.? 9.2 3.9 4.7 3.1. 2.fi 3.0 3.9 3_fi a.0 5.2 3_� 3,8 3.7 3-2 1 4.5 .�`1.11^�1.2 s 0.2 0.3 b.5 l 3 y. 1.9 3.3 a_6 4-4 5.0 3.5 2.2 2-9 3.A 4.5 3.7 3,5 3.a '.5 1.2 3.7 �- 1.5 1.9 "I0.4 0.6 1.7 1 9 2.6 '-z' 3_7 4.4 G_❑ 4.5 2.9 Y_7 2.99 0.9 3 1 1 0.6 i_1 2.0 2.Z 2.4 '3. 2.7 3.7 �;2..2--7 Z_3 2.1 1.9 3-3 0.9 1.0 2.. 2.9 2 2 2. :61.0 40 '.0 1.7 '1 -2 0.9 b '. 0.2 i r 1 1.7 4-0 _3 3.7 2_9 1_0 '1 - 3 �j,�1�-�1.1 0.1 l 3 2.3 %.2 3.7 3.2 2.7 '1 3 U_ i 2.0 3. 4.7 4 D 2.3 1.3 0.8 2.7 ,2 3_a 4.3 2-4 i_a 1.6b-o b.0 O.a b.❑ i r� 2.3 :.6 2.0 9 2.Q � 3,5 .,.1�= 0_D 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0. � 1.5 '1.7 2_0 3.6\3.fi 3.5 1.8 a_1 0.1 b.0 b.0 0.0 O.p a,0 0.0 0.0 0.0 b.0 0.0 0.0 o_D f Z .6 2.7 3.6 2.3 2.e 1.7 b.7 0.1 0.0 10.0 o.a 0.0 10.0 0.0 0-o 1.0 10.0 0.0 0.0 11 1.9 2.1 2.1 1.8� .0 3.1 i 5 2.3 1.7 a_9 0.4 0.1 o_U 0.0 b.P b.D 0.0 0.0 0.0 a_D `0.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.1 l.a 1- 1 i.9 1.6 '1-0 1.3 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.0 0,❑ 0.0 0.0 b.0 a.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 _ 0 s 03-e 2.6 1.6 i_1 b. 1.2 z_1 3-1 2.7 1.7 0.7 b.3 '0-1-0-0b.o b_o o.o u.P b_D a_d b.o b.D o. J� 3 3.5 2_0 2.0 *1.7. 0 9 1.5 3.7 3.7 2.fi 1.7 1-0 0.8 0.2 10_0 b.p b.D 0.0 0. 2.6 2.3 1.6 1.3 2.a .6 4.6 4.6 2_fi S.o 0.5 0.1 10.1) 0.0 0.0 o_0 b. 2.0~7.2 2.1 1.7 1.99 *3 4.7 s.9�61 3.o i. '. 0.0 b.o 0.0 b. 1.9 2.2 2.2 i.0 �rII 44.F S.7 A.3 5.0 2.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0. 2.5 2.7 2.5 2 3.6 4.3 5 F.o 3_3 _7 b,o a_d b. 1 3.4 )3_2 2.6 5 3.6 4.0 6.0 4.1 2.3 i_ b_0 J® 3.9 2.7 2 1 3.5 2.8 i_a 2.2 1.2 0 7 0.0 T3'3_, 2.7 -2.0 2.3 2.1 S.s 3._1 b.9 b. b_o b.o b.o 0.0 0.0 0. 2_d 2.2 1.9 1.5 S.a 0.9 0.7 0.6 0-S 0.3- f�--P u.0 0.0 o.q O.o O.a o.0 0_ �1.5 "1.7 1.7 1.3 10.9 .8 D_8 0.9 1.1 1.2 10.9 D.z 0.0 0.0 u,o U.0 0.0 0_D 0.0 0.0 0_0 0. W V V Y 1 • ).2 0.2 0.2 o.1 0-1 U_U 0.0 0.0 0, 10 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0_e �U.O 0.0 0_0 7 )_a 0.9 0.4 b,3 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 a_0 0.0 0_a O.p 0.0 0.p 0.0 0.0 0.0 b.0 0_U 0.0 Qv ).9 1-U 0.6 0_0 0.4 0.2 0.1 b.1 o_o b.0 0.0 0.0 u_o 0.0 0_0 0.0 U,o 0.D 0.0 0.0 0_v 0.0 !_3 2.5 Z.i 1.7 l.0 0.5 b.3 0.1 a,0 0.0 1),o 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1_0 0.0 U,0 0.0 o.0 0.0 0,o �^ 2.a 3.0 0.9 b.4 1.2 0.1 o_U 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 0.0 O,o U,o 0.0 0.0 1.8 3.9 3.2 4.5 3.1 1_4 0.6 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 O.D U_0 0.0 0.0 0.0 U,a 0.0 O,o 0.0 l,3 0.5 c,B 1.9 .2 2.0 o.a 0.3 0.7 0.0 0.0 U_0 0.0 a-u 0.0 O,o 0.0 0.0 0.0 b.0 0.0 b.0 3.b 4_a 4_9 5,7 �' 2.9 1.1 0.5 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.9 o_U 0.0 o.a 0.0 10.0 o.D o,o ?.s '3 7 6.) fi_2 9. 2_8 1.1 a_5 0.2 0.0 0.o f).0 0.0 0.0 o_D 0.0 0.0 0_o 0.0 u_0 0.0 0-o 2.P }i .5 u_L 3.2 Z-3 1.0 0.4 u_2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2 4.8 4-3 1.4_9 2.2 0.6 0.3 0.1 U_U 0.0 0_0 b_0 0.0 U_0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 o.0 0,0 O,D l 9 2.2 2_d 2.7 12,•4 1.6 0.5 0.2 0.1 0,a 0.0 0.0 -0-00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 O.a U.0 0,0 0.0 0.0 2.9 2.3 '1.3 --D u.d b.l a_1 b.o b.o o.o b.o o.o b_o b.o o.D b_o b.o o_o o.o o.o i_5 1.2 1.1 I- 0.4 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 a.o o_0 0.0 0-o o.o b.0 U_0 b.0 b.o 0.0 3.2 0.4 0.7 0.7 0.7 a_h 0.3 0,1 0_0 o-0 0.0 a.0 0.0 0.0 a_a 0.0 0.o O.a 0.0 o.o 0_0 0.0 ).2 0_3 0A 0.5 a_5 0.5 b.3 0.1 0.1 b.l 0.0 0.0 O,o 0.o O.n 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0_0 O.D o,D ).2 0,4 0.7 0,9 1,D 0.9 0.6 0.3 U_2 0,1 0.0 o_0 0.0 0_o U_0 0.0 0.0 o_u o_0 0.0 1.3 .0 1.3 z_z 1.5 1,4 .3 0.7 b,4 0.2 0.1 0.0 o.0 0.0 0.0 o.D 0.0 O.o a.o O.0 b.0 0.0 ).6 7.- 1.6 1.1 2.4 2 6 i_z 0.E 0.3 a-1 0,0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0-0 i1.0 0.0 0.0 U_U 0.0 ).9 2. 2.0 2.5 3.5 Z•5 2. 1.9 0.0 U.d 0.1 0.0 a.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 U_0 0.0 a.o 0.0 b.o o-o 1,9 i.3 4.3 4.5 4-3 1 3.4 i.2 o_A 0.1 a_u o.0 0.0 o.D O.0 10.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 0_0 3.3 '_2 3,6 3.9 3.7 '1.0 3.4 1.3 0 6 10.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 a.o 0.0 o.0 O.D U.0 o.0 3.0 -a 0.3 4.4 4•4 2.A .0 1-3 0.6 0.2 10_1. 0_0 0.0 0.0 U_0 0.0 0.0 O.0 0.0 0.0 o_U i_7 .3 2.2. 3.2 2.7 2.6 1.2 0.6 10_3 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 b,0 0.0 0.0 0.0 o_D 0.0 0.0 ELEVATION 2 2.o i.y .6 0.3 U.2 0.1 0,0 u_G o.0 O.o o.D U_0 0.0 0.a 0.0 O.B 1,6 2_u 2.5 3.5 2. F1` B 1.7 >.1 0.5 *0 3 'a 1 O.0 0 a o.0 -0 0_0 0.0 0.0 0.0 b.6 1-5 1.7 1.6 2.0 1.6 i.P 2.5 1.B 0.9 0_4 o,z 0.1 u.0 0.0 0,0 0.0 0.0 b.0 U_0 b_0 r ' 'a -al 2.3 '1-5 1.6 2.1 _3 2.0 2.3 i.3 0.6 0.3 0.l 0.0 0.0 U_0 0.0 b.0 0.0 0.0 b.o 0-0 1.9 2.? 'z_a 2.2 1 1 3-fi 9 2.1 a.e 0.3 0.1 0-0 0.0 0,0 0_0 0.0 0.0 o_0 0.0 0.0 0_0 a_a b.0 a.a i_2 3 0 3.s 3.5 2.7 Z-0 2. 1,6 4-7 2.4 0.9 "o 0.2 0.1 0.1 o_i b.l a_1 0_0 0.1 U_1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.o O,o 1.3 3_ 4.5 3.d 2.9 2.0 3.1 3.7 2.5 i._9 '1 '1 0-7 0_A 0.3 0.3 a_3 0.3 *0 .2 0.3 b,3 0_1 0.0 0.0 0,0 0.0 0,0 1.0 3-a 3.3 3.9 3.B 2.5 1.7 '1.5 1.2 3.z 1.5 1.2 1-D 1.3 1.2 '1 .2. "1 -2 O.P o_7 0-7 0.2 0.l 0.0 b.0 0_U 0.0 0.9 1.9 3.5 3.3 2.4 2.3 2_u 1.9 2.7 2_4 1.7 1.4 '1 5 1.2 3.0 1.0 3.1 1.3 1.0 0.9 *0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.7 3.7 3.4 2-0 2.6 2,5 ,3 3.2 2.7 1-9 1.9 1.1 3_4 u.6 1.6 3-4 2.9 1.5 0_e 0_4 b.Z 0.1 0.0 0.0 o 0 02 vvr - vv a'-1 J r . VV kzli YJ 0Uti 0.0 a.a 0.0 a.0 0.0 b_ b_u 0.0 0.0 b.0 0_0 0.0 u_0 0,0 0 �a_0 0,0 0.1 0.1 .3 b.tl 0.0 0.0 0.0 b_u o,0 /a o.tl 0,9 0-u 0,0 0.0 0.0 0.0 b.0 0.0 O,o 0.0 0,0 0.1 0.1 .3 0-6 1.3 1.9 0.0 o_D 0.0 o_a 0.0 b.a 0.0 b.0 U.4 b_0 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.0 0.0 10.0 o,0 o_D 0.0 0-1 ,3 a_6 1,3 2.2. 2.s O.p o_0 0.0 b.0 0.0 0,0 0.4 0.0 0-0 0,0 0.0 0.0 o_0 0.0 0.0 0.0 a.0 O.o a_0 b.1 -2 0.6 0_0 b.9 b.0 0.0 o.o o.0 b,0 0_o h_a o_o h.o 0_o h.o a_0 0.0 0.0 b,0 0.0 b,0 o.a o.4 b.o a.o o.o o.0 0.o o_u b.a b.o I b.o o.o b.o o_o b.o o.o b.o 0.0 b.l u 3 0.6 i-3 2.1 '2.E '0.0 O.o 0-0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.D a.0 0.0 0.0 *00 0.0 b.0 0.0 0.0 o.0 0.9 b_D 0.1 O.1 0 2 0.4 1.2 1,9 1.5 0.9 o_a 0_a n.o 0_4 b.a -0.0*0.0b_a b,o 9.0 0.0 b.0 0_0 b.o a -a -0.0 0.0 b.1 0_1 b 2 o.s b_s i,a i_� o_a 0.0 b_u o.0 b.o 10,0 b.0 0.0 0.0 a.0 0,0 b_o 0.0 0,0 0_0 0,0 0.0 0.0 b_o 0.1 0 E 0.5 1,0 1.6 1,E 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 b_o 0.o b.a o.0 b.0 a_0 O.p o.0 0,0 0.0 0.0 0 n o.0 0.0 0-1 0.2 0.5 0.0 b_o 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.o b_o 0.0 0.0 0_0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.n 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 b.. 0_0 0.0 b_0 0.0 0.0 u.0 0.0 0_a 0.0 0_0 0.0 b.o a.0 0.9 b.o 0.0 b.0 '0.0 0.0 b,l 0_ 0.4 a.9 1.7 _( b,o 0.0 o.o o.0 0,0 o.a 0.0 0.0 o_D 0.o b.0 0.0 o.0 b.o b_0 o.P o_ O.D b,0 0.1 0. o.E 1.0 1-d 2.E 0.0 0.0 '0.0 '0.0 '0.0 0.0 0.0 a_0 O.D b,0 0.0 b.0 D.0 0.0 b.o a_o 0, b.o 0.0 0.1 0. O.d i.o 1.7 .i o.a O.0 b.o 0.0 0.0 b.0 a.0 O.0 b,tl a_0 o.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 o.0 b.o b_ 0.0 o.1 0.1 o.l 0.3 .6 1.1 0.0 b.0 b.n 0.0 0.0 0_0 o.0 o.0 0.0 O.a o.a o.0 o,a o.1 0.1 o_1 o_ 0.2 b.1 0.1 b.l 0_2 .4 O.o 0.0 0.0 o_D 0.0 0.0 a.0 0.0 b.1 0.0 b.l 0_1 0.2 O.2 a_2 0.2 0. b_5 0.3 0_1 0,1 '.1 13.2 0.2 0.= 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 o_0 0.0 b,o a_1 0.2 a.3 0.2 0.4 a_0 0.7 0.9 i.0 0. 1.2 1..brff:2 0.7 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 O,a o_a 0.0 b,n a_0 0.0 b,l. 0_c 0.9 ror 2,5 2.n u.B 0.7 0,9 0.2 b.l b_t 0.1 b.0 a.D 0.0 0.0 0_0 0.0 b.o 0.1 0.4 0.9 0.7 1.1; 3.5 2.0 0,7 i_9 1.0 l.0 0.6 b.3 0.1 o,o 0.0 0.9 0_0 0.0 O.o b_1 0.1 0,3 0.8 1.3 i.0 2.2 +f0.4 0.2 0.1 0-D 0.0 0.0 0_C b_o o_0 0-o 0_o 0.0 0_0 0.1 b.l a_3 0.6 1.3 1.2 2.0 3_Q O.o 1,6 1.1 0,6 0.2 0.1 h,n 0.0 o.D b-o 0_C b.o a_0 0.0 0_0 a_U 0.0 0_0 0.1 b.l b.3 0.6 a.9 1,0 1.2 1.1 0.7 0.6 0.2 O,z 0.1 0,0 0.0 a.0 0.0 a.0 0,0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0_0 0,0 0.0 0.0 0.0. 0.1 0,z b.a GA b,F b_3 0.5 a0.2 a_Y 0.1 b.o 0.0 0,0 b.0 b.4 O.c a.0 0.0 11.0 0.0 O.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10_1 0_1 o.z b.2 b.2 0.1 a_1 0,1 0,1 0.0 0.0 a-0 0.0 0.0 o_U 0,C o_o b_tl o.0 0,0 b_0 o.D 'o_o 10.0 a.9 b.o 0.o a_1 0.1 b.o 0_0 0.o 0.0 o.4 b.o 0.0 o_o b.o a.o 0.0 o.c tFJUUI {L 1.3 ) �.7 3.1 3.7 0.0 0.1 0.0 O.a 0.0 0-D � O.o 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 .9 1.S 2.5 3.8 b e_a 2,3 o.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 .7 2.9 2.4 1.5 b•? .7 1.2 z_9 �A 's.ti 1.5 2.3 b.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 0. D � a 2.9 2.1 -1-20.7 .5 0.8 1-9 2.9 Z-e .3 1-1 0.4 0_3 0.0 D Z-9 2.2 1,3 b.7 .S 0.5 1.0 1.8 1.6 _G 0.6 a-3 0.1 0.0 o.n y��f� 0f'9 1 $ 2.6 2.3 1.5 0.B _5 0.! 0.7 1.2 1.3 .6 G_6 0.2 1' 1 1 7 1.0 1.8 1.9 0.9 1 5 a_a 0.6 1.2 1.7 -) 0.6 0.-s 0.3 b.3 0. 7-1 1.4 2.2 2 ��.- 3.4 3.6 1 3 i.d 1.5 1.2 0•Ft o 5 0.5 1-U 2.2 2.6 2 0 1.3 0-7 0.4 0.5 0.8 "1 • 1.9 1.? 2- 3.1 2-9 13.6 3-3 i 3 1 6 1-b 1.0 l.a 0.9 0.6 0.7 1.6 3.2 1.6 O 3 2,8 1.z o_e; 0.9 1-5 _8 2.9 1.53.1 0.0 3-9 4.7 3.? i 7 2.3 1-3 1.7 l.D 0.7 1.0 i_1 *3.1 5.1 .6 a 1.3 0.9 i 2.4 a- �1.6 3.5 3.B �3.5 5.2 l.6 4.9 l,5 -3-31 2.5 i.5 0.9 0.7 1.0 1.5 i.3 0.3 s_D �!. 0.? i.4 2.! i.9 Y,0 3.F 4.5 43.9 i.9 0.5 4-a 5.9 3-7 3.4 ®'3 � r Y.1 3.1 2.1 1.3 u_8 0.6 G.9 ~1.3 '/,.0 2, 1•2 1.0 1.3 i.9 1.2 7.'� 3.1 3.3 3.1 Z.z 9.1 9.0 _3 .5 2-2 �1 3.o 3.0 ,5 1.6 1.0 0-1 0..7 b-9 1..3 1 1.9 1.5 1.6 2.2 1.3 1,B 2 6 1.% 1.5 1.7 2.0 3-0 6.9 2.P 1.4 2.0 7.1 2.3 1.7 1.3 .1 l.z 1.0 2.7 1-') 2.8 3.z Y.7 3.5 2.0 1.6 i. 1 0 1.1 l.d 1.7 i.5 1.6 1.1 0.7 'r 1 1.2 1.5 2.1 1.6 2.1 7.c 2.6 3.2 .0 2.2 Z.6 *1.0 3.6 3_e .2 1.3 O.i 0.5 0.4 0,5 0.6 0.7 0_6 0.4 b.s IC r i.9 3,7 3.4 4.1 Z-e 3.7 3.1 a.s Y_1 1.9 l.0 o.4 0.2 0.2 0.2 b,3 0.2 0.3 0-2 0.1 t 1 2.7 %,1 2.6 2.2 1.3 0.0 0.5 b_7. 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 '0-7 a.4 0.7 1 2-0 i.9 2.8bbbbbb 2.6 1.7 1.9 i.l l.n o.9 0.9 b.6 0.4 a.3 0.1 0.1 b.0 %-0 b_0 0.0 0.9 A_0 0.0 f 0.1 0.2 U_3 0.5 a.e i_0 1.0 1.1 0.8 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.3 0.9 0.2 0_1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 b.o 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 d.0 0-1 0.1 0.2 tl_4 0.4 0.5 0.3 0.5 0.3 0.3 0.2 o.Z 0.1 0.1 0,1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.o 0,0 0.0 0.n t O.a a.0 0.1 a,1 0.2 0.z 0.2 0.1 0.1 o.l 0.1 0.0 o,o a.0 0.0 o.9 o.0 O.o O.G 0.0 O.o a.0 o_o o.o 0.0 It 1 o_a 0.0 u_o 0.0 O'l 0.1 0.0 0.D a.0 0.0 'a.D 0.0 0.0 a.0 0.0 0.0 -0.0 0.0 0.0 0_0 0.0 9.0 a_0 0.0 a-0 0.0 b_o b.o b.o 0.o b.o b,o a.o 0.0 'G-o b.o 0.0 b_a 0.o b.D 0.0 0.0 b.D b.a 0.0 0.0 b_o o.0 0_0 0.0 0.0 0.0 t 0.0 a_o 6.0 0,o a_o 0.0 0.0 a.0 0.0 o,D 0.0 0.0 0.0 O,n 0.0 o_a 0.n 0.0 b_0 0.0 0-o 0.0 0.0 O.a 0.0 0.0 i 0.0 0.0 a-o 0.0 b.o 0.0 0.0 0.a 0_a 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 a.a 0.0 0.0 o_o 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 t 1 u.o 0.0 0.0 0.o a.o o.o b,a b.G o.o o,D '0.0 '0.0 1.0 o.o O.a a_G '0.0'0.00.a '0.00.0 '0.0b.o 0.0 0.o '0.0 i r 1.5 2.6 3-5 3.3 3.0 1 2.1 2.9 2.3 2.9 4.3 4.0 3. `I.a 0.9 2.3 i_0 0,5 0.2 0.1 0.0 g_5 2.7 3 a 1 3.B 3-3 1.0 3-1 i•1 4.0 3. 3_n 7-0 2-91 2.3 1.2 0_6 0,2 0.1 O.o 0.0 0.0 0.9 1.8 4- 4.0 '1_n a3.1 2.3 3. 3.8 �u.2 3.3 2.9 3.5 4.9 5-2 5.1 6.3 3.3 1.9 1.5 0.8 0.9 D.1 b_0 -0 1,5 2.0 3 4 'a 1 i-1 3.6 2.h '3. 3.a 2.7 3-0 2.9 2-s 5.0 5,7 0.1 5.6 3.4 2-0 2.P 0_9 b.3 b.i O.n 0-0 0.0 1-4 'lz.7 3. �A..6 �_2 1 1 2.2 2.z '..a 12.5 3.1 *1.6 7.2 2.R 3.6 %.5 1.7 s.a '3.3 2.6 i_7 0,6 0.3 0.1 0.1 b.0 o,0 5 ,Z 3.7 3.R 3.2 2.3 2.7 2,6 1.9 1,9 1.9 �1.0 3.0 3.8 0.1 9 5.3 �-i *3.0 1.6 0.8 0.3 0,1 0.3 0.0 b.0 a,d 3.7 4.0 1.3 4_fl 3.6 3.7 7 7.ti 1.6 1.3 1.3 1.0 3.z 2.7 5.7 3.R 4.4 9.1 4.8 4.3 3.9 2 ,3.0 1.B '1 3 0.9 6_9 1.2 2.1 2.6 4-3 4.3 4-4 2,6 2,a 1.1 0.6 0-3 b-1 0.o b.a 0'0 3,6 3.6 2-7 '1-6 1.3 2.7 7.7 1.8 b-9 0.6 b.� i_0 1,0 2.1 5J.2 8.6 2.z 2.3 '1 .0 0.9 b.ti O.x b.i 0.0 0_0 0.4 2.5 2-4 2.6 ] 7 .s 2.9 1.R i_0 0.5 ID.3 0,5 1-3 0-7 1.2 i..4 1.2 i_3 1.2 b.7 1.0 b,s 0.1 b.1 b_D b.4 0_U 0 2-0 32.o i.B a2.o i-4 -0-8b.6 u_3 O.z 0.3 b.e 0_z b.a o.3 o_a o.3 b_3 O.x o.9 O.z b.l o_o b.o 0.0 0.0 1.7 1.0 o_s 0.8 0.9 0.8 0.6 b.5 0-3 0.2 0.1 0.1 b_1 0.1 b_1 0.1 0.1 b_1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 b.0 %.0 0.0 3.0 0,5 0_4 0.4 0-9 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0-U 0.0 0,0 U-0 0.D 0.0 1.0 O.o 0.0 0.0 1_0 0.0 1-0 0.0 0'0 0.0 3.4 0.3 0.2 0-2 0.2 0-1 0.0 0-0 0,0 0.0 b_D 0.0 b,o 0.0 0.0 0-0 0.0 b,o 0.0 0.0 b.0 0,0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3_2 b.2 b_1 0,3 0_0 0,0 b.o I - 0 *0.0 b_a 0.0 b,o 0.0 0.0 b_U 0.0 0.0 0_0 O.o 0_0 0.0 0.0 b_0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.1 0.0 b_P 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 b.o 0.0 b.0 0_0 0.0 b.o 0.0 b.v 0-0 0.0 0,0 0.0 0.0 '0.0 0.0 0_0 0_0 0.0 o_U 0.0 3.0 13.0 o.0 0.0 0.0 0,o b-D 0.0 0.0 b-o b.o b-P 0.0 b,o b.0 0-o b,v 0-0 0,0 b.0 '0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0_0 b-o b.0 )-0 0.0 0.0 0.0 b_U %.0 0_0 0.0 0.0 0_0 0.0 o.0 0.0 a.0 b_o 0-0 0.0 b_0 b.D b.o 0.0 b,0 b.0 0.0 10-0 0.0 0,0 3,0 (1_0 '0.v 0.0 0.0 b_0 b_D o.0 0.o 0.0 0.0 0.0 b.o b_o %.0 0.o b.0 b.o b.o 0-0 b.o 0.0 0.0 0,0 0-0 b.0 u_o 3.0 0.0 0.0 b_a 0-n b.o 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 b.o 0_0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 0.0 0.0 0.n 0.0 0.0 0.0 3-0 0.0 0.0 'D.0 0.0 0,0 0-0 %.0 b-0 0.0 b.0 b.0 0.0 b-0 0-0 0.0 0-0 0.0 0.0 0_a 0.0 3_o b_o b.o b.o b.0 b.0 b,o b.0 b.D 0.o b_0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 o,o o_o o.o b.o b_o b.0 Lumineire Schedult 3.D '0-00,P b_o *0 _0 o,o b_o b.P '0.0b_o b.n 0.010.0 0.0 b_o b.o b_o '0.0b_o -0-00.0 pro eat Afl Pro'- 3.n b,0 o.o lb b.o b.o b.o o.o b.o 0,0 0.0 b-o o.0 o,D 0.0 0,o b_0 b-0 b.0 b.0 b.o Symbol Qt 2 3_0 0,0 b.a 0.0 0.0 o.0 0.0 P.0 b_0 0.0 0-0 0,0 b.0 U_0 b.0 b.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 �■ 38 3,0 0.0 0.0 0.0 b-o b.P 9,0 0_0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 b.o b.0 'G-o 0_0 0.0 b_o 0.0 b.D 0.0 RU 800236.7000 INurrfmbon resut provided to Ruud conducted under these design par, ter verifying court 03/25/05 FRI 17:01 FAX r I Maximum =7.8 Minimum =0.1 Avg/Min Rati0=24.20 b.o Max/Min Ratio=78.00 0.0 b.D o_a o_o b_0 b_o O.D HEIGHT TO BOTTOM OF FIXTURES: 22.5' AFG PROPOSED POLES MEET 120 MPH SUSTAINED WINDS b.° EXISTING POLE BASES b.o 0.0 b_o 0 D ADDITIONAL REQUIRED EQUIPMENT: (28) - PS4S20C1 BZ (20' X 4" SQUARE STEEL POLES, SINGLE MOUNT) "0.0 (5) - PS4S20C2BZ (20' X 4" SQUARE STEEL POLES, TWIN 180° MOUNT) (4) - PS4S20CTBZ (20' X 4" SQUARE STEEL POLES, TENON MOUNT) D.fl i.D D.D y Label AC440 Arrangement SINGLE Lumens 33100 LLF 0.650 Description AC2440-M (400W PR440 G1V494 SINGLE SINGLE 33100 36000 0.650 0.650 PR2440-M (400W QVC494-M (400V1 UD LIG G ) USA <www.ruudlighting.com> 905.671.1991 CAN is shown on this lighting design are based on project parameters I Lighting used in conjunction with luminaire test procedures laboratory conditions. Actual project conditions differing from ametem may affect field rasults. The customer re responsible pliance with any applicable electrical, lighting, or energy code. Date:3125r2005 Scale: 1"=40' L0y0ut py: MAKK JAIWHrnT Project Name: BEST WESTERN LOT Filename: 50324RE1 MDJ.a32 16OOg FOOTCANDLES CALCULATED AT GRADE USING MEAN LUMENS Numeric Summary Project: All Projects Label Avg Max Min Avg in MaxJMin SITE 0.94 9.0 0_U OAO U. L I V Z V AC Series 6" Extended Pole Mount This compact forward -throw reflector has a main beam of 60°+ from vertical (30" from horizontal), providing wide lateral distribution and excellent uniformities. A Backlight Shield accessory (standard on Wall Mount) permits precise cutoff adjustability. Three Sizes: 12" square x 5" deep (305 x 127 mm) 16" square x 6.5" deep (406 x 165 mm) 22" square x 9.25" deep (559 x 235 mm) Candlepower distribution curve of 40OW MH 16" Area Cutoff Floodlight. 100' 80' 60' 40' 20' 0' 20' 40' 60' 80' 100' 160' 48.8 140' .. ... 423 120' ........ ... .... 36.6 100 ..- --. ..; ... 30.5 80 - 24.4 60' .6-- - 18.3 40 3 12.2 20 6 6.1 O 20 t 6.1 40 12.2 3D.5 244 183 122 6.1 0m 61 12.2 18.3 24.4 3D.5 Isofootcandle plot of 40OW MH Area Cutoff Floodlight at 25' (7.6 m) mounting height, 0" tilt above horizontal, with backlight shield removed. 80' 60' 40' 20' 0' 20' 4060' 80' 80' 60' 40' 20, 0' 20' 40' 60' 80, 24.4 18.3 2.2 6.1 Om 6.1 12.2 18.3 24.4 24.4 18.3 12.2 6.1 Om 6.1 122 18.3 244 Isofootcandle plot of 175W MH Area Cutoff Floodlight at 15' (4.6 m) mounting height, 0° tilt above horizontal, with backlight shield located for backlight cutoff. Isofootcandle plot of 1 NOW MH Area Cutoff Floodlight at 30' (9.1 m) mounting height, O'tilt above horizontal, with backlight shield removed. M, Neiv improved phatornetr is 1 performance coming eariy 2OV The 12-inch and 16-inch housings of the Parking/Roadway Light have a Type III asymmetric distribution pattern. The 22-inch housing has Type II asymmetric distribution. Ideally suited for roadway applications, parking areas or for building - mounted security lighting, Three Sizes: 12" square x 5" deep (305 x 127 mm) 16" square x 6.5" deep (406 x 165 mm) 22" square x 9.25" deep (559 x 235 mm) Typical Candlepower Distribution of 40OW HPS Parking/Roadway Light. 100' 80' 60' 4020' 0' 20' 40' 60' 80' 100' 100' 30.5 24.4 18.3 I 40' .. ..._...4.. .;_.. .. 12.2 20' 6.1 5 0' o m 20' - 6.7 40' ... _. .. _.___ . ... ... 12.2 18.3 244 100' 30.5 33.5 244 18.3 12.2 61 Om 6.1 12.2 183 244 30.5 Isofootcandle plot of one 40OW HPS Parking/Roadway light at 30' (9.1 m) mounting height, and 0° tilt above horizontal. Typical Candlepower Distribution of 15OW HPS Parking/Roadway Light. 80' 60' 40' 20' 0' 20' 40' 60' 80' 80' 24.4 60' .:.. __ :... _. 18.3 20, 0' _ � OM 20' .. ._,.___. l_... 6.1 80' 244 24.4 18.3 12,2 6.1 O m 6.1 12.2 18.3 24.4 Isofootcandle plot of one 150W HPS Parking/Roadway Light at 20' (6.1 m) mounting height, and 0° tilt above horizontal. T 14J :Lamp `Included! AC Series 6" Extended Pole Mount This compact forward -throw reflector has a main beam of 60°+ from vertical (30° from horizontal), providing wide lateral distribution and excellent uniformities. A Backlight Shield accessory (standard on Wall Mount) permits precise cutoff adjustability. Three Sizes: 12" square x 5" deep (305 x 127 mm) 16" square x 6.5" deep (406 x 165 mm) 22" square x 9.25" deep (559 x 235 mm) Candlepower distribution curve of 40OW MH 16" Area Cutoff Floodlight, 100' 80' 60' 4020' 0' 20' 40' 60' 80' 100' 160' 48.6 140' 1.. _ :. 423 120' .... 36.6 100' _.. _.'.... .. .... ..... ... 30.5 60' ..4.._; ...'_.. ;.. 18.3 40- 12.2 0 6 61 0 O 0m 20' .... :... 6.1 30.5 24.4 183 12.2 6.1 Om 91 122 183 24.4 30.5 Isofootcandle plot of 40OW MH Area Cutoff Floodlight at 25' (7.6 m) mounting height, 0° tilt above horizontal, with backlight shield removed. 80' 60' 40' 20' 0' 20' 40' 60' 80' 80' 60, 40' 20' 0' 20' 40' 60, 80, 24.4 18.3 12.2 6.1 0M 6,1 12.2 18.3 24.4 24.4 18.3 12.2 6.1 0 m 6.1 12.2 18.3 24.4 Isofootcandle plot of 175W MH Area Cutoff Floodlight at 15' (4.6 m) mounting height, 0° tilt above horizontal, with backlight shield located for backlight cutoff. Isofootcandle plot of 1000W MH Area Cutoff Floodlight at 30' (9.1 m) mounting height, 0' tilt above horizontal, with backlight shield removed. V Z Effective Pi )ected Area (EPA) Ratings 1, .) Fixtures 1-1/2" Close Pole Mount (0" tilt) Configuration Number 1 2 3 5 6 12 sq. housing 04/ 0.94 n/a n/a n/a 16' sq. housing 080 160 n/a n/a n/a 22' sq. housing 1.49 2 98 n/a n/a n/a NOTE: For Configurations 3 5 & 6 a 6" Extended Pole Mount must be used NOTE: For Configurations 3, 5 & 6 with 22" sq housmq, a special 12" Extended Pole Mount must be used ---consult factory. 6" Extended Pole Mount Arm (0" tilt) ..6 ■-■ in we Configuration Number, 1 2 3 5 6 12 sq housing 0 Y, 1 10 0.92 140 184 16" sq. housing 0 95 1 90 1 50 2 25 3.00 22 sq. housing 164 328 n/a n/a n/a NOTE: For Conhgurahons 3. 5 & 6 wilt, n" sq housing, a special 12" Extended Pole Mount must be - usedconsult factory 12" Extended Pole Mount Arm (special order) 22" housings at 90' configuration im- Configuration Number 3 5 6 Standard housing will flat tens 3.03 4.61 6.06 OV or VFT Series with sag lens 3.21 4.88 6.42 OV or VFT Series with back box & sag lens 3.33 5.06 6.66 Fixed 20" Mount M in or Configuration Number 21 22 23 25 26 12 sq. housing /0 1,12 1.18 166 236 16'sq. housing I26 2,08 2,17 3.08 4.30 22' sq. housing _ 73ri 3.44 n/a n/a n/a In -Line Bracket (PBD) WE 2 Fixtures W-" 3 Fixtures 12 sq. housing 139 2,33 16" sq. housing 188 3.00 22' sq housing 302 4.62 NOTE: For VFT fixtures with sag Inns, add 009, with sag lens and back box, add 0-09+0.06 (0,15). V 1-1/2" Close Pole Mount (0" tilt) for VFT or VPR Series _ -0 ■ -� J Configuration Number 1 2 250 & 40OW MH (with son Irns1 1 2 316 1000W MH, A0 & 100w HPS (will] lag lens and back box) 164 3.28 6" Extended Pole Mount Arm (0° tilt) for VFT or VPR Series w -a Configuration Number 1 2 250 & 40OW Mli (with sag Ions) 1.73 3.46 1000W MH, 250 & 40OW HPS (with sag Inns and back box) 1 79 3.58 1-1/2" Close Pole Mount (0" tilt) for Wedge Light w M`--■ l Configuration Number 1 2 3 5 5 16 sq. housing 045 0.80 n/a n/a n/a 22 sq housing 084 146 n/a n/a n/a NOTE: For Conhgurahons 31 5 & 6 with 22" sq housing, a special 12" Extended Pole Mount must be used--consoll factory. 6" Extended Pole Mount Arm (0° tilt) for Wedge Light -a ■--■ in ■�■ Configuration Number 1 2 3 5 6 16 sq. housing 0,53 0.96 0.93 1,41 186 22" sq housing 099 176 n/a n/a n/a NOTE: For Configurations 3, 5 & 6 with 22' sq housing, a special 12" Extended Pole Mount must be used --consul) factory. 1-1/2" Close Pole Mount (0° tilt), 6" Extended Pole Mount Arm (0" tilt) or Fixed 20° Mount for Rectangular Housing -m ■- Configuration Number 1 2 3 5 6 1-1/2 Close Pole Mount Arm 0.60 077 n/a n/a n/a 6" Extended Pole Mount Arm 0.60 1.06 0.93 1.27 186 20 Fixed Mount 0.88 124 150 212 3.00 In -Line Bracket (PBD) for Rectangular Housing ■'11 �� 2 Fixtures 3 Fixtures In -Line Bracket 149 238 Square Tube Post -Top Light Round Tube Post -Top Light 16" sq. housing 2 23 Center Tenon or Direct Fitter 1.21 22" sq. housing 141 Off -Center Tenon or Direct Fitter 1.21 22" sq. housing with OV Series Optics: 250 & 40OW MH (with sag lens) 3.50 250 & 40OW HPS & 1000W MH (with sag lens and back box) 3.56 2" Adjustable Fitter with 12"Square Housin Catalog # PA/PB-1 # Fixtures 0 1 0,61 10 0.65 20 0.77 30 0.84 45° 0.91 60' 107 70° 1.16 80° 1.20 90` 121 PA/PB-2 2 in -line 2.82 2.89 3.14 3.28 3.41 3.73 3.91 199 4.01 PB-3 3in-line 4.68 4.91 5.28 550 568 617 644 656 659 PB-4(90) 4 0 90 4,19 4.37 4.55 4.65 416 5.00 512 514 5.20 PB-4 4in-line 6,54 6.93 742 771 795 860 897 913 917 PT-1 1 0.82 0.86 0.98 105 1 11 128 137 141 142 PT/PD-2(90) 2 @ 90 1.26 1.41 1.52 158 1.62 1.77 1.84 1.87 n/a PT/PD-2(180) 2@180 1,43 143 143 143 149 175 190 195 196 PT/PD-3(90) 3 @ 90 1,87 2 02 213 219 2,23 2.38 2.45 2.48 n/a PT-3(120) 3 @ 120' 1.70 1.89 2.21 2.36 2.47 2.76 3.08 316 316 PT/PD-4(90) 4 0 90 2.31 2.60 2,82 2.94 3 04 132 3.49 3.54 3.53 PW-1A3 1 1.08' 1.12` 1.24' 131` 138' 154" 163' 167" 168' PW-2A3 2 2.16' 2.24' 2 48" 2 62" 2 76' 3 08' 3 26' 3 32' 3 34' 2" Adjustable Fitter with 16" Square Housing Catalog ! PA/PB-1 #Fixtures 1 0 0.93 10 1.06 20 1.27 30 139 45" 150 60` 1.78 70' 1.95 80' 2.02 90` 2,03 PA/PB-2 2 in -line 3.86 4.11 4.53 4.78 4 99 5.56 5.89 603 6.05 PB-3 3 in -line 6.35 6.87 7.51 7.88 819 9.04 9.55 9,76 9.79 PB-4(90) 4 @ 90 5.84 6.17 6.49 6.67 6.83 7,25 7.50 7,60 7.62 PBA 4in-line 8.84 9.63 1049 1098 1140 1253 1321 1349 1353 PT-1 1 1.14 1.26 1.48 160 1,71 1.99 216 2,23 2.24 PT/PD-2(90) 2 @ 90 1.90 2.16 2.36 2.47 2.56 2.81 n/a n/a n/a PT/PD-2(180) 2 @ 180 2.09 2.09 210 2.34 2.40 2.84 3.08 318 319 PT/PD-3(90) 3 @ 90 2.83 310 3.30 3.41 349 175 n/a n/a n/a PT-3(120) 3@120° 2,07 281 350 424 474 509 548 563 563 PT/PD-4(90) 4 @ 90 3.57 413 4.53 4.72 4,90 542 n/a n/a n/a PW-1A3 1 1 AW 1.53" 1 74* 186' 1 97' 2 25' 2 42' 2 49' 2 50" PW-2A3 2 2.80" 3.06' 3 48' 3 72' 3 94' 4 50` 4 84' 4 98` 5 00` 2" Adjustable Fitter with 22"Square Housin Catalog If PA/PB-1 #Fixtures 1 0 1.62 10 1.94 20 2.34 30 2.56 45 2 74 60° 3,26 70' 3.56 80` 3.69 90° 3.69 PA/PB-2 2 in -line 5.63 6.28 7.07 7,51 _787 8.91 9.51 977 9.77 PB-3 3in-line 9.12 10.27 1145 1212 1266 1422 1512 1551 1551 PB-4(90) 4 @ 90 8.74 9,40 9.99 10,32 10.59 1137 11,83 12.03 12.03 PB-4 4 in -line 12.62 14.27 15,84 16,73 17.45 19.53 20.73 2125 2125 PT-1 1 1.83 2.15 2.55 217 2.95 3.47 3.77 3.90 190 PT/PD-2(180) 2 0 180° 3.45 3.45 3.87 3.99 4.23 4,97 5,44 5.62 5.60 PT-3(120) 3 @ 120 3,33 3.68 4.97 533 5.51 6.41 n/a n/a n/a PW-1A3 1 2.09' 2.41" Z.l* 303` 321' 373' 403' 416' 416' PW-2A3 2 4.18' 4.82' 5 62' 6 06' 6 42" 7 46" 8 06" 8 32" 8 32" 2" Adjustable Fitter With 14" Square Micro flood Catalog If # Fixtures 0 10' 20 30 45' 60' 70' 80' g0° 2" Adjustable Fitter with Rectangular Housing Catalog # # Fixtures 0 10° 20° 30° 45' 60' 70' e0° 9o� 11 1 Ruud' Steel and Alumdinum Square Poles PS, PA aeries Pole Selection NOTE: Hanging signs, banners and To choose the correct pole for an flags on poles is not recommended application, careful consideration must without considering increased wind be given to the shape, size, number and loading. The EPA ratings below do not weight of all fixtures to be supported, as allow for this added stress. well as the geographical location of the Please consult factory for advice on job. The charts below and on page 154 pole selection if attaching signage or 30' indicate Effective Projected Area (EPA) flags. ratings for Ruud Lighting poles and 25' floodlights. Use this data in conjunction 22' with the map on page 153 to choose the 19, appropriate pole for your fixture and tenon setup. The chart values are base 15' wind velocity and allow for a 1.3 gust factor. 10' The EPA rating of the pole must be equal to or greater than that of the fixture, taking into consideration the wind conditions at the job site. Consult factory for pole freight (based on ship -to ZIP code). 10' 15' 19' 22' 25' 30' Poles can be ordered without base cover. Tsq. S, A $ A S 4"sq. S S A S A S S S 5"sq. S A S 6"sq. S A Key: S = Steel; A = Aluminum Pole Specifications I Order 1 Height (feet)x Bolt Circle/ Bolt Maximum _ Pole "EPA" Ratings Width (inches)x Range Size Fixture Base Wind Velocity (MPH) Shipping Catalog No. Wall (inches) (Inches) Inches Weight (Ibs) 70 60 go 109 110 120 Weight (Ibs ) Square Steel Poles PS3S10C°BZ 10 x 3 x 0.125 10/9.3-11 3/4 200 31.4 23.6 18.2 14.3 11.5 9.3 58 PS3S15C*BZ 15 x 3 x 0.125 10/9.3-11 3/4 175 18.5 13.4 9.9 7.4 5.5 4.1 82 PS3S19C*BZ 19 x 3 x 0.125 10/9.3-11 3/4 145 11.5 7.8 5.2 3.3 2.0 0.9 97 PS4S10C*BZ 10 x 4 x 0.125 10/9.3-11 3/4 300 59.9 45.2 35.1 27.9 22.6 18.5 78 PS,IS15C.*B� 15 x 4 x 0.125 10/9.3-11 3/4 300 36.5 26.9 20.3 15.6 121 9.5 119 PS4S19�*BZ 19 x 4 x 0.125 10/9.3-11 3/4 270 24.0 16.9 12.1 8.7 6.1 4.2 150 PS4S22C'BZ 22 x 4 x 0.125 10/9.3-11 3/4 240 20.4 14.0 9.7 6.6 4.3 2.5 163 PS4S25C'8Z 25 x 4 x 0.125 10/9.3-11 3/4 210 15.9 10.4 6.6 3.9 1.9 0.4 182 PS4S25S`BZ 25 x 4 x 0.188 10/9.3-11 314 325 25.3 17.6 12.3 8.5 5.7 3.6 252 PS4S30S*BZ 30 x 4 x 0.188 10/9.3-11 3/4 250 17.7 11.4 7.1 4.0 1.7 0.0 301 PS5S25S*BZ 25 x 5 x 0.188 10/9.7-11.3 1 450 43.9 31.4 22.8 16.6 12.1 8.7 320 PS5S30S*BZ 30 x 5 x 0.188 10/9.7-11.3 1 375 32.2 21.9 14.9 9.9 6.2 3.4 379 PS6S30S*BZ 30 x 6 x 0.188 11.5/11.3-12.8 1 525 50.8 35.7 25.3 17.9 12.4 8.2 457 Square Aluminum Poles PA3S10C_BZ 10 x 3 x 0.125 8 112 100 7.0 5.1 3.7 2.8 2.0 0.0 21 PA3S15C*BZ 15 x 3 x 0.125 8 112 70 2.4 1.3 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 31 PA4S15C*BZ 15 x 4 x 0.125 9.25 3/4 125 5.6 3.5 2.1 1.0 0.2 0.0 43 PA4S19D*BZ 19 x 4 x 0.250 9.25 3/4 175 8.5 5.7 3.6 2.1 1.0 0.1 95 PA5S25D*BZ 25 x 5 x 0.250 11.5 1 260 11.3 7.2 4.3 2.1 0.4 0.0 143 PA6S30D*BZ 30 x 6 x 0.250 13 1 323 11.7 6.8 3.2 0.5 0.0 0.0 210 Square aluminum poles do not include the Crown -Weld base. For poles over 30', see our Round Tapered Poles on page 157. NOTES: Specify direct mount pole configuration: 1 2 3 5 6 .�MI-0imor+ For fixtures with Fixed 20' Mount, add prefix "2" to configuration numbers (i.e. "21" "22" "23" "25" and "26"). EXAMPLE: PS6S3OS21BZ * Indicate T for tenon mount. (Order tenon separately) GFI Outlet Accessory (120V) The common sense design of this accessory allows for easy installation because the outlet is built right into a pole hand hole cover. No extra holes to drill, extra conduit to install or separate boxes to attach. And it is UL Listed in the U.S. and Canada for wet locations! Assembly is tightened down with two internal locking brackets. A gasketed, hinged cover is included. Order with your poles or retrofit an existing installation. GFI Outlet Order Information Catalog # REC-GFIBZ (For all poles except 5" & 6" Aluminum Poles) REC-GFI5&6ABZ (For 5' & 6" Aluminum Poles) 154 *These values must be multiplied by this ratio: Fixture Mounting Height Total Pole Height CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 (802) 846-4106 FAX (802) 846-4101 April 1, 2005 Laura O'Connor Windjammer 1076 Williston Road South Burlington, VT 05403 Re: Boundary Line Adjustment Dear Ms. O'Connor: Enclosed is the agenda for next Tuesday's Development Review Board meeting and staff comments to the Board. Please be sure that someone is at the meeting on Tuesday, April 5, 2005 at 7:30 p.m. at the City Hall Conference Room, 575 Dorset Street. If you have any questions, please give us a call. Sincerely, Betsy McDonough Administrative Assistant Encl. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONgNG 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 (802) 846-4106 FAX (802) 846-4101. Permit Number SD- 05 - � / APPLICATION FOR SUBDIVISION SKETCH PLAN REVIEW All information requested on this application must be completed in full. Failure to provide the requested information either on this application form or on the plans will result in your application being rejected and a delay in the review before the Development Review Board. For amendments, please provide pertinent information only. 1) OWNER OF RECORD (Name as shown on deed, mailing address. phone and fax 4) 2) LOCATION OF LAST RECORDED DEED (Book and page #) Vo�.o, , ke 52,5 ►�Q� _ z.3 -2:,FS ')APPLICANT (Name, mailing address, phone and fax #) Wr'e—� , , SC I AV e 7��NAI (f An"At) `"`� u-c-, Z-. r7 f /lo"-�� _ t � cz.w- . 6, (A& \C, .. 1 9 n.5 L4 S57 _ P -x u-A --V ' �;4!a5-u5o 4) APPLICANT'S LEGAL INTEREST IN THE PROPERTY (fee simple, option, etc.) a - o ,e - .&- - --- 5) CONTACT ��PERSON (Name, mailing address, phon�and fax // 6) PROJECT STREET ADDRESS: /67L 7) TAX PARCEL ID # (can be obtained at Assessor's Office) 8) PROJECT DESCRIPTION a) Existing Uses on Property (including description and size of each separate use) 177,E b) Proposed Uses on property (include description and size of each new use and existing uses to remain) c) Total building square footage on property (proposed buildings and existing buildings to remain) ZZ.Z S d) Proposed height of building (if applicable) //o (fxG�,Q -95t F! e) Number of residential units (if applicable, new units and existing units to remain) f) Other (list any other information pertinent to this application not specifically requested above, please note if Overlay Districts are applicable) Qju 9) LOT COVERAGE a) Building: Existing_!, $�j % Proposed 1 B�j % b) Overall (building, parking, outside storage, etc) Existing 11,14- % Proposed % c) Front yard (along each street) Existing / j $ % Proposed /y. / % 10) TYPE OF EXISTING OR PROPOSED ENCUMBRANCES ON PROPERTY (easements, covenants, leases, rights of way, etc.) .ds 11) PROPOSED EXTENSION, RELOCATION, OR MODIFICATION OF MUNICIPAL FACILITIES (sanitary sewer, water supply, streets, storm drainage, etc.)_�G _ 12) OWNERS OF RECORD OF ALL CONTIGUOUS PROPERTIES & MAILING ADDRESSES (this may be provided on a separate attached sheet) 0) ESTIMATED PROJECT COMPLETION DATE ,rA-1.c_ �Zo 14) PLANS AND FEE Plat plans shall be submitted which shows the information listed on Exhibit A attached. Five (5) regular size copies and one reduced copy (I 1" x 17") of the plans must be submitted. A sketch subdivision application fee is $125. 2 I hereby certify that all the information requested as part of this application has been submitted and is accurate to the best of my knowled vlr— SIGNATZY,E OF APP CANT (7 �OFGN T�PO�PERTY OWNER Do not write below this line DATE OF SUBMISSION: I have reviewed this sketch plan application and find it to be: Complete ❑ Incomplete ctor of Planning & Zoning or Designee ,� P 3,- - * " ATTACHED TO CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON Subdivision Application — SKETCH PLAN Windjammer Hospitality Group LLC Precourt Investment Company LLC 8 (b) The co -applicants propose a boundary line adjustment, merging a 15'x15' section of Precourt Investment Company LLC (PIC) property into the Windjammer parcel. The second portion is the rework of the existing roadway into the Windjammer to allow better access to Precourt Investment Company parcels. No other changes are proposed for the Windjammer Hospitality parcel. 12) Champlain School Apt. Partnership 410 Shelburne Road South Burlington, VT 05403 (1068 Williston Road) Fank J. and Anna G. Cota 397 Patchen Road South Burlington, VT 05403 (397 & 401 Patchen Road) Francis E. Quigley 353 Patchen Road, #1 South Burlington, VT 05403 David Burns 353 Patchen Road, 43 South Burlington, VT Robert A. & Linda Graham 361 Patchen Road South Burlington, VT 05403 Susan Heiser 339 Patchen Road South Burlington, VT 05403 Shannon K. Sheehan 353 Patchen Road, #2 South Burlington, VT 05403 Rexbo Development, Inc. Box 760 05403 Greenfield, MA 01302 (1143 Williston Road) Russell Todd 353 Patchen Road, #4 South Burlington, VT 05403 Larkin Tarrant HoeHL Partnership 410 Shelburne Road South Burlington, VT 05403 (5 Dorset Street) Geoffrey & Arlene Bricknell 355 Patchen Road, #5 South Burlington, VT 05403 Liam McCaffrey Meghan Fay 355 Patchen Road, #7 South Burlington, VT 05403 Adam Quick 355 Patchen Road, #8 South Burlington, VT 05403 Champlain Oil Co., Inc. PO Box 2126 South Burlington, VT 05407-2126 (1055 Williston Road) Charles N. and Janet B. Perkins 80 South Cove Road Burlington, VT 05401 (1087 Williston Road) Lodging North, Inc. Gary N. Farrell 870 Williston Road South Burlington, VT 05403 (1117 Williston Road) Toni Lisman 32 Larch Road South Burlington, VT 05403 Gregory Sinclair 36 Larch Road South Burlington, VT 05403 James Boyd 355 Patchen Road, #6 South Burlington, VT 05403 Wesco, Inc. PO Box 2287 South Burlington, VT 05407-2287 (1108 & 1118 Williston Road) Kenneth A. Kero 1128 Williston Road South Burlington, VT 05403 Arthur C. Toutant, Trustee 1398 Hinesburg Road South Burlington, VT 05403 (1140-1142 Williston Road) State of Vermont Vermont Agency of Transportation Attn: Scott Whiffed, Esq. 133 State Street Montpelier, VT 05633-0001 Windjammer Hospitality Group LLC 1076 Williston Road South Burlington, VT 05403 Carolyn Leavitt 34 Larch Road South Burlington, VT 05403 Jack Russell Jack Associates 1161 Williston Road South Burlington, VT 05403 ENTRY ORDER V7. SUPPF-ME 00UPT SLED N CLERK'S OFFIC ; SUPREME COURT DOCKET NO. 00-446 APR 1 1 2001 MARCH TERM, 2001 hi re Appeal of Windjammer Hospitality APPEALED FROM: Environmental Court DOCKET NO. 137-8-99 Vtec Trial Judge: Meredith Wright In the above -entitled cause, the Clerk will enter: Appellant Windjammer Hospitality Group (Windjammer) appeals from a decision of the Environmental Court which held that split lots must conform to the minimum lot frontage requirements required for each district in which they are located. On appeal, Windjammer contends that a split lot, one that lies in more than one zoning district, conforms to the applicable zoning bylaws as long as it maintains minimum lot frontage on one street. We affirm. This case arises out of the City of South Burlington's denial of Windjammer's application to subdivide a 54-acre parcel which it currently leases, with a purchase option, from owner Evelyn Lamplough. Windjammer owns and operates Windjammer Best Western Inn and Conference Center, and Windjammer Restaurant, on the leased property. Approximately one acre of the leased property maybe subject to a neighboring property owner's right of first refusal, which has prevented Windjammer from exercising its purchase option. To address this concern, Windjammer and Ms. Lamplough submitted an application to the South Burlington Planning Commission seeking to subdivide the leased property. Proposed lot 1, consisting of a 1.47 acre lot, includes that portion of the leased property which is subject to the right of first refusal. Proposed lot 2, a 52.876 acre lot, encompasses all of the buildings and improvements associated with Windjammer's business, as well as vacant land. As proposed, the subdivision would enable Windjammer to purchase all of proposed lot 2 without triggering the right of first refusal. Windjammer would continue to lease lot 1. The leased property is located in two zoning districts: the southern half of the parcel, including two segments with frontage on Williston Road and all of the land occupied by the motel, conference center and restaurant buildings, is located in the commercial zoning district (C-1); the northern, unimproved portion of the parcel, with frontage on Patchen Road, is located in the residential zoning district (R-4). Both Williston and Patchen Roads are classified as "arterial or collector" streets under the City's zoning regulations for the purpose of measuring minimum lot frontage. The minimum lot frontage on "arterial or collector" streets is 200 feet in the C-1 district, and 100 or 170 feet in the R-4 district, depending on use. Under the proposed subdivision, lot 1 would fall entirely in the C-1 district, and would include a 234.57-foot segment of Williston Road frontage; lot 2 would fall in both districts, and include the entire 26L')I-foot Patchen Road frontage, but only a 50-foot segment of Williston Road frontage. The minimum frontage required for lot 2 in the C-1 zoning district on Williston Road, however, is 200 feet. Additionally, "[h]otels, motels and restaurants are neither permitted nor conditional uses in the R-4 zoning district." The City of South Burlington Planning Commission denied the subdivision application on the ground that proposed lot 2 did not have sufficient frontage on Williston Road. Windjammer appealed the decision to the environmental court, claiming that proposed lot 2 met the minimum frontage lot requirement because it had sufficient frontage on Patchen Road, and did not need to meet the minimum frontage requirements on Williston Road as well. The environmental court granted the City's motion for summary judgment. In its decision, the environmental court first noted that, "if the proposed Lot 2 ... were solely in the C-1 district, or were split between districts allowing the use, as long as the frontage on one street is adequate, the lack of sufficient frontage on the other street would be no bar to approval of the subdivision."(Emphasis added). However, the court observed that as a "split lot,"§ 29.007 of the zoning bylaws was controlling. Section 29.007 states: Where a district boundary line divides a lot which was in a single ownership at the time of passage of these regulations, the Board of Adjustment may permit, as a conditional use, the extension of the regulations for either portion of the lot not to exceed fifty (50) feet beyond the district line into the remaining portion of the lot. City of South Burlington, Vt. Zoning Regulations art. XXIX, §29.007. The court held that "the necessary corollary of that provision is that, other than in such extension area, uses on a split lot must comply with the district requirements for the district they are in." The environmental court also based its decision on § 25.115 of the bylaws, which requires that "[n]o lot shall be so reduced in size that the lot size, frontage, coverage, setbacks, or other requirements of these regulations shall be smaller than herein prescribed for each district." (Emphasis added). The court found that the proposed subdivision would result in a violation of § 25.115 as "[i]t would reduce the lot size so that the frontage required for the commercial use in the C-1 district would be smaller than that prescribed for the C-1 district." On appeal, Windjammer contends that the environmental court erred as a matter of law in requiring the proposed subdivision to fulfill minimum lot frontage requirements on both Williston and Patchen Roads. Specifically, Windjammer claims that the environmental court "employed an overly narrow reading" of § 29.007, and asserts that but for the split -lot nature of proposed lot 2, it would satisfy the City's zoning bylaw frontage requirements. We use "the same standard as the trial court," and will affirm a summary judgment "if there are no genuine issues of material fact and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law." Granger v. Town of Woodford, 167 Vt. 610, 611, 708 A.2d 1345, 1346 (1998) (mem.); see also V.R.C.P. 56(c). We will defer to the environmental court's interpretation of a zoning ordinance unless the construction is clearly erroneous, arbitrary or capricious. In re Weeks, 167 Vt. 551, 554, 712 A.2d 907, 909 (1998). We agree with the trial court's interpretation of § 29.007. Appellant correctly notes that the environmental court construed § 29.007 to mean that uses on a split lot must comply with the zoning requirements for the district in which each portion of the split lot is located, but claims this is an "overly narrow reading" of the provision. In fact, the environmental court's interpretation is consistent with this Court's prior determination that split lot property which lies in two districts with differing use requirements must comply with the use provision in each. See McLaugh v. Town of Norwich. 140 Vt. 49, 54-55, 433 A.2d 319, 322 (1981). Thus, in McLaughry, where appellant's property was located in both a residential and a commercial zoning district, a denial of appellant's application to develop the property commercially was upheld where there was "no evidence to indicate that the property could not be used for two different purposes; that is, that part of it which lies within the business district could be used for business purposes, and that part of the property lying within the residential district could be used for residential purposes." Id. Appellants draw our attention to decisions in other jurisdictions which have allowed property owners to aggregate frontage from both zones in a split lot to meet the minimum frontage and lot size requirements for the zone in which improvements have been proposed. See, e.g., Tofias v. Butler, 523 N.E.2d 796, 799 (Mass.App.Ct. 1988) (landowner permitted to build structure on commercial portion of split lot using residential portion for purpose of calculating lot coverage requirements under zoning ordinance); Moore v. Town of Swampscott, 530 N.E.2d 808, 809 (Mass.App.Ct. 1988) (landowner permitted to use more restrictive zone of split lot to satisfy bylaw space and frontage requirements of less restrictive zone for purpose of building single family residence on combined parcel). In both of those cases, landowners were permitted to make a passive use of the more restricted zone to meet zoning requirements for active improvements planned for the less restricted portion of the lot. However, those cases are distinguishable from the instant case in that the landowners in both Tofias and Moore were attempting to aggregate parcels for a single, unified use of the land. See Tobias, 523 N.E.2d at 799 (noting underlying "desire to permit land owners to enjoy the use of their entire properties as single units"); Moore, 530 N.E.2d at 809 (permitting frontage in more restrictive district to meet bylaw requirements for a building in the less ID restricted district where neither lot alone is sufficient to meet zoning requirements in which they are located); see also Forest City. Inc. v. Payson, 239 A.2d 167, 169 (Me. 1968) (also noting desire to 3 permit use of split lot properties as single units). In contrast, Windjammer seeks to subdivide a split lot, which is currently in compliance with the City's bylaws, rendering one of the resulting lots noncompliant. Furthermore, a more recent decision by the Appeals Court of Massachusetts has held that "the use of land in another zoning district ... solely to meet dimensional requirements is considered a permissible abstract or passive use where ... it gppears both zoning districts permit the proposed active use." Boulter Bros. Const. Co. v. Zoning Bd. of Appeals of Norfolk, 697 N.E.2d 997, 999 (Mass.App.Ct.1998) (emphasis added). Consistent with our holding in McLaughrv, Boulter requires that the use within each zone remain in conformity with that district's use requirement. In response to the environmental court's holding under § 25.115, appellant contends that that section constitutes a general provision of the zoning bylaws, and "does not impose any special requirement upon split lots." Appellant therefore claims that § 29.007, because it applies specifically to split lots, is controlling. See Rutland v. Keiffer, 124 Vt. 357, 362, 205 A.2d 400, 403 (1964) (special provisions control over general provisions in construing zoning ordinances). Appellant is correct in asserting that § 25.115 does not impose specific requirements on split lots; on the contrary, it applies to all lots. Section 25.115 prohibits the reduction of any lot area that would result in a reduction in the minimum dimensional requirements "prescribed for each district," and thus provides an additional basis supporting the denial of appellants' subdivision application. Affirmed. CT Publish 13 Do Not Publish BY THE COURT: 4 CITE" OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPAirrM[ENT OF PI.AidNING chi ZONING 575 DORSET STREET 701711 I BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 (802) 846-4106 FAX (802) 846-4101 January 23, 2001 Dennis Webster Wiemann - Lamphere Architects 245 South Park Drive Colchester, VT 05446 Re: Additions, 1076 Williston Road Dear Mr. Webster: Enclosed please find a copy of the Findings of Fact and Decision on the above referenced matter issued on 1/22/01. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely; Ra mond J. Belair, Administrative Officer RJB/mcp DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD 6 FEBRUARY 20V`1 The South Burlington Development Review Board held a regular meeting on Tuesday, 6 February 2001, at 7:30 p.m., in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset St. Members Present: J. Dinklage, Chair; J. Cameron, G. Chamberland, M. Boucher Also Present: R. Belair, Administrative Officer; N. Loller, J. Zaetz, M. Paige, B. Dion, D. Burke, M. Beaudin, M. Chaffee, L. Hayes, B. Cassidy, E. Woodbury, V. Webster, M. Gawrych, C. Bolton, D. & C. Anderson, M. Connolly, R. Becker, F. Guillot, P. Mahoney, A. Merchant, M. Connolley, E. & A. Beaudoin, R. LaBounty, L. & S. McClellan, T. Dunn, J. Prinz 1. Other Business: Mr. Belair advised that the applicant in Item #11 has asked for a postponement until 20 March. Mr. Boucher moved to continue the hearing for Item 411 on the agenda until 20 March 2001. Mr. Chamberland seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Mr. Dinklage acknowledged receipt of a letter from the Georgetown Project regarding the proposed project of Leo and Daniel O'Brien. The letter includes recommendations from a meeting held between the developers and the Georgetown Homeowners Association. 2. Minutes of 7 November 2000 and 16 January 2001: Mr. Boucher moved to approve the Minutes of 7 November as written. Mr. Cameron seconded. Motion passed unanimously. The Minutes of 16 January could not be voted upon, as a majority of those attending the meeting was not present. 3. Report on a recent site plan decision issued by the Administrative Officer: a. Site plan application #SP-01-03 of Tygate Companies to amend a previously approved plan for a 176 room motel and 250 seat restaurant. The amendment consists of a new motel lobby, a drive through canopy, and a new pedestrian canopy, 1076 Williston Rd. Approved. No issues were raised. 4. Consent Agenda: SITE PLAN APPLICATION TO BE REVIEWED BY THE SOUTH BURLINGTON ADMINISTP..ATIVE OFFICER The following site plan application will be reviewed by the South Buy lington Director of Planning and Zoning as authorized under Section 26.10 of the South Burlington Zoning Regulations. The Director shall issue a decision no sooner than two (2) days from the date of this notice. A decision of the Director may be appealed by an interested party to the Development Review Board within 15 days of the Director's decision. Notice of an appeal shall comply with the provisions of 24 VSA, Section 4465. 1. Site plan application #SP-01-03 of Tygate Companies to amend a previously approved plan for a 176 room motel and 250 seat restaurant. The amendment consists of a new motel lobby, a drive through canopy and a new pedestrian canopy, 1076 Williston Road. Site plan applications may be reviewed at the Planning Department offices, 575 Dorset Street, South Burlington, Vermont 05403 aavaoi araaw was - - - mw alaMO aUall we - - alloomwal [— r tim NuAffe MIM J� wanaaM Ww"m wan' L ow lip �IaarO1 >1imm DOIOI arum* wu F Z Q a . �� r� �1 A �.�aoo A 14V IV H _ I J BIKE RA�K // 3 RAMSEY p EXISTING ADDITIONAL PAVING = 1296 SF HOTEL ADDITION! = SF \\ j ENCLOSED SACPACE:+ 1188 SF; CD NEW L BY OF,COVE RE SPACE/T H.C. P�RKIIJNQ EXISTING NEW 70py a, pa RESTAURANT ® h I 5 EXISTING �� W w GULF ❑IL P^ �� HOTEL w W F-+ RELOCATED GROUNDS/STORAGE C) p BUILDING EXISTING /CANOPES (� Q o HOTEL / ADDITION = 880 SF CILLEY `,, OF C SPACE i 176 MOTEL ROOMS _ 250 SEAT RESTAURANT � 1500 SF FOR PATRON USE alvm W. 100 LOT AREA — 57,552 A OR 2, T❑UTANT T �' aHW IrtLE � I it PROJECT ILOT COVERAGE OVERALL NORTH BUILDING, 46,297 SF — 1,85% SITE LANDSCAPE; 88,1% PLAN PARKING, BUILDING, STORAGE XISTING UTILITY KE SA-1 nnnm�. IIVHIL\HULULdU ur-dwinys ALonstruot ion orawingS\SA-1 SlIE ARCHITECTURAL -I IX 17. dwg Mon Jan 15 10:22:13 2001 WIEMANN - LAMPHERE ARCHITECTS .# �f- (, �- G/� CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON APPLICATION FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW All information requested on this application must be completed in full. Failure to provide the requested information either on this application form or on the site plan will result in your application being rejected and a delay in the review before the Development Review Board. 2) APPLICANT (Ngrrp,,mailjng address,,phone and f* #) ,3„�� ,AT,,�� IL�'IA%7Vit1L�I/ �i1��/l��►tl i� f1 �Vir167�1�IJ.iJNI/C�,�1'I� l�ir��f�/I s.;I*I'L / I' / 3) CONTACT PERSON (Name, mailing address, phone and fax #) ,T,T PDRTES .4 LIM 5) TAX MAP NUMBER (can be obtained at Assessor's Office) _ 6) PROJE ESCRIPTI N ,p) gxistingMses on Property (in�plud)ng,description)and size of use) b) Proposed Uses on pro erty (r•I de descri ti®n and i e of each new use and existing uses to remain) , % ti c) Total building square fop tage on prop" (proposed buildings and existing uildi s to remain) d) Height of building & number of floors (proposed 4uildings anq existing b ildifigs to remain, specify if basement and mezzanine) VAe a -�, I azinLd 61 V/,C; 04A- e) Number of residential units (if applicable, new units and existing units to remain) f) Number of employees (existing and proposed): 112i g) Other (list any other information pertinent to this application not specifically requested above): 7) LOT COVERAGE a) Building: Existing % Proposed % b) Overall (building, parking, outside storage, etc)� Existing ono Proposed ! �. % c) Front yard (along each street) Existing _�_ % Proposed �_ % 3) COS7 ES71MATES a) !uilding, $ _ b) Landscaping: $ c) Other site iin provernents (please lost ith cost)o 9) ESTWATE-D TRAFFIC a a) Average dailap �trac for entire property (in and out) b) .A.M. Peak hour for gntireproperty (in and out): c) P.M. Peak hour for antire property (In and out): 10) PEAK HOURS OF OPERATnN: I i) PEAK DAYS OF OPERA°I 90N: 12) ESTIMATED PROJECT COMPLETnN DATE: a �` i 13) SITE PLAN A, ND FEE A site plan shall be s ubmitted which shows the information listed on Exhibit A attached. rive (5) regular size copies and one reduced copy (11" x 17") of the site plan must be submitted. A site plan application fee shall be paid to the City at the time of submitting the site plan application (see Exhibit A). I hereby certify that all the information requested �s part of this application has been submitted and is accurate to the b t of my knowledge. I A U E CIF A L CANT SIGNATURE OF PROPERTY OWNER Do not write below this line DATE OF SUBMISSION: A 1 /'01 REVIEW AUTHORITY-. � Development Review Board I have reviewed this site plan application and find it to be - (Apfrmsp) El Director, Planning & Zoning Complete Incomplete Director of Planning & Zoning or Designee Date SITE PLAN APPLICATION TO BE REVIEWED BY THE SOUTH BURLINGTON ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER The following site plan application will be reviewed by the South Bu; lington Director of Planning and Zoning as authorized under Section 26.10 of the South Burlington Zoning Regulations. The Director shall issue a decision no sooner than two (2) days from the date of this notice. A decision of the Director may be appealed by an interested party to the Development Review Board within 15 days of the Director's decision. Notice of an appeal shall comply with the provisions of 24 VSA, Section 4465. 1. Site plan application #SP-01-03 of Tygate Companies to amend a previously approved plan for a 176 room motel and 250 seat restaurant. The amendment consists of a new motel lobby, a drive through canopy and a new pedestrian canopy, 1076 Williston Road. Site plan applications may be reviewed at the Planning Department offices, 575 Dorset Street, South Burlington, Vermont 05403 IVED MAY 2 3 2000. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON APPLICATION FOR Jo. Eurli L-on SITE PLAN REVIEW All information requested on this application must be completed in full. Failure to provide the requested information either on this application form or on the site plan will result in your application being rejected and a delay in the review before the Development Review 'Board. a) OWNED OF,,,REOOgp (dame as shown on deed, mailing address, phone and fax #) 2) 3) 1CON7ACT 4) PROJECT ST phone a (dame, mailing address, phone and fax #) S) TAX MAP NUMBER (can be obtained at Assessor's Office) Ott 19 0 6) PROJECT DESORIPTIO a) is sang U son Prope (inclu iM de cri tion and size of ach separate use) b) Proposed Uses (in iud escriptic and size each ne use and existing uses to remain) LVAA2 �lt��if If �] { , � 111� �, % '(1yl% c) Totail bu'I ing square fo tage (propose buildi gs and existin buildings to remain) d) Height of building & number of floors (proposed buildings and existing b�y� iildi s to r�errain, specify if basement Ind mezzaninq) . A � I a U 40,rA a) Nu m e4 of residentiai units (if applicable, new units and existing units to remain) Ak- n 'Number of employees (existing and proposed): g) Other (list any other information pertinent to this application not specifically requested above): 7) LOT COVERAGE a) Building: Existing % Proposed % b) Overall (building, parking, ou side storage, etc) Existing % Proposed % c) Front yard (along each street) Existing % Proposed �_ % 8) COST ESTIMATES a) Building: $ _ 0 b) Landscaping: $ V c) Other site improvements (please list with cast): 9) ESTIMATED TRAFFIC a) :Average daily traffic (in and out): L�6/ b) A.M. Peak hour (in and out): c) P.M. Peak hour (In and out): 10) PEAK HOURS OF OPERATION: 11) PEAK DAYS OF OPERATION: 12) ESTIMATED PROJECT COMPLETION DATE: 13) SITE PLAN AND FEE hjAA2.Ll ODD A site plan shall be submitted which shows the information listed on Exhibit A attached. Five (5) regular size copies and one reduced copy (11" x 17") of the site plan must be submitted. A site plan application fee shall be paid to the City at the time of submitting the site plan application (see Exhibit A). I hereby certify that ail the information requested s part of this application has been submitted and is accurate to the -bast of my kno edge. SIGNATU OF A PLICANT SIGNATURE'. OF CO -APPLICANT Do not write below this line DATE OF SUBMISSION: REVIEW AUTHORITY: Development Review Board I have reviewed this site plan application and find it to be- 0 Complete 11 Director, Planning & Zoning ElIncomplete Director of Planning & Zoning or Designee Date (Apfrmsp) SITE PLAN APPLICATION TO BE REVIEWED BY THE SOUTH BURLINGTON DIRECTOR OF PLANNING & ZONING The following site plan application will be reviewed by the South Burlington Director of Planning and Zoning as authorized under Section 26.10 of the South Burlington Zoning Regulations. The Director shall issue a decision no sooner than two (2) days from the date of this notice. A decision of the Director may be appealed by an interested party to the Development Review Board within 15 days of the Director's decision. Notice of an appeal shall comply with the provisions of 24 VSA, Section 4465. 1. Site plan application #SP-00-27 of Tygate Companies to amend a previously approved plan for a 176 room motel and 250 seat restaurant. The amendment consists of a new motel lobby, a drive through canopy and a new pedestrian canopy, 1076 Williston Road. Site plan applications may be reviewed at the Planning Department offices, 575 Dorset Street, South Burlington, Vermont 05403 May 25, 2000 t 46e1 •sVw o A = s 8i M.OI L1.ZON V �LLnn ,8i-RLZ _ � i"nA al U p�p � /�yy��n { L U 0 y rn gJJY?pv � s � i 'afr• F �m Z to f Y 4 • �Zs• Rk1.� 4 0 �b Q O o 2 lip? 0 g > T� 4 gal 0 C Z 9 Z 4 R 011�1 � 0 51 Rod�� :a!1 '!Il 2S QN 9 ! S Six a 1• i {. ' W'� ..� 9 g $ R z b O ® © 4 © ® O Z [fill P�P fit I[I III peg sR`�! Z I 8 iR Aa g o Fr a M �( $ so 4ljg $- 4��j$sj ABPi$yj Q i>40001-9© 6 ll R� a 3 iii ppa J S ;} qQ asa Nf aA Pg� a� i S ti 5 UI�O C) SQS O Np _�VN �()iy ? °r0y ill}ff NV ¢$Ti d,'o yy 3f+xt R>�i 17 Q ZA 2A $3 $} H. Sg :Oc p z N m F a ^ �A> z m C:-O I m v �� >z jm AZ�; r � C or , � W F; m m r- Z Tpp� -� �P$S m m s 3 v =o z 11p 24 jS rf Y a s N O wil l '41 ga'l I y g S a 3� g 1, S F j_3 �3 D VERMONT SURVEY and ENGINEERING, INC. Surveyors and Civil Engineers — (802-229-9138) (FAX: 802-229-9130) 79 River Street #301 — Montpelier, Vermont 05502 7n�� o ©oo 0 00 00 00 0 w Ti 0z 0� �� JVJ a �� a it I3 a rn q }+A aPsR� R R 9 $_ yy if � ; ill ��S�! �p�� C% fitSir figo�- A =g Q 7Ry� � • 'f = sPi' D I Z R g A z P r 4 lit � � � °vr e�9 y S pia °a litr Z ° o a Elit P 4 r Ull •4• F vW R r�� v ' Qy 4661 '�aW a� y, i F �-11jA �o� imrn oZQ`>N{'r� CC,�A rJ, apt M�D Z Zm�cinH I HL� �vmmMo �zCc myy- M r.p �5m >ZDZ MR R nogg t*t m C z m z m gzim m gz a o K3 P� QyP yP 3�h P D4 S+ S fif F n11 1N lit +}!� .z.. if NQ rr Q Q 5> y D # z It I 41 i-'j ij It - Ir Z a a � g �' o p s gR� 3 >i �g �� r � pgea �" R �•� o�z- Aa 4 �: � P � �fx¢ �� s� �g1 S cc 3 g - rr }zg 1� iF� � r�91 VERMONT SURVEY and ENGINEERING, INC. Surveyors and Civil Engineers — (802-229-9138) (FAX: 802-229-9130) 79 River Street #301 — Montpelier, Vermont 05602 i� 0 r To �a wAlw "'� - - - \\ \� z a'ter m law RAMSEYEW i �ICIOSQD SPACE/+ 1188 SF� A �� OFF CONrRE<j SPACE V A MWIDNAL PAVING = 1296 SF 1 \ \ I � N7 AUTO CijoPY GULF OIL TE4 CROUN"RAGE--\ \� w " ADDITION SW SF \ \ \ w / OF SPACE CILLEY 177 MOTEL ROOMS 250 SEAT RESTAURANT �1500 SF FOR PATRON USE 'LOT AREA - 57.552 A OR 2,506,965 SF E ' TOUTANT o,. 4 ; �.-'" ' �L❑T COVERAGE F'RuuJECT NORTH BUILDING' 46,297 SF - 1.857 LANDSCAPE, 88.1% PARKING, BUILDING, STORAGES 287,168 SF - 11,46% oIwIM er: EXISTING UTILITY KEY SEWAGE TELEPHONE WATER ELECTRIC SITE DRAIN --- SITE f LAN 0 0 8 co x F a 0 SA-1 ._..■�ttttt RAMSEY EXISTING RESTAURANT \ _ GULF OIL L 4) L I if MUSK — g, - ® EXISTING HOTEL ADDITION OF CQ CILLEY TOUTANT jy. p' % PROJECT .,..� NORTH JAN/ �t o, Burling/on �a \ $IKE \ \ •ADDITIONAL PAVING = 1296 SF \ .O = SF OF '.NCL \ OSED SPACAC E + 1188 SF )F.COVERED SPACE H.C.PARKING - iN AUTO CANOPY /� "' �TED GROUN*/STORAGE—� � I = 880 SF SPACE / \ 176 MOTEL ROOMS 250 SEAT RESTAURANT 1500 SF FOR PATRON USE LOT AREA — 57.552 A OR 2.506,965 SF LOT COVERAGE BUILDINGI 46,297 SF — 1.85% LANDSCAPE, 88.1% PARKING, BUILDING, ST❑RAGEi 287,168 SF — 11.46% XISTING UTILITY KEY SEWAGE TELEPHONE WATER ELECTRIC SITE DRAIN — Sau E 1'-w DiAIM 07-01-0f DRAWN BY. Kwo CNF] M BY: ow PROJECT: 2000046 SHEET ME: OVERALL SITE PLAN OIYwNo N& SA-1 \2000046 TYGATE\Autocad Draw,,ys\Construction drawings\SA-1 SITE An .1ITECTURAL11X17-2.dwg Thu Jan 11 16:15:42 2001 WIEMANN - LAMPHERE ARCHITECTS 15.30't STALE OF NERMONT / ^" Oa 2�1•01^. a /n Z O J STATE OF VFINONT i8.82' MEAS. 68.57' REC. J N/F HARPER HDTEIS. INC. SK 73 PC 79 REC. \ AMP \©\ a 0 o Q by v ti \o )' FRONT Ah RACK O y4 ti }�Q O Q V IP �Q O 4` ° F 4i 146.57'- MEAS. 78.37' REC. 146.54' REC. N54'06'16"W - 55.20 EAS. 55.25' REC. N28'36146"E 150.79' MEA! 151.72' REC GRAPHIC SCALE 0 0 M C r r MATCH LINE NTH SHMT 2 OF 2 P O ZONING DISTRICT "RESIDENTIAL, 4 PER ACRE- (R4) cy rJ �� 0 ZONING DISTRICT 'COMMERCIAL 1" (CI) A X (INCLUDES PARCEL "C") SMF RELOCATED GARAGE IPF ' SS�4 GRAVEL`S e - / � - �PARK! IN S08'50'21"W 0) 423.07' MEAS 422.50' REC. AVEL PARKING a_ A0j/( N/F XS11N CORPORAnON BK 180 PC 151 Q IPF 7 VS24*04'25"W PARKING NOTE: 261 Standard Spaces 9 Handicap Space 19 Sp (est.) on 9-1 surface 289 Total Existing Spaces The zoning code requires 289 parking spaces. N/F CWILLARD BK 289 PG 542 1 N/F INNSON SK 126 PC 395 N19'13'11"W _-- 57.72' N14'38'24"E VICINITY MAP LEGEND o MMF MARBLE MONUMENT FOUND o CMF CONCRETE MONUMENT FOUND, 0 IPF IRON PIPE FOUND 0 SMF SURVEY MARKER FOUND -- • — x — x - FENCE LINE ooa0000�x oo STONEWALL PROPERTY LINE RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE EASEMENT LINE — ZONING SETBACK LINE 1 WOODS LINE 0 DECIDUOUS TREE EVERGREEN TREE SHRUB HYDRANT SIGN COMBINATION POLE ® SEWER MANHOLE ® DRAINAGE MANHOLE WATER SHUT OFF STREET LIGHT JAN UO of So. Burlington SURVEY DATA FROM INFORMATION PROVIDE BY VERMONT SURVEY & ENGINEERING, INC. DATED JANUARY, 1998. fill f pI gyp■p E SOME, 1/8'=V-0' DATE: 01 /10/01 DRAWN BY: JM CHECKED BY: D13W PROjwr-. 200046 SHI 1ME REVISED PARKING PLAN / THIS AREA ADDED 5/1 /9B BY --ANN-LAMPHERE ARCHITECTS FROM KREBS @ UNSING FINAL PUT FOR SUMMER WOODS DATED N83'07'29"W 2.20' N56'43'30W 19.14' N/F MATE PROPFRDIS N57'01'S0"E 6K 281 PC 522 2205' ...'i4 1 MILE VICINITY MAP MATCH UNE VNTH SHEET 1 OF 2 soN 396 NFNU / BK 126 PGGIII / LEGEND / 13 MMF o CMF ® IPF ® SMF rYIrYY 8 ff OO City of So. Burlingto , MARBLE MONUMENT FOUND CONCRETE MONUMENT FOUND IRON PIPE FOUND SURVEY MARKER FOUND FENCE LINE STONEWALL PROPERTY LINE RIGHT—OF—WAY LINE EASEMENT LINE ZONING SETBACK LINE WOODS LINE DECIDUOUS TREE EVERGREEN TREE SHRUB HYDRANT SIGN COMBINATION POLE SEWER MANHOLE DRAINAGE MANHOLE WATER SHUT OFF STREET LIGHT W Isl W AL� z z Q x Ai SCALE: 116• = 1 •-t CWTE: 01/10/01 ORNNN BY: JM CH CKM BY: Dew PRDJECr, 200046 GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET I inch = 100 ft. PLOT PLAN south PLANNING & ZONING September 21, 2010 George Roy Windjammer Inn & Conference Center 1076 Williston Road So. Burlington, VT 05403 Re: Escrow Agreement Release Dear Mr. Roy: Please be advised that the City of South Burlington hereby releases you from the obligation to maintain $5400 in an escrow account at the Merchants Bank for landscaping planted in 2007. Should you require further information, please let me know. Since I , R m nd J. Belair Administrative Officer 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 tel 802.846.4106 fax 802.846.4101 www.shuri.com SITE PLAN ESCROW AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, executed in triplicate by and between c.� ��l o , hereinafter referred to as "Developer", the CITY OF SQUTH B RLIN�GTON, hereinafter referred to as "Municipality", and the I1L�Yc� �ti,1=� �. �t y , hereinafter referred to as "Bank". WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, Developer has received site plan approval from the MUNICIPALITY'S Development Review Board for the development of property located atAC,.')j < A- as depicted on a site plan entitled '�Y>�rursn-nrt.� ,.tvo� Yt ted d and prepared by � WHEREAS, Developer is required by said approval, at its own expense, to complete certain improvements; and WHEREAS, the parties to this Agreement wish to establish an escrow account to secure the obligations of the Developer as set forth in the City approval; and WHEREAS, the Bank executes this Agreement solely in the capacity of escrow agent. follows: NOW THEREFORE, the parties hereby covenant and agree as 1. DEVELOPER will, at its own expense, complete the following construction as depicted and in accordance with the specifications set forth in said site plan and related documents: 2. The Developer shall com lete the improvements set forth in Paragraph one no later than 1 ` /, (; p 4, 3. DEVELOPER shall replace or repair any defective or improper work or materials which may be recognized within three (3) years after completion of the improvements set forth in Paragraph one. For the purpose of this Agreement "completion shall be deemed to have occurred when the MUNICIPALITY has inspected and approved the construction of all the improvements required by this Agreement and issued written notice to the DEVELOPER that the construction is complete. 4. For the guaranty of Developer's performance of all requirements herinabove set forth, and prior to the issuance of any zoning permit for TyAl'�4I C Ro(J-b-, , Developer and Bank agree that the surd)bf __;Cl�;( shall be set aside and held in escrow by the Bank and shall be available for payment to the Municipality in accordance with the terms herein set forth. 5. If the Municipality shall file with the Bank a statement that the Developer is in the judgement of Municipality in default under the terms of this Agreement, the Bank shall from time to time pay monies from said escrow fund to the Municipality, in amounts not to exceed a total enabling the Municipality to complete improvements and requirements set forth in this Agreement. 6. The Municipality will promptly submit to the Developer a copy of such statement as it files with the Bank. The consent of the developer to such payment by the Bank to the Municipality shall not be required. The Bank shall incur no liability to the Developer on account of making such payment to the Municipality , nor shall the Bank be required to inquire into the propriety of any claim by the Municipality of default on the part of the Developer or into the use of such funds by the Municipality in completing such improvements. 7. The Municipality shall not file with the Bank a statement of default until thirty (30) days after notice has been sent by it to the Developer by certified mail, return receipt requested, setting forth its intention to do so. 8. All monies released by the Bank to the Municipality pursuant to paragraph five (5) shall be used by the Municipality solely for the purpose of performing obligations imposed upon the Developer by that portion of this Agreement upon which the Developer is then in default. Any work to be performed by the Municipality pursuant hereto shall be let on a contractual basis, or on a time and material basis or shall be performed by the Municipality with its own work force and equipment or shall be accomplished in such a manner as in the judgement of the Municipality shall accomplish the work most expeditiously and economically. 9. If monies are released by the Bank to the Municipality pursuant to paragraph five (5) and it shall later develop that a portion of the released monies are surplus to the Municipality's needs, any such surplus shall be refunded by the Municipality to the Bank to be held and distributed by the Bank pursuant to the terms of this Agreement. 10. The Bank will not refuse or delay to make such payments to the Municipality when requested by the Municipality by the appropriate statement, and Developer will not interfere with or hinder such payments by the Bank to the Municipality. Said statement shall contain a certificate of compliance with the notice requirements of paragraph seven (7) of this agreement. 11. This agreement shall terminate and shall be of no force or effect upon performance of all requirements contemplated hereby, and the completion of the warranty period set forth in paragraph three (3). 12.The sum of Q shall be maintained in escrow until certification to the Bank by the Municipality of the completion of the warranty period set forth in paragraph three (3). 13. This agreement shall not only be binding upon the parties hereto, but also their respective heirs, executers, administrators, successors, and assigns. Da thy of Witness 1� .1 - . v--,xm By: a¢�� Wit ess Du y Authorized Agent (DEVELOPER'S NAME) 'LI614- 1Tj-ZaZAj- �m Dated at ;cw v, 0)%24 lU ll lun , vT this day of IVY �. Witness By: _ 4irtAne$�� Duly Authorized Agent CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON Diehat JOt 1i f0�1— this day of_ ZOO Witness 74 Witness , By: l , :� D- (it-Z'Z),J-el� Duly Authorized Agent (NAME OF BANK -- 3`' PARTY) �ICKC'�ilCr 6[Utk STITZEL, PAGE & FLETCHER, P.C. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 171 BATTERY STREET P.O. BOX 1507 BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05402-1507 (802) 660-2555 (VOICE/TDD) STEVEN F. STITZEL FAX,(802) 660-2552 or 660-91 19 PATTI R. PAGE* E-MAIL (FIRM2555@FIRMSPF.COM) ROBERT E. FLETCHER WRITER'S E-MAIL (JMCLEAN@FIRMSPF.COM) ('ALSO ADMITTED IN N Y.) WRITER'S FAX (802) 660-2552 December 6, 2000 Martha Hicks -Robinson, Clerk Vermont Supreme Court 109 State Street Montpelier, VT 056029-0801 RE: Appeal of Windjammer Hospitality Group Docket No. 2000-446 Dear Ms. Hicks -Robinson: JOSEPH S. McLEAN TIMOTHY M. EUSTACE MIA KARVONIDES AMANDA S.E. LAFFERTY Enclosed for filing with the Court is one (1) original and eleven (11) copies of the City of South Burlington's Brief in connection with the above -referenced matter. By copy of this letter I am also forwarding two (2) copies of the City's Brief to Eric Knudsen, Esq. attorney for Appellants. If you should have any questions, please call. JSM/bjl Enclosure cc: Raymond J. Belair Eric Knudsen, Esq. son4485.cor Thank you. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF VERMONT DOCKET NO. 2000-446 IN RE: APPEAL OF WINDJAMMER HOSPITALITY GROUP Appeal from the Vermont Environmental Court Docket No. 137-8-99 Vtec BRIEF OF APPELLEE Joseph S. McLean, Esq. Stitzel, Page & Fletcher, P.C. 171 Battery Street P.O. Box 1507 Burlington, VT 05402-1507 (802) 660-2555 Attorneys for the City of South Burlington TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF AUTHORITIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . STATEMENT OF THE CASE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 ARGUMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 A. Standard of Review . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 B. The Environmental Court Correctly Determined that Uses On a Split Lot Must Comply with the District Requirements for the District In Which They Are Located . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 i. The Plain Language of the Zoning Regulations Supports the Environmental Court's Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 ii. The Environmental Court's Conclusion that g25.115 of the Zoning Regulations Prohibits Appellant's Proposed Subdivision is Not Clearly Erroneous, Arbitrary or Capricious . . . . . . . . . . . 12 CONCLUSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 i TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Cases In re Sardi, Vermont Supreme Court Docket No. 99-069 (March 17, 2000) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 In re Greer. Vermont Supreme Court Docket #98-508 (October 21, 1999) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Badger v. Town of Ferrisburah, 168 Vt. 37 (1998) . . . . . . . 3 Appeal of Weeks, 167 Vt. 551 (1998) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,4 Boulter Brothers Contruction Company, Inc. v. Zoning Board of Appeal of Norfolk, 697N.E.2d 997 (Mass. App. Ct. 1998) . . . . 9 Bisson v. Ward, 160 Vt. 343 (1993) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Robes v. Town of Hartford, 161 Vt. 187 (1993) . . . . . . . . 15 In re McCormick Management Co., 149 Vt. 585 (1988) . . . . . 11 Tofias v. Butler, 523 N.E.2d 796 (Mass. App. Ct. 1988) 7,9,10 Moore v. Swapscott, 530 N.E.2d 809 (Mass. App. Ct. 1988) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7, 9, 10 McLaughry v. Town of Norwich, 140 Vt. 49 (1981) . . . . . . . . 7 Lomberg v. Crowley, 138 Vt. 420 (1980) . . . . . . . . . . . 13 City of Rutland v. Keiffer, 124 Vt. 357 (1964) . . . . . . 13,16 Other Authorities Anderson's American Law of Zoning (4" ed. 1996) . . . . . . . 6 ii STATEMENT OF THE CASE For the purposes of this appeal, the Appellee, City of South Burlington, accepts the Statement of the Case contained in Appellant's Brief, except as specified herein. 1 STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES I. Was the Environmental Court's construction of the City's Zoning Regulations, as applied to Appellant's proposal, clearly erroneous, arbitrary or capricious? r ARGUMENT I. The Environmental Court's construction of the City's Zoning Regulations, as applied to Appellant's proposal, was not clearly erroneous, arbitrary or capricious, and should be upheld by this Court. A. Standard of Review This is an appeal by Appellant, Windjammer Hospitality Group (hereinafter the "Appellant") from the Vermont Environmental Court's Decision and Order on Cross -Motions for Summary Judgment, filed September 11, 2000, granting summary judgment in favor of Appellee, the City of South Burlington (hereinafter the "City") and denying Appellant's Motion for Summary Judgment. The Environmental Court concluded that Appellant's application for preliminary plat approval to subdivide a parcel of land into two lots did not meet the standards for approval contained in the City of South Burlington Zoning Regulations. See Appellant's Printed Case, at 001-004. The City agrees. This Court's review of appeals of this nature is deferential. See In re Sardi, Vermont Supreme Court Docket No. 99-069 (March 17, 2000) (Entry Order) at ; Badger v. Town of Ferrisburgh, 168 Vt. 37, 39 (1998). Thus, it is bound by the Environmental Court's construction of the Zoning Regulations unless such construction is clearly erroneous, arbitrary or capricious. Id.; see also In re Gregoire, Vermont Supreme Court Docket No. 98-508 (Oct. 21, 1999), at ; Appeal of Weeks, 167 Vt. 551, 554 (1998). Furthermore, this Court, like the trial 3 court, must construe the Zoning Regulations according to general principles of statutory construction, adhering to the plain language thereof, and "always bearing in mind that the paramount function of the court is to give effect to the legislative intent." Weeks, 167 Vt. at 554. Given the above, the plain language of the Zoning Regulations, and the legal arguments contained herein, this Court should affirm the Environmental Court's grant of summary judgment in favor of the City. B. The Environmental Court Correctly Determined that Uses On a Split Lot Must Comply with the District Requirements for the District In Which They Are Located It is undisputed that the property at issue is a so-called "split lot" (i.e., a lot divided by a zoning district boundary), a portion of which is located in the City's Residential 4 (R-4) zoning district and the remainder of which is located in the Commercial 1 (C-1) zoning district. That portion of the property located in the C-1 district has frontage on Williston Road and is improved with a motel, conference center and restaurant, uses allowed in the district. See City's Printed Case, at 3. The R-4 portion of the property has frontage on Patchen Road and is unimproved. Under the City's Zoning Regulations, Article IX, §§9.10 and 9.20, most commercial and/or business uses, including hotel, motel and restaurant use, are prohibited in the R-4 district, see City's Printed Case, at 2, and each district is subject to separate and distinct area, density and dimensional requirements. See Appellant's Printed Case, at 070-075. At present, those portions of the property located in the 4 R-4 and C-1 districts, respectively, meet all area, density and dimensional requirements, including lot frontage, for those districts. However, under Appellant's subdivision proposal, the lot frontage dedicated to the existing commercial use in the C-1 district (i.e., the motel/conference center/restaurant use located on proposed Lot 2) would be reduced in size, resulting in a frontage along Williston Road that is smaller than that prescribed by the Zoning Regulations for commercial uses in the C-1 district. Appellant contends that such a reduction in required lot frontage is permissible under the Zoning Regulations, arguing that it is entitled to make "abstract" or "passive" use of the frontage located in the more restrictive, R- 4 district to compensate for any loss of frontage in the less restrictive, C-1 district. The Environmental Court, construing applicable provisions of the Zoning Regulations, disagreed, concluding that Appellant's proposal failed to meet the standards for approval under said Regulations. The City believes that the Environmental Court's construction of the applicable regulations was correct, and that Appellant has failed to demonstrate that said construction is clearly erroneous, arbitrary or capricious. Therefore, it should be affirmed by this Court. i. The Plain Language of the Zoning Regulations Supports the Environmental court's Conclusion The City of South Burlington Zoning Regulations, at §29.007, address the extension of uses on split lots. That provision provides in pertinent part that "[w]here a district boundary line 9 divides a lot which was in single ownership at the time of passage of these regulations, the Board of Adjustment may permit, as a conditional use, the extension of the regulations for either portion of the lot not to exceed fifty (50) feet beyond the district line into the remaining portion of the lot ." Communities commonly adopt such language to address issues related to split lots. See Anderson's American Law of Zoning (4th ed. 1996), at §9.12 ("such a provision permits relief without a showing of hardship [as required for a variance], but it minimizes the extent to which the boundaries of a district may be altered through administrative action. Under such an ordinance, the board ... has authority to protect adjoining owners by denying permission to extend a use into a more restricted area"). In its Decision and Order on Cross -Motions for Summary Judgment, the Environmental Court, construing §29.007, states that "§29.007 allows the regulations for either district to be extended up to fifty feet into the other portion of the lot, as a conditional use." This interpretation is consistent with the plain language of the Zoning Regulations and is not clearly erroneous, arbitrary or capricious. The Environmental Court goes on to observe that "[t]he necessary corollary of . . . [§29.007] is that, other than in such extension area, uses on a split lot must comply with the district requirements for the district they are in." See Appellant's Printed Case at 003 (citing McLaughry v. Town of Norwich, 140 Vt. 49, 54-55 (1981)). In the McLaughry case, supra, this Court upheld the trial court's conclusion that dividing a lot into two zoning districts was not per se unreasonable, absent evidence that the property "could not be used for two different purposes" and/or "would not promote the health, safety, convenience and general welfare of the inhabitants" of the municipality. McLaughry, 140 Vt. at 54- 55. No such evidence or argument regarding reasonable use was presented in this case. Accordingly, given the above, the Environmental Court logically inferred that, except in the manner and to the extent provided in §29.007, a proposed use or development located in more than one zoning district must meet the requirements for each district in which it is located. Appellant contends that "the Environmental Court employed an overly narrow reading of the provision [§29.007] and that the more reasoned interpretation would distinguish between the extension of active uses from one district to another and passive or abstract uses that extend beyond boundary lines." See Appellant's Brief, at 6. In support of its position, Appellant points to case names and cases from other jurisdictions' where courts, in addressing issues related to split lots, have apparently recognized an "active use/passive use" distinction to allow the so-called "passive" use of land in one district to be 1 Appellant relies primarily upon two Massachusetts Appeals Court cases, Tofias v. Butler, 523 N.E.2d 796 (Mass. App. Ct. 1988) and Moore v. Swapscott, 530 N.E.2d 809 (Mass. App. Ct. 1988). 11 used to meet dimensional requirements in an adjoining district. Appellant contends that the same analysis is appropriate here. The trial court, in its review of the parties' cross -motions for summary judgment, considered and properly rejected Appellant's invitation to read this distinction into the plain language of §29.007. Clearly, nothing in the language of §29.007, itself requires such a reading. Nor is there any other evidence of legislative intent to support this interpretation. Thus, the Environmental Court's construction of §29.007 cannot be said to be clearly erroneous, arbitrary or capricious. Furthermore, for the reasons discussed below, the cases cited by Appellant are inapposite in the context of this case, and the reasoning employed therein should not be adopted by this Court. First, the rule stated in the Massachusetts cases cited by Appellant is precluded by language of the Zoning Regulations, themselves. As noted above, Appellant's property currently exists as a single, split lot, which meets lot frontage requirements in both districts in which it is located. Under Appellant's proposal, proposed Lot 1 would meet frontage requirements on Williston Road; proposed Lot 2 would not. Section 25.115 of the Zoning Regulations provides that [n]o lot shall be so reduced in area that the ... frontage ... or other requirements of these regulations shall be smaller than herein prescribed for each district." Appellant's proposal violates §25.115, since it results in the creation of a lot fronting on 0 Williston Road that does not meet the applicable frontage requirement. Second, this case is factually distinguishable from both the Tofias and Moore cases, supra. As the Tofias court emphasizes, the decision in that case was "strengthened by the fact of the equivalence of the lot coverage percentages in the two districts." Here, however, the lot frontage requirements in the R-4 and C-1 districts are not equivalent and, unlike the situation in Moore (where a two family residential dwelling situated on a "single hybrid lot" was allowed to aggregate frontage from a portion of the lot that (apparently) only allowed single family residences as of right), the so-called "active uses" in this case (hotel/conference center/restaurant) stand in stark contrast to the mostly residential -compatible uses allowed in the R-4 district. Indeed, in this regard, the Appeals Court of Massachusetts has recently stated "it has been clear since at least 1988 that the use of land in another zoning district . . . solely to meet dimensional requirements is considered a permissible abstract or passive use where, as here, it appears both zoning districts permit the proposed active use, i.e., single family residential." See Boulter Brothers Construction Company, Inc. v. Zoning Board of Appeal of Norfolk, 697 N.E.2d 997, 999 (Mass. App. Ct. 1998) (emphasis added). There in no question that both zoning districts do not permit the proposed active use in this case. 9 Finally, in both the Tofias and Moore cases, the respective property owners proposed to merge separate, individually noncomplying lots -- portions of which extended over more than one zoning district -- to create a unified lot, and to utilize a portion of the unified lot located in the less restrictive district to meet dimensional requirements in the more restrictive district. See Tofias, 523 N.E.2d at 797; Moore, 530 N.E.2d at 809. The Tofias court saw this as appropriate (especially given an "equivalence" of uses and standards between districts) to strike a balance between "the ordinance's apparent recognition of the value of regular zone boundaries and a desire to permit land owners to enjoy the use of their entire properties as single units." See Tofias, 523 N.E.2d at 799 (emphasis added). Here, as noted above, the necessary "equivalence" between districts does not exist, and Appellant clearly does not seek to use its entire property as a single unit. In addition to the foregoing factors, there are other strong policy reasons why this Court should decline to apply the analysis of the Massachusetts court in this case. Perhaps the most significant of these is the impact of such an approach on the development potential of that portion of the lot from which the borrowing occurs. As the Tofias court clearly recognized, borrowing from one district to fill out dimensional requirements in another district may render that portion of the lot from which the borrowing occurs undevelopable. See Tofias 523 N.E. 2d at 800 ("to the extent required to satisfy the dimensional 10 requirements, such residential land cannot be subsequently built on or counted towards the lot coverage requirement of another structure, but rather must be left as open space"). In this case, a very substantial portion of proposed Lot 2 (containing approximately half its acreage) is located in the R-4 district, in which residential density is allowed at a density of four (4) units per acre. Appellant has approximately 260 feet of frontage along Patchen Road. However, if approximately 150 feet of road frontage on Patchen Road is used to satisfy frontage requirements on Williston Road, the R-4 portion of the property will be limited to no more than two (2) dwelling units based on the remaining 110 feet of Patchen Road frontage. See Appellant's Printed Case at 002, 071-72. Furthermore, given its proposed allocation of Patchen Road frontage to a commercial use in the C-1 district, Appellant could not subdivide along the zoning district boundary, since such action would result in the creation of a lot in the C-1 district that has only 50 feet of frontage on Williston Road. This Court has frequently observed that a goal of zoning is to gradually eliminate, and not to encourage or unnecessarily perpetuate, such noncompliance. See In re McCormick Management Co., 149 Vt. 585, 589 (1988). The rule advocated by Appellant virtually assures either future litigation involving the R-4 portion of the lot or the sanctioning of a noncomplying lot/structure. Given the above, this Court should refuse to adopt the reasoning of the Massachusetts court in connection with this matter, and reject 11 Appellant's argument that lot frontage located in the R-4 district may be "passively" used to meet minimum lot frontage requirements in the C1 district. Appellant has failed to demonstrate that the Environmental Court's plain language interpretation of §29.007 is clearly erroneous, arbitrary and capricious. That interpretation should be affirmed by this Court. ii. The Environmental Court's Conclusion that 5425.115 of the Zoning Regulations Prohibits Appellant's Proposed Subdivision is Not Clearly Erroneous, Arbitrary or Capricious As an alternative basis for its ruling in this case, the Environmental Court construed §25.115 of the Zoning Regulations to prohibit Appellant's project. That provision, captioned Reduction of Lot size, states that "[n]o lot shall be so reduced in size that the lot size, frontage, coverage, setbacks or other requirements of these regulations shall be smaller than herein prescribed for each district." Reading this language in connection with Appellant's proposal, the Environmental Court noted that [a]t the present time the parcel [proposed Lot 1] complies with the frontage requirements for each district [i.e., the R-4 and C-1 districts]. That is, the commercial uses are in the C-1 portion of the lot, and they have the required frontage in the C-1 district as well. Unless a variance can be obtained from this provision, the subdivision cannot be approved as proposed because it would violate §25.115. It would reduce the lot size so that the frontage required in the commercial district would be smaller than that prescribed for the C-1 district. 12 See Appellant's Printed Case at 003-004 (footnote omitted). Accordingly, the trial court properly concluded that Appellant's proposal failed to comply with the standards of the Zoning Regulations. In its brief, Appellant contends that the Environmental Court erred in its interpretation of §25.115. Specifically, Appellant points out that in construing a zoning ordinance, "special provisions relating to subjects will control over general provisions." Appellant's Brief at 10. On the basis of this widely accepted maxim, Appellant asserts that "§25.115 is a provision of general application, whereas section 29.007 of the Zoning Bylaw specifically governs split lots and their conformity to dimensional requirements." Id. Therefore, Appellant concludes that section 25.115 "does not impose any special requirements on split lots, which are expressly governed by section 29.007 of the Zoning Bylaw." Id. For the reasons discussed herein, the City disagrees. Both §29.007 and §25.115 are applicable to the property at issue in this case, and the trial court did not err in its construction of those provisions. First, with regard to the general rule of construction cited by Appellant, said rule is typically employed to resolve an obvious conflict between provisions of a statute or ordinance that relate to the same subject matter. See Bisson v. Ward, 160 Vt. 343, 349 (1993); Lomberg v. Crowley, 138 Vt. 420, 423 (1980). For example, in City of Rutland v. Keiffer, 124 Vt. 357 (1964), the case cited by Appellant, the relevant provisions of the 13 City's zoning ordinance contained conflicting language regarding the use of land for the purpose of renting space for "automobile house trailers." Id. at 361-62. The Court appropriately resolved the conflict by holding that the more specific provision controlled over the more general. Id. at 362. No such conflict exists between the bylaw provisions in this case. Instead, as discussed below, §§29.007 and 25.115 can each be applied, independently and without conflict, to the property at issue. By its plain language, §29.007 is a permissive provision applicable to split lots. It authorizes the Board of Adjustment to permit, as a conditional use, "the extension of the regulations for either portion of ... [a split] lot not to exceed fifty (50) feet beyond the district line into the remaining portion of the lot." See Appellant's Printed Case at 078. Clearly, this provision is intended to provide relief to the owners of split lots, allowing them to utilize property in an adjoining district (either "actively" or "passively") in a manner that might not otherwise be allowed under the regulations applicable to a particular district. As the Environmental Court correctly observes, however, the logical, negative implication of this language is that "other than in the extension area, uses on a split lot must comply with the district requirements for the district they are in." Id. at 003. Here, Appellant is permitted by §29.007 to use up to fifty feet of either the C-1 or R-4 districts to meet applicable bylaw requirements in the adjoining district. 14 By contrast, §25.115 is a prohibitory provision that applies to any lot, irrespective of whether it is split by a district boundary. That provision forbids any reduction in lot area (by way of subdivision or boundary line adjustment, for example) that correspondingly results in a reduction in the minimum dimensional requirements "prescribed for each district." Id. at 075. In this case, Appellant may subdivide its property in any appropriate manner (consistent with the City's Subdivision Regulations), provided that, in so doing, it does not create some aspect of noncompliance with the minimum dimensional requirements required for a district. There is no obvious conflict between this provision and §29.007 that would require this Court to apply one provision, and not the other. Accordingly, the Environmental Court correctly determined that both provisions are applicable to Appellant's proposal. Second, Appellant takes issue with the trial court's interpretation of the phrase "for each district" in §25.115, arguing that this language is only intended to "reflect the fact that dimensional requirements vary by zoning district" and that it is not intended to apply to split lots. See Appellant's Brief at 10. However, Appellant fails to demonstrate that the Environmental Court's interpretation of this language is clearly erroneous, arbitrary or capricious. It is well established that statutory or bylaw provisions that deal with aspects of the same subject must be viewed and construed in pari materia. See Robes v. Town of Hartford, 161 Vt. 15 187, 192 (1993) (provisions that are part of the same statutory scheme must be read in pari materia). Similarly, this Court has stated that legislative intent must control in determining the construction of statutes dealing with the same subject - matter. When two statutes deal with the same subject matter and one is general and the other is special, they must be read together and harmonized if possible to give effect to a consistent legislative policy. See City of Rutland v. Keiffer, 124 Vt. 357, 363 (1964). Sections 29.007 and 25.115 arguably deal with the same subject matter since the former applies to split lots and the latter to all lots, including split lots. Given the above, the Environmental Court properly construed §25.115 by reading it in pari materia with §29.007. Having already determined that, under §29.007, uses on a split lot must comply with the district requirements for the district in which they are located, it was logical for the trial court to further conclude that the "for each district" language of §25.115 prohibits a split lot from being reduced in size so as to create some aspect of noncompliance with the minimum dimensional (or other) requirements prescribed for each district. In other words, the trial court appropriately read §29.007 and §25.115 together to give effect to a consistent policy expressed through the bylaw: to wit, that with the exception of the 50-foot "extension area" between districts, any proposed use or development on a lot located in more than one zoning district must meet minimum dimensional requirements for the district in which it is located, 16 and (absent a variance) such minimum district specific requirements must be maintained. Appellant has not demonstrated that the Environmental Court's reading of the above -stated provisions is clearly erroneous, arbitrary and capricious. Therefore, its appeal should be denied, and the Environmental Court's ruling should be affirmed. CONCLUSION For all of the foregoing reasons, the City of South Burlington respectfully requests that this Court affirm the Environmental Court's September 11, 2000 Decision and Order on Cross -Motions for Summary Judgment. DATED at Burlington, Vermont, this --''day of December 2000. son744.1it CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON By: Stitzel, Page & Fletcher, P.C., Its %a4 neys eph S. McLean 17 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF VERMONT DOCKET NO. 2000-446 IN RE: APPEAL OF WINDJAMMER HOSPITALITY GROUP Appeal from the Vermont Environmental Court Docket No4 137-8-99 Vtec CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON'S PRINTED CASE Joseph S. McLean, Esq. Stitzel, Page & Fletcher, P.C. 171 Battery Street P.O. Box 1507 Burlington, VT 05402-1507 (802) 660-2555 Attorneys for the City of South Burlington CITY OF SOUTH ' BURLINGTON FITWT-lfl� ARTICLE IX RESIDENTIAL 4 DISTRICT (R4) 9.00 Purpose A Residential 4 District is hereby formed in order to encourage residential use at moderate densities that are compatible with existing neighborhoods and undeveloped land adjacent to those neighborhoods. Any uses not expressly permitted are prohibited, except those which are allowed as conditional uses. 9.10 Permitted Uses The following uses are permitted in the Residential 4 District. 9.101 Single, two and multi -family dwellings. 9.102 Accessory uses to the uses listed above including private garages and recreational facilities such as tennis courts and swimming pools. 9.20 Conditional Uses The following uses are allowed in the Residential 4 District as conditional uses subject to approval by the.Board of Adjustment in accordance with the provisions of Section 26.05. 9.201 Churches. Such facilities shall not be permitted on local streets within the R4 District. 9.202 Day care centers 9.203 Nursing and Convalescent Homes 9.204 Agriculture, horticulture, and forestry, including the keeping of cattle, horses, or other domestic farm animals, for personal use or commercial purposes. Minimum lot area shall be ten (10) acres. 9.205 Public utility substations and transmission lines. Review of these facilities shall include an evaluation of safety, aesthetics, noise and availability of alternate sites. 9.206 Municipal facilities 9.207 Accessory residential units 9.208 Congregate housing 9.209 Accessory uses to the uses listed above. 9.30 Area, Density, and Dimensional Requirements In the Residential 4 District all requirements of Article XXV governing lot size, density, frontage, and setbacks shall apply. 9.40 Planned Unit Developments Planned Unit Developments (PUD's) are hereby permitted in the R4 District in order to encourage innovation of design and layout of residential uses and limited non-residential uses. Accordingly, the modification of the South Burlington Zoning Regulations by the Planning Commission is permitted simultaneously with the approval of a subdivision plat subject to the conditions of Section 26.15 and this section. 9.401 Permitted uses shall be those uses set forth in Sections 9.101, 9.102 and 9.201 - 9.209. 9.402 Maximum density shall be the normal maximum for the R4 District as provided in Section 25.00. 9.403 All PUD's must connect to existing municipal water and sewer systems. 9.404 The following requirements of the zoning regulations may be modified in accordance with the conditions and objectives of this section: Sections 25.00 (but not overall maximum density or maximum lot coverage) and 25.109. 9.1 ARTICLE XII COMMERCIAL 1 DISTRICT (CI) 12.00 Purpose A Commercial 1 District is hereby formed in order to encourage the location of general retail and office uses in a manner that serves as or enhances a compact central business area. Other uses that would benefit from nearby access to a central business area including clustered residential development and small industrial employers, may be permitted if they do not interfere with accessibility and continuity of the commercial district. Large -lot retail uses, warehouses, major industrial employers, and incompatible industrial uses shall not be permitted. Planned Unit Developments are encouraged in order to coordinate traffic movements, promote mixed -use developments, provide shared parking opportunities, and to provide a potential location for high - traffic generating commercial uses. Any uses not expressly permitted are prohibited, except those which are allowed as conditional uses. 12.10 Permitted Uses The following uses are permitted in the Commercial 1 District. 12.101 General office 12.102 Medical office 12.103 Retail businesses, not including shopping centers, supermarkets, department stores and discount stores. 12.104 Hotels and motels 12.105 Standard restaurant, excluding fast food. 12.106 Service stations 12.107 Indoor theaters 12.108 Radio and television studios 12.109 Personal Service 12.110 Accessory uses to the uses listed above. 12.20 Conditional Uses The following uses are Permitted in the Commercial 1 District as conditional uses subject to approval by tree i3c;arii of Adjustment in accordance with the provisions of Section 26.05. 12.201 Taverns, night clubs and private clubs 12.202 Indoor and outdoor recreational facilities 12.203 Printing, bookbinding, publishing and engraving 12.204 Research and testing laboratories 12.205 Manufacturing and assembly from previously prepared materials and components 12.206 Public utility power generating plants, substations and transmission lines. Review of these facilities shall include an evaluation of safety, aesthetics, noise, and availability of alternate sites. 12.207 Federal, State and municipal facilities 12.208 Day care center 12.209 Rooming and boarding houses 12.210 Bed and breakfasts, tourist homes 12.211 Educational facilities, including offices, classrooms, and support services but excluding buildings for residential use. 12.212 Amusement arcades 12.213 Convenience store 12.214 Bakery and delicatessen restaurants 12.215 Bus terminal 12.216 Public and private parking facilities 12.217 Accessory uses to the uses listed above. 12.1 1230 Area, Density and Dimensional Requirements In the Commercial 1 District all requirements of Article XXV governing lot size, lot coverage, frontage, and setbacks shall apply. 12.40 Planned Unit Developments Planned Unit Developments (PUD's) are hereby permitted in the C 1 District in order to encourage innovation of design and layout, encourage more efficient use of land for commercial development, promote mixed -use development and shared parking opportunities, provide coordinated access to and from commercial developments via public roadways, and maintain service levels on public roadways with a minimum of publicly financed roadway improvements. Accordingly, the modification of the South Burlington Zoning Regulations by the Planning Commission is permitted simultaneously with the approval of a subdivision plat subject to the conditions of Section 26.15 and this section. 12.401 Permitted Uses (a) Those uses set forth in Sections 12.101 - 12.110 and 12.201 12.216. (b) Fast food restaurants (c) Banks with drive -through service (d) Supermarkets (e) Department and discount stores (1) Shopping Centers (g) Public parking facilities (h) Multi -family dwellings 12.402 Area, Density and Dimensional Requirements (a) Minimum area - 4 acres (b) Minimum frontage - 350 feet (c) Area and frontage requirements may be met by the consolidation of contiguous lots under separate ownership. Any requirements for shared access and/or parlang-must De secure/; by permanent legal agreements. (d) Construction of a new public street may serve as the minimum frontage requirements. (e) Maximum lot coverage shall be the normal maximum for the C 1 District. (1) Maximum density for residential uses shall be 7 units per acre. 12.403 Standards for Use of Public Roadways (a) The nearest signalized intersection or those intersections specified by the Planning Commission, shall have an overall level of service of "D" (as defined in Transportation and Traffic Engineering Handbook, ITE) or better, at the peak street hour, including the anticipated impact of the fully developed proposed PUD. In addition, the level of service of each through movement on the major roadway shall have a LOS "D" or better. (b) Entrances to PUD's shall be separated by a minimum distance of 400 feet either side of a public street. However, entrances to PUD's may be allowed on opposite sides of a public street if substantially aligned with each other. 12.2 oil ' r ' (c) Signalized entrances to PUD's shall be separated from signalized intersections (measured between the near edges of the driveway and intersection) based on the following projected street traffic volumes: Projected Peak Hour (vph per access lane) below 450 450-550 550-650 650-750 above 750 Volume Distance (feet) 300 350 400 450 500 (d) The location and design of project access shall address the following criteria: (i) Possible use of secondary streets for access. (u) Alignment of access points with existing intersections or curb cuts; consolidation of exiting curb cuts. (ii►) Provision of access to abutting properties. (iv) Safety of access location including consideration of sight distance and previous accident patterns. (v) Provision of deceleration, acceleration and/or left -turn stacking lanes. (vi) Provision of adequate curb radii to accommodate anticipated speed and type of vehicles. (e) Coincidence of peak hours of traffic on adjacent arterial/collector street with peak hours.of traffic generated by project should be minimized. 121.40A StanUJ&rI- fo_T i.a±-J i.�,ye'tarld PRIklng Design of internal circulation patterns and parking areas shall address the following criteria: (a) Distance between access points and parking areas shall be adequate to minimize blockage and to prevent back-ups onto the public street. (b) Parking areas shall provide convenient access to building entrances and shall minimize conflict between pedestrian and vehicle circulation. (c) Screening shall be provided where headlights from vehicles on site may be visible and project parallel to a public street. 12.405 Additional Standards All PUD's shall be serviced by municipal water and sewer. 12.406 Modification of Standards (a) Where limitations of a site may cause unusual hardship in complying with any of the standards provided in Sections 12.403 and 12.404, the Planning Commission may modify such standards as 12.3 GQOGG long as the general objectives of the PUD are met. (b) The following requirements of the zoning regulations may be modified in accordance with the conditions and objectives of this section: Section 25.00 (but not maximum density and maximum lot coverage) and Sections 25.101 through 25.109. 12.50 Automobile Sales Zone (Cl-Auto) Automobile sales and related service use shall be permitted as a conditional use in the portions of the C 1 District designated on the Zoning Map as C 1-Auto. This area is generally bounded to the south by Holmes Road, to the west by the western boundaries of 1185 - 1325 Shelburne Road and Fayette Drive, to the north by the northern boundary of the South Burlington Cemetery Property west of Shelburne Road and the northern boundary of 1030 Shelburne Road east of Shelburne Road, and to the east by the R4 District boundary north of Baldwin Avenue and the centerline of Shelburne Road south of Baldwin Avenue. The purpose of the CI -Auto zone is to recognize the existence of several automobile sales and service facilities in this area of the City and allow for their continued operation and improvement, while not detracting from the overall purpose of the C 1 District. 12.501 Permitted uses shall be those uses set forth in Sections 12.101 - 12.110. 12.502 Conditional uses shall be'those uses set forth in Sections 12.201 - 12.216, and automobile sales, including service and sale of related accessories. 12.503 Area, Density and Dimensional Requirements All provisions of Section 12.30 shall apply. 12.504 Planned Unit Developments Planned Unit Developments are hereby permitted in the C1-Auto zone. All provisions of Section 12.40 shall apply except as provided below: (a) Permitted Uses -- -- . ( . Those 11s set fo?*h_in sections 12.401(a)-(h). (n) Automobile sales, including service and sale of related accessories. J 12.4 STITZEL, PAGE & FLETCHER, P.C. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 171 BATTERY STREET P.O. BOX 1507 BURUNGTON, VERMONT 05402-1507 (802) 660-2555 (VOICE/TDD) STEVEN F. STITZEL FAX (802) 660-2552 or 660-9119 PAM R. PAGE' E-MAIL (FIRM2555@FIRMSPF.COM) ROBERT E. FLETCHER WRITER'S E-MAIL (JMCLEAN@FIRMSPF.COM) (*ALSO ADMI7fED IN N.Y.) WRITER'S FAX (802) 660-2552 November 3, 2000 Lee L. Suskin, Esq., Clerk Vermont Supreme Court 109 State Street Montpelier, VT 05609-0801 JOSEPH S. McLEAN TIMOTHY M. EUSTACE MIA KARVONIDES AMANDA S.E. LAFFERTY Re: Windjammer Hospitality Group v. City of South Burlington Supreme Court Docket No. 2000-446 Dear Lee: Enclosed for filing with regard to the above -captioned matter is the City of South Burlington' Docketing Statement. Thank you. JSM/jp Enclosure CC: Eric M. Knudsen, Esq. Charles Hafter Son4470.cor 4 STITZEL, PAGE & FLETCHER, P.C. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 171 BATTERY STREET P.O. BOX 1507 BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05402-1507 VERMONT SUPREME COURT WINDJAMMER HOSPITALITY ) GROUP ) Plaintiff/Appellant ) V. ) CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON ) Defendant/Appellee ) Appealed from: Vermont Environmental Court Docket No. 137-8-99Vtec Supreme Court Docket No. 2000-446 DOCKETING STATEMENT A. Court, Counsel 1) Trial Judge: Hon. Merideth Wright 2) Trial counsel for plaintiff/appellant: Eric M. Knudsen, Esq. 3) Trial counsel for defendant/appellee: Joseph S. McLean, Esq. 4) Counsel in Supreme Court for plaintiff/appellant: Eric M. Knudsen, Esq. 5) Counsel in Supreme Court for defendant/appellee: Joseph S. McLean, Esq. 6) Please list other parties and their counsel: None. 7) Date of decision being appealed: September 11, 2000 8) Date notice of appeal filed: October 3, 2000 B. Criminal Cases 1) Was defendant given a sentence of imprisonment? N/A 2) If so, what is the sentence? N/A 3) If so, has the sentence been stayed pending appeal? N/A 1 STITZEL, PAGE & FLETCHER, P.C. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 171 BATTERY STREET P.O. BOX 1507 BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05402-1507 4) If the sentence has not been stayed, when did the defendant begin service of the sentence? N/A 5) What penalty other than a sentence has been imposed? N/A Please describe: 6) Was trial counsel appointed or retained? N/A C. Brief Description of Nature of Case and Result Please see Appellant's Docketing Statement. D. Statement of Issues To Be Raised on Appeal The Environmental Court correctly determined that the City of South Burlington Zoning Bylaw requires proposed Lot 2 of Windjammer's subdivision application to have minimum lot frontage on both Williston Road and Patchen Road because it is a split lot located partly in a commercial zoning district with frontage on Williston Road and partly in a residential zoning district with frontage on Patchen Road. E. Photocopies of Documents to be Attached Was there a written decision? Yes F. Inventory of Hearings; Transcripts Ordered. None. Date of Length of Type of Reporter's name Transcript Date necss. hearing hearing hearing (or "TAPE") necessary transcript days/hours for appeal? ordered Does the appellee agree as to wlytch transcript(s) are essential for the appeal? Yes `,/ No If not, indicate name(s), date(s), and reports) of additional transcript(s) needed. G. Conference; Summary Disposition 1) Do you request a conference with a staff attorney to discuss either settlement or expedited resolution? (Most conferences are done by phone) Yes oNocircle 2 s I 2) Is this matter appropriate for expedited disposition by a three -justice panel pursuant to V.R.A.P. 33.1 and the criteria set forth in qV A.P. 33.2? yes O circle Please explain: The appeal before the Court is particular to the interpretation of the City of South Burlington Zoning Bylaw and does not involve the establishment of a new rule of law or involve a legal issue of substantial public interest. Submitted by: CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON Dated: vi Zla-0 By: Son739.1it STITZEL, PAGE & FLETCHER, P.C. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 171 BATTERY STREET P.O. BOX 1507 BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05402-1507 S. McLean STITZEL; PAGB--& FLETCHER, P.C. Attorneys for City of South Burlington 3 A OCT-05-2000 THIS 02:39 PM. 9TZEL PAGE FLETCHER PC FAX N0. 3f 102552 P. 01 STITZEI,, PAGE Fc;. FLETCHER, P.C. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 17I BATTERY SIRFIeT R0, BOX 1507 BURLINGTON, VI'RMONT 05102.1507 (NO2) $60-2555 (VGTCErrDI)) STISNEN F. S'I't7 A,t, FAX (802) 660.2552 Sa• 000-9119 JOSAI'i 15, MaLEAN PATri it, mr-* E-MAii, (FIRM2555Q?FIRMSPI'+,�pi� TIMOTHY M LWTAGE RODERT F. FLF. r(,` thil WRITER'S E-MAIL (1 k 4197'ACf:(81F1RMSPF.�1�1) MIA KARVONINIS MALSO ATA ITO iN N Y) WRrrLR'S FAX (902) 560-2552 AMANDA S,V, LAICCERTY FACSIMILE TRANSMI'I`l'AL SHEET Bate: October 5, 2000 Ray Betaur, Administrative Officer I "-}X: 846-4101 kL: In Re: Appeal of Windjammer Hospitality C1rrOLlp ()ocket No. 137-8-99 vtec Sender: Timothy Eustacc You should receive 4 page(s), including this cover sheet. If you dog not receive all die pages, please call (802) 660-2555 MESSAGE Transmitted herewith arc documents in connection with the above -referenced matter. Please call if you have Duty questions. Thank you. This 111-s u is intcndnd only rot the t,se Of the addressee a,td may eontnin infOmmtion thnl is privileged and oontidcntial. If yeu arc not tic Intwtded recipient, you are herehy notified that any d rsciiiju ion of this communication is mlictly prohibited. If,you have received this ennnnumcMiun in error, please notify us immediately by 10cphone (802-060-2555). I'lank you. 0 OCT-05-2000 THU 02:39 PM RTITZEI PACs. FLETCHER PC Fr1K NO. 8OP"02552 P, 02 LANGROCK SPErRRY & WOOL, LLP wDDLenIM fktter F, Tnn.anrk A r T O R N 8 Y S AT L A W I.'Ilrn MCI= 7.1111m Wtliiam B, Mtlit,, )t'. A I.itntced Linblliry Partnership Jalm.5 W.SwiIL Includine a 11roftmiany1 Corporation 16mRy J. Jciacl3n, Jahn F. Evcrr Swan M. Murrny John L, C ALu'r Maclwll L. r°uarl Kevin 1:. Novi rtank 1•I. L:mpwk r1,�h '�tohi t+en 1'. Rcudul D.utuw Prvin Mrl,nuldilen October 3, 2000 Carolyn A. Iutchinson, Clerk Suite) of Vennont Cnvirorlmental :'hurl 235 North Main St., First Floor Barre, VT 05641 Re: In Re: Appeal of Whidjamnser llu,spijali(y Group Docket No. 137-8-99 Vtec Dacr Ms. Hutchinson: LV-%LN iY4N mi"hi'd W. WcA Mack L. Speny Clvirccybur I.. L%Vltt Liam L, Mutphy llumcu Z. Corl-,m L oa S. ShArw Do M. Knudaan rr•.t+LY'lu, Burlington 0filru I enclose for tiling Notice of AI)peal with related Certificate of Service ill eomwetion with the above - entitled matter. Also enclosed is our clieck in the amount of $150.00 for the filing fee. [''loase call if yowl have any questions. Vary truly yours, Eric M. Knudsen EMK1sIl cknndsen@l angrock.com Eno. cc: Walter B, Levering See Certificate of Service Is",815_1 MIDDLUVRY! t I t S. ?kwnnt Sep t • P.O. Dmwr 351 - !Mi3rllullm, Vrrmonc 05753-0351 (802) 3884356 - Vu (802) 388.6149 - Bmad, attorr y4@larBrock.coo LUALINGTOM 275 Collui;u Straus - P.O. Box 721 - Burlington, Vcrtnnnc 45402.0721 (802) 864 0217 • rar< (602.) 864-0137 - 1'md, tittumuye(iklen rywk.eom OCT-05-2000 7HU 0240 Fii QT TZEL PAGE FLETCHER PC FAX P10. 80``2552 P. 03 STATE 01, 't ERMONT ENVIRONMENTAL COURT In Rc: Appeal of Windjammer hospitality Group ) Docket No. 137-8-99 Vtec NOW COMES Windjammer l lospit._lity Group, the above named Appellant, by and tbrough its attorney, Eric M. Knudsen, Esquire, of the law firni of Lang rock Sperry & Wool, LL.P, and hereby gives notice of appeal to the Vermont Supreme Court from the Envirorunental Court in the above -captioned matter. The matter appealed is the Environmental Court's Decision and Order on Cross -Motions for Summary Judgment entered September 11, 2000. DATED at Burlington, in the County orChittenden and State of Vermont this dzy of October, 2000, LANGROCK SPERRY & WOOL. LIT Eric M. Knudsen, Esq. 275 College Street P.U. Box 721 Burlington, V'1' 05402-0721 Attomeys for Appellant Windjammer Hospitality Group, 187783.1 OCT-05-2000 7HU 02:40 PM pTTITZEL PACE FLETCHEa PC FAX NO, 80P:�02552 . t 1 P. 04 STATE: t71' VERMC)N1 ENVIRONMENTAL COUIZT In Re: Appeal of Windjammer hospitality Group ) Docket No. 137-8-99 Vtcc CERTIFICATE OF '.LRVICI 1, 1.?ric M. Knudsen, !At(orney for Appellant,Vy'indlawmier Hospitality Group, hereby certify thit in the abovc-reverenced matter, on the` 3"1 clay of October, 2000, I served za c0p), oi' Notice o,'Al2pealldatcd October 3, 2000, by placing the same in die United, States mail, po4tag(!. pmpaid, to the following patties: Joseph S. McLean, Esq. Attorney for City of South Burlington Stitzel PLA90 & Fletcher, PC` 171 Battery Street 110 Box 1507 Burlington, VT 054402-1507 Martha 1. Hicks-RoUison Suprenit Court Docket Clerk: Vermont Supreme Court 109 State Street Montpelier, VT 05609-0501 DAT1s1) at Burlington, in the County of Chittendcn and State of Vermont this S ' 14 day of October, 2000. J8M8.t LikNGl?C14:.'iK SPERRY & WOOL., T.:I T By; �. Fric M. Knudsen, F,sq, 275 College Street P.O. 13ox 721 Burlington, VT 05402-0721 Attorneys for Appellant Windjammer Hospitality Group State of Vermont WATER SUPPLY & WASTEWATER DISPOSAL PERMIT LAWS/REGULATIONS INVOLVED Environmental Protection Rules Effective August 8, 1996 Case Number: WW-4-1435 PIN: EJ00-0180 Landowner: Best Western Windjammer Inn Address: 1076 Williston Road South Burlington, VT 05403 This project, consisting of an addition to the Best Western housing the front desk and the relocation of the existing pump station and force main serving the four washing machines and the 250 seat conference center served by municipal water and wastewater services located off Williston Road in the city of South Burlington, Vermont is hereby approved under the requirements of the regulations named above, subject to the following conditions. This permit does not constitute approval under Act 250 case number 4CO217 & amendments. GENERAL This permit does not relieve the permittee from obtaining all other approvals and permits as may be required from the Act 250 District Environmental Commission, the Department of Labor and Industry - telephone (802) 828-2106 or (802) 658-2199, the Vermont Department of Health - telephone (802) 863-7220, and local officials prior to proceeding with this project. The project shall be completed as shown on the following plans which have been stamped "approved" by the Wastewater Management Division: Project No. 00179, Drawing Number C1 "Site Plan" dated 6-20-2000 and Drawing Number C2 "Pump Station Details and Specifications dated 6-20-2000 prepared by Civil Engineering Associates, Inc. The project shall not deviate from the approved plans without prior written approval from the Wastewater Management Division. No alterations to the building other than those indicated on the approved plan or Water Supply and Wastewater Disposal Permit, which would change or affect the exterior water supply, or wastewater disposal, or the approved use of the building shall be allowed without prior review and approval from the Division of Wastewater Management. 4. The Wastewater Management Division now reviews the sewage and water systems for public buildings under 10 V.S.A., Chapter 61 - Water Supply and Wastewater Disposal Permit. Water Supply & Wastewater Disposal Permit WW-4-1435 Best Western Windjammer Inn Page 2 By acceptance of this permit, the permittee agrees to allow representatives of the State of Vermont access to the property covered by the permit, at reasonable times, for the purpose of ascertaining compliance with Vermont environmental/health statutes and regulations, with this permit. 6. A copy of the approved plans and this permit shall remain on the project during all phases of construction and, upon request, shall be made available for inspection by State or local personnel. 7. All conditions set forth in Certificate of Co m.pliance#4CO217-1 through 4CO217-7 shall remain in effect except as modified or amended herein. WASTEWATER DISPOSAL 8. A professional engineer, registered in the State of Vermont, is to generally supervise the construction of the pump station, valve pit and force main and, upon completion of construction, the supervising engineer is to submit to the Wastewater Management Division a written certification stating all construction has been completed in accordance with the stamped approved plans. The engineer's certification is to be submitted to the Division prior to activating the pump station and the certification shall include, but not be limited to, the results of all leakage testing performed on the force main as described in the Environmental Protection Rules, Chapter 1, Appendix A. Dated at Essex Junction, Vermont this August 11, 2000. Canute E. Dahnasse, Commissioner Department of Environmental Conservation By g:O Ernest P. Christianson Environmental Analyst V c For the Record South Burlington Planning Commission & Select Board Civil Engineering Associates, Inc. Act 250 Coordinator - Case #4CO217 & amendments Department of Labor & Industry Health Department -Food & Lodging Licenses Water Supply Division CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 (802) 846-4106 FAX (802) 846-4101 May 30, 2000 Dennis Webster C/o Weimann Lamphere 245 S. Park Drive Colchester, VT 05446 Re: Site Plan — Econolodge — 1076 Williston Road Dear Mr. Webster: Enclosed please find a copy of Finding of Facts for the above referenced project dated May 30, 2000. Please note the conditions of approval, including that a zoning permit be obtained within six (6) months or this approval is null and void. If you have any questions, please give me a call. Sincerely, Sarah MacCallum Planning & Zoning Assistant Enclosure t a c� z �i �6ti 1 ')M _ A z m �8, N,OI Ly.70H tz fE++l 1 m N n 1 1q iat Ot L N J D +1 �3 1° 0 O Y ° e!� ° 00 J `' n p $, 0w 44 \ A� oW t z Z 4 o • m rt x z Qo W a o vay -1 qg r9z A jito 2� s z r 311 $ lac d g � it N Or T �p a $m �a L77 j �tl -4 3G i 1 VJ a Q Q® (a Q Q© Q© ® o Fn s �y4fill g _ s� i�3 s Z s $ r•a w p gg � F * 4060 It10.40•far °o '°P til 21 qg ell; ?� � �, � F 2 q� 6 � sf $rgsr°ti ^ (Ar 7 N� a papA$ S� S �Q' 1,I v 0SO tie iiii� Y x!!!$.78 SA Fp_aR� ga sas$ �y�mL ��2 p_DQA�fcT�CA 2=D �i 4 Q i 66$# 10as �� P Aa i 3i c Z gt j QQ I r,lit I s � c Z � ZVf2mZ i ��zm K 4� m m ¢N�ssp( ¢ Spa �g s� rm��1 >m>m x�; s og zv v �T1 QP i I v P. P. 11- 4 Fr IY r Jill [Jr.It 17' fir � YI I IT Ir 1 49 [ ?I T 21, it Il I It It ;5-ya )1 .114441, it a f lit, j tz �a rtit j � � A9 � � g i�� g �l3� � y �� g• �C VERMONT SURVEY and ENGINEERING, INC. Surveyors and Civil Engineers — (802-229-9138) (FAX: 802-229-9130) 79 River Street #301 — Montpelier, Vermont 05502 SL $ 9 x ° o 4 FBI 'j 5 o gq g g g ° 9. r � P 11 QP P. 4 Y �iY = �f �Fn �ig[i 1 Scr t 3SQ ag S a *� °9 �.L$ Ylll 181.1- �$ 333� I pis;; I o- f.7 ' it =p f =g#� iti oil 11 will � :� I A I;" J� �� g�8 p t will P sy�� 9°e S PISr Ki 4 f�T fl VERMONT SURVEY and ENCINEERINC, INC. Surveyors and Civil Engineers — (802-229-9138) (FAX: 802-229-9130) 79 River Street #301 — Montpelier, Vermont 05602 P3 0z 0 a� AQ 4 o ®oo 0 00 0 0 00 M NI [fit w; if I-Riji, '. 13 sang =� tittat AT ILI[ g if a d z 0 M z 0 O e 3 r - 1 rr � - - -l- � LIM- volls- -- NSEY EW LOBBY 25 OF �� \ cc:3\ F�RWACE/ E1188 SF \SPICE PAVING = ; 1298 SF N7N=GGIOPY� GULF OIL I \ RE LOCCATED GROUNDS/STnRAGE� 'ten f AMMON - WO SF / OF CQViREJ;± SPACE • ` \ LLEY Q 177 MOTEL ROOMS _ _ _ ♦ 250 SEAT RESTAURANT :-� 1500 SF FOR PATRON USE p„ + LOT AREA - 57,552 A OR 2,506,965 SF • wTANr PROJECT LOT COVERAGE NORTH BUILDINGi 46,297 SF - 1.85% -y PARKING,PBIUIBLDING, ST❑RAGEi 287,168 SF - 11,46% XISTING UTILITY KE SEWAGE TELEPHONE WATER ELECTRIC SITE DRAIN --- CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 (802) 846-4106 FAX (802) 846-4101 July 28, 1999 Walt Levering Windjammer Hospitality Group 1076 Williston Road .South Burlington, Vermont 05403 Re: Preliminary Plat, 1076 Williston Road Dear Mr. Levering: Enclosed is a copy of the June 22, 1999 Planning Commission meeting minutes. If you have any questions, please give me a call. q ,, Director Planning & Zoning JW/mcp 1 Encl PLANNING COMMISSION 22 JUNE 1999 2. Consent Agenda: a) Design review request of Anchorage Inn to replace an existing 40 square foot freestanding sign with a new 32 square foot freestanding sign, 108 Dorset Street b) Design review request of Donny's Pizza to replace an existing wall sign (on awning) with a new wall sign (on awning), 364 Dorset Street. No issues were raised on either item. Mr Dinklage moved to approve the two consent agenda items subject to the conditions in the Director of Planninp, & Zoning's memorandum of 18 June 1999. Ms. Quimby seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 3. Sketch plan application of Ashbrook Park Homeowners Association to amend a previously approved 17 unit planned unit development consisting of three buildings. The amendment consists of creating separate lots under the footprint of each unit, 701 Dorset Street: Mr. Morwood explained that the project was approved in the 1980's. The developer made a mistake and got approval for a condominium project and then conveyed the units as town houses. The issue was never raised until about a month ago. Mr. Belair said there is no problem doing this. It has been done several times before. Members agreed to go straight to final plat. 4. Public Hearing: Preliminary plat application of Windjammer Hospitality Group/Evelyn Lamplough to subdivide a 54.4 acre parcel with a hotel/restaurant use, into two lots of 52.9 acres and 1.5 acres, 1076 Williston Road: Mr. Knudsen said the application is identical to the one seen at sketch plan review. No development is proposed. The purpose of the subdivision is to isolate a piece of property that is encumbered by a right of first refusal. The outstanding issue is frontage on Williston Road. Lot 2 would have only 50 feet of frontage on that road, and the City Attorney says this is not in compliance with the Ordinance as 200 feet is that requirement. The applicant said they will dispute this as there is 200 feet of frontage on Patchen Road, and they feel this meets the requirement. 2 PLANNING COMMISSION 22 JUNE 1999 Mr. Burgess said the Commission will take the recommendation of its own attorney. Mr. Knudsen noted the business is having a problem getting financing because the lenders want real collateral. Mr. O'Rourke moved that based on the Findings of Fact and Conclusions in the document numbered #SD-99-32 the South Burlington Planning Commission hereby denies the Applicants' request to subdivide a 54.352 acre parcel into two lots of 1.476 acres (lot #0 and 52.876 acres (lots #2), 1076 Williston Road, for the following reason: 1 The application does not comply with or satisfy the requirements of Section 25.00 of the zoning regulations Proposed lot #2 will not meet the 200 minimum frontage requirement on Williston Road in the C 1 District. Ms. Quimby seconded. The motion was then passed unanimously. 5. Sketch Plan Application of Dorset Land Company to amend a previously approved planned unit development consisting of a 21,750 square foot general office building, 184 unit congregate housing facility, and a 79 unit extended stay hotel. The amendment consists of constructing a 24 unit extended stay hotel building with an overhead walkway to the existing extended stay hotel in place of the general office building, 415 Dorset Street: Mr. DesLauriers showed what is now approved and what is currently built. Access and parking would be the same: 35 surface parking spaces. The building footprint would be smaller. The addition would have 24 suites. Three of these would have 2 bedrooms, the others 1 bedroom. They would eliminate one bedroom in the existing hotel and make it a meeting room. The project would go from 13% building coverage to I I% and from 3 1 % total lot coverage to 28%. They would also go from 57 to 35 parking spaces. The change in use should result in a 35% reduction in traffic. There would bean increase of225 gpd in sewer use. Mr. DesLauriers said they understand that they need City Council approval for the overhead connector. Mr. Belair said the Council needs to approve a structure that goes over a city street. Mr. DesLauriers said they have submitted design review information which is being heard in another meeting tonight. The building will be sprinklered. 3 STITZEL, PAGE & FLETCHER, P.C. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 171 BATTERY STREET P.O. BOX 1507 BURLINGTON. VERMONT 05402-1507 (802) 660-2555 (VOICE/TDD) STEVEN F. STITZEL FAX (802) 660-2552 or 660-9119 PATTI R. PAGE* E-MAIL(FIRM2555 _5 FIRMSPF.COM) ROBERT E FLETCHER WRITER'S E-MAIL (JMCLEAN6 FIR.MSPF.COM) WRITER'S FAX (802) 660-2552 JOSEPH S.MCLEAN TIMOTHY M. EUSTACE MIA KARVONIDES AMANDA S.E. LAFFERTY ('ALSO ADMITTED IN N.Y.) February 8, 2000 Carolyn Hutchinson, Clerk Vermont Environmental Court 255 No. Main Street, 15t Floor Barre, VT 05641 RE: Appeal of Windjammer Hospitality Group Docket No. 137-8-99 Vtec Dear Ms. Hutchinson: OF COUNSEL ARTHUR W. CERNOSIA Enclosed for filing with the Court, please find the City of South Burlington's reply to the Windjammer Hospitality Group's Opposition to the City's Cross -Motion for Summary Judgment and In further Support of the Appellant's Motion for Summary Judgment. Thank you. Very truly yours, oseph S . Mc JSM/bjl Enclosure cc: Charles Hafter Eric M. Knudsen, Esq. son4242.cor STITZEL, PAGE & FLETCHM P.C. ATTORNEYS AT LAW m liA9"1'vin STREET 11.11. BOX 1.507 13F1t1.1\(;T(1\, \'I;I;NI(1.N'1 STATE OF VERMONT ENVIRONMENTAL COURT IN RE: ) APPEAL OF ) DOCKET NO. 137-8-99 Vtec WINDJAMMER HOSPITALITY GROUP ) CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON'S REPLY TO WINDJAMMER HOSPITALITY GROUP'S OPPOSITION TO CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON'S CROSS MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND IN FURTHER SUPPORT OF APPELLANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT NOW COMES the Appellee, City of South Burlington, by and through its attorneys, Stitzel, Page & Fletcher, P.C., and hereby submits the following reply to Appellant's Opposition to the City of South Burlington's Cross Motion for Summary Judgment and in Further Support of Appellant's Motion for Summary Judgment, dated January 18, 2000. Memorandum By responsive memorandum, dated January 18, 2000, the Appellant, Windjammer Hospitality Group, has asked this Court to grant its motion for summary judgment and to deny the City's motion for summary judgment in the above -referenced matter. In support of its request, Appellant argues (1) that the City of South Burlington Zoning Regulations (the "Zoning Regulations") do not require so-called "through lots" to meet minimum frontage requirements along all streets on which they front; and (2) that Appellant is not required to meet the dimensional requirements for the respective zoning districts in which its property is located. These arguments are without merit, and should be rejected by this Court. I. The Zoning Regulations Clearly Prohibit Appellant's Project In its responsive memorandum, Appellant begins by reminding this Court of the well recognized principle that, in construing zoning regulations, any uncertainty must be decided in favor of the property owner. Appellant further observes (and the City concedes) that the City of South Burlington Zoning Regulations (the "Zoning Regulations") do not specifically address frontage requirements on so-called "through lots," nor do the Zoning Regulations define either "through lot" or "split lot."' Given these factors, Appellant argues, this Court should apply the above -stated principle to resolve the issue of whether the subject property must meet frontage requirements along both Williston and Patchen Road in its favor. The flaw in Appellant's argument, however, is its assumption that any uncertainty exists in this case regarding what is required under the Zoning Regulations. The Zoning Regulations clearly state that "lot frontage" is defined as "[t]he boundary of a lot along a public street," and Table 25-1 (Area, Density and Dimensional Requirements) (the significance of which Appellant attempts to minimize) sets forth minimum lot frontage requirements "on local streets" and "on arterial or collectors." These provisions, read together, unambiguously require a lot 1 The terms "through lot" and "split lot," as used in the City's memorandum, are used as convenient shorthand to described circumstances that undeniably exist on Appellant's property, to wit: it is an interior lot bounded along its northerly and southerly property lines by public streets, and it extends over more than one zoning district. 2 fronting on more that one street to meet the minimum lot frontage requirements for every street on which it fronts. Notwithstanding Appellant's characterization of Table 25-1 as "nothing more than a chart with dimensional information," §25.00 of the Zoning Regulations states that "the size and dimensions of lots and yards, lot coverage and density for the . . . [R4 and C1 Districts, among others] shall be as indicated in Table 25-1." (The property at issue is located in the City's R4 and C1 zoning districts). Accordingly, Table 25-1 contains the operative provisions under the Zoning Regulations regulating area, dimensional and density requirements in the districts where the property is located. By its plain language, Table 25-1 identifies two separate regulatory categories under the heading "Minimum Lot Frontage." The first category applies to lots fronting "on local streets." The second category applies to lots fronting on "arterial or collectors." Footnote 2 in Table 25-1 states that the second category, noted above, applies to "those arterial and collector streets listed in Section 25.101." Both Williston Road and Patchen Road, the public streets on which the lot in question bounds, are identified in §25.101. As noted above, "lot frontage" is defined as "[t]he boundary of a lot along a public street." Zoning Regulations, at §28.127. This definition merely explains what lot frontage is. It is consistent with the general law on the subject, see Federici v. Borough of Oakmount Zoning Hearing Board, 583 A.2d 15, 17 3 (Pa.Cmwlth. 1990), and contains no independent regulatory authority. Rather, the Zoning Regulations simply state that lot frontage exists whenever a property line extends along a public street. Nothing in the definition limits the concept of lot frontage to a single street where the lot bounds more than one street, as Appellant contends. Here, it is undisputed that the northerly and southerly property lines of the involved lot extend along Patchen and Williston Roads, respectively, and that those roads are public streets in the City. See Zoning Regulations, at §28.152. Therefore, by definition, "lot frontage" exists along both Williston and Patchen Roads. By its terms, Table 25-1 regulates minimum lot frontage on "local streets" and on those streets defined as "arterial or collectors" in §25.101. (emphasis added) The Zoning Regulations' use of the plural here is significant. Since Appellant's property is a through lot, and fronts on more than one street, it must meet the minimum frontage requirements on for all streets on which it fronts, provided Appellant retains reasonable use of the property.2 As applied to lots fronting on more than one street, this result is logically dictated by Table 25-1. Under Table 25-1, separate frontage requirements are provided for lots on local streets and on streets identified as arterial or collectors. While insignificant for lots fronting on only one street, these case. 2 There is no issue regarding "reasonable use" in this n separate frontage requirements are applicable to lots which front on more than one street. For example, assuming that a through lot fronts on a local street on one end and an arterial street at the other, it clearly must meet the minimum frontage requirements for both types of streets on which it fronts since Table 25-1 sets forth separate frontage requirements therefore. The same principle applies where a through lot is bounded by two local streets or, as here, two arterial or collector streets. Under Appellant's argument, however, a through lot satisfies the requirements of Table 25-1 if it meets the frontage requirements on one street only. Given the above, this is undeniably incorrect. Accordingly, this Court should conclude that, by their terms, the Zoning Regulations prohibit Appellant's project. II. Appellant's "Abstract Use" Theory Should Be Rejected There is no question in this case that Appellant's lot is located in both the R4 and C1 zoning districts. Zoning law typically refers to a lot possessing these characteristics as a "split lot." In its summary judgment memorandum, the City argued that a it is not permissible to aggregate frontage from residentially zoned property to meet dimensional requirements in a commercial district. Appellant disputes this contention, citing two Massachusetts cases, Tofias v. Butler, 523 N.E.2d 796 (Mass. App. Ct. 1988) and Moore v. Swapscott, 530 N.E.2d 809 (Mass. App. Ct. 1988) (this case is incorrectly referred to by Appellant as Carriag v. Cordeiro), for the proposition that land in the more restricted (i.e., residential) portion of a split lot 5 may be used for so-called "abstract" or passive purposes to meet dimensional requirements in the less restricted (i.e., commercial) portion of the lot. As discussed herein, there is no legal basis for this Court to adopt such a rule, and the cases cited are distinguishable for the reasons stated below. First, as noted above, Appellant's property currently consists of a single split lot, with frontage in two districts. The existing lot presently meets lot frontage requirements in both districts in which it is located. Under Appellant's proposal, proposed Lot 1, so-called, will meet frontage requirements on Williston Road, but proposed Lot 2 will not. If, as Appellant suggests, frontage on Patchen Road is used to meet frontage requirements on Williston Road, that portion of Lot 2 that fronts on Patchen Road will not meet frontage requirements since (as discussed below) it is inappropriate to use or count the same frontage twice. Section 25.115 of the Zoning Regulations provides that [n]o lot shall be so reduced in area that the ... frontage ... or other requirements of these regulations shall be smaller than herein prescribed for each district." See Zoning Regulations at §25.115. Appellant's proposal violates §25.115, which prohibits a reduction in lot area that results in frontage that will not meet district requirements. Second, in both the Tofias and Moore cases, the property owners proposed to bring separate lots, portions of which extended over more than one zoning district, into single 6 ownership as a unified lot, and to utilize a portion of the unified lot located in the less restrictive district to meet dimensional requirements in the more restrictive district. See Tofias, 523 N.E.2d at 797; Moore, 530 N.E.2d at 809. Here, Appellant seeks take a conforming split lot and subdivide it so that one of the resulting lots is noncomplying with regard to frontage along Williston Road. Appellant then proposes to use the frontage in the residential portion of the nonconforming lot to meet frontage requirements for a commercial use in the commercial portion of the lot. This is inconsistent with one of the fundamental principles underlying the Tofias court's reasoning - "the desire to permit land owners to enjoy the use of their entire properties as single units." See Tofias, 523 N.E.2d at 799. Third, as the Tofias court emphasizes, the decision there was "strengthened by the fact of the equivalence of the lot coverage percentages in the two districts." Here, however, the lot frontage requirements in the R4 and C1 districts are not equivalent and, unlike the situation in Moore (where a two family residential dwelling situated on a "single hybrid lot" was allowed to aggregate frontage from a portion of the lot that (apparently) only allowed single family residences as of right), the proposed "active use" in this case (hotel/restaurant) stands in stark contrast to the uses allowed in the R4 district. In this regard, the Appeals Court of Massachusetts, the same court that decided the Tobias and Moore cases, recently stated "it has 7 been clear since at least 1988 that the use of land in another zoning district . . . solely to meet dimensional requirements is considered a permissible abstract or passive use where, as here, it appears both zoning districts permit the proposed active use, i.e., single family residential." See Boulter Brothers Construction Company, Inc. v. Zoning Board of Appeal of Norfolk, 697 N.E.2d 997, 999 (Mass. App. Ct. 1998) (emphasis added). As noted above, this is not the case here. In addition to these distinguishing factors, there are several other reasons why this Court should refuse to apply the Massachusetts court's analysis in this case. First, although the active/passive use distinction has some appeal in highly developed areas where an urban or suburban lot is split by a district boundary, and it is necessary to use land in the adjoining district simply to fill out dimensional requirements, this analysis is problematic in areas, like Vermont, where there are large parcels of undeveloped land. In such instance, "borrowing" from one district to meet dimensional requirements in another district may, as the Tobias court recognized, render that portion of the lot from which the borrowing occurs undevelopable. See Tobias 523 N.E. 2d at 800 (holding that residential land counted toward the lot coverage requirement of another structure located in another district cannot be built upon). This is not and issue where that portion of the lot from which the borrowing occurs cannot be further subdivided. However, where, as here, the remaining land in the R4 district is of sufficient acreage to FP allow for further subdivision (and is very likely to be the subject of a future subdivision application), the proposed borrowing of "frontage" creates a potential 5t`' Amendment takings issue. The end result is that, if Appellants are permitted to borrow frontage now, and subdivide later, then the City will be left with a commercial use (the hotel/restaurant) in the C1 district that has only 50 feet of frontage on Williston Road. Second, the City's Zoning Regulations, recognizing the unique circumstances confronting lots that are divided by a district boundary, already make provision for such lots to obtain relief from hardship. Specifically, §29.007 of the Zoning Regulations provides in pertinent part that where a district boundary line divides a lot which was in a single ownership at the time of passage of these regulations, the [DRB] may permit, as a conditional use, the extension of the regulations for either portion of the lot not to exceed fifty (50) feet beyond the district line into the remaining portion of the lot. See Zoning Regulations, at §29.007. Accordingly, this provision authorizes the City's DRB to address the split lot problem confronted by Appellant by extending the zoning regulations applicable to the C1 district 50 feet into the R4 district. This is a common technique for addressing issues related to split lots. See Anderson's American Law of Zoning (4t" ed. 1996) at §9.12 ("such a provision permits relief without a showing of hardship, but it minimizes the extent to which the boundaries of a district may be altered through administrative action. Under such an ordinance, the board . . . has authority to protect 9 adjoining owners by denying permission to extend a use into a more restricted area . . . "). Appellant is also free to address its frontage problem through resort to the statutory variance criteria. See Zoning Regulations, at §27.00. To date, Appellant has not made application for such a variance, however. Given, this circumstance, and the other factors discussed above, this Court should refuse to adopt the reasoning of the Massachusetts court in connection with this matter, and it should reject Appellant's argument that lot frontage located in the R4 district may be used to meet minimum lot frontage requirements in the C1 district. conclusion For all the reasons set forth herein, and in the City's memorandum in support of its motion for summary judgment, Appellant's motion for summary judgment should be denied, and judgment as a matter of law should be granted in the City's favor. DATED at Burlington, Vermont, this 8th day of February, 2000. CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON By: STITZELf','PAGE & FLETCHER, P.C. Its Atto'�n,4ys Jos,6ph S . McLean i son626.1it E 10 __ ac: wIra" ♦ ass-1— —N 111 ,+ •K. iilleniunt, Fuzz 013. )1 ea. lalo, Elope, Valentina, Kicks nd Signature a j j.9; ea. Zany retireds 20`iOff All aportwward Packs 2e— ' P,�!,on, Star R'ar,, Star Trek & Magic the Gathering 201100 Jeanie Buddies ieanie Cases 2p"Off 4 for $6 ' Selected Sportscard Singles 25'" Off • Supply Specials THE BASEaALL Farr- .mc THE FAN -ATTIC 159 Pearl Street Essex Junction ,ski 879-8386 The crossword is on 13A. The jumble is on 5D. ESSEX Perkins Bend SO BURLINGTON June 5 Condo Association Yard & 6; 9am-5pm. Upright Sale. Sat-6/5-9-3. Off freezer, Jotul Stove, old River Rd & Circ. Highway wood fired cook range, 289. Near PineWood. gas grill, horse tack, misc. household items, books , FAIRFAX 6/5 + 6/6, 9 to 5. 132 Hunts St., go past misc. small farm items, BFA 1/4 mile, many items, riding mower and much too numerous to list! more. 1600 Dorset St. FAIRFAX Moving Sale! $O BURLINGTON Neigh - Fri, Sat. & Sun. 9-6pm. borhood garage sale. Antiques, antique wood Laurel Hill South. [Impe- cook stove, furniture, rial, Worth, Andrews, Scottsdale, Sandalwood, TVs, snowblower, tiller, lawn tractor, 1986 ' Sebring, Green Dolphin & Toyota 4WD pickup, Take Shelburne power & hand tools, lawn Rd Rd . , 7 south to Impe- and garden tools, baby riv rial Drive [Left at Pizzeria clothes and toys, college " Uno] Sat. June 5; gam-ipm, rain or shine. accessories, Grandfather Clothes & furniture. clock. Many other house- SO BURLINGTON 400 hold items. On Rte 104, half way between St. Al- Hinesburg Rd. Store bans exit and 104 A, go closed, many decorative onto Austin Rd and fol- wreaths, arrangements, low signs. 271 Cherrier- store fixtures, flower ville Rd. 849-2868. coolers, and display racks. Also, multi -family E GORGIA 508Sodom 1 mile from the Cob clothing, freezer, dress - Webb right hand side. ere, chairs. Sat -Sun 9-5. SO BURLINGTON Sun - Household items, toys, racing go-cart frame. day, 9 -1, 10 Deerfield Sat 9-4pm Rd., off Spear St., Furni- ture, kid's clothes & equip., china, & A LOT HUNTINGTON Sherman Hollow Rd, Old chairs, MORE. No early birds old and new stuff. SOUTH BURLINGTON Neighborhood sale! Oak Creek Dr. Sat-6/5 & Sun - Fri/Sat/Sun 9-4. JERICHO Neighborhood yard sale. [Near MMU, 6/6-9-3. Off Brown's Trace, onto SOUTH BURLINGTON Morgan] Sat. 6/5 [8-4] Toys, bikes, books, kid's � 13 Sebring Rd, behind clothes, baby stuff, misc. Uno's pizzeria. Baby clothing & items, mater- nity clothes. s 1, JERICNO 431 Browny Trace Rd. Barn Sale, on 2, en's.Wom 2, 3X, & men's. Much day only. Furniture, odd more. Sat-8-4 &Sun-8-2. s/ends. more! Sat 8-3. JERICHO Jericho Easl development [off Rt. 15, Multi -family neighbor hood garage sale. Satur. day 9am-3pm. JERICHO Sat, June 5th, 9am-4pm. At the Jericho Commu- nity Center. JOHNSON MOVING SALE!! Take 100C north from Johnson to Oberhill Rd. 6/5, 6/6 [8am-5pm] Furniture, tools, clothes, toys, great bargains! MILTON 32 Sammanicki Circle off Rte 7 behind Vet. Furniture, electron- ics, antiques, clothes, books, wedding gown, misc. Sat/Sun 8-2pm. MILTON 9A.M. - 2P.M. Baby items, baby clothes, furniture and more. 345 Duffy Rd. MONKTON 1449 Bristol Rd. Multi -family, lug- gage, windsurfer, Vision - ware, canning jars, tod- dler items, Beanies. Sat only 9-4pm. SOUTH BURLINGTON Huge Church Yard Salel Sat-8:30-3. Ascension Lutheran. 95 Allen Rd. Benefits VT Respite House & Good News Ga- rage. Household items, collectibiles, bake sale & refreshments. Tax de- ductable donations wel- come. Information: 862- 8866 or 878-1528. SOUTH BURLINGTON 69 Bartlett Bay Rd, off Rt 7 [turn at Jiffy Lube]. Multi -family, some 50's stuff, antiques. Sat 6/5, 8am-1pm, SOUTH BURLINGTON 210 Airport Pkwy., multi- family, household items toys, & furniture. Sat June 5, 8:30 _ 3 SOUTH BURLINGTON Multi -Family. Misc. items Sat-9-3. 34 Floral St. Dorset Farms. No early birds. ST. GEORGE Yard Sale! Sat-9-5. Rugs, clothing, toys, small electrical ap- pliances, & a printer. Across from Rocky MEW 1W chat �ay Dinner for Two — Prime Rib ~ Chicken Cordon Bleu or - - Baked Stuffed Lobster Includes Wine and Dessert Eartr Blyd Special y� /'� n� Served from STh. 7 8.95 (j]'!/�JI` Dinner 5-10 nightly �n• J,) Sunday Dinner served in Dining Room served ring Reservations at 863-6363 GARAGE SALES 4 WILLISTON Golf Links neighborhood garage sales. 10 homes partici- pating. Many items [inci. new ceiling fans at 127 Fairwayl. Sat. 6/5 8AM- Noon. Sun. 6/6 10AM- Noon. Rain or shine. From Williston village take No. Williston Rd. 3/4 miles then right on to Fairway Dr. or Tamarack Dr. Orange signs. WILLISTON Neighbor- hood sale. South Rd, Christmas Hill Rd., Applewood Ln., & Oak Hill Rd. Lots of children's clothing, plants, crafts & misc. items. 8-5 Sat. June 5. WILLISTON Rte 2A across from church. Truckload sale, rock ma- ple dressers, desk/ chairs, bookshelf, twin box spring and mattres- ses, TV's and more. Fri/ Sat after 9am. "Sold the First Day". We hear this everyday from successful ad- vertisers. Free Press Classifieds work. Call us at 658-3321. We can help you make your ad work. WILLISTON Sunrise drive neighborhood sale! [off Rt. 2, French Hill, just north of Pine Ridge Schooll 8-10 families. 6/5, 6/6, 9am-2pm WILLISTON Williston Woods Annual Commu- nityy Garage Sale. 6/4 and 6/5, 9 to 4. Double bed,'. 45" loom and warping mill, porch tables, golf clubs, court organ etc. WINOOSKI 13 Whitney St., Sat & Sun, 9 to 1, high chair, car seat, exercise equip, clothes, TV & much more. WINOOSK19 June 5 & 6, 9-5pm. A little bit of everything. No early birds. 77 Hood St. WINOOSKI Indoor garage sale. Fri. & Sat. 9am. Something for ev- eryone. 207A West St. PERSONALS 6 ADOPT -A LOVING COU- PLE SEEKS TO ADOPT NEWBORN BABY. PLEASE CALL US AT 1-00-290-1127. ADOPTION Addison Cty. Social Services is seek- ing an adoptive home for an energetic, friendly & loving 12 yr. old boy. For more info., call Jane PERSONALS 6 WANTED SPACE FOR PLAYING'. INDOOR VOLLEYBALL Will provide nets, light- ing, and small rental fee. Call Dave Jordan at [802]253-2870 ADULT 8 ENTERTAINMENT HARDBODIES ENTERTAINMENT As always, the best! Cal! 888-882-5553 SOLID GOLD DANCERS Birthdays, Bachelor, Bachelorette, Strip-0- Grams. Call 862-1377 LEGAL BURLINGTON BOARD OF SCHOOL COMMISSIONERS At the School Board Meeting on Tuesday, June 8, 1999, 7:30 p.m. at 150 Colchester Ave- nue, Burlington, Vermont, the following will be adopted: The Local Education Agency Plan -Part 11, IDEA-B [Individuals with Disabilities Education Act] for FY 2000, and the IDEA-B Pre -School Incentive Grant Budget for FY2000. Copies of both documents will be made available upon re- quest from the Office of Special Services, 150 Colchester Avenue, Burlington, Vermont. June 5, 6, 7, 8, 1999 NOTICE OF MEETING t The VEPP Inc. Board of Directors meeting has been rescheduled to June 15, 1999, 1:00 PM, Capitol Plaza Hotel, Montpelier, Vermont. Anyone wishing informa- tion may contact the VEPP Inc. offices. June 5, 1999 Public Announcement The Agency of Human Services announces that, effective July 1, 1999, the methods, standards and principles for estab- lishing Medicaid payment rates for long-term care facilities will be amended. [1] The first amendment, to be adopted pursuant NOTICES i l nursing facilities to cer- tain hospital -based facili- ties. The public can obtain in- formation about these proposals from Marjorie Power, Attorney, Division of Rate Setting, 103 So. Main St., Waterbury, VT 05671-2201, [802] 241- 2708. Written comments may be filed with the Di- vision on or before June 14, 1999. June 111-I0 HEARING )TH BURLINGTON PLANNING COMMISSION Planning Commission will hold a public hearing at the South Burlington City Hall, Conference Room, 575 Dorset Street, South Burlington, Vermont on Tuesday, June 22, 1999, at 7:30 P.M. to consider the following: 1] Preliminary plat appli- cation of Windjammer Hospitality Group/Evelyn Lamplough to subdivide a 54.4 acre parcel with a hotel/restaurant use into two [2] lots of 52.9 acres and 1.5 acres, 1076 Williston Road. Copies of the application are available for public inspection at the South Burlington City Hall. William Burgess Chairman, South Burlington Planning Commission June 5, 1999 STATE OF VERMONT DISTRICT OF CHITTENDEN, SS. PROBATE COURT DOCKET NO. 28564 IN RE THE ESTATE OF Madeline Welsh LATE OF Burlington NOTICE TO CREDITORS To the creditors of the estate of Madeline Welsh late of Burlington, Ver- mont. I have been appointed a personal representative of the above -named es- tate. All creditors having claims against the estate must present their claims in writing within 4 months of the date of the first publication of this notice. The claim must be pres- ented to ' me at the ad- dress listed below with a LEGAL Address of Probate Court Chittenden District Probate Court P.O. Box 511 Burlington, VT 05402-0511 June 5, 12, 1999 STATE OF VERMONT DISTRICT OF CHITTENDEN, SS. PROBATE COURT DOCKET NO. 28126 N RE THE ESTATE OF DELLE V LENEUVE TE OF NDERHILL, VERMONT NOTICE TO CREDITORS To the creditors of the estate of Ardelle Ville- neuve, late of Underhill, Vermont. I have been appointed a Special Administratorof the above -named estate. All creditors having claims against the estate must present their claims in writing within 4 months of the date of the first Publication of this notice. The claim must be pres- ented to me at the ad- dress listed below with a copy filed with the regis- ter of the Chittenden Probate Court. The claim will be forever barred if it is not presented as de- scribed above within the four month deadline. Dated: September 23, 1998 Joseph D. Fallon, Esq. PO Box 257 Hinesburg, VT 05461 [802]482-2137 SPECIAL ADMINISTRA- TOR OF THE ESTATE OF ARDELLE VILLENEUVE Name of Publication: Burlington Free Press 1 st Publication Date: June 5, 1999 2nd Publication Date: June 12, 1999 Address of Probate Court Chittenden District Probate Court P.O. Box 511 Burlington, VT 05402-0511 June 5, 12, 1999 fMP10ymenf 1 STITZEL, PAGE & FLETCHER, P.C. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 171 BATTERY STREET P.O. BOX 1507 BURLINGTON. VERMONT 05402-1507 (80' STEVEN F. STITZEL FAX (802)((VOICE 660-2 DD) P.ATTI R. PAGE* E-MAIL(FIRM255i FIRMSPF.COT1) ROBERT E. FLETCHER WRITER'S E-M.AIL (JMCCEAN'( FIRMSPF.COM) JOSEPH S. McLEAN TIMOTHY M. EUSTACE (*ALSO ADMITTED IN N.Y.) August 2, 1999 Carolyn Hutchinson, Clerk Vermont Environmental Court 255 North Main Street, 1st Floor Barre, VT 05641 OF COUNSEL ARTHUR W. CERNOSIA Re: Appeal of Windjammer Hospitality Group and Evelyn Lamplough Dear Ms. Hutchinson: Enclosed for filing with the Court is the Windjammer Hospitality Group's Notice of Appeal, and the $150.00 filing fee in connection with the above -referenced matter. Thank you. Sinc,: reAy, . McLean JSM/bj1 Enclosure cc: Joe Weith Eric Knudsen, Esq. S=560. cor STATE OF VERMONT CHITTENDEN COUNTY, SS IN RE: WINDJAMMER HOSPITALITY ) GROUP and EVELYN ► LAMPLOUGH ) VERMONT ENVIRONMENTAL COURT DOCKET NO. NOTICE OF APPEAL TO: City of South Burlington Planning Commission, Clerk NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that Windiammer Hospitality Group ("Appellant") hereby gives Notice of Appeal to the Vermont Environmental Court from the decision of the City of South Burlington Planning Commission dated June 22, 1999 denying Appellant's subdivision application. A copy of said decision is attached hereto. 150649.1 Dated at Burlington, Vermont, this I` ' day of July, 1999. Langrock, Sperry & Wool By: Eric M. Knudsen, Esq. 275 College Street PO Box 721 Burlington, VT 05402 (802) 864-0217 !'iECEI�eD i11 City of So. Burlington #SD-99-32 STATE OF VERMONT COUNTY OF CHITTENDEN CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON RE: APPLICATION OF EVELYN LA APLOUGH & WINDJAMMER HOSPITALITY GROUP - TWO (2) LOT SUBDIVISION This matter came before the South Burlington Planning Commission pursuant to the provisions of Section 203 of the South Burlington Subdivision Regulations on application of Evelyn Lamplough & Windjammer Hospitality Group, hereinafter "Applicants" for approval to subdivide a 54.352 acre parcel into two (2) lots of 1.476 acres (lot # 1) and 52.876 acres (lot #2), 1076 Williston Road, as depicted on a two (2) page set of plans, page one (1) entitled, "Preliminary Plan for Evelyn W. Lamplough and Windjammer Hospitality Group, LLC showing Proposed Subdivision at 1076 Williston Road South Burlington, Vermont," prepared by Vermont Survey and Engineering, Inc., dated April 16, 1999. Based on the evidence submitted at the meeting and as part of the application, the Planning Commission hereby renders the following decision on this application. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. This project consists of subdividing a 54.352 acre parcel into two (2) lots of 1.476 acres (lot #l) and 52.876 acres (lot #2). This property is developed with a standard restaurant and 176 room motel. The sketch plan was reviewed on 3/23/99. 2. The owner of record of this particular property is Evelyn W. Lamplough. 3. This property located at 1076 Williston Road lies within the CI, R4 and Conservation and Open Space Districts. It is bounded on the west by Holiday Inn, on the south by a single family dwelling, service station, medical office, photo shop and Williston Road, on the east by auto sales and undeveloped land, and on the north by undeveloped land. 4. Lot size/frontaae: Both lots meet the minimum lot size requirement of 40,000 square feet. 5. Lot 42 does not meet the 200 foot minimum frontage requirement along Williston Road. This lot is proposed to have 50 feet of frontage. The Planning Commission does not have the authority to waive this requirement. 6. Coverage/setbacks: Coverage information for the new lots was not submitted. Setback requirements will be met. CONCLUSIONS Section 25.00 of the zoning regulations requires that any newly created lot have a minimum of 200 feet of frontage in the C 1 District. The proposed lot #2 will have 50 feet of frontage on Williston Road in the C I District. The Planning Commission concludes that the requirements of Section 25.00 of the zoning regulations are not being met. DECISION Based on the above Findings of Fact and Conclusions, the South Burlington Planning Commission hereby denies the Applicants' request to subdivide a 54.352 acre parcel into two (2) lots of 1.476 acres (lot #1) and 52.876 acres (lot #2), 1076 Williston Road, for the following reason: 1. The application does not comply with or satisfy the requirements of Section 25.00 of the zoning regulations. Proposed lot 42 will not meet the 200'minimum frontage requirement on Williston Road in the C 1 District. Dated this -7>� day of June, 1999 at South Burlington, Vermont Chairman or Clerk South Burlington Planning Commission ui�7.1:3ZIRi,TLiNILI�il:vLSI ;:rr, ��:1;i�17ilLL:iLl9�G.(Z•;[1;:��;1t �11:iIiv7M LANGROCK SPERRY & WOOL EXPLANATION AMOUNT 58-6/116 ATTORNEYS AT LAW P.O. BOX721 3397 275 COLLEGE STREET BURLINGTON. VERMONT 05402 PAY _II ix AMOUNT i1 (J �-llIJ�1IAig0A, �1 " UG�I //1T WWI I eac1 nF TO THE ORDER OF DESCRIPTION CHECK NUMBER T�w V 0 nv �,�" ��I - I 397 MIDDLEBURY, VERMONT 05753 - • rw rerwreC 9 V0033971I' i:0l1,6000621: V311156111093S-011' CHECK AMOUNT 1 6 i,T• STITZEL, PAGE & FLETCHER, P.C. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 171 BATTERY STREET P.O. BOX 1507 BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05402-1507 OIC STEVEN F. STITZEL (802 F6AX (802) 660-2555 60- 552DD) OF COUNSEL PATTI R. PAGE' E-MAIL(FMM2555 FIRMSPF.COM) ARTHUR W. CERNOSIA ROBERT E. FLETCHER WRITER'S E-MAIL (JMCLEAN@FIRMSPF.COM) JOSEPH S. MCLEAN TIMOTHY M. EUSTACE MIA KARVONIDES ('ALSO ADMITTED IN N.Y.) December 10, 1999 Carolyn Hutchinson, Clerk Vermont Environmental Court 255 N. Main St., 1st Floor Barre, VT 05641 Re: Appeal of Windjammer Hospitality Group Docket No. 137-8-99 Vtec Dear Carolyn: Enclosed for filing with regard to the above -referenced matter is the City of South Burlington's Opposition to Appellant's Motion for Summary Judgment and Cross -Motion for Summary Judgment. Also enclosed is fhie Affidavit of Raymond J. Belair in support thereof. Sync rely, Joseph S. McLean JSM/jp Enclosure cc: Eric M. Knudsen, Esq. Raymond Belair s=4198. cor STITZEL, PAGE & FLETCHER, P.C. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 171 BATTERY STREET P.O. BOX 1507 BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05402-1507 STATE OF VERMONT ENVIRONMENTAL COURT IN RE: ) APPEAL OF ) DOCKET NO. 137-8-99 Vtec WINDJAMMER HOSPITALITY GROUP ) CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON'S OPPOSITION TO APPELLANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND CROSS -MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT NOW COMES the Appellee, City of South Burlington, by and through its attorneys, Stitzel, Page & Fletcher, P.C., and asks this Court to issue an order denying Appellant's Motion for Summary Judgment, dated November 1, 1999, and granting summary judgment in favor of the City. Introduction The facts necessary to decide this motion are not in dispute, and are set forth in Appellant's Statement of Undisputed Material Facts, dated November 1, 1999, and the affidavit of Raymond J. Belair, attached hereto. This is an appeal by Windjammer Hospitality Group from a decision of the South Burlington Planning Commission denying an application for preliminary plat approval. Appellant and Evelyn Lamplough, as co -applicants, seek to subdivide a parcel of land owned by Mrs. Lamplough into two (2) lots. It is the City's position that the South Burlington Zoning Regulations (the 1 STITZEL, PAGE & FLETCHER, P.C. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 171 BATTERY STREET P.O. BOX 1507 BURLINOTON. VERMONT 05402-1507 "Zoning Regulations") (City's Exhibit 1, attached hereto) require the proposed lots to meet frontage requirements for all streets on which they front. Appellant disagrees. Mrs. Lamplough owns approximately fifty-four and one half (542) acres of land situated between Williston Road and Patchen Road, two arterial streets in the City. The property at issue isi a so-called "through lot" (i.e., an interior lot having frontage on two or more (2) streets), as well as a so-called "split lot" (i.e., a lot divided by a zoning district boundary line). The existing lot has approximately 285 feet of frontage on Williston Road, and 261 feet of frontage on Patchen Road. The property is situated in both the Commercial 1 (Cl) and Residential 4 (R4) zoning districts. The southerly portion of the property, located in the C1 district and fronting on Williston Road, is currently developed with an existing hotel/restaurant. The northerly portion of the property, located in the R4 district and fronting on Patchen Road, is currently undeveloped. Most commercial uses, including hotel and restaurant use, are not allowed in the R4 district. The applicants propose to create two lots of approximately 1.5 (Lot 1) and 53 (Lot 2) acres. Proposed Lot 1 will front on Williston Road, with approximately 235 feet of frontage thereon. 2 STITZEL, PAGE & FLETCHER, P.C. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 171 BATTERY STREET P.O. BOX 1507 BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05402-1507 Proposed Lot 2 (which will remain a through lot) will front on both Williston Road and Patchen Road, with approximately 50 feet of frontage on Williston Road and 261 feet of frontage on Patchen Road. The existing commercial building will be situated on proposed Lot 2. Under the Zoning Regulations, the minimum frontage requirement in the C1 district is 200 feet for commercial uses located on arterial or collector streets. The minimum frontage requirement in the R4 district for arterial or collector streets is either 100 or 170 feet, depending upon the use proposed. Argument By motion for summary judgment, Appellant has asked this Court to conclude that the Zoning Regulations only require a through lot to meet frontage requirements on one public road. There is no factual or legal basis for such a conclusion. Under both the Zoning Regulations and established principles of the law of zoning, a through lot is required to meet frontage requirements on all of the streets on which it fronts, and land development on a split lot must conform to the requirements for that portion of the lot on which it is located. Appellant's project fails to meet these requirements. Therefore,. Appellant's 3 STITZEL, PAGE & FLETCHER, P.C. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 171 BATTERY STREET P.O. BOX 1507 BURLI NGTON, VERMONT 05402-1507 motion should be denied and summary judgment should be granted in favor of the City. The Zoning Regulations do not specifically address frontage requirements on through lots. However, §28.127 of the Zoning Regulations defines lot frontage as "[t]he boundary of a lot along a public street," and Table 25-1 of the Zoning Regulations, regarding "Area, Density and Dimensional Requirements" sets forth the minimum lot frontage requirements on both "local streets" and "arterial or collector" streets. Additionally, Exhibit 28A of the Zoning Regulations, involving yard requirements, indicates that interior lots that "front" on two streets have two front yards. Read together, it is clear that frontage exists wherever a lot boundary runs along a street, and that a lot fronting on more than one street must comply with the minimum lot frontage requirements for all streets on which it fronts. This requirement is consistent with the purpose of frontage requirements, which historically have existed as a form of density control, preventing overcrowding and avoiding an undue concentration of population. See Anderson's American Law of Zoning (4th ed., 1996), at §9.54. Particularly with regard to through lots, minimum frontage requirements on all streets are necessary to insure the protection of lands adjoining the 4 STITZEL, PAGE & FLETCHER, P.C. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 171 BATTERY STREET P.O. BOX 1507 BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05402-1507 frontage, and the consistent application of land use restrictions) to similarly situated properties. Id. at §9.59. Further, although they present similar problems, the law treats corner lots (which are the subject of the cases cited by Appellant) and through lots differently. Id. Unlike corner lots, through lots have generally been required to comply with setbacks and other dimensional requirements on all streets on which they front, unless application of the dimensional standards would result in a taking of most of the parcel. Id., at §9.59 ("[i]n the usual case, a through lot, with frontage at both ends, is required to observe the setback restrictions at both ends) (emphasis added); see also Levien v. Bernstein, 365 N.Y.S.2d 41, 43 (1975) (Culotta, J., dissenting) ("[t]his case should not be confused with the so-called `though lot' type of case, i.e., those cases involving lots having frontage on two streets . . . Generally, in those cases, the owner must conform to the requirements for each frontage, . . . [unless] the requirements cannot be applied in such a way as to deprive him of the reasonable use of his property") (citing Anderson). Appellant has not suggested, nor could it demonstrate, that meeting the frontage requirements on both Williston and Patchen Roads would deprive it of reasonable use of the property involved here. 5 STITZEL, PAGE & FLETCHER, P.C. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 171 BATTERY STREET P.O. BOX 1507 BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05402-1507 Accordingly, proposed Lot 2 cannot be approved since it fails to comply with the minimum frontage requirements along Williston Road. Appellant has suggested that since proposed Lot 2 satisfies the frontage requirements along Patchen Road it complies with the requirements of the Zoning Regulations, notwithstanding the absence of frontage on Williston Road. For the reasons discussed above, the City believes that Appellant's argument must fail. Appellant's project is also problematic for another, perhaps more significant reason, however. As noted above, this property is a split lot, located in both the C1 and R4 zoning districts. Each of these districts has separate use and dimensional requirements. It is well established that, unless the applicable zoning regulations otherwise provide, any proposed use or development on a lot located in more than one zoning district must meet the dimensional requirements for the district in which it is located. Id. at §9.12; McLaughry v. Town of Norwich, 140 Vt. 49, 54-55 (1981). In other words, depending where on a split lot a project is proposed, it may be necessary to meet the requirements that apply to each portion of the property. Id. In this case, Appellant's project will not meet the frontage requirements for a commercial use (i.e., the hotel/restaurant) located in the C1 M STITZEL, PAGE & FLETCHER, P.C. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 171 BATTERY STREET P.O. BOX 1507 BURLINGTON. VERMONT 05402-1507 district, and it is not permissible to "borrow" or aggregate frontage from residentially zoned property to meet dimensional requirements in a commercial district. Appellant also cannot use frontage located in the R4 district to provide access to a commercial use located in the C1 district. It is reasonable to assume that Appellant will at some point seek to develop that portion of the property located in the R4 district for uses allowed in that district. Given the uses allowed under the Zoning Regulations for the C1 and R4 districts, and the dimensional requirements associated therewith, any development in the R4 district must necessarily be separate and distinct from C1 district development. Development in the R4 district may be precluded, however, if the so-called Patchen Road frontage is allocated to support development in the C1 district, potentially rendering the R4 property unsuitable for development.) To avoid this consequence, and for the other reasons discussed herein, this Court should deny Appellant's 1 It seems likely that the applicants will at some point seek to subdivide Lot 2 along the district boundary to allow development consistent with the uses allowed in the R4 district. Further, it appears to the City that Appellant, through this case, is attempting to set up a future claim that an unconstitutional taking of the R4 property will occur unless it (Appellant) is allowed to create a lot in the C1 district with only 50 feet of frontage on Williston Road. 7 appeal, and grant judgment in this matter in favor of the City. conclusion For all of the foregoing reasons, the City of South Burlington respectfully requests that this Court deny Appellant'sl motion for summary judgment, and issue an order granting summary judgment in the City's favor. DATED at Burlington, Vermont, this (off`' day of December, 1999. son604.1it STITZEL, PAGE & FLETCHER, P.C. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 171 BATTERY STREET P.O. BOX 1507 BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05402-1507 CITY'Q' SOUTH BURLINGTON By: Sti e , Page & Fletcher, P.C. eph S. McLean No Text STITZEL, PAGE & FLETCHER, P.C. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 171 BATTERY STREET P.O. BOX 1507 BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05402-1507 STATE OF VERMONT ENVIRONMENTAL COURT IN RE: APPEAL OF WINDJAMMER HOSPITALITY GROUP DOCKET NO. 137-8-99 Vtec AFFIDAVIT OF RAYMOND J. BELAIR Raymond J. Belair, being duly sworn, deposes and states on his personal knowledge, as follows. 1. I, Raymond J. Belair, am the Zoning Administrative Officer for the City of South Burlington, Vermont. 2. As the Zoning Administrative Officer, I am familiar with the above -referenced matter. 3. Appellant and Evelyn Lamplough, as co -applicants, seek to subdivide a parcel of land owned by Mrs. Lamplough into two (2) lots. 4. It is the City's position that the South Burlington Zoning Regulations require the proposed lots to meet frontage requirements for all streets on which they front. 5. Mrs. Lamplough owns approximately fifty-four and one half (542) acres of land situated between Williston Road and Patchen Road, two arterial streets in the City. 6. The property at issue is a so-called "through lot" (i.e., an interior lot having frontage on two or more (2) streets), as well as a so-called "split lot" (i.e., a lot divided by a zoning district boundary line). 7. The existing lot has approximately 285 feet of frontage on Williston Road, and 261 feet of frontage on Patchen Road. L STITZEL, PAGE & FLETCHER, P.C. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 171 BATTERY STREET P.O. BOX 1507 BURLINGTON. VERMONT 05402 1507 8. The property is situated in both the Commercial 1 (Cl) and Residential 4 (R4) zoning districts. 9. The southerly portion of the property, located in the C1 district and fronting on Williston Road, is currently developed with an existing hotel/restaurant. The northerly portion of the property, located in the R4 district and fronting on Patchen Road, is currently undeveloped. 10. Most commercial uses, including hotel and restaurant use, are not allowed in the R4 district. 11. The applicants propose to create two lots of approximately 1.5 (Lot 1) and 53 (Lot 2) acres. 12. Proposed Lot 1 will front on Williston Road, with approximately 235 feet of frontage thereon. Proposed Lot 2 (which will remain a through lot) will front on both Williston Road and Patchen Road, with approximately 50 feet of frontage on Williston Road and 261 feet of frontage on Patchen Road. 13. The existing commercial building will be situated on proposed Lot 2. 14. Under the Zoning Regulations, the minimum frontage requirement in the C1 district is 200 feet for commercial uses located on arterial or collector streets. The minimum frontage requirement in the R4 district for arterial or collector streets sois either 100 or 170 feet, depending upon the use proposed. 15. This affidavit is submitted pursuant to V.R.C.P. 56 and is intended to constitute a statement of undisputed material facts in support of the City of South Burlington's cross motion for summary judgment in the above -referenced matter. 2 DATED at Burlington, Vermont, this day of December 1999. Subscribed and sworn to before me this W day of Decei�nber, 1999. 05.lit STITZEL, PAGE & FLETCHER, P.C. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 171 BATTERY STREET P.O. BOX 1507 BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05a02-1507 Public ission Expires: 2/10/03 3 R ymond J. Belair STITZEL, PAGE & FLETCHER, P.C. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 171 BATTERY STREET P.O. BOX 1507 BURLINGTON, VER.MONT 05402-1507 (802) 660-2555 (VO10E/TDD) STEVEN F. STITZEL FAX (802) 660-2552 PATTI R. PAGE' E-MAIL(FIRM2555CFIRMSPF.COM) ROBERT E. FLETCHER WRITER'S E-MAIL (JMCLEAN rc IRMSPF.COM) JOSEPH S. MCLEAN TIMOTHY M. EUSTACE ('ALSO ADMITTED IN N.Y.) September 20, 1999 Carolyn Hutchinson, Clerk Vermont Environmental court 255 N. Main Street, 1st Floor Barre, VT 05641 OF COUNSEL ARTHUR W. CERNOSIA Re: Appeal of Windjammer Hospitality Group and Evelyn Lamplough Docket No. 137-8-99 Vtec Dear Carolyn: I am writing with regard to the above -referenced matter. Specifically, having had an opportunity to confer with the Administrative Officer for the City of South Burlington, the City hereby notifies the Court that it has no further objection to Appellant's Motion for Extension of Time for Filing Notice of Appeal dated August 20, 1999, or to this Court's Entry Order granting same. Accordingly, the City believes that its Motion to Vacate dated August 31, 1999 may be denied as moot. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Please let me know if you have any questions. Very truly yours, JoseDh"' McLean JSM/bjl cc: Raymond Belair Eric Knudsen, Esq. S=4134 . cor CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 (802) 846-4106 FAX (802) 846-4101 September 14 , 1999 Joseph S. McLean, Esquire Stitzel, Page & Fletcher, PC P.O. Box 1507 Burlington, Vermont 05402. Re: Windjammer Hospitality Group Appeal Dear Joe: Here is my time line on the events surrounding the above matter. plicant was tThe skchold that thelan for this Planni application was held on 3/23/99 (minutes enclosed). As you can see, the Commission couldnot theve a 2 lot subdivision. On June 5,ot. On / 19999the a publicplicant submitted a notice was placed in the (Free plat application for( ) Press for a public hearing to be held on 6/22/99. The public hearing was held on 6/22/99 (minutes enclosed). Staff prepared a decision to deny the request which was signed by the Chairman of the Commission that same evening. On 6/23/99 Joe Weith sent a letter to Walt Levering (copy enclosed) enclosing a copy of the Findings of Fact, Conclusions, & Decision. At some later date, I received a call from Eric Knudson asking about when the written decision was going to be issued. He has stated that this call was on 7/19/99. I can not confirm or deny the accuracy of this date. I told him that since we were very busy and short staffed that we were running behind and that we would try to get it out as soon as we could. I had forgotten that we had already sent outdecision ision. About a week later I was on 6 3/99 and called Mr, Knudsen going through leftga essate and ge on hiscvovered oice mail that we hadat we had out the / mailed it out on 6/23/99 to Walt Levering. We did not send the letter out certified mail since we are not required by law. We always use regular mail for these types of mailings. The letter did not come back to us so we must assume that he received it. If you have any questions, please give me a call. Sincerely, and J. Belair, Administrative Officer RW/mcp Encls S TITZEL, PAGE & FLETCHER, P.C. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 171 BATTERY STREET P.O. BOX 1507 BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05402-1507 (802) 660-2555 (VO10E/i'DD) STEVEN F. STITZEL FAX (802) 660-2552 PATTI R. PAGE* E-MAH4FIRM2555@FIRMSPF.COM) ROBERT E. FLETCHER WRITER'S E-MAIL (JMCLEANQFIRMSPF.COM) JOSEPH S. MCLEAN TIMOTHY M. EUSTACE (-ALSO ADWITED IN N.Y.) August 31, 1999 Carolyn Hutchinson, Clerk Vermont Environmental Court 255 North Main Street, 15` Floor Barre, VT 05641 OF COUNSEL ARTHUR W. CERNOSIA Re: Appeal of Windjammer Hospitality Group and Evelyn Lamplough Docket No. 137-8-99Vtec Dear Ms. Hutchinson: Enclosed for filing with regard to the above -captioned matter is City of South Burlington's Motion to Vacate. Thank you. S' rely, Joseph S. McLean JSM/gmt Enclosure cc: Joe Weith ter Eric M. Knudsen, Esq. SON574.COR STITZEL, PAGE & FLETCHER, P.C. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 171 BATTERY STREET P.O. BOX 1507 BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05402-1507 STATE OF VERMONT ENVIRONMENTAL COURT IN RE: WINDJAMMER HOSPITALITY ) VERMONT ENVIRONMENTAL COURT GROUP AND EVELYN LAMPLOUGH ) DOCKET NO. 137-8-99Vtec CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON'S MOTION TO VACATE NOW COMES the Appellee, City of South Burlington, by and through its attorneys Stitzel, Page & Fletcher, P.C., and asks this Court to vacate its Entry Regarding Motion, dated August 25, 1999, in the above -referenced matter. Memorandum This is an appeal by Appellants, Windjammer Hospitality Group and Evelyn Lamplough, from a decision of the South Burlington Planning Commission denying an application for subdivision approval. By motion filed August 23, 1999 (and received by the City by mail on that same date) Appellants asked this Court to extend the applicable time for filing a notice of appeal pursuant to V.R.A.P. 4, arguing that such an extension is warranted due to excusable neglect. By Entry Regarding Motion dated August 25, 1999, this Court granted Appellants' motion without first providing the City with a reasonable opportunity to review and respond to same. Vermont Rule of Appellate Procedure 4 provides that "[t]he superior or district court may extend the time for filing the notice of appeal by any party . . . (2) for excusable neglect, upon motion and notice, if request is made within 30 days after the expiration of the period originally prescribed by this subdivision." Where motion and notice are required before a court may act, principles of due process and fundamental justice require some reasonable opportunity for the non-moving party to be heard on a matter prior to the issuance of an order relative thereto. Compare V.R.C.P. 78(b) ("[a]ny party opposed to the granting of a written motion shall file a memorandum in opposition thereto, not more than 15 days after service of the motion, unless otherwise ordered by the Court"). No such opportunity to be heard was afforded to the City with regard to the motion at issue in this proceeding. Based on the above, the City of South Burlington respectfully requests that this Court vacate its Entry Regarding Motion in the above -referenced matter, and that it provide the City with 15 business days from August 23, 1999 to respond to Appellants' motion. DATED at Burlington, Vermont, this 31st day of August, 1999. son596.1it 99-5869 STITZEL, PAGE & FLETCHER, P.C. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 171 BATTERY STREET P.O. BOX 1507 BURLINGTON. VERMONT 05402 1507 CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON By: STITZE , PAGE & FLETCHER, P.C., Its,prttq4eys bph S. McLean 2 CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 (802) 846-4106 FAX (802) 846-4101 September 2, 1999 Carolyn Hutchinson, Clerk Vermont Environmental Court 255 North Main Street, 15t Floor Barre, Vermont 05641 Re: Appeal of Windjammer Hospitality Group Docket No. 137-8-99 Vtec Dear Ms. Hutchinson: Please be advised that there are no interested parties in this matter. If you have any questions, please let me know. Sincere y " Jf/ Raimond J. Belair, Administrative Officer RIB/mcp cc: Joseph S. McLean, Esquire Eric M. Knudsen, Esquire PLANNING COMMISSION 22 JUNE 1999 2. Consent Agenda. - a) Design review request of Anchorage Inn to replace an existing 40 square foot freestanding sign with a new 32 square foot freestanding sign, 108 Dorset Street b) Design review request of Donny's Pizza to replace an existing wall sign (on awning) with a new wall sign (on awning), 364 Dorset Street. No issues were raised on either item. Mr. Dinklage moved to approve the two consent agenda items subject to the conditions in the Director of Planning & Zoning's memorandum of 18 June 1999 Ms Quimby seconded Motion passed unanimously. 3. Sketch plan application of Ashbrook Park Homeowners Association to amend a previously approved 17 unit planned unit development consisting of three buildings. The amendment consists of creating separate lots under the footprint of each unit, 701 Dorset Street: Mr. Morwood explained that the project was approved in the 1980's. The developer made a mistake and got approval for a condominium project and then conveyed the units as town houses. The issue was never raised until about a month ago. Mr. Belair said there is no problem doing this. It has been done several times before. Members agreed to go straight to final plat. 4. Public Hearing: Preliminary plat application of Windjammer Hospitality Group/Evelyn Lamplough to subdivide a 54.4 acre parcel with a hotel/restaurant use, into two lots of 52.9 acres and 1.5 acres, 1076 Williston Road: Mr. Knudsen said the application is identical to the one seen at sketch plan review. No development is proposed. The purpose of the subdivision is to isolate a piece of property that is encumbered by a right of first refusal. "The outstanding issue is frontage on Williston Road. Lot 2 would have only 50 feet of frontage on that road, and the City Attorney says this is not in compliance with the Ordinance as 200 feet is that requirement. The applicant said they will dispute this as there is 200 feet of frontage on Patchen Road, and they feel this meets the requirement. Pa PLANNING COMMISSION 22 JUNE 1999 Mr. Burgess said the Commission will take the recommendation of its own attorney. Mr. Knudsen noted the business is having a problem getting financing because the lenders want real collateral. Mr. O'Rourke moved that based on the Findings of Fact and Conclusions in the document numbered #SD-99-32 the South Burlington Planning Commission hereby denies the Applicants' request to subdivide a 54.352 acre parcel into two lots of 1.476 acres (lot # 1) and 52.876 acres (lots #2 1076 Williston Road, for the following reason: 1. The application does not comply with or satisfy the requirements of Section 25.00 of the zoning regulations. Proposed lot #2 will not meet the 200 minimum frontage requirement on Williston Road in the C 1 District. Ms. Quimbv seconded. The motion was then passed unanimously. 5. Sketch Plan Application of Dorset Land Company to amend a previously approved planned unit development consisting of a 21,750 square foot general office building, 184 unit congregate housing facility, and a 79 unit extended stay hotel. The amendment consists of constructing a 24 unit extended stay hotel building with an overhead walkway to the existing extended stay hotel in place of the general office building, 415 Dorset Street: Mr. DesLauriers showed what is now approved and what is currently built Access and parking would be the same: 35 surface parking spaces. The building footprint would be smaller. The addition would have 24 suites. Three of these would have 2 bedrooms, the others 1 bedroom. They would eliminate one bedroom in the existing hotel and make it a meeting room. The project would go from 13% building coverage to 11% and from 3 1 % total lot coverage to 28%. They would also go from 57 to 35 parking spaces. The change in use should result in a 35% reduction in traffic. There would be an increase of225 gpd in sewer use. Yr. DesLauriers said they understand that they need City Council approval for the overhead connector. Mr. Belair said the Council needs to approve a structure that goes over a city street. Mr. DesLauriers said they have submitted design review information which is being heard in another meeting tonight. The building will be sprinklered. PLANNING COMMISSION 23 MARCH 1999 6 The applicant shall obtain a zoning permit within six months pursuant to Section 27.302 of the zoning regulations or this approval is null and void. 7 The applicant shall obtain a Certificate of Occupancy/Compliance from the Administrative Officer prior to use of the newly converted space. 8 Any change to the site plan shall require approval by the South Burlington Planning Commission. Ms Barone seconded Motion passed unanimously. 6. Design Review application of Design Sign, Inc., to change the graphics on 4 signs, 205 Dorset Street: Mr. Floyd explained that they are changing the top part of the signs only. The new graphics will have a dark background with light letters. No issues were raised. Mr. O'Rourke moved that the Planning Commission approve the design review application of Design Signs, Inc, to change the graphics on four signs 205 Dorset Street as depicted on drawings and photographs prepared by Design Signs Inc with a stamped received date of February 22 1999 in accordance with the following stip- ulations: 1 This approval is for compliance with only the design review criteria contained in the South Burlington Sign Ordinance (i.e., Section 4(a)-(d)) The decision of whether or not this application complies with other provisions of the Sign Ordinance shall be made by the Code Officer. 2 In accordance with Section 23(h) of the Sign Ordinance the two nonconforming signs on the property (A Plus Beepers) shall be brought into conformance with Sections 19(c) and 4 by 3/23/01. Sign design approval shall be obtained from the Planning Commission prior to changing these signs. 3 The applicant shall obtain a sign permit from the Code Officer within six months of this approval or this approval is null and void. 4 Any change to the sign design shall require approval of the Planning Commission. Ms Barone seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 7. Sketch plan application of Evelyn Lamplough & Windjammer Hospitality Group to subdivide a 54.352 acre parcel into two lots of 1.476 acres, (lot #1) and 52.876 acres (lot 42), 1076 Williston Road: Mr. Levering said the proposed subdivision would help them in their program to get some financing. They have been leasing property from Mrs. Lamplough and now want to exercise the option to purchase it. There is no additional development planned, and they are not trying to increase anything. PLANNING COMMISSION 23 MARCH 1999 Mr. Knudson explained the conditions of the original lease which referenced three lots (A, B, and Q. The proposed subdivision would merge lots A and B, so there would be only two lots. The actual lot to be subdivided is a bit larger than parcel C. It would have full frontage on Williston Rd. Mr. Knudson also explained the terms of a right of first refusal which Harpers have on lot C. This right of first refusal would be impacted by the proposed subdivision. Windjammer would continue to lease that piece of land. Mr. Dinklage noted that the applicant is asking the Commission to create a nonconforming lot which it cannot do. Mr. Knudson said it is there position that this is not a nonconforming lot. Mr. Burgess said the Commission would take its attorney's opinion on this. Mr. Weith said there could be a planning benefit for a lot with no frontage. Accesses could be combined, but the sign would be lost and would have to go on property the applicant owns. He said there is a reason for frontage requirements, and they should be met. Mr. Burgess said it appears that if the applicant came in with an application, it would be denied. 8. Continuation of items # 8 and 9 on the agenda: Ms. Barone moved to continue Item #8 on the agenda to 4/27/99 and Item #9 to 5/11/99, as requested by the applicants. Mr. Dinklage seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 9. Appoint advisory committee for Market Street Canopy study: Mr. Dinklage moved to appoint the committee as recommended by staff in its memo of 22 March 1999. Ms. Barone seconded. Motion passed unanimously. As there was no further business to come before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 8:35 p.m. South Burlington Planning Commission 4 STITZEL, PAGE & FLETCHER, P.C. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 171 BATTERY STREET P.O. BOX 1 i07 BURLINGTON. VERMONT 05402-1507 (802) 660-2555 (VO10E/TDD) STEVEN F. STITZEL FAX (802) 660-2552 PATTI R. PAGE• E-MAIL(FIRM2555, i FIRMSPF.COM) ROBERT E. FLETCHER WRITER'S E-MAIL (JMCLEAN ii1FIRMSPF.COM) JOSEPH S.MCLEAN TIMOTHY M. EUSTACE ("ALSO ADMITTED IN N.Y.) August 18, 1999 Carolyn Hutchinson, Clerk Vermont Environmental Court 255 N. Main Street, 1" Floor Barre, VT 05641 Re: Appeal of Windjammer Hopsitality Group Docket No. 137-8-99 Vtec Dear Carolyn: OF COUNSEL ARTHUR W CERNOSIA Enclosed for filing with regard to the above -captioned matter is my Entry of Appearance on behalf of the City of South Burlington. Thank you. Sinc y, seph S. McLean JSM/jp Enclosure cc: Eric M. Knudsen, Esq. Joseph Weith Sor:SEE.ccr STATE OF VERMONT ENVIRONMENTAL COURT IN RE: APPEAL OF WINDJAMMER HOSPITALITY GROUP DOCKET NO. 137-8-99 Vtec ENTRY OF APPEARANCE NOW COMES JOSEPH S. MCLEAN, of the firm of Stitzel, Page & Fletcher, P.C., and hereby enters his appearance in the above - referenced matter by and on behalf of the City of South Burlington. son595.1it STITZEL, PAGE & FLETCHER, P.C. ATTORNEN'S AT LAW ]71 RATTFRI STREET I'.l1, MIX 15111 lit i'. ;%(m'111\.\'FIM10\'1' iI-J11'_' 1.., 07 Dated at Burlington, Vermont, this 18th day of August, 1999. By: STITZEL, PAGE & FLETCHER, P.C. Attorneys for the City o/P South Burlington 1 S. McLean AUG-30-1999 MON 10:48 AM STIT(EL. PAGE FLETCHER PC FAX K 3021"n 52 P. 0 1 S'i'ITZE[a, -PAGE & FLETCHER, P.C. AT I'URNE `i'S AT Lit W 171 rIATTERY STREET P.0 14OX 1507 31]RLING'I'QN Vf-."RMONI' 05g0:,).1507 STEW-N h, STITM, (Sn7•) (60.2559 (V0ICIII7I)D) PAI II R• PACYP FASC 002) GG0-2552 RC)ItISRTE.rixi,c'Iiflt3 i`ry'n :ht� � CrT'IxtiTzPl.Cir�t} <}1 4"i�JNSt:Y. tX'Itrf' S • Cvt ,L-��"iTA fug "_ "I�CL,�� AR.CIJI: W. C'P.feNCic1A JCiSL•PII S. MCLEAN TIMM) IY Al. EUS !'ACE ("ALSO AI)\bri'm IN N Y.; FAC'SIM1LE TRAN4NIiTTAF ST4FaF,'T i)ate: August 30, 1999 o: Ray Belair Fax 846-4101 Ite: Windjammer Hospitality Group Sender: Joe McLean MESSAGE Transmitted herewith are the most recent eoI°resportc?cnce cons anlinl; the aF)ove- refcrenecd matter. Please. review and cal[ to discuss ;any questions car c��IrIIx eMs you may have. Thank you. I hIs irus..iagc is frtfund`ki Oidy for the we ot'thC nddres5ce and may CUr,tain lltformali(Ip that i :0 fld cCsnriacrti I. IryoII lee TkIt 7hC inlrndcd rCcipicnt, ytrn aru hCrt�y tl0tif"22d that tts imrnudiflanfy disscrninatioll or .his' cmintunf,atiau is strlCOy Erolaibizi�d. If yoil haxc re ctvrd Ibis Corr mumiclltion in ct'ror, pt "c tat)iit;V ,�Iy 6y tc.IcpEuine (802460-2,555). Thank you AUG-30-1999 MOM 10:48 AM STI EL PAGE FLETCHER PC FAX NO. 8026P, 552 Po 02 LANGROCK SPERRY & WOOL MILIDLE'DURY Niar F. longjwk Non moco Film WIM;AM a. MINT, Jr. )-In)" W, Swart John F. Evvrh Sj,.,-,%n M, Kai, ay )kbn L. Kalhwr Mitchel L. ptzl K.-Aii R. Tirown Vaank 1-1, Luaagrnrl UjAkd'in'ra 11, R&:3idol B;Acm N,Irs MeLILIgIditl August-20, 1999 Carolyn Hutchinson, Clerk Vormoat Environmental Court 255 N. NfililL SU-CUI, I" Flour Burt;, VT 05641 ATTORNFY8 AT LAW A Partnership Profi:suionil Corpororion Re; In Re: Windianimer Hospitality Group and Evelyn Lumplough Dear M,%, I lutchinsom 13UMIJODM4 miehael W. wt.1 Murk L. Sperry ChrisrllpM L Davii Uum L. Murphy Thom' Z. Crar6on Aluoit 1. BLU 1-ia,1% B. EW, r,)t Laic M.Knud=r) Arfiliuwd 0tamdi RNund &ay, 117 AXPLYTOL Burliogloal Office Ple-mo find enclosed for filing in the above -referenced ratter a Motion for Extension of Time for Filing Notice of Appcal, Affidavit of Eric M. Knudsen and Affidavit of Walter B. Levering, Jr, Please Call me if you have any questions. Vcry truly yours, Eric V. Knudsen EMK/sII cknLId.9en@jangrock.coni cc: 'Walter B. Levering, Jr. Josoph S, McLean, Esq. ✓ [5_'295.1 MIDDUBURY: 1115- Pt"Isin, Strict - P.C. L)rjwur 351 , Wdlobury. VermoaL D5753 (802)388,6356 - Fix (802) 336,6149 Emnfli BURLINCTON: 275 Colicp Scrccr - P.O. B,,x 721 . BUrIiVora. Vtralcllt 0540,472 (80l) M421? - Pay (802)964.0137 • EmniI4 �'E k) 2 3 190A STITZEL, PAGE & FLETCHER PC — - j AUG-30-1999 MO\ 10:49 ? STtyZ.EL PAGE FLETCHER Pi, FAX NO, 602Fr-T52 P. 03 sTATE Orr VERMON t CHITTENDEN COUNTY, SS IN RE: WINDJAMMER HOSPITALITY } GROUT' and LVEL 'N ) VERMONT ENVIRONMENTAL COURT LAMPLOUGH ) DOCKET NO. Iti�QTit: N.FOR EXTENSION OF_Ti_ E f j(iR t NOW COMES Windjarnrner Hospitality Group ("Win4arntncr"), by and through its attorneys, Langroek Sperry & Wool, and pursuant to V.R.A,P. 4 hereby moves the Court for i art extension of the time period for filing its notice «f appeal to the date such notice was I actually filed. In support of this Motion. Windjammer submits the followring nicmorandum and the affidavits attached hereto of Eric M, Knudsen, Esq., and Walter B. Levering, Jr. MUIL�,EDLM On June 22, 1999, the South Burlington Planning Commission held a public hearing i on Windjalntner's Subdivision Application. The Application was denied by a vote of the Commission but no written decision was issued that evening. As set forth in the affidavit of Eric M, Knudsen attached hereto, on July 13, 1999, he contacted Walter Levering of Windjammer Hospitality Group to inquire as to whether he had received a written decision yet from Soutlt Burlington. Asset forth in the affidavit of Waiter B. Levering, Jr. attached hereto, , Mr. Levering had not received a written copy of the decision as of that date. On July 19, i 999, less sitar: thirty (30) days from the date of the public hearing, Appellant" s counsel, Eric Knudsen, contacted Ray Belair of the South Burlington Planning and Zoning Office and inquired as to the status of the written decision. Mr. l3clair indicated to Mr, Knudsen that the written decision had riot yet been issued and that they were a bit backed up but that a written AUG-30-1999 MON 10:49 AM ST EL PAGE FLETCHER PC FAX NO. 8028r552 P. 04 decision would be forthcoming. On July 27, 1999, Mr. Knudsen received a voice mail message iron; Mr. Belair in which he stated that contrary to his previous telephone II conversation, the written decision had actually been issued and sent to Mr. Levering by correspondence dated Amc 23, 1999. At Mr. Knudsen's request, Mr. Belair sent a copy of said correspondence and decision to both Mr. Knudsen and Mr. Levering which was received ,; by each on July 28, 1999. On July 29, 1999, Windjaanniet filed it's Notice of Appeal with the South Burlington Planning Commission, i Although it hits yet to be raised as an issue iu this appeal, the Notice of Appeal technically was filed beyond the 30 day appeal period from the date of the written decision ' I which was June 22, I999. V.RA.P. 4 provides, however, that the time for filing a Notice of Appeal may be extended upon notice and motion for excusable nebiect if a request therefor is I made within 30 days after the expiration of the period originally prescribed. In accordance i with V.R.A.P. 4, this Motion is being; made within 30 days of the expiration of the original appeal period date, July 22, 1999. As set forth above, and in the affidavits attached hereto, neither Windjammer nor its icgal counsel received a copy of the written decision until hily 28, 1999, despite South Burlington's purported delivery of the written Notice of Decision to Walter Levering by correspondence dated June 23, 1999. Further, Windjammer's counsel mode specific inquiries to Ray Belair and relied on those statements in not filing a Notice of Appeal until after the appeal period had expired. For the above stated reasons, the failure to timely file a notice of appeal constitutes excusable neglect under V,R.A.P. 4 and therefore this timely Motion for Extension of Time to mile Notice of Appeal should he granted to accept the Notice of Appeal Tiled July 29, 1999 as timely. 2 AUG-30-1999 MON 10�50 AM STT EL PAGE FLETCHER PC FAX NO. 8026F'12552 P. 05 I 151604.1 DATED at Burlington, Vermont this 20 iay of August, 1999. LANGROCK SPERRY & WOOL Eric M. Knudsen, Esq. 275 College Street, V0. Box 721 Burlington, VT 05402-0721 (802) 864-0217 Attorneys for Windjammer t-l!ospitality Group. 3 AUG-30-1999 MON 10:50 AM STITZEL PAGE FLETCHER PC FAX NO. 802PPO7552 P. 06 STATE OF VERMONT MITTENDEN COUNTY, SS IN R& WINDJAMMER HOSPITALITY GROUP and L, VELYN VERMONT ENVIRONMENTAL COURT LAMPLOUGH DOCKET NO. AFFIDAVIT OF ERIC M. KNIiRaN I, Eric M. Knudsen under oath depose and say that: 1 1 acted as counsel to Windjammer Hospitality Croup ("Win4iainnler") in its 8PFlication for subdivision to the South Budington Planning Comi-nission and attended a public; hearing on behalf of Windjammer on June 22,199.9. 2. On July 13 1999,1 contacted Walter Levering of Wjjjdj alilmer Hospitality Group and inquired as to whether he had received a copy ofa %Titten Notice of Decision frorn the SouCi Burlington Planning Commission. He responded that he had not yet received any written notice, 3. On Jul), 19, 1999, 1 contacted Ray Belair of the South Burlington Planxiing,-Md Zoning Office mid inquired of him as to whether aArritten decision had been issued in Windjammer's subdivision application. He informed me that 11ownitten decision had burr. and flint they were bit backed up in i3sLiing written decisions but that a decision would be foythcorning. 4, On July 27, 1999,1 received avoice mail mesa-ge from Ray l3clair in which he stated that contrary to our earlier conversation a written decision had been issued acid Conveyed to N-If. Lovajhig daLod Jung 23, 1999, 1 tuft a voice mail message for Mr. Belair asking hint to provide me and Windjammer with copies of said transmittal and written Notice of Decision. AUG-30-1999 MON 10:51 AM STTTZEL PAGE FLETCHER PC FAX NO, 802E""552 P. 07 • i J 5. On July 28, 1999, I received a copy of South Burlington's transmittal letter as well as a written Notice of Decision dated June 22, 1999. I I 6. p;z July 29, 1999,1 filed a Notice of Appeal on behalf of Windjammer Hospitality Group with the Clerk of the South Burlington Planning Commission. � I DATED at BLAM ,ton, Vermont this 20-' day of August, 1999, Eric M. Knudsen, Esq. STATE OF VERMONT CHITTFNDE-N COUN'rY, SS. SUBSCRIBED and SWORN to before me this � O day of August, 1999, Totary l' itkki ' 13t4U5.1 i 2 AUG-30-1999 MON 10:51 AM STT EL PAGE FLETCHER PC FAX K. 8028P 552 P. 08 J STATE OF VERMONT Cl-TrrrENDEN COUNTY, SS IN RC: WINDJAMMER HOSPITALITY ) ! GROUP and EVELYN ) VERMONT ENVIRONMENTAL COUI:'1' � LAMPLOUGH ) DOCKET NO. AFF11)AV1T OF WAd TER B. L F.RTNG, JIB I, WALTER B. LFVERING, JR., manager of Windjammer Hospitality Group, LLC, under oath propose and say that: 1. 1 attended the public hcaring before the South Burlington Planning Commission on Junc 22, 1999 as the representative of Windjammer Hospitality Group in its application i'or subdivision. On July 13, 1999,1 received a call horn our attorney, Eric M. Knudsen, who � inquired as to whether I had received a written Notice of Decision from the South Burlington i Pta=fining Commission. I told him that I had not received any such written notice, as of that date. 3. On July 28, 1999, I first received a copy of the written Notice of Decision which wu transmitted to me with correspondence dated June 23, 1999. I DATED at South Burlington, Vermont tnis _19]!-63, of August, 19 9, C Wa1 ,-r B. Levering, Jr. STATE" OF VERMONT CI-1117I7ENDEN COUNTY, SS. SUBSCRIBED and SWORN to before me this _f l day of August, 1 99. IS 1606.1 40tary - lie AUG-30-1999 MON 10:52 AM STiTZEL PAGE FLETCHER PC FAX NO, 8028RO2552 P, 09 Environmental Cour, of vermont State of vermont ENTRY RBGARD ING NOT I ON In Rea Appeal of Windjammer Hospitality Group 1 137-8-99 Vtec [Mclean/I(,iudsen] Title: Motion 8xt. of Time File 90L .ofAppeal, No. 1 Filed c.n: A_:gL:st 23, 1999 Filed Ev: '':ludsen, Eric M. , Attorney for: Appellant Windjammer Hospitality Group 52espaalse . , ��r:� Compliancs by Denied scheduled for hearing on! Ocher at — -- Time Allotted Judge G DatEJ Dace copies ser.C`toc Clerkf; z.iit3als Y Copies sent to: Attorney Eric M. Knudsexi for Appellant Windjammer k?o }vitality Group Attorney Joseph McLean for Sou- Burlington, City or y rlo' STIML, rA(7,E . FLFTCIi Fi PC VERMONT ENVIRONMENTAL COURT August 9, 1999 ----------------------- south Burlington, City of I 575 Dorset Street South Burlington VT 05403 ------------------------------------------- (802) 479-4486 1st Floor 255 North Main Street Barre, Vermont 05641 In R.re: P-! peal. of Windjammer HCCZPitdaiGrouf)cc•;et No. 137•-8-99 Vtec Environmental Court docket number 137-8-?9 Vt:e:! l:as been assigned to the above - referenced zoning board/planning commission appeal. The notice of appeal was received at the Environmental. Court on Augusr 3, 1999. Please use the Environmental Court docket n,�mber wh'cn. fllinq r..ny documents or asking any questions concerning this case. tiel--mont Rules of Civil Procedure No- 74 acid 'r5 ;e) , as amended, set out. the procedures -to follow in this appeal, t^.e following: , 1. A person filing the appeal .s c :.�. r. atx "appel_lant" . Appel3 •:,nt has r_'.irty (30) days f:,.orr, the dare tl:e t Ot.-ee of. appeal was filed tc file with this Court the statement. of qu,�._:tic::= I — Pi -Led by V.R.C.1 . 76 (e) (4) (B) . This r;�:aternent should be specific because it will govern the scope of the appc—al. 2. V.1?.C'.P. 76(r_} a� .,~� d efY:2:c:"_av ,T�.xly �, 1.?9E, r_eq,ur,_.• _1.e <,lerk , ,,�nc_e of. the zoning boa-3/p1an.r;.�.r_:; cc Rrieiss c:x tr, i;.r.:r✓. t� the ei.tant a list. of all interested par;�i.�-:-: r,i.:.i instru:.tions zO se:-��- r�ot:ice upon the interested parties t1lat the appeal has k,ee.n filed arld to give them the add,- ass of they "I(n.rt allcw them to ,uartici... �t:e in the case here. we zequest that: r.he t.:,orr:/city send to the CO rt a copy of the list t prov'.d?d to ther�r E 11�3nt . The appellant :r,u:>r. -r�rLd 0.ice t . ; n rG_t efi , fx t .�• ; to court :>r.:vc z1 a 0- the date- of c t. �:, this ,, a.�a.u, i request that t b� ap e7.l3rx.: a . _ .Y us a fiat o t hja ' rye. _•g�:LF received the appell<ant'.:. :zoti.ce^ tc .r.,.::ereste, parties. 3. A person with standing to oppose t 1,e appear is called an "appellee". Appellees have twenty (<t0) oa,'S �::-"r the date the appellant serves them with the notice that tlie appey?. has br'ezi filed, to file their entry of appearance (r.a�1aest � partL.c:�ipatc.) w:itkl this Court. Failure to file an. a.ppeas .r w_.t:i1� x ,,.hj.s time may result in the case proc eding to a mer_*s hear ,,k without them. All parties who are participating in this case are responsible for sending copies of their court filings to the other parties. The case will be ready for hearing when the time for filing the appellant's statement of questions has expired. The Court may extend that time if requested by written motion. The Clerk of the Court will contact the parties to arrange for a pre -hearing telephone conference with Judge Merideth Wright, and the case will be set for a merits hearing to be held in or near the county in which the case originated. Please note that under 24 VSA 4471 (1) these appeals are de novo, unless the municipality has adopted procedures to make them on the record. Sincerely, QGJ__ J As�r J c L. Goule 0e, Acting Dep. Clerk Vt. Environmental Court CC: Eric M. Knudsen, Attorney for Appellant, Windjammer Hospitality Group Open Case, South Burlington, City of FAXED COPIES DO NOT MEET FILING DEADLINES. FAXED DOCUMENTS MAY BE AUTHORIZED IN EXTRFNE CIRCUMSTANCES. PLEASE DO NOT FAX WITHOUT AUTHORIZATION. IF YOU HAVE NOT PROVIDED THE COURT WITH A 'TELEPHONE NUMBER WHERE YOU CAN BE REACHED FOR THE PURPOSE OF TELEPHONE CONFERENCES, PLEASE DO SO. R ) STATE OF VERMONT CHITTENDEN COUNTY, SS IN RE: WINDJAMMER HOSPITALITY ) GROUP and EVELYN ) VERMONT ENVIRONMENTAL COURT LAMPLOUGH ) DOCKET NO. NOTICE OF APPEAL TO: City of South Burlington Planning Commission, Clerk NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that Windjammer Hospitality Group ("Appellant") hereby gives Notice of Appeal to the Vermont Environmental Court from the decision of the City of South Burlington Planning Commission dated June 22, 1999 denying Appellant's subdivision application. A copy of said decision is attached hereto. 150649.1 Dated at Burlington, Vermont, this 'day of July, 1999. Langrock, Sperry & Wool By: Eric M. Knudsen, Esq. 275 College Street PO Box 721 Burlington, VT 05402 (802) 864-0217 E C E I V D JUL City of So. Burlington } LANGROCK SPERRY & WOOL MIDDLEBURY ATTORNEYS AT LAW BURLINGTON Peter F. Langrock Michael W. Wool Ellen Mercer Fallon A Partnership Mark L. Sperry William B. Miller, Jr. Christopher L. Davis James W. Swift Including a Professional Corporation Liam L. Murphy Emily J. Joselson Thomas Z. Carlson John F. Evers Alison J. Bell Susan M. Murray - John L. Kellner Lisa B. Shelkrot Mitchell L. Pearl Eric M. Knudsen Kevin E. Brown Frank H.Langrock Beth Robinson F. Rendol Barlow Affiliated Counsel: Devin McLaughlin Roland Gray, III July 29, 1999 REPLY TO: Burlington Office VIA HAND DELIVERY City of South Burlington Planning Commission, Clerk 575 Dorset Street South Burlington, Vermont 05403 Re: Windjammer Hospitality Group Notice of Appeal Dear Sir/Madam: Please find enclosed a Notice of Appeal to the Vermont Environmental Court on behalf of Windjammer Hospitality Group. I have enclosed the filing fee of $150.00. Please provide me with a list of interest persons in accordance with V.R.C.P. 76. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions. Very truly yours, Eric M. Knudsen eknudsen411).lanizi-ock. coin EMK/emk Enclosures c: Walter Levering, Jr. Robert Eastman, Esq. R E C E I V I-C-D JUL 2 9 1999 City of So. Burlington MIDDLEBURY: 111 S. Pleasant Street • P.O. Drawer 351 • Middlebury, Vermont 05753-0351 (802) 388-6356 • Fax (802) 388.6149 • Email: attorneys@langrock.com BURLINGTON: 275 College Street • P.O. Box 721 • Burlington, Vermont 05402-0721 (802) 864.0217 • Fax (802) 864-0137 • Email: attorneys Ccvlangrock.corn CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 (802) 846-4106 FAX (802) 846-4101 June 23, 1999 Walt Levering Windjammer Hospitality Group 1076 Williston Road South Burlington, Vermont 05403 Re: Two (2) Lot Subdivision, 1076 Williston Road Dear Mr. Levering: Enclosed please find a copy of the Findings of Fact, Conclusions and Decision on the above referenced project approved by the Planning Commission on 6/22/99. If you have any questions, please give me a call. Sin erely, 4 04"'� Joe eith, Director Pla ing & Zoning JW/mcp Memorandum - Planning June 22, 1999 agenda items June 18, 1999 to modify the maximum building coverage and setback requirements but not maximum lot coverage. This problem can be resolved by recording a "Notice of Conditions" indicating that for zoning and subdivision purposes all the lots are to be treated as one (1) lot. Lot size/frontage: The footprint lots will not meet the 9500 square foot minimum lot size requirement and the 80 foot frontage requirement. Section 10.404 of the zoning regulations allows the Planning Commission to modify the minimum lot size and minimum frontage requirements. Other: the revised final plat should include metes and bounds information to tie the corners of each building to property lines. 4) EVELYN LAMPLOUGH & WINDJAMMER HOSPITALITY GROUP - 2 LOT SUBDIVISION - PRELIMINARY PLAT This project consists of subdividing a 54.352 acre parcel into two (2) lots of 1.476 acres (lot # l) and. 52.876 acres (lot #2). This property is developed with a standard restaurant and 176 room motel. The sketch plan was reviewed on 3/23/99 (minutes enclosed). This property located at 1076 Williston Road lies within the C1, R4 and Conservation and Open Space Districts. It is bounded on the west by Holiday Inn, on the south by a single family dwelling, service station, medical office, photo shop and Williston Road, on the east by auto sales and undeveloped land, and on the north by undeveloped land. Lot size/frontage: Both lots meet the minimum lot size requirement of 40,000 square feet. Lot #2 does not meet the 200 foot minimum frontage requirement along Williston Road. This lot is proposed to have 50 feet of frontage. The Planning Commission does not have the authority to waive this requirement (see enclosed letter from City Attorney). Coverage/setbacks: Coverage information for the new lots was not submitted. Setback requirements will be met. 3 I CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BUR.LINGTON, VERMONT 05403 (802) 846-4106 FAX (802) 846-4101 June 18, 1999 Walt Levering Windjammer Hospitality Group 1076 Williston Road South Burlington, Vermont 05403 Re: Two (2) Lot Subdivision, 1076 Williston Road Dear Mr. Levering: Enclosed is the agenda for next Tuesday's Planning Commission meeting and my comments to the Planning Commission. Comments from City Engineer Bill Szymanski and the Fire Department were sent to you at an earlier date. Please be sure someone is present on Tuesday, June 22, 1999 at 7:30 P.M. to represent your request. If you have any questions, please give me a call. Si Joe NV�ith, Director Planning & Zoning JW/mcp Encls CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 (802) 846-4106 FAX (802) 846-4101 June 10, 1999 Walt Levering Windjammer Hospitality Group 1076 Williston Road South Burlington, Vermont 05403 Re: Two (2) Lot Subdivision, 1076 Williston Road Dear Mr. Levering: Enclosed are preliminary comments on the above referenced project from City Engineer, William Szymanski, the Fire Department and myself. Please respond to these comments with additional information and/or revised plans, if appropriate, as soon as possible. If you have any questions, please give me a call Sincerely, 4X4--J� WAOL� Raymond J. Belair, Zoning and Planning Assistant RJB/mcp Encls MEMORANDUM To: South Burlington Planning Commission From: South Burlington Fire Department Re: June 22, 1999 agenda items Date: May 10, 1999 1) Ashbrook Condo Development 701 Dorset Street Acceptable 2) John Larkin 1545 Hinesburg Road The multi -family buildings should be sprinklered 3) Windjammer Hospitality 1076 Williston Road Acceptable 4) Dorset Land Company 415 Dorset Street The building should be sprinklered 5) Estate of Hortense Verchereau 1366 Williston Road Acceptable Dated 4/16/99 Dated 4/21/99 Dated 4/26/99 Dated 5/3/99 Dated 5/5/99 MEMORANDUM To: Applicants/Project Files From: Raymond J. Belair, Zoning & Planning Assistant Re: Preliminary comments, June 22, 1999 agenda items Date: June 10, 1999 ASHBROOK PARK HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION - FOOTPRINT LOTS - SKETCH PLAN — sketch plan submitted is acceptable — the revised final plat should include metes and bounds information to tie the corners of each building to the property lines. — prior to recording the final plat plan, the applicant will be required to record a legal document which indicates that for zoning and subdivision purposes all the lots are to be treated as one (1) lot. EVELYN LAMPLOUGH & WINDJAMMER HOSPITALITY GROUP - 2 LOT SUBDIVISION - PRELIMINARY PLAT the proposed subdivision results in lot #2 having 50 feet of frontage on Williston Road. Section 25.00 of the zoning regulations requires a minimum of 200 feet of frontage. The Planning Commission does not have the authority to approve a lot which does not meet the area and dimensional requirements. DORSET LAND COMPANY - 24 UNIT HOTEL EXPANSION - SKETCH PLAN — applicant will need approval from the City Council to span the City street with the overhead walkway. — indicate gross square footage of building — the Parking Management Plan will need to be amended — the preliminary plat application should include the sewer allocation request and landscaping plan. MEMORANDUM To: South Burlington Planning Commission From: William J. Szymanski, South Burlington City Engineer Re: June 22, 1999 Agenda Items Date: May 10, 1999 DORSET LAND COIV>PANY - DORSET STREET Walkway clearance to Aspen Drive should conform to State Highway standards as they apply to bridges. LAMPLOUGH & WINDJAMMER - 2 LOT SUBDIVISION The Champlain Water District has a large main across this property. This should be shown on the plans. VERCHEREAU - 2 LOT SUBDIVISION - WILLISTON ROAD 1) The r.o.w. to proposed lot #2 should be 20 feet in width. 2) Water service will require crossing Williston Road unless an easement is obtained to tie into the Cottage Grove main. ASHBROOK PARK - DORSET STREET The lot layout plan prepared by Krebs & Lansing Engineers dated September, 1982 and received by City 4/16/99 is acceptable. 1 PUBLIC HEARING SOUTH BURLINGTON PLANNING COMMISSION The South Burlington Planning Commission will hold a public hearing at the South Burlington City Hall, Conference Room, 575 Dorset Street, South Burlington, Vermont on Tuesday, June 22, 1999, at 7:30 P.M. to consider the following: 1) Preliminary plat application of Windjammer Hospitality Group/Evelyn Lamplough to subdivide a 54.4 acre parcel with a hotel/restaurant use into two (2) lots of 52.9 acres and 1.5 acres, 1076 Williston Road. Copies of the application are available for public inspection at the South Burlington City Hall. William Burgess Chairman, South Burlington Planning Commiion June 5, 1999 CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 (802) 846-4106 FAX (802) 846-4101 April20, 1999 Walt Levering Windjammer Hospitality Group 1076 Williston Road South Burlington, Vermont 05403 Re: Two (2) Lot Subdivision, 1076 Williston Road Dear Mr. Levering: Enclosed is a copy of the March 23, 1999 Planning Commission meeting minutes. If you have any questions, please give me a call. Planning & Zoning JW/mcp 1 Encl EXISTING ENCUMBERANCES O Rights end eomment9 convayad to Champlain Water District by deed dated April 2, 1901 and recorded In Volume 30a, Page 99 of the said Land Records. ODrainage Easements an set out in agreement between Wsllam J. tamplough and Evelyn W. Lamplaugh with Harper Hotels of Vermont. Inc. doled November 10, 1954 and -dad in Vdume 99, Pogo 128 of the said Land Records. � OSewer and water msve ernants conyed to the Term of South Burlington by dead doled April 28, 1986, and recorded in Volume 70. Page 30 of the said Land Records, O4 Right of way fa ingress and egress contained in deed from Witham J. Lomploughh at ux to Vaughn R. Mather and Male M. Mather doled January 16, 1946, recorded in Volume 20. ge lee of the Paacid Land Record. © Rights and statements conveyed to Green Mountain Powar Corporation by deed dated June 16. 1977, and recorded in Vol... 131. Pogo 450 of the said land Renard. OTerms and conditions of the following Land Use Permits of record: a. 217-5 b. 217-6; dated July 14, 1983; Volume 191, Page 119. c 14CO217-8; doled March 1Z IM: Volume 212. Pogo 201. O ulax and condltina of Lease bateset Evelyn Lanplough, Lessn, and Paul S. Graves and Walter S. Levering, Jr., Lessees, dated November 1, 1976, a Memorandum of whkn b recorded in Vdume 123, Page 512, osM¢wd to Tygots Properties by A.-d,,M vent dated December 24, 198lirecordad in Volume 17, Page 178 and confirmed by Assignment and Assumption of Lee. hen Walter B. Lavorhg, Jr. to Tygots Properties, dated December 15, 1991, r..ded In Vol... 315, Page 438 of the said Land Records. (applicable to Pace, 1 and Parcel II) O{ Installation, Agreement (traffic signals) with City of South Berlinggton, dated September 3, 1990, recorded In Volume 310, Page 152. OEasement Agreement with Bemard CaWlard at d, dated July 10, 1991, recorded in Vdume 311, Pop 51. O Decoration of Co --to. Restrictions. Easements and Condtlorns, dated April 23, 1955, retarded 1, Volume 218, Page 20. This "atnr , ancumbers land designated as "Parcel C' on a survey recorded in Volume 30, Page 29. Rots and © easomeatil conveyed to Nins h Telegraph company byEngland dead doted May 20, 1207 and recorded In Vol... 409, Page 130 of the said Land Records. j FLOOD NOTE Bawd upon a ,Ar of the good insurance to map City of South Burlington, VermanChiltandem County, panel 5 of 15. Community panel number 500195 0005 B. ~tive dale 3/16/at, It appears that the property does not lie within a flood zero. 1 MILE i VICINITY MAP ZONING NOTE - Zoning Claseif"Ion: The property IMs in two zone. m�er "Comclal 1 (CI)" and 'Roelden" 4 Per Aos (R4). The approximate Ion" delrlot boundary b shown graphically an the ourvey. Halyh - The zoning roquVenont In both zones is a madmum height of 40 fast for any pitched roof and 35 feet above the average preconstructbn grads far any other structure. Setbacks: The zoning code for zone Ct requires a front yore oofbaok of 50 feet from the planned right -of -say of Wilblon Road (50 test), a 15 foot setback far the side yord, and a 30 ford s.tbodh for hiss ran yvd There are errantly no improvements on it. portion of the subject property that Ws in the Re zons. Bulk Restrictions: For the restaurant, the zoning code requires 1 pnkinq space far each MO fixed seats provided far Patron use, plus 1 Parking space far men 200 square fast or floor area prorldod for patron um but not containing fixed seats. For the hoW, the zoning code requires 1 parking space for each guest bedroom plus 2 parking spaces far own 3 ernploysea. The zoning code far Zone CI also requires o maximum lot coverage of 30% by buildings and 70% by buildings, parking, and outside storage. Source City of South Burlington Zoning Regulations effective September IZ 1994 and knot amended October 6, 1997. STATE OF 431110117 / CMF' / h0 r ptF / / BK 85 114 co \ PG 290 / \ Nu. S24'31'1 10.00' / N / N/T PATROI PLACE ASSMATES I1K 296 PG 313 / $Min / / / / s / / LOT 2 N/F WNSON A Aim BN 120 PG 390 CMF 21y3°Se / / LEGEND S, °i� / �g'1 1►��c. o MMF MARBLE MONUMENT FOUND 69�.y'y ry2n0' / o CMF CONCRETE MONUMENT FOUND ® IPF IRON PIPE FOUND Is c ®SMF SURVEY MARKER FOUND x FENCE LINE o� STONEWALL '8 PROPERTY LINE RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE v� EASEMENT LINE ZONING SETBACK LINE WOODS LINE verb• 4 �'Q`"r3 fl DECIDUOUS TREE QM EVERGREEN TREE ZONING D1SIMC "RESIDENTIAL. ^,�'��C7 SHRUB STATE OF FERNONT / �j 4 PER ACRE' (R4) HYDRANT / p SIGN / 'CZOMOMMERaAL 11"" (TRICT Cl) NM / BIc 126PG M 4 ® COMBINATION POLE SEWER MANHOLE DRAINAGE MANHOLE I& WATER SHUT OFF MATCH LINE WITH SHEET 1 OF 2 Or STREET LIGHT GRAPHIC SCALE se o m se hoc xaa ( IN P®1' ) inch - IGO it 1 l LEGAL DIPTiON LOT 2 (omUwd fmilm dMA 1 of 2) Thence proceeding from said point N6519'01"W for o distance of 74.99 feel to a point. Thence proceeding from add paint SUMS'57'111 far a distance of 244.63 feet to a Point Thanes Proceeding from add paint N7072'SS"W for o distance of 155.47 feet to a point. Thence proceeding from said point S19'45'02'W far a distance of 40.71 feet (for arly a record distance o/ 40.28 feet) to a connate monument found. Thence preexisting horn add concrete monument N50'27'14'W for a distance of 81182 feet (formerly a record diii of 68.57 fat) to a concrete monument found In the easterly line of I- SO. Times proceeding from add conorsto monument N2047'10'W in and along the easterly line of 1-89 far a distance of 278.19 feet to a point In the "Mody line of thence proceeding from add point N3r42'S8"E In and along the eaatarly line of 1-89 far a distance of 911.04 fast to a concrete monument ford In the easterly line of I -SA lha nce proceeding horn said ooncrate movement N57'10'SB'E in and along the ,ecetedy Tine of 1-89 far a distance of 269.31 fast (formedy a record distance of 27033 feet) to o comet. monument found in the easterly Ana of 1-1I9. Thence proceeding from add concrete monument S71'28'05% in and do" the easterly line of 1-89 far a dlatmn of 219.31 foot to a point In the sastedy line of 1-80. Thanes procaadIng from add point N38'56'IeE in and along the earthly line of 1-89 for a distance of 1148.04 lost to a concrete monument found In the easlsly line of 1-89, Thence prooeedng from add concrete monument N502719'E in and along the malady the of 1-6g 1. a dbtods of 401.15 fast (formally a raoard detente of 401.13 fat) to a --to monument found in the saetarly line of 1-69. Thence proowding from add concrete monument N49'43'03"E In and along the easterly IM of 1-a9 for a distance of 38.95 Met (lame I a record distonae of 38.77 feet) to a point In the asalerly line of 1-89 and the southary Tins of Palchan Rood. Thence proceeding from add point, S24*IV50'E in and along the southerlyy line of Paid - Road far a distance, of 251.31 fast to a point In the southerly line of Palchen Rood. Thence proceeding from add polnt, S6139'50'W far a list-- of 200.45 fast to a Point. Thonca proceeding from add print, 524'30'09"E far a distance of 25278 feet to a point. Thence Proceeding from add Point, N6139'5Z"E far a distance of 200.45 Met to a point in the southerly line of Palchm Rood. Thence proceeding from add point S24'31'10'E In and along the southerly the of Pathan Road for a dbtarhoe of 10.00 feet to a point in the southerly line of Patdhen Rood Thence prooeoding hen Bald point 532'36'10"W far a distance of 323.59 to a survey muter found. Thence proosWhg Fran add survey marker. SM'01'44rW far a distance of 1788.50 feet (fcrmedy o record dlstarnca of 1788.48 test) to a survey marker found. Thence P-meting from acid survey marker, S17U'04'W far a distance of 318.94 hat (formerly o record distance of 318.93 fast) to on Iran plea found. Thence proceeding from add Iran pipe. S830'21"1e for a distance of 423.07 feel (formerly a record distance of 422.50 feet) to an Iran pipe found Thence proceeding from add Iron pipe. S74111'10'W for a distance of 31.10 feet to a Pohl Thanes proceeding from add point. S24V4'25"W far a distance of la3.35 feet to a point. Thence proceeding from add point. S271736'W far a distance of 2113.67 Met to a point in the northerly lira of Williston Rood. Thence praonrodinq from odd point, 1,15434'62'11if in and along the northerly line of Williston Road for o distance of 50.00 fast to the place of beginning containing within gad bards 5ZB76 pig or minus acres. RECEIVED APR 2 G 1�r City of So. Bur[ipatoin Owner of Record: Evelyn Lamplough c/o Robert Eastman, Eaq. 308 Main Street PO Box 568 Burlington, VT 05402-0558 Subdivider: Evelyn Lamplough and Windjammer Hospitality Group, LLC Wolter Levering, Manager t076 Williston Road South Burlington, VT 05403 PRELIMINARY PLAN for EVELYN W. LAMPLOUGH and VANDJAMMER HOSPITALITY GROUP, LLC showing PROPOSED SUBDIVISION at 1076 Williston Road South Burlington, Vermont SHEET 2 OF 2, Date of Last Revision: April 16, 1999 28'30't STALE OF VERIIONT h� ati o° i 1+ m / ^•T ZI STATE OF VFItlA0t4T A CJ IQ d. N56'2714"W S19'45'02"W 58.82' MEAS. 40.71 MEAS. 68.57REC. 40.28' REC. Jr r N/F HARPER HD1E1r+, NC / e 6K 73 PG 79 r / S70'26'09"E i 81.96 MEAS. 82.02' REC. 15' SIDELINE ILAA GRAPHIC SCALE so o se as 1. ono IN PBER MATCH LINE VATH SHEET 2 OF 2 ZONING DISTRICT / y "RESIDENRAL, 4 PER ACRE' (R4) y 91- ZONINGDISTRICT COMMERCIALI- (Cl) Q ^^�_a•:•6 / N/F MIRISOti BK 128 PO JBB L10T 2 OZX0 t AOIEE 0 LEGEND 1 MILE r VICINITY MAP B MMF MARBLE MONUMENT FOUND 0CMF CONCRETE MONUMENT FOUND ® IPF IRON PIPE FOUND �SMP SURVEY MARKER FOUND Sw - x - x - x- FENCE LINE 0000xomoo STONEWALL PROPERTY LINE RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE ----- EASEMENT LINE - - ' - ZONING SETBACK LINE 3 �' 1 WOODS LINE �4S, © DECIDUOUS TREE kn o, EVERGREEN TREE SHRUB TMlEHYDRANT PROPEIS "new PO SIGN / ® COMBINATION POLE SEWER MANHOLE ® DRAINAGE MANHOLE / IPF WATER SHUT OFF i # STREET LIGHT 40 IPF 21"W MEAS. REC. O / s4r N/F JJSIW O PORATO OK 180 PO 151 I S A 1 sea isei o A11. PARKING NOTE: 0 •0 0 IPF 270 Standard Spaces 0 0 � t9 Spocee (eet) an gravel surface b� 4 r 4r4 'ere 574'01'10'W 297 Toter Existing Spaces �S 31.10' Based on Information supplied by others, the zoning '04 code requires 325 parking spaces. There N sufficient d aea on the subjsd parcel to odd at least 28 additional y S24'04'25"W spaces N necessary 183.35 p� • IP i IP ' rs FLOOD NOTE: Based upon a review of the flood tnsurome rote map. City of south Burtington. Vermont, Chittanden County: panel 6 of I Community panel dsh� 4 "a4pk number 500195 0005 S, effective data 3/16/81, it appears that the N/T COIILLWD property does not Its within a flood zone. B( 289 PO 542 130cn - 100 ft i ZONING NOTE: Zoning paast6cotion: The property live In two zone. "Ccmmer kil 1 (C1)� and `Reeklentkd, 4 per Acre (R4)'. The approximate -I g district boundary I. shown graphically an the survey. Halght: The zoning requirement in both zones Is a mczimum hoot of 49 fast for my pitched roof and 35 feet above the overoge preconstruatlon grade fee any other druot.m Setbacks: The zoning code for zone 01 re"Iras a front yard setback of 50 feet from the planned dgM-of-way of Willstan Road (80 feet), a 15 foot setback for the side yord, and a 30 foot setback for the rear yard, There an currently no hnprokwmwt. an the portion of the subject property that R. in the R4 zon. Bulk Restrictions: For the restaurant, the zoningqu code rehee 1 parking amps for each 3.0 fixed mot. provided far patron k». plus i porkirw space for vadn 200 square feet of floor area provided for patron use but not containing fined soot. For the hotel, the zoning code requkes 1 code y1or�orw for each guest 01 also requiresb a�nW plus bl cweroge of 30% bybbuildi buh 3 ildings cep The onkp bulding., parking, and outride stowage. Sourer. City of South Burlington Zoning Regulations oHeothvs September 12, 104 and last amended October 6, 1997. EXISTING ENCUMBERANCES O Rights and easements conveyed to Champlain Water District by dead dated April 2. 1991 and recorded In Vdume 3M Page 99 of the add Land Records. ODrainage Easements as set out in agreement bate - William J. Lamplough and Evelyn W. LomPlough with Harper Hotels of Vermont. Inc. dated November 10. 1954 and m recorded in Vole 69, Page 128 of the add Land Records. V Sewer and water easements conveyed to the Town of South Burlington by dead doted April 28, 1966, and recorded in Vdume 7D, Page 346 of the said Land Records. Right of way for ingress and eg- contained in dead from William J. Lamplough at ux to Vaughn R. Mather and Mader M. Mather dated January 16. 1946, recorded In Volume 20, Page 166 of the mid Land Records. ORights and mooments conveyed to Oreen Mountain Power Corporathn by deed doled Jane 16. 1977. and recorded In Vdume 131, Page 450 of the said land Record. V Terms and conditions of the fallowing Land Use Permits of record: a. 0217-5 b. 0217-6; dated July 14. t983; Vdume 191, Page 119. c. 17-8; dated March 12. 1985; V.I... 212. Page 201. OTema and conditions of Lease between Evelyn Lamplough, Lessor, and Paul S, Ora`ws and Writer B. Levering, Jr., Losaees, dated November 1, 1976, a Memorandum of which is rewrdad in Volume 123, Pogo 312; assigned to Tygote Properties by Assignment dated December 24, 19M recorded In Vokane 217. Page 178 and confirmed by Assignment and Assumption of Loom from Walter 8. Levering. Jr. to Tygote Properties. doted Decermbo is, 1991, recorded In Volume 315, Page 438 of the said Land Record. (applicable to ParcelI and Porad 9) O Installation Agreement (traffic signals) with City of South Burlington. dated September 3. 1990, recorded In Vdume � 310, Page 15Z V Easement Agreement with Bemard C 111.rd at al, doled July 10. 1991. recorded in Volume 311, Page 51. ® Declaration of Covenant. Restriction. Easements and Conditions, doted April 23, 1965, recorded In Volume 21A Page 20. This Insbumwt encumbers land designated as 'Parcel C' on o survey recorded in Volume 60, Page 29, QRights and easements conveyed to Hew En y id Td 1phona A: Telegraph Company by dead dated May 20. 1997 and recorded in Volume 40% Page 130 of the said Lord Records. LEGAL DESCRIPTION LOT 1 Situated In the State of Vermont. County of Chithaden. City of South Burlington, shown hereon as LOT 1, and Itrther dew0ed as fellows: Beginning at an Won pipe found at the southwest corner of land. arced now or formerly by Waste. Inc. as recorded in Volume 328, Page 430. Said iron pipe den being in the north line of Wi9bton Rood. Thence proosedinq from said Won pipe. N56IV34�W In and along the northerly Inns of Wiliston Read, for a diatancs of 234.57 feet to a point Thence proosming from sold point, Nlg'30'51"E for a distance of 231.49 feet to a marble monument found. Thence proceeding from mid marble monument. S7W26'D9'E for a diatonce of 81.98 feet (fomnerly a record distance of 82.02 feet) to a marble monument frond. Theme proceeding from mid marble monument, S70'W45'E for a distance of 132.58 fast, (formerly a record distance of 132.66 feet), In and dog the Me of LOT 2, to a survey marker found. Than proceeding from said survey morkar, SOOVV46'E for a distance of 161.61 feet. in and along the fine of LOT 2, to an iron pipe fond. Thence proceeding from said Iron pipe. S3612'11"W for a get-- of 144.15 feet, In and along the line of lands owned now or formerly byy Wewo inc., to the point or place of beginning, containing within add bounds 1.476 plus or minus mro. LOT 2 Situated in the State of Vermont. County of Chlttendan. City of South Burlington, known as 1076 Williston Road, shown hereon as LOT 2, and further described oe follows: Beginning at an iron pipe found of the southeast comer of lands owned now or formerly by Toutant as recorded in Volume 179. Paces 244. Said Wan pipe also being in the north IM of WRIT tw Road. Thence proaeedIng from will Won ppe. N20'36'46'E far a distance of 150.79 fast (farmeriy a record distance of 151.72 feet) to an kern pipe fond. Thence proceeding Worn sold W08on pore. N64''16"W for a distance of 53.20 feet (farmWy o r-ord distance of 55.25 feet) to an Won pipe found. Thence proceedIng from sold Won pipe. N54'2TSVIN for a distance of 78.30 feet (fomarty a record distance of 78.37 feet) to an Iran pipe found, Thence prooaedIns from sold Wan pipe. N5418'52W far a distance of 146.57 test (formerly a record distance of 146.54 feet) to a concrete monument found. Thou proceeding from sold concrete manumant, 145419'03"111 for a distance of 125,05 hat (formerly a record distance of 124.99 East) to an Iran pipe found. Thou proceeding from sold Wan ppa. N69'04'46'W for a distance of 161.61 feet, In and along the easterly line o1 LOT 1. to a survey marker found. Thence proceeding from said survey marker. N7a'S6'45"W for a distance of 132.58 feet, (formerly a record distance of 132.66 feet), In and along the northerly line of LOT 1, to o marble monument found Thence proceeding from said marble monument, 1124'44'20'E for a distance of 612.52 feel to a point C=nAtwd m ~ 2 of 2) RECEIVED APR 2615./ City of So. Burlingto Owner of Record: Evelyn Lamplough c/o Robert Eastman, Esq. 308 Main Street PO Box 568 Burlington, VT 05402-0568 Subdivider: Evelyn Lamplough and Windjammer Hospitality Group, LLC Wolter Levering, Manager 1076 Williston Road South Burlington, VT 05403 PRELIMINARY PLAN for EVELYN W. LAMPLOUGH and WINDJAMMER HOSPITALITY GROUP. LLC showing PROPOSED SUBDIVISION at 1076 Williston Road South Burlington, Vermont SHEET 1 OF 2 1 Date of Lost Revision: April 1 CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON Subdivision Application - PRELIMINARY PLAT 1) Name of Applicant Windjammer Hospitality Group / Evelyn Lamplough 2 ) Name of Subdivision Lamplough / Windjammer Subdivision 3) Submit Subdivision Fee 4) Describe Subdivision (,i.e. total acreage, number of lots or units, type of land use, gross floor area for commercial or industrial uses) • See attached sheet. 5) Indicate any changes to name, address, or phone numbers of owner of record, applicant, or contact person since sketch plan application: 6) None. Name, address, and phone number of: a. Engineer None. b. Surveyor Vermont Survey and Engineering, Inc., 79 River Street, #301, Montpelier, VT 05602 (802) 229-9130 d. Plat Designer 7) Indicate any changes to the subdivision such as number of lots or units, property lines, applicant's legal interest in the property, etc., since sketch plan application: None. 1 8) List names and mailing addresses of owners of record of all contiguous properties: See attached sheet. 9) State title, drawing number, date of original plus any revisions, and designer(s) of the preliminary map(s) accompanying this application: "Preliminary Plan for Evelyn W. Lamplough and Windjammer Hospitality Group, LLC Showing Proposed Subdivision at 1076 Williston Road, South Burlington, VV by Vermont Survey and Engineering, Inc., Sheets 1 and 2, last revised,l, 10) COST ESTIMATES for Planned Unit Developments, multi -family and commercial and industrial complexes: a) Buildings None,. b) Landscaping None,. c) All other site improvements (e.g., curb work development is proposed as part of subdivision. No 11) ESTIMATED TRAFFIC for Planned Unit Developments, multi- family projects, and commercial and industrial complexes (2-way traffic, in plus out): A.M. Peak hour P.M. peak hour Average daily traffic % of trucks 12) Attach FIVE copies and ONE reduced copy (11 x 17) of preliminary map showing the following information: a) Proposed subdivision name or identifying title and the name of the City.. b) Name and address of owner of record, subdivider and designer of Preliminary Plat. c) Number of acres within the proposed subdivision, location of property lines, structures, watercourses, wooded areas, and other essential existing physical features. 2 d) The names of all subdivisions immediately adjacent and the names of owners of record of adjacent acreage. e) The location and size of any existing sewers and water mains, culverts and drains on the property to be subdi- vided. f) Location, names and widths of existing and proposed streets, private ways, sidewalks, curb cuts, paths, easements, parks and other public or privately main- tained open spaces as well as similar facts regarding adjacent property. g) Contour lines at intervals of five feet, based on United States Geological Survey datum of existing grades and also of proposed finished grades where change of exist- ing ground elevation will be five feet or more. h) Complete survey of subdivision tract by a licensed land surveyor. i) Numerical and graphic scale, date and truce north arrow. j) Details of proposed connection with existing water supply or alternative means of providing water supply to the proposed subdivision. k) Details of proposed connection with the existing sani- tary sewage disposal system or adequate provisions for on -site disposal of septic wastes. 1) If on -site sewage disposal system is proposed, location and results of tests to ascertain subsurface soil, rock and ground water conditions, depth to ground water unless pits are dry at depth of five feet; location and results of percolation tests. m) Provisions for collecting and discharging storm drainage in the form of drainage plan. n) Preliminary designs of any bridges or culvert which may be required. o) The location of temporary markers adequate to enable the Commission to locate readily and appraise the basic layout in the field. Unless on existing street intersection is -shown, the distance along a street from one corner of the property to the nearest existing street intersection shall be shown. p) All parcels of land proposed to be dedicated or reserved for public use and the conditions of such dedication or reservation. K3 ATTACHMENT TO CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON Subdivision Application - PRELIMINARY PLAT Windjammer Hospitality Group / Evelyn Lamplough Lamplough / Windjammer Subdivision 4) The co -applicants propose a two lot subdivision as depicted on the submitted sketch plan to create a 1.476 +/- acre lot (Lot 1) and a 52.876 +/- acre lot (Lot 2). The co -applicants do not propose any development on either of the lots. In fact, most of the proposed Lot 1 is encumbered by a Declaration of Covenants, Restrictions, Easements and Conditions that prevents any development on the lot. Presently, Windjammer Hospitality Group leases the entire property from Mrs. Lamplough under a long term lease, which includes an option to purchase the property. There has been a dispute in the past as to whether a small portion of the property is subject to a right of first refusal benefitting an adjoining property, which is now owned by Harper Hotels of Vermont, Inc. (aka Holiday Inn). That portion of the property that may be subject to the disputed right of first refusal is entirely within the proposed Lot 1 and is shaded on the sketch plan. The purpose of the subdivision is to enable Windjammer Hospitality Group to exercise its option to purchase all of the proposed Lot 2 without affecting the disputed right of first refusal that may encumber a portion of the proposed Lot 1. Mrs. Lamplough would continue to own the proposed Lot 1 subject to the long-term lease to Windjammer Hospitality Group and the disputed right of first refusal. 8) Harper Hotels of Vermont, Inc. 1068 Williston Road South Burlington, VT 05403 Bernard J., Sr. and Catherine Couillard P.O. Box 2104 South Burlington, VT 05407-2104 (1150 Williston Road) Randall G. Munson 366 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 (201 Patchen Road) Frank J. and Anna G. Cota 397 Patchen Road South Burlington, VT 05403 (397 & 401 Patchen Road) Robert A. Graham 361 Patchen Road South Burlington, VT 05403 Beatrice V. Alger 339 Patchen Road South Burlington, VT 05403 Francis E. Quigley 355 Patchen Road, #1 South Burlington, VT 05403 Shannon K. Sheehan 355 Patchen Road, #2 South Burlington, VT 05403 David M. Burns 355 Patchen Road, #3 South Burlington, VT 05403 Elizabeth A. Carter 355 Patchen Road, #4 South Burlington, VT 05403 John P. and Helen Gouvin 355 Patchen Road, #5 South Burlington, VT 05403 John A. Swainbank 355 Patchen Road, #6 South Burlington, VT 05403 James A. Martin 355 Patchen Road, #7 South Burlington, VT 05403 Michael Pasqual 355 Patchen Road, #8 South Burlington, VT 05403 Ronald and Mary Magnuson 357-359 Patchen Road South Burlington, VT 05403 Champlain Oil Co., Inc. PO Box 2126 South Burlington, VT 05407-2126 (1055 Williston Road) Charles N. and Janet B. Perkins 80 South Cove Road Burlington, VT 05401 (1087 Williston Road) Lodging North, Inc. Gary N. Farrell 870 Williston Road South Burlington, VT 05403 (1117 Williston Road) Rexbo Development, Inc. Box 760 Greenfield, MA 01302 (1143 Williston Road) Howard Johnson's Motel c/o John Larkin 410 Shelburne Road South Burlington, VT 05403 (5 Dorset Street) Precourt Investment Company Rinald G. Precourt 21 Mapleleaf Lane Shelburne, VT 05482 (1160-1166, & 1174 Williston Road) Wesco, Inc. PO Box 2287 South Burlington, VT 05407-2287 (1108 & 1118 Williston Road) Kenneth A. Kero 1128 Williston Road South Burlington, VT 05403 Arthur C. Toutant, Trustee 1398 Hinesburg Road South Burlington, VT 05403 (1140-1142 Williston Road) State of Vermont Vermont Agency of Transportation Attn: Scott Whitted, Esq. 133 State Street Montpelier, VT 05633-0001 Tygate Properties 1076 Williston Road So. Burlington, VT 05403 13) Development timetable (including number of phases, and start and completion dates) : No development proposed as part of subdivision. 14) List the waivers applicant desires from the requirements of these regulations: ` None. 15) 1) All existing subdivision, approximate tract lines and acreage of adjacent parcels, together with the names of the records owners of all adjacent parcels of land, namely, those directly abutting or directly across any street adjoining the proposed subdivision. 2) Locations, widths and names of existing, filed or pro- posed streets, curb cuts, easements, building lines and alleys pertaining to the proposed subdivision and to the adjacent properties as designated in paragraph 1 above. 3) An outline of the platted area together with its street system and an indication of the future probable street system of the remaining portion of the tract, if the Preliminary Plat submitted covers only part of the subdivider's entire holding. (8ignature) applicant\of contact person 4 MEMORANDUM To: Applicants/Project filesA From: Raymond J. Belair, oning & Planning Assistant Re: Preliminary comments, March 23, 1998 agenda items Date: March 5, 1999 MAGIC HAT BREWING COMPANY — a plat should be submitted showing the entire PUD. — the applicant should provide landscaping around the proposed wastewater treatment equipment to mitigate its visual impact from Bartlett Bay Road. — applicant should submit a statement addressing potential noise and odor impacts resulting from the equipment. EVELYN LAMPLOUGH & WINDJAMMER HOSPITALITY GROUP - 2 LOT SUBDIVISION - SKETCH PLAN proposed subdivision results in lot #2 having 50 feet of frontage on Williston Road. Section 25.00 of the zoning regulations requires a minimum of 200 feet of frontage. BUDGET CAR & TRUCK RENTAL - AUTO SERVICE & REPAIR - SITE PLAN — plan should be revised to show a bike rack. — the building mounted flood lights located at either end of the building and the pole mounted flood lights should be replaced with downcasting shielded fixtures approved by the Director of Zoning & Planning. — a portion of the property, at the northwest corner, beyond the paved area is being used for vehicle and boat storage. This is not allowed since this area would have to be counted towards overall coverage which is currently at the limit. DESIGN SIGN, INC. - NEW SIGN - DESIGN REVIEW information and plans submitted are acceptable. LEGAL DESCRIPTION EXISTING ENCUMBERANCES O Rights and easem ents omveym to CAampah Water District by deed dated April 2, 1991 and recorded An 308, Pape 99 of the said Land Records. OOrairoge Easement. - set out In agnenNnt between *111k. 1 Lamplou¢h old Evelyn W. lenpiough with 4apw Hotels of Vermont In. dMed N-smber 10. 1054 and r-ordod h VoAnne So. Page 128 of the sold Land Renard. OSewn and wafer --is conveyed to the T of Ssuth f#rlMglm by deed doted April 24 1946, and reaordsd In m Volue 70. Paps 30 of the said Land Rooard. Oil Right of way far khgreas and egress contohed h deed from 1011- 1 Lernpaugh et - to Vaughn R. Mother and Made M. Mathr dated January IS, 1949, recorded In Volume 20, Pogo 156 of the sold Land Reoorde. Rights and easrnmts conveyed to Green Mountain Powsr Corporation by deed doled ,Maw IS 1977, and recorded in Volume 131, Page 450 of the sold Lab Records. Q Terms and conditions old the rdawbg Land Use Permit of record: a. /4CO217-5 b. /4CO217-6; doted July 14, 1983; Volume 191. Page 119. c. F.0O217-8; deed March 12. I98M. Volume 21Z Pogo 201. O Tenons aM oandltlau of Leases between Evelyn Lomplougk Leweor, and Pad S. fiavw and Wdiw S. Lewrin% &.. Usoow. doted Nownber 1. 1976. a MernoraoAan of which is recorded In Volume 123, Page 51Z oseignsd to Tygote P oprtM by &-figmment doled Deoernbr 24, t966 recorded In Vdurr 217, Pogo 178 and -nfinlW by Aselgrenent and Assumption of Leave than Walter & Levering, .k. to T)gate Prgnertla. dated 040-ber IS. 1591, recorded in Vain. 315. Pops 438 of the sold Lad Record. (uppOobh to Pored I and Patel 1) AZwment Luxe;,. signals) with City of v SwN a , dated Septenbr a teen; recorded in Vol- 31a Page + OEasernnt Ago w o of with Bernard CarNrud et aL dated Jay 10, 1991. recorded In V:-1. 311, Page .11. ® Declaration of Covernuntsr R-trlctiaw, Easements and C-dillons, dotal April 23, 196a recorded kin Vbknne ZIM Pope 20. Ills herummt srnaarhbere land deetgno+ed -'Par-1 C on a survey recorded in Volume 80, Pogo 29. to Neer © TTelegraph Co npony by dal dated May gland 720. 11997 Rights oas and recorded in Volume 409. Pops 130 of the sdtl Lard Record. FLOOD NOTE: Based upon a ravbw of the Rood hm sur-old rats op. City of South Sur6gton. Vermont Cntttenden Co ntyt pal 5 of 15. Community, panel nuaAw 300195 OM efleehe dots 3/144. R appears that the property does not F. neBNn a flood zarns. 15"gpr* cw 4>I � W 1 MILE VICINITY MAP / R ZONING NOTE: Zanip ol" i catlan: The property Iles in two zone, 'Co renercid 1 (Cl)' and 'Reddentid. 4 Per Aare (R4)'. The apprari tote zoning district boundary Is shown graphically an the survey. Haight: The zoning requkernrht In both Tones Is a maxknum height of 40 feet for my pitched r-f and 35 feet above the awrogs preoonetnrotan grade for any other err ctur. Setbodcc The zonkW wdo for zarne Cl roqukee a front yard setback of 50 feet frorn the planned right-of-way of V Mleon Road (80 feet). a 15 foot selb, *for fed olds yord. and a 30 hot setback for the rear yard. Thee are currently no knpronemmta an the portion of the subject property that ins In the R4 mores. Bulk Restriction: For the restaurant the zoning code roqul es 1 parking spar:. far each &0 fixed scab provided for patron we, pin I parking vpo- for such 200 aquas feet of Sow area proNded for Patron use but not containing fixed swim For the hotel. the Zankn9 coda requires 1 poking spa- far each guest bad.- plus 2 parking goo -far main 3 ampbyee. The mnig was for zaps CI alea requires a rnadr nun lot Coverage of = by buildings and 70% by busAhgs, parkkg, and outside storage. S- aty of South Burlington Zoning Reguatans etf-0. S4ptenbr 12. 1994 and last anended October S. 1997. CIF I69• }} / h��t / � ry � Di SfAIE OF MBNOMT / / / ZONNG DISTRICT GRAPHIC SCALE o a o 10 s o IN I inch - 200 tl. / y IL MIT COTA 8K 85 PC 290 STATE OF WRONT A� �O / hryryrO NA PATt1O1 RACE ASSOCIATES arc 296 pc 313 doer LOT 2 sMF aK 121 1ePO 1 / / MATCH UNE WITH SHEET t OF 2 eLEGEND / oMMF MARBLE MONUMENT FOUND o CMF CONCRETE MONUMENT FOUND • IPF IRON PIPE FOUND / s SMF SURVEY MARKER FOUND FENCE LINE STONEWALL ALL / - PROPERTY LINE RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE EASEMENTENT LINE /O ZONING SETBACK LINE WOODS LINE © DECIDUOUS TREE a� EVERGREEN TREE zONilfo wsTwc 'RESM11AL, 4 PER ACRE' (R4) ^�� yy SHRUB HYDRANT / SIGN •fl COMBINATION POLE INKRA famm a6 ® SEWER MANHOLE / DRAINAGE MANHOLE Y/ WATER SHUT OFF STREET LIGHT LOT 2 (aadYwd toil dot 1 of 10 Thence proceeding from sac point N6519'01'W for a dstmce of 74.99 het to a point. Thence proasedYq from sold paint S3616'S7'W far o dYtarras o1 244,63 fee to a point. Thence proceeding hare sold point 1470'2fW11I far a dlstans of IM47 fee to a point Thane pronadbV hen said point S19'45., W for a distance of 40.71 feet (fomnarly a record diet-oo of 40.28 feat) to a concrete monument found Thence Procsadrng hm oamm asaid cst. onuent N56'27'14'W for o dktanos of 68.82 feet (formeiy a record distance of 6&57 fwet) to a concrete monenent found In the sodely lire of t- 8& Then- proceeding from said oonorete monument N2'47'10'W in and along the sootwiy fine of 1-89 for a dstan- of ZM19 fee to a Point in the eaetaty sine of 1-89. Then- proceeding harm said pant N37'42'5trE In and along the soot dy One W 1-89 fa a distan- of 911.04 h*t to a oanante mowrment found in the easterly [ions of 1-89. Then- proceeding from said concrete coon rnent 1,157-4U'S8'E in aM dog the easterly the of 1-89 for a dtstm- of 269.31 fee (formerly a retard dstan- of 270.33 feet) to a concrete monument found in the easterly the of I-89. Thence proceeding from mid concrete mon -ront. 571Z6b6'E in and ulag the eoeerly line of 1-89 far o disU- of 219.31 feet to a point in the easterly 16ne of 1-M. Thence procwdbg frcm mid point N36'56'16'E in and along the walady fine of I-89 for a distance of 114&04 feet to a oono ete monument found In the eoeerfy lie of 1-89. Thane proceeding from said oonoete monument N50'27'19'E in and along the a-tely line of 1-89 far a dhtante of 401.15 feet (fonrnerly a record 41emnce of 401.13 test) to a concrete marvanerht found In the easterly Iine of I-89. Thence pr..-* g horn said canoes -t. N49'43'OSE in and along the sae4rly tide of 1-69 far o dMon- of 36.95 fee (formerly o record distance of 3&77 feet) to a point in the easterly One of 1-89 and the southerly If- o Patdnen Road Thrace prwm&ng from said point S24'15'S0'E in and dap the sau6nedy the of Potchen Road for a dittannos of 251.3t feet to a point in the southerly line of Patchan Read. Then- point. W proceeding from add 561'39'50'for o distance of 200,45 feet to a point Tlnmc* proceeding froacid point S24'30'09'E for dlstarnoe of 252.78 feet to a point Thence proceeding from acid point N61'3052E for a dfetm- of 20&46 feet to a point in the southerly n- of Patchen Road. Then- proosedirp from said point S24'31'10-E in and along the southerly IM of PoIchen Rood for o distance of 10.00 feet to a pal in the southerly One of Patchan Road Thence prooesArp from said paint 532'36'10'11f far a diatm- of 323,50 to a survey marker found Thance prooesdrng from sold survey marker. S361D1'49'W far a diolance of 178&80 feet (formerly a record distance of 178&48 fwl) to o survey marker found Then- proceedirng horn sold survey make, S17'88'04'W far o dist-oe of 31&94 feet (f-.iy a record det- of 31&93 feet) to m Iran pipe found Thence proceeding ream add ion pipe, SSW211W far a dht-ce of 423.07 feet (formerly a rsocrd di k- of 42250 het) tom ion Pipe found Then- prooaetp from said ion pipe. S7M'10'W far a dean- of 31.10 fee to a point Thence p,--dkp from add paid, S240425'W far a distace of la&35 feet to a point Thmo* proowdrg from add paint S27'1725CW far a distance of 265,87 feet to o point in the northerly line of Williston Rood. Thence proaes6p hen sold paint 1454*5V52'11/ in and long the northerly line of wilfstm Road for a distancs of 50.00 feet to the pa- of beginning containing within said bound* 5ZS76 plus for mina oar-. V to RED 1 ti rT N 8. 0 X JAN 1 9 1999 w v City of So. Burlington �+1 00 (1) >_ N N N O M awl O fed il� C N SKETCH PLAN for h v EVELYN W. LAMPLOUGH and WINDJAMMER HOSPITAUTY GROUP, LLC showing O o rn PROPOSED SUBDIVISION at 1076 Williston Rood k�► South Burlington, Vermont to SHEET 2 OF 2 Date of Last Revision: January 13. 1999 la•ao•t m v STATE OF VERMONT 58.82' MEAS. 68.57' REC. 15' SIDELINE STATE OF VERMONT / / / z� N V A gp £� 1 N56.12'34"W -ki -71 S19'45'02'W 40.71 MEAS. 40.28' REC. J 971' HUM lams, W. OK 73 PC 79 TEAS. \\'' REC. Vt 4}\ �47T_54 � 78.36 MEAS. 78.37' REC. GRAPHIC SCALE ID F e. ea i. IN tar) 1 19ch a 200 14 MATCH LINE IMTH SHEET 2 OF 2 ZONING DISTRICT 'RESIDENTIAL. 4 PER ACRE" (114) eP�• / 0 ZONNC DISTRICT 0 , COMMERCIAL 1' (CI) • T 1 N/MR6dt / IN26 PG 396 / LOT 2 / \ / LEGEND o MMF MARBLE MONUMENT FOUND / o CMF CONCRETE MONUMENT FOUND IPF IRON PIPE FOUND • SMF SURVEY MARKER FOUND SMF -x-x-x- FENCE LINE STONEWALL ----- PROPERTY LINE RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE EASEMENT LINE ZONING SETBACK LINE WOODS © LINE DECIDUOUS TREE ov rn a n EVERGREEN TREE SHRUB N7T TT -ATE W HYDRANT iK mi x 522 --- SIGN fl COMBINATION POLE SEWER MANHOLE ® DRAINAGE MANHOLE WATER SHUT OFF # STREET LIGHT 1P / �IPF %r S08'S0'21_JiL_ Ill 1LE7. PAPo0N4C" .o / atr N/T OORP(FA E1K 18 llal � fa 16g P6 151 Q j2 V_ aeee T , `* PARKING NOTE: O .0 270 Standard Spaces � l Par8 Hamdoap Spaces � 4 _.19 Spaces (eat) an grakai surface 4 e S74'01'1 OaW 297 Told Exidinq Spaces 31.10' Eased m information tupplied by ah. p:... the _sing °f cad. requk- -5 porktg p- There * r,fY.cont l T ores on the subject parcel to add at lead 2t addtknd {} S24Ve25'W spooea N neooseary. /7, • 183.35 �J FLOOD NOTE: - Eased upon o -Ale of the flood teurap crate map City of South 14'1y� 4 number 01995 0005� affao�tl a data 3/16/61, l 5 it or - tthaIf te th. d Nyy OOINW- W perty does not Ion wNhIn a IHod zone. BK 283 W 542 all �REC.'---- �N28Z6'46 2E 150,79' t,-'.EAS. 151.72' REC.-�` a._i`5t 4'c2`V,• BE0i10" POINT OF ZONING NOTE Zor'ag Ciaeeifcatlap; The Property flee In tau zanaa, 'Commraial 1 (Cl)' and •Reddentid, 4 par Ave (R4)'. The approximote zoning Wtli t boundary le ahoan graph'..dy on the survey. 19,1,4t: The zominq requtemrpt In both zones is o maximum height of 4,) test far my pitched root and 35 feet above the Dosage preo-twtW O:sb I.., my atho a enactor.. S.tbodl. The zaning coda for zone CI r.gL,b- o front yard attt--* a! 50 foot from thc pl-d rlPne 01-aoy of Williston Road (60 taot), a 15 foot setback fee the we yard, and a 30 foot setback fee tln tea pad Thee. on -tly rw Irma-erd. on the portion of t o a *led pmp«ty that Bea n tin. R4 zano. Bulk Ra dintotlam For the re tou ant, the 2anng Code roqulrea 1 parking spooe for eaoh 3.0 fixed sate Provided for Patron u.a. plc t porknp w- fee each 2DO sw- Vest of floor area provided far Prdrm uee but vet contannq fixed seats. Far the hotel. tha zoning coda roWM i porldif?VP for each quest bn- plu. 2 parking .p- for "m 3 �xrploye.s. The zonl.q Dods zone Cl oleo requires a maxtnum lot coverage of 30% by bulidlrtgs and 70X by b.1dFpga. Poking. and outdate doge. Souroer City of South Burlington Zoning Regulation. * feethe September i2, 1994 and last amerldad October 6, 1997. 1 MILE r VICINITY MAP E)aSTING ENCUMBERANCES O Rights and easement. wnvsy d to Champlain Water Dletriot by dead doted April Z 1091 and rooardad In Volume 306, Page 99 of the void Lae Reoorda. ODrdnog. Eaeemant- w set out In ogreamsot bat- VWian L Lamplough and Evelyn W. Lonplough MU How Notate of Vermont, fro. dated November 10. 1954 and meoordW in Volum. 69, Page 125 of the said Land Reeds. Seerer and trot« eaaementa conveyed to the Toan of South &Wftgton by dead dated April 28. 1966, and rscodod InVolume 70, Poge 346 of the sold Lad Re cords. O Right of way for Ingress and egmea. contained In dead from Wiliam d Lo npkwgh at ux to Vaughn R. Mather and Mode M. Ua9mer dated w Jaxry 16. 1846, recorded in Volume 20. Pogo 166 of the wld Land Reoo da. ORight. and aos«nents conveyed to Ckesn Mountain Poor Corporation by dead dated June 16, 1977, aW rewrded in Volane 131. Page 450 of the add Lord Records. Terms and canditlara of the fall.,-, 1_and Uee Pumps of record: ta4r,{t. ^17_F b. j4W217-6; date Jdy 14, 1983; Volume 191, Pugs 119. c /4CO217-8; "ad Moron 1Z 1911 Volume 21Z Page 201. O Terms and kxndniont of I- betesen Evelyn Lnrrplaugh, I-. and Paul 5. Or- and Wafter S. L-1a Jr., L .. V, dated November 1, 1976. o Mernarandum of wh 1. recorded in Vbit- 123, Page 512: teslyled to Tygate Properties by A mig nment Opted December 24, 19M raoorded In Volume 217, Pogo 178 and a f-.d by Assigmment. and Aaaumptlan of I-- ham Walter 9. Levwlg, Jr. to Tygote Properties, doted December 15. 1991. ncardsd In Volume 31r, Pr 43E o; Jpo told Land Rs..rds. (appli able to Parcel 1 and Pared I) Installation Agreement (traffic signals) vdth cey of South Budhgton, doted September 3, 1990, recorded h Volume 310, Page 152. OEaaernent Agreement alth Bernard Coullard at d, dated Jtsy M 1"I. reoordod h Vdurne 311, Page 51. ® D.Woratlon of ov CI.. Restrbtkmm, Easement. and Candtlom, dried April 65 23. 19. rsoaded In Volume 218. Page 20 This lmil nt .maambera load designated w 'Pacal C' m o surv.y noaded In Volume 80, Page 29. Ill) Rlghta and e.Eaments canx}ed to Nee Fnoad TWphane & TNeegrph C-pony by dead dated May 20, 1997 and reoodded in Vokane 40% Pops 130 of the sold Land R cmde. LEGAL DESCRIPTION LOT 1 MWotW In the stall. of Vermont. ownty of ChHterMern. City of south BurlYgt,^ Mows befaos w LOT 1, and further dnceed a foiloera: B-0-1-9 at GOIron pipe found at the -th.W Owner of Ia1da oa.W moll « formerly by ve WeaInc a r .wdad in Volume 328, Poga 4X Said Iran pie duo being h the north Am of WMletam Road. Thermos proosedYg from win Yon pipe, N561234W in and along the narfhady Ion of WW ton Road• far o dl tance of 23C57 Net to a pGl t Thence proceeding ham auk Point. N19'W51'E for a 4W-- of 231,40 feet to a marble mon-A farad. Thence Proceeding tram sold marble m«e.4 S70,W091E far a datmw of 81.96 feet (t«medy a record dWmce of 8202 Net) to a marble monument fond. TAerwe proosedeq from auk marble monument, S7036'45"E fee o deance of 132M Net (1«medy o reood dldmce of 13286 led), In and dog Via line of LOT Z to a survumy maker frond. Thence pr-ding from sold survey maker, S000446E for o d d.- of 161,81 feet. In and along the Ion of LOT Z to m Iron pips Hard. 111- prooseding kern sold ton pipe, S3612'Wlf fee a distmee of 144.15 led, In and dog the Ion of lanes onned - ar farrmerlyby W- Ina., to the paint or pace of begk.*.% oontahinq aithin add bound. 1.470 plus « mhw saw. LOT 2 Situated in the StoL of Vermont. County of CMtterdar, City of Swath Budtgton. loom as TOM WMI ton Rood all- Irani a LOT Z and futlr cheated u foNourc Beginning ygat on Won pipe found at the southeast - by E load. Toutant rrecorded InVVolume79. Page 244. lonrSold Yon pipe dw being in the north the of WMNtm Rood. Thaws prc-dhg .o f- ld Ion a.':•n. N28'35'46'E for o datmce of 15079 feet (formerly a rvoard diaeawa of 151.72 led) to an lam pipe 1and. Therese proceWin9 from sold ton piper, N6406'16'W Tar o dNtmos of 216.20 feet (formedy a record distace of 5525 Net) to on Iran pipe found. Thence proceeding h«n said kvn pba, N5473'54"W for a distance of 78.36 feet (fonnedy a record dktawe of 7637 feet) to on Iran pipe found. Therese Pmaarding from said Yea pipe. N54'IW52'W far a distance of 146.57 feat (formerly a record d ita ce of 146.54 Net) to a concrete monunwnt found Thawe proos la:: from veld concrete monanent, N54'I 03'W far a dbtace of 125.06 feet (farmarly . record dlatanoe of 124.99 feet) to an tan pipe found Thence proo"dng hom sold ton pipe. N000446'W for a dletarroe of 161.61 f-L In and dang the sastery, h- of LOT 1, to a surrey mocker found. Thanoa prooWinq from sold survey mark«. N7036'45'W for a dletace of 13LW feel, (formerly a record ddaroe of 132.66 feet), in and dog the norfh«ly lie of LOT 1, to a nabk monument fond. Theresa prooaeding from said marble nerrt. mounN24'44'21YE for a distance of 612.52 feet to a paint. C,10"daiw!2of2) U O E CV+N �. ' ice" N O O t0 00 u7 O ' X JAN 1 9 1999 W v o City of So. Burlington t) > : Wpm N N y,, 1 c O M a� I I O 11) 40 N N SKETCH PLAN �s for EVELYN X L MPL.DL "H and v tr i AWi illA ffi HUSH i rlu i'Y' ailAWi` l L LL Cp `., showing k PROPOSED SUBDIVISION % at 1076 Williston Road South Burlington, Vermont � to SHEET 1 OF 2 Date of Lost RevWlm: Januory 13. 1999 Memorandum - Planning March 23, 1998 agenda meeting March 19, 1999 7) EVELYN LAMPLOUGH & WINDJAMMER HOSPITALITY GROUP - 2 LOT SUBDIVISION - SKETCH PLAN This project consists of subdividing a 54.352 acre parcel into two (2) lots of 1.476 acres (lot # 1) and 52.876 acres (lot #2). This property is developed with a standard restaurant and 176 room motel. This property located at 1076 Williston Road lies within the C1, R4 and Conservation and Open Space Districts. It is bounded on the west by Holiday Inn, on the south by a single family dwelling, service station, medical office, photo shop and Williston Road, on the east by auto sales and undeveloped land, and on the north by undeveloped land. Lot size/frontwze: Both lots meet the minimum lot size requirement of 40,000 square feet. Lot #2 does not meet the 200 foot minimum frontage requirement along Williston Road. This lot is proposed to have 50 feet of frontage. The Planning Commission does not have the authority to waive this requirement (see enclosed letter from City Attorney). Coverage/setbacks: Coverage information for the new lots was not submitted Setback requirements will be met. 8) MAGIC HAT BREWING COMPANY - WASTEWATER TREATMENT - REVISED FINAL PLAT The applicant has requested that this application be continued to the 4/27/99 meeting. 9) DORSET SQUARE ASSOCIATES - ADD RETAIL BUILDING - PRELIMINARY PLAT This application was continued from the 2/23/99 meeting (minutes not available) to provide the applicant an opportunity to prepare a plan to relocate the future street in question. This plan has been prepared and must now be considered by the City Council. The applicant is requesting that this application be continued to provide him an opportunity to meet with the Council on the proposed relocation. 4 I /-t� CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON Subdivision Application - SKETCH PLAN 1) Name, address, and phone number of: a. Owner of record t.V Fyn b,n 16 h alo 1eaLe-4- 30Y .A4e- f3" ", 5�8 E3�,.1 VT os yoz - os 6 Fb 3 -2,'26 b . C - APp l i cants�t' ��d/ .�, r�/a�cL, �(1/ r�/,uv�no.- I`/us �, G• �c r� (t%; ��✓ Le �e�,.1e �v76 Gt/i�/s/vh iP�� ..So . 6�'��f �-►1�+,, � n � t1d� C. Contact Z?a,2cp �' �, �e) ��3 -1l'2-2 2) Purpose, location, and nature of subdivision or development, including number of lots, units, or parcels and proposed use(s). 5 <,� A -el ,s-Az,-A 3) Applicant's legal interest in the property (fee simple, option, etc. 4) Names of owners of record of all contiguous properties .S.g e- aA -1 //s/. 5) Type of existing or proposed encumbrances on property such as easements, covenants, leases, rights of way, etc. See- a A d'W skw. &, S-/Gc,1G1 .n /a.v, . 4,� 4 I c a ;-� 1 6) Proposed extension, relocation, or modification of municipal facilities such as sanit��y`�ry sewer, water supply, streets, storm drainage, etc. /V=re_ 7) Describe any previous actions taken by the Zoning Board of Adjustment or by the South Burlington Planning Commission which affects the proposed subdivision, and include the datAe� of such actions: /Vvhe_ 8) Submit five copies and one reduced copy (81 x 11, 81 x 14 or 11 x 17) of a Sketch plan showing the following information: a) Name and address of the owner of record and applicant. b) Name of owners of record of contiguous properties. c) Date, true north arrow and scale (numerical and graphic). d) Boundaries and area of: 1) all contiguous land belonging to owner of record, and 2) proposed subdivision. e) Existing and proposed layout of property lines; type and location of existing and proposed restrictions on land, such as easements and covenants. f) Type of, location, and size of existing and proposed streets, structures, utilities, and open space. g) Existing zoning boundaries. h) Existing water courses, wetlands, floodplains, wooded areas, ledge outcrops, and other natural features. i) Location of existing septic systems and wells. j) Location map, showing relation of proposed subdivision to adjacent property and surrounding area. k) All applicable information required for a site plan, as provided in the South Burlington Zoning Regulations, shall be submitted for subdivisions involving a commercial or industrial complex, multi -family project, planned unit development, or planned residential development. (Signature) applicant oe contact person Date South Burlington, VT 05403 Beatrice V. Alger 339 Patchen Road South Burlington, VT 05403 Francis E. Quigley 355 Patchen Road, #1 South Burlington, VT 05403 Shannon K.Sheehan 355 Patchen Road, #2 South Burlington, VT 05403 David M. Burns 355 Patchen Road, #3 South Burlington, VT 05403 Elizabeth A. Carter 355 Patchen Road, #4 South Burlington, VT 05403 John P. and Helen Gouvin 355 Patchen Road, #5 South Burlington, VT 05403 John A. Swainbank 355 Patchen Road, #6 South Burlington, VT 05403 James A. Martin 355 Patchen Road, #7 South Burlington, VT 05403 Michael Pasqual 355 Patchen Road, #8 South Burlington, VT 05403 Ronald and Mary Magnuson 357-359 Patchen Road South Burlington, VT 05403 Champlain Oil Co., Inc. PO Box 2126 South Burlington, VT 05407-2126 (1055 Williston Road) Charles N. and Janet B. Perkins 80 South Cove Road Burlington, VT 05401 (1087 Williston Road) Lodging North, Inc. Gary N. Farrell 870 Williston Road South Burlington, VT 05403 (1117 Williston Road) Rexbo Development, Inc. Box 760 Greenfield, MA 01302 (1143 Williston Road) Howard Johnson's Motel c/o John Larkin 410 Shelburne Road South Burlington, VT 05403 (5 Dorset Street) Precourt Investment Company Rinald G. Precourt 21 Mapleleaf Lane Shelburne, VT 05482 (1160-1166, & 1174 Williston Road) Wesco, Inc. PO Box 2287 South Burlington, VT 05407-2287 (1108 & 1118 Williston Road) Kenneth A. Kero 1128 Williston Road South Burlington, VT 05403 Arthur C. Toutant, Trustee 1398 Hinesburg Road South Burlington, VT 05403 (1140-1142 Williston Road) State of Vermont Vermont Agency of Transportation Attn: Scott Whitted, Esq. 133 State Street Montpelier, VT 05633-0001 Tygate Properties 1076 Williston Road So. Burlington, VT 05403 Item 5) The property is encumbered by those easements and rights of way set forth on the submitted sketch plan. Further, the responses to items 2) and 3) above discuss covenants and restrictions and a disputed right of first refusal applicable to a portion of proposed Lot 1 as well as Windjammer Hospitality Group's leasehold interest in the property. 88796_1 MEMORANDUM To: South Burlington Planning Commission From: South Burlington Fire Department Re: March 23, 1999 agenda items Date: March 10, 1999 1) Magic Hat Dated 1 /29/99 5 Bartlett Bay Road Acceptable 2) Budget Car a T ruck Rental Dated 2/18/99 700 Airport Parkway The building should meet the code for auto service 3) Windjammer Hospitality Group Dated 1/19/99 1076 Williston Road Acceptable MEMORANDUM To: South Burlington Planning Commission From. William J. Szymanski, South Burlington City Engineer Re: March 23, 1999 Agenda Items Date: March 5, 1999 MAGIC HAT BREWERY - BARTLETT BAY ROAD Site plan prepared by Civil Engineering Associates dated February, 1999 is acceptable. BUDGET RENT -A -CAR - AIRPORT PARKWAY 1. Site plan prepared by Lamoureux & Stone dated 11/1/93 with latest revision dated 7/12/94 and received by City 2/18/99 is acceptable. EVELYN W. LAMPLOUGH PROPERTY - 2 LOT SUBDIVISION The Champlain Water District may have a water main easement along or near the westerly property line of lot 2. If so, it should be shown on the plan. 1 CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 (802) 846-4106 FAX (802) 846-4101 March 18, 1999 Walt Levering Windjammer Hospitality Group 1076 Williston Road South Burlington, Vermont 05403 Re: Two (2) Lot Subdivision, 1076 Williston Road Dear Mr. Levering: Enclosed is the agenda for next Tuesday's Planning Commission meeting and comments from City Engineer Bill Szymanski, the Fire Department and myself. Please be sure someone is present on Tuesday, March 23, 1999 at 7:30 P.M. to represent your request. If you have any questions, please give me a call. rely, Jo eith, Director Planning & Zoning JW/mcp Encls CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERIVIONT 05403 (802) 846-4106 FAX (802) 846-4101 March 5, 1999 Walt Leverinu V Windjammer Hospitality Group 1076 Williston Road South Burlington, Vermont 05403 Re: Two (2) Lot Subdivision, 1076 Williston Road Dear Mr. Levering: Enclosed are preliminary comments on the above referenced project from City Engineer, William Szymanski and myself. Comments from the Fire Department will be submitted when they are available. Please respond to these comments with additional information and/or revised plans, if appropriate, no later than Friday, March 12, 1999. If you have any questions, please give me a call. Sincerel , Raymond J. Belair, Zoning and Planning Assistant RJB/mcp Encls MEMORANDUM To: South Burlington Planning Commission From: William J. Szymanski, South Burlington City Engineer Re: March 23, 1999 Agenda Items Date: March 5, 1999 MAGIC HAT BREWERY - BARTLETT BAY ROAD Site plan prepared by Civil Engineering Associates dated February, 1999 is acceptable. BUDGET RENT -A -CAR - AIRPORT PARKWAY 1. Site plan prepared by Lamoureux & Stone dated I I/1/93 with latest revision dated 7/12/94 and received by City 2/18/99 is acceptable. EVELYN W. LAMPLOUGH PROPERTY - 2 LOT SUBDIVISION The Champlain Water District may have a water main easement along or near the westerly property line of lot 2. If so, it should be shown on the plan. 1 I ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR SUBDIVISION AN (SKETCH PLAN) OF EVELYN LAMPLOUGH WINDJAMMER HOSPITALITY GROUP Item 2) The co -applicants propose a two lot subdivision as depicted on the submitted sketch plan to create a 1.476 +/- acre lot (Lot 1) and a 52.876 +/- acre lot (Lot 2). The co -applicants do not propose any development on either of the lots. In fact, most of the proposed Lot 1 is encumbered by a Declaration of Covenants, Restrictions, Easements and Conditions that prevents any development on the lot. Presently, Windjammer Hospitality Group leases the entire property from Mrs. Lamplough under a long term lease, which includes an option to purchase the property. There has been a dispute in the past as to whether a small portion of the property is subject to a right of first refusal benefitting an adjoining property, which is now owned by Harper Hotels of Vermont, Inc. (aka Holiday Inn). That portion of the property that may be subject to the disputed right of first refusal is entirely within the proposed Lot 1 and is shaded on the sketch plan. The purpose of the subdivision is to enable Windjammer Hospitality Group to exercise its option to purchase all of the proposed Lot 2 without affecting the disputed right of first refusal that may encumber a portion of the proposed Lot 1. Mrs. Lamplough would continue to own the proposed Lot 1 subject to the long-term lease to Windjammer Hospitality Group and the disputed right of first refusal. Item 4) Harper Hotels of Vermont, Inc. 1068 Williston Road South Burlington, VT 05403 Bernard J., Sr. and Catherine Couillard P.O. Box 2104 South Burlington, VT 05407-2104 (1150 Williston Road) Randall G. Munson 366 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403 (201 Patchen Road) Frank J. and Anna G. Cota 397 Patchen Road South Burlington, VT 05403 (397 & 401 Patchen Road) Robert A. Graham 361 Patchen Road Post -it® Fax Note 7671 DateVVf pages To /J 7 (� Fro Co./Dept. Co. Phone # Phone # h , 1 b 1 Fax # Fax # SFAX OF WOM .A R2' tEAC 6&57' REC. 82.02' REC. km 15' sceiw MATCH LINE NTH SWEET 2 OF 2 / ZOfEMO 'RE40ENnAL tltssrIWT 4 M ACRE' (R• 0. ZONNG DtSTRICT •COMIERC7AL I' (Cl) Lai 2 BLIX i A� ;v vngg 40.28 REC. MA wm Hms. W- INK 73 PC 71 /• • r I / i > N5612'34'W� 234.57' tff ?� �11W 144.1 � b# N5419'03'W 125.08 MEAS. 124.99REC. 1 GRAPHIC SCALE t h"- 200 t! 7&38 MEAS. 7&37' REC. 55.25' REC. N28'36'4fi"E �0.79 :?crU. / 151.72' REC. 50.00' r73 C ® WU 0 cm • iPF • 54 000000s I A ti'F �� • PF q 423.07 NEAS. 422.50' REC. AL PARKW i M/F AWN ODAPQAlOM a mpg is PAWNG NOTE: 270 Sb.,dad Spew. O rr a ttorleaap svaar 1D sbocr (rt.) onya..l w.1aw S74'01'10'W 227 Totai EdxUrw spew. aa.w - blf—tlnn supp04d by a.o r.raA 325 parkh9'Paw` TM. m tM sub) l parch to add at S24104'29'W Saar rr"O r 183.35 � FLOOD NOTE BrW span a raN.r a tM blood hvrvw. rv. Burlkgton. WR*rtont CMEw1d.n CwntY. puM rn^Vx 7D0195 000.f' & .ttatM do4 1/iE/a. M/T 00.4AAD W-P" daw not 5..10rh a Aood xam. OK 2N PC SQ ZONING NOTE p.r A— (R4Gr.f0k tk- Tt. Drw" Y.. h too zart.a 'Canart4rcb apww*—E. .*q dl.trfct b—dvy 1..t— t 717'38"W roof and 3Dabow N. Ttr /w*—t 10 both _ 1. a m.*_ h.la: pnoorW—Ow 9r'od. tar a,ty 26� 5-lb-1- Tlt.:onh9 ooa. ra . Cl r.wbr— a *—t yard ..tb. � —.oy or .. r1 Ro (OD I..t). a 10 kart ..tbocA fpr 16. Or h tM R4xorra �' ro Ytpro..Mts on tiv perlic 9rc R..trbtsfttc Far tM rrt—t. tlr —AV ood. rq,*— 1 > p—W.dd Or patr a.. eat rot mnl paY+q 'pO0' rar .oaM 200 p.1&q ldiWp tk.d rota For 11w -6. (v xp cl W.. PwK D.Ooun pAq 2 twrtltg guar /ar buldkn - p ddng. and -t m. atom aa.ua0. of 301E br S— C y 11 South Ru1Yq— Z-6.9 R.VA.U-..ff--U- S., LANGROCK SPERRY & WOOL BURLINGTON MIDDLEBURY ATTORNEYS AT I. A W Michael W. Wool Peter F. Langrock Mark L. Sperry Ellen Mercer Fallon A Partnership p Christopher L. DavisLiam William B. Miller, Jr. James W. Swift Including a Professional Corporation L. Murphy Emily J. Joselson Thomas Z. Carlson Alison J. Bell John F. Evers Susan M. Murray Lisa B. Shelkrot John L. Kellner Eric M. Knudsen Mitchell L. Pearl Kevin E. Brown Frank H. Langrock Beth Robinson Affiliated Counsel: F. Rendol Barlow Roland Gray, III Dcvin McLaughlin January 26, 1999 REPLY TO: Burlington Office Joseph S. McLean, Esq. Mr. Raymond Belair Stitzel, Page & Fletcher, P.C. City of South Burlington 171 Battery Street Planning and Zoning Office P. O. Box 1507 575 Dorset Street Burlington, VT 05402-1507 South Burlington, VT 05403 Re: Lamplough/Windjammer Subdivision Application Dear Joe and Ray: As we discussed, we are providing this letter to you in response to your concern that the above - referenced subdivision application will create a lot that fails to satisfy South Burlington's minimum lot frontage requirement. For the reasons expressed below, we believe that both of the proposed lots conform to the minimum lot frontage requirements as expressed in the South Burlington Zoning Regulations. A brief description of the dimensions of the proposed subdivision is necessary. All measurements and property descriptions are based on the Sketch Plan last revised January 13, 1999, which was submitted with the subdivision application and should be referenced accordingly. At present, the Lamplough property is a single parcel consisting of approximately fifty-four acres bounded by Williston Road on the south and Patchen Road on the north. On both Williston Road and Patchen Road, the parcel's boundary with the streets is located on either side of intervening landowners in an H-shaped configuration. The parcel's Williston Road boundary is composed of two pieces of 50 feet and 234.57 feet, respectively, for a total of 284.57 feet. The parcel's Patchen Road boundary is composed of two pieces of 10 feet and 251.31 feet, respectively, for a total of 261.31 feet. The proposed subdivision would create two lots. Lot 1 would consist of 1.476 acres and have a boundary of 234.57 feet along Williston Road and no boundary along Patchen Road. Lot 2 would have the same boundary along Patchen Road as the unsubdivided lot, i.e., 261.31 feet, and a fifty foot boundary along Williston Road. MIDDLEBURY: 111 S. Pleasant Street - P.O. Drawer 351 . Middlebury, Vermont 05753-0351 (802) 388-6356 - Fax (802) 388.6149 - Email: attomeys@langrock.com BURLINGTON: 275 College Street - P.O. Box 721 - Burlington, Vermont 05402-0721 (802) 864.0217 - Fax (802) 864.0137 - Email: attomeysC langrock.com Re: Lamplough/Windjammer Subdivision Application January 26, 1999 Page -2- You have maintained that Lot 2 is non -conforming because it does not have minimum lot frontage on both Williston Road and Patchen Road. There is no dispute that proposed Lot 2 does meet the minimum lot frontage requirement for Patchen Road. The outstanding issue, however, is whether the Zoning Regulations require the proposed Lot 2 to meet the minimum lot frontage requirements on both Williston Road and Patchen Road. We maintain that it does not. The Zoning Regulations do not have any specific provision that expressly states that a lot bounded by more than one public street must meet the minimum lot frontage requirements on all public streets by which it is bounded'. In fact, a reading of the Zoning Regulations provisions regarding frontage indicates that a lot only needs to have minimum lot frontage on at least one public street in order to comply with the Zoning Regulations's frontage requirements, not that it needs to have minimum lot frontage on every public street by which it is bounded. An analysis of the Zoning Regulations' frontage requirements begins with its definition of "lot frontage." "Lot frontage" is defined as "[t]he boundary of a lot along a public street" (emphasis supplied). The Regulations use of "a public street" in the singular is critical here because it expresses the concept that frontage is measured with respect to only one public street, not "any" or "all" public streets. This distinction is critical and is one that is evident throughout the Zoning Regulations. For example, the Regulations defined setback as "the nearest portion of a structure to any property l�including the street right-of-way." (emphasis supplied). In this example, the Regulations use the word "any" instead of "a" to indicate that the setback is to apply to all property boundaries. Even beyond the plain meaning of "lot frontage," other provisions of the Zoning Regulations support the applicants' position. Section 25.110 of the Zoning Regulations expressly provides that "[n]o land development may be permitted on lots which do not have either frontage on a public road or public waters..." (emphasis supplied). Here again, the Regulations state the frontage requirement in terms of a public road in the singular, which is affirmative support for the applicant's position that a lot satisfies the frontage requirement by having minimum lot frontage along a public road, not all public roads by which it is bounded. Moreover, the 'You have referred us to Exhibit 28A of the Zoning Regulations as a requirement that minimum lot frontage be maintained on both public streets. Exhibit 28A, however, is not relevant to the "frontage" question as it simply seeks to illustrate the definitions of "yard" for various shaped lots by noting which "yards" of such lots will be considered front, side or rear. It is necessary for the Zoning Regulations to provide the Exhibit 28A examples for setback purposes because there are different setback distances required of front, side and rear yards. See Table 25-1. Thus, Exhibit 28A does not impose any frontage requirements. Re: Lamplough/Windjammer Subdivision Application January 26, 1999 Page -3- Regulations even provide for development of lots with no lot frontage so long as reasonable access can be secured and approved by means of at least a twenty foot wide right of way2. See section 26.20. In light of such provisions, it is certainly unreasonable for the City to now assert that Lot 2 must have minimum lot frontage on more than one public road in order to meet the Zoning Regulations. Furthermore, the City's position that minimum lot frontage is required on all public streets by which a lot is bounded will lead to absurd actions by property owners in order to comply with such requirements. For example, in this case, Mrs. Lamplough could negotiate with her neighbors adjoining her fifty foot boundary on Williston Road and adjust their respective boundaries by conveying to them the fifty foot wide access area and retaining a permanent easement and right-of-way over this area. In so doing, the proposed Lot 2 would no longer be bounded by Williston Road and Lot 2 would conform under the City's position because it meets the minimum lot frontage requirement by all public roads by which it is bounded, i.e., Patchen Road. Clearly, the City's Zoning Regulations could not have intended to encourage landowners to reduce their property rights in this manner (i.e., fee owner to easement holder) in order to create conformance. Yet, this is precisely the type of action which will be encouraged by the City's position with respect to the dual frontage requirement. Although Vermont courts have yet to address the issue discussed herein, courts in both Pennsylvania and New Jersey have refused to interpret municipal zoning regulations in those states to require that a lot satisfy minimum lot frontage on all public streets by which it is bound. See Thrush v. Township of Bensalem, 424 A.2d 988 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1981); Galanter v. Planning Bd. of Tp. of Howell, 511 A.2d 702 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 1986). Copies of these cases are enclosed for your convenience. The Thrush case is directly on point. It dealt with a corner lot where the owner proposed a subdivision that would have resulted in one of the subdivided lots having frontage on two public streets, but only one with the minimum lot frontage required by the zoning ordinance. The Thrush court noted that the ordinance in question did not specifically require minimum lot frontage on all public streets by which a lot was abutted and then went on to find that "front yard" for purposes of setback was wholly distinct from the concept of "frontage." The court concluded that the lot conformed to the ordinance since it had the minimum lot frontage on one street. 'Here, applicant will remain the fee owner of an access to proposed Lot 2 that is fifty feet in width. Re: Lamplough/Windjammer Subdivision Application January 26, 1999 Page -4- The Galanter case interprets an ordinance that provides a near identical definition of "lot frontage" as the South Burlington ordinance. The court emphasized that the definition utilizes "a public street" in the singular in the definition. The court concluded its analysis as follows: [I]nterpretations which lead to absurd to unreasonable results are to be avoided. Since the front yard, setback, and all other bulk and related requirements are met as to both streets, no reason appears why the lot frontage requirement should be applicable to both Yellowbrook Road and Cranberry Road. As defendants have also pointed out, they could probably avoid any such requirement by simply conveying a small strip of land, say two feet [in width], along Cranberry Road and then they would no longer have "frontage" on that street. ialanter, 51 i A.2d at 704 (citations omitted). You have also expressed your concern with regard to future development on proposed Lot 1 and the possibility of a new curb cut on this lot. As noted in the Sketch Plan application, the bulk of proposed Lot 1 (all of the shaded area) is subject to restrictive covenants, which are of record in the South Burlington land records, and a copy of which is enclosed. Further, with regard to this application, the applicants will gladly accept as a subdivision condition to be binding on them and their successors that no Williston Road curb cut to the lot will be permitted. For all of the reasons discussed herein, we urge the City to re -consider its initial position with respect to the Lamplough/Windjammer subdivision application and determine that the proposed Lot 2 does satisfy the minimum lot frontage requirement. Please do not hesitate to contact me to discuss this matter further. Very truly yours, ,J,/Liam L. Murphy EMK:srt Encs. / 89598_1 Mr. Walter B. Levering, Jr. Robert W. Eastman, Esq. J88 Pa. 424 ATLANTIC REPORTER, 2d SERIES significantly affect determinations by pub- meet minimum requirements for setback lic agencies. from both streets, but minimum frontage Wajert v. State Ethics Commission, 491 Pa. 255, 420 A.2d 439 (1980) is distinguisha- ble. Application of the Ethics Act to shut the door of a court against the practice of law therein by an attorney is clearly in conflict with the actual judicial action which explicitly provided for the admission of that very attorney to practice before that court. However, until the Supreme Court makes express provision for financial disclosure by solicitors, the Ethics Act disclosure require- ment is not inconsistent and therefore is not ousted by the governing provision of the constitution. w 0 5 RETRUMBERSYSTEM T Robert TRUSH and Margaret Trush, Appellants, V. TOWNSHIP OF BENSALEM, Appellee. Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania. Argued Oct. 9, 1980. Decided Jan. 22, 1981 Landowners appealed from order of the Common Pleas Court, Bucks County, Isaac S. Garb, J., dismissing appeal from decision of board of supervisors denying application for subdivision of lot. The Commonwealth Court, 31 C.D.1980, Mencer, J., held that ordinance required that proposed dwelling requirement applied to only one street upon which corner lot abutted. Reversed and remanded. Zoning and Planning —252, 254 Zoning ordinance required that pro- posed dwelling on corner lot meet minimum requirements for setback from both streets, but minimum frontage requirement applied to only one street upon which corner lot abutted. Stanton C. Kelton, III, Wood & Floge, Bensalem, for appellants. Henry H. Huhn, Leslie G. Dias, Cornwells Heights, for appellee. Before MENCER, BLATT and CRAIG, JJ. MENCER, Judge. Robert Trush and Margaret Trush (appel- lants) appeal from an order of the Court of Common Pleas of Bucks County which dis- missed their appeal from the decision of the Board of Supervisors of the Township of Bensalem (Township) denying their applica- tion for a subdivision of their property. We reverse and remand. The property in question is located at the intersection of Kleckner and Albert Roads in the Township and constitutes one lot with an existing two -dwelling house. Ap- pellants' proposal would divide the property into two separate L-shaped lots: (1) the dwelling house and its lot, which would be located entirely on Kleckner Road, and (2) an unimproved lot located partly on Kleck- ner Road and partly on Albert Road. For reference, a sketch of the proposed subdivi- sion is reproduced below. The Township denied the application, the lower court af- firmed, and this appeal followed. TRUSH v. TOWNSHIP OF BENSALEM Cite as, Pa.Cmwith., 424 A.2d 988 Proposed Subdivision Line 127 18' 3 ProposedT 1 Dwelling 72' 12' r -- 57.32 .24,.57' 177.92' 135.64 Existing 2-story Dwelling t LOT 41 83'i i LOT !i2 65' Kleckner Road The issue before us is whether Lot No. 2 has the required frontage mandated by Sec- tion 402(2) of the Township zoning ordi- nance, which provides that "[e]ach lot shall have a minimum frontage and an average width of not less than eighty (80) feet." Section 1600(25xb) of the ordinance states, in part, that "[i]n the case of a corner lot, the yards extending along all streets are front yards." (Emphasis added.) Section 1600(25xe) also provides: "Front and Side Yards of Corner Lots. On a corner lot, the yard facing each street which shall equal the required front yard for lots facing the street." The lower court construed these sections to mean that "in a case of a corner lot the frontage requirement of § 402(2) of 80 feet shall be applicable on each street." (Emphasis added.) The court then conclud- ed that, since the frontage on Kleckner Road was less than 80 feet, the application was properly denied. Appellants argue that the lower court erred in its conclusion that Lot No. 2 must have an 80-foot frontage on Kleckner Road. We agree. The lower court erred by equat- ing the term "frontage" with "front yard." These terms have separate meanings and may not be used interchangeably. Albert Road Pa. 989 The distinction between these terms is aptly illustrated in Jersild v. Sarcone, 260 Iowa 288, 149 N.W.2d 179 (1967). In Jer- sild, the dispute centered around the ability of the landowner of a corner lot to choose which street he would use to determine his front yard. The court instructed that "[w]here lots or tracts abut on a street, we have frontage, and of course as to corner lots there is a frontage on two streets." Id. at 295, 149 N.W.2d at 184. Since the ordi- nance did not specify which street the own- er of a corner lot must use to determine his front yard, the court concluded that it was proper for the owner "to choose which frontage he desired to use as his front yard." Id. at 295, 149 N.W.2d at 185 (em- phasis added). In this context, then, the term "front yard" is used to denote the area between the front of a structure and the edge of the property. "Front yard," therefore, has lit- tle in common with "frontage," which re- fers to the extent of land abutting on a street. With these distinctions firmly in mind, we read Section 1600 of the ordinance as requiring that, in the case of a corner lot, J90 Pa. 424 ATLANTIC REPORTER, 2d SERIES the yards extending along all streets shall be considered front yards and are subject to the requirements relating to a front yard. "Front yard" is defined in Section 402(4xa) of the ordinance: "One yard, not less than thirty-five (35) feet in depth." Since "front yard" is not defined in terms of frontage, but rather in terms of setback, we must conclude that, in a corner lot all yards abut- ting on a street must comply only with the 35-foot setback requirement applicable to front yards. This interpretation is but- tressed by a reading of the definition of "side yards" in Section 402(4xb) of the ordi- nance: "Two yards, not less than thirty (30) feet in aggregate width, and neither less than twelve (12) feet; except that in the case of a corner lot the yard abutting the street shall be not less than thirty-five (35) feet in width." (Emphasis added.) From the diagram, it is obvious that the proposed dwelling in Lot No. 2 complies with all the requirements of the ordinance. The lot has the minimum frontage and an average width of 80 feet, the front yard has a 35-foot depth, and the side yard abutting the street has at least a 35-foot width. The lower court's decision to the contrary must, therefore, be reversed. The lower court failed to rule on two other points: (1) whether the dwelling on Lot No. 1 will meet the 30-foot rear yard requirement and (2) whether this proposed subdivision is subject to certain require- ments regarding such matters as the neces- sity for showing existing sewer lines, fire hydrants, and the like. We will remand solely for determination of these matters.' Order reversed and case remanded. ORDER AND NOW, this 22nd day of January, 1981, the order of the Court of Common Pleas of Bucks County, dated November 28, 1979, in the above captioned matter, is here- by reversed, and the case is remanded for proceedings consistent with this opinion. 1. In view of our decision, we need not address appellants' constitutional argument. COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania, DE- PARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, BUREAU OF TRAFFIC SAFETY, Ap. pellant, Michael MIERNICKI, Appellee. Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania. Argued Dec. 8, 1980. Decided Jan. 22, 1981. An order of the Court of Common Pleas, Bucks County, Harriet M. Mims, J., sustained appeal of a driver from suspen- sion of his operating privileges. The De- partment of Transportation, Bureau of Traffic Safety, appealed from the order of the Court of Common Pleas. The Common- wealth Court, No. 1337 C.D. 1979, Craig, J., held that: (1) Department of Transporta- tion, Bureau of Traffic Safety, acted cor- rectly in raising driver's point total to five upon restoration of his license from suspen- sion, including nonpoint suspension, and thus when later certifications of convictions brought total to 11 or more points, resulting additional suspension was proper, but (2) Department of Transportation, Bureau of Traffic Safety, improperly assessed four points against driver based on speeding of- fenses, in view of statute providing that three points shall be assessed for speeding violations of ten to 15 miles per hour over the maximum. Order reversed and suspension, as mod- ified to 165 days reinstated. 1. Automobiles e-144.1(3) Department of Transportation, Bureau of Traffic Safety acted correctly in raising driver's point total to five upon restoration of his license from suspension, including nonpoint suspension, and thus when later COM., DEPT. OF TRANSP. v. REOTT Pa. 991 Cite as, Pa.Cmwlth., 424 A2d 991 certifications of conviction brought total to sessed four points against Miernicki based 11 or more points, resulting additional sus- on the speeding offense on September 4, pension was proper. 75 Pa.C.S.A. § 1539. 1977. The citation for that offense indi- 2. Automobiles—144.1(3) cates that Miernicki was traveling at fif- teen miles per hour over the allowed speed. Department of transportation, Bureau Section 1535 of the Code, 75 Pa.C.S. § 1535, of Traffic Safety, improperly assessed four provides that three points shall be assessed points against driver based on speeding of- for speeding violations of 10-15 miles per fenses, in view of statute providing that hour over the maximum speed allowed. three points shall be assessed for speeding The trial court correctly adjusted Mier - violations of ten to 15 miles per hour over nicki's total to reflect the proper assess - the maximum. 75 Pa.C.S.A. § 1535. ment. Harold H. Cramer, Harrisburg, for appel- lant. Michael Miernicki, pro se. Before WILKINSON, CRAIG and PAL- L,ADINO, JJ. CRAIG, Judge. The Department of Transportation, Bu- reau of Traffic Safety (department) appeals from the order of the Court of Common Pleas of Bucks County which sustained the appeal of Michael Miernicki from the de- partment's 180-day suspension of his oper- ating privileges under Section 1539 of the Vehicle Code, 75 Pa.C.S. § 1539. As in Department of Transportation, Bu- reau of Traffic Safety v. Dinkins, Pa. Cmwlth. —, 424 A.2d 591 (1568 C.D. 1979, filed January 20, 1981), argued before this panel the same day as this case, the trial court here did not have the benefit of our decision in Department of Transportation, Bureau of Traffic Safety v. Gearhart, 50 Pa.Cmwlth. 474, 413 A.2d 1161 (1980) when it decided this case. [1) The Gearhart decision has now es- tablished that the department acted cor- rectly in raising Miernicki's point total to five upon restoration of his license from a suspension, including a non -point suspen- sion. Hence, when later certifications of conviction brought Miernicki's total to elev- en or more points, the resulting additional suspension was proper. However, even thus adjusted, Miernicki's total accumulation is eleven points, and, two earlier suspensions having been im- posed, Section 1539 requires suspension for fifteen days for each point, or a total of 165 days in this case. The lower court's order will be reversed, and the department's suspension, as modi- fied to 165 days, will be reinstated. ORDER AND NOW, January 22, 1981, the June 11, 1979 order of the Court of Common Pleas of Bucks County, at No. 78-7450-10- 6, sustaining the appeal of Michael Mier- nicki, is reversed, and the suspension im- posed by the Department of Transportation, Bureau of Traffic Safety, as modified from 180 to 165 days, is reinstated. w 0 S KEYNUMRER SYSTEM T COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania, DE- PARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, BUREAU OF TRAFFIC SAFETY, Ap- pellant, V. Robert REOTT, Appellee. Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania. Argued Dec. 11, 1980. Decided Jan. 22, 1981. [2] However, we agree with the court Department of Transportation sought below that the department improperly as- to revoke operator's license. The Common F, 702 N. J. 511 ATLANTIC REPORTER, _d SERIES those involved in matters considered under R. 4:50-1. [2, 31 The trial judge decided this mat- ter before Mazakas was decided. We now expressly overrule Cotter and Cuccurullo. We see no reason to remand this case for further consideration under the Mazakas standards where such a short time period is involved. Essentially, plaintiffs' motion was filed one business day late. Substan- tial compliance with the filing limitation is evident from the facts in this case and this constitutes one of the "extraordinary cir- cumstances" referred to in Mazakas (205 N.J..Super. at 371-372, 500 A.2d 1085). Hence, in the exercise of our original juris- diction, we reverse the order denying re- consideration and remand for entry of an order returning the case to the trial calen- dar in such position as it would have had if it had not been referred to arbitration. See interim Rule 10C and R. 4:21A-6(c). Reversed and remanded for further pro- ceedings in accordance with this opinion. w p SNEY NUMBER SYSTEM T 211 NJ.Super. 218 Lawrence GALANTER and Elizabeth Galanter, his wife, and Susan Arnold, Plaintiffs -Respondents, V. PLANNING BOARD OF the TOWNSHIP OF HOWELL, Central Concrete Com- pany, a New Jersey Corporation, Nel- son R. Walling and Gary 0. Walling, Defendants -Appellants. Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division. Argued May 29, 1986. Decided June 18, 1986. Appeal was taken from order of the Superior Court, Law Division, Monmouth County, which reversed site plan approval for cement plant. The Superior Court, Ap- pellate Division, Simpson, J.A.D., held that zoning ordinance did not require minimum lot frontage on both streets in the case of a corner lot. Reversed and remanded. 1. Statutes e--189 Statutes are to be read sensibly rather than literally and interpretations which lead to absurd or unreasonable results are to be avoided. 2. Zoning and Planning (9=254 Minimum lot frontage requirement was not applicable to both streets in the case of a corner lot, and corner lot which met minimum frontage requirements on one street was in compliance with zoning requirements. Vincent E. Halleran, Jr., Freehold, for appellants (Martin S. Wolf, Trenton, on brief). Richard K. Sacks, Lakewood, for respon- dents (Sharkey & Sacks, Lakewood, attor- neys; Richard K. Sacks, Lakewood, on brief). Before Judges KING, O'BRIEN and SIMPSON. The opinion of the court was delivered by SIMPSON, J.A.D. Defendants property owners or contract purchasers appeal from a November 12, 1985 Law Division judgment reversing site plan approval granted by the Howell Town- ship Planning Board for construction of a cement plant on lots 1 and 1.01 as shown on the Township Tax Map. Plaintiffs are owners of adjoining properties. The opera- tive facts are not in dispute and the ques- tion presented is whether the zoning ordi- nance requires minimum lot frontage on both streets in the case of a corner lot. In a letter opinion of October 25, 1985 the trial GALANTER v. PLANNING BD. OF 1P. OF HOWELL N. J. 703 Cite as 511 A.2d M (N.ISuperAD. 1986) judge answered the question in the affirm- The Planning Board did not address the ative. We disagree and therefore reverse. issue directly, but impliedly found that the The parcel is a 4.79 acre site in the 250 foot frontage requirement only applied industrial zone with 580 feet bordering on to one street. The judge noted that "front- Yellowbrook Road and 218.71 feet along age" is not defined in the Municipal Land Cranberry :Road. The Howell Township Use Law, N.J.S.A. 40:55D-1 et seq. and the Land Use Ordinance schedule requires only references thereto in the ordinance are "Minimum Lot Frontage of 250 feet." No cited above. Cases cited by the court and other bulk, dimensional, height and related counsel do not specifically address the is - requirements are in dispute, but plaintiffs sue either. It is apparent, however, that successfully contended below that the 218.- there is a double significance to the term 71 feet frontage on Cranberry Road was when a corner lot is involved. Frontage on insufficient and a variance would be re- an improved street, to permit access by quired. Section 14-21.4b. requires that fire police and ambulance vehicles, obvi- "Each lot shall have frontage on an im- ously promotes the public health, safety proved public street" (emphasis added). and general welfare. N.J.SA. 40:55D-2.a. Another section of the ordinance provides and b.; 40:55D-35. See also, Yokley, 4 that: Zoning Law and Practice, § 23-8 at 149 "Lot Frontage" shall mean that por- (4th Ed., 1979). The frontage on Yellow - ofxistinlot extending along a street line. brook Road serves these purposes in the In e n existing odd shaped or triangle shaped present case, regardless of additional front - lots or proposed lots extending along a age on Cranberry Road. As to a corner curved street line the length of the front- lot, however, restrictions as to setbacks age may be considered to be the same as and front, side and rear yard requirements the lot width except that such length of also protect other owners on both streets frontage shall not be less than one-half and this is the obvious purpose of Howell of minimum frontage required and in no Township Land Use Ordinance Sections 14- case less than 50 feet in length as mea- 9.2 and 14-9.3 set forth above. As already sured along the street line, except as noted, the site plan meets all such bulk otherwise provided in the within chapter. dimensional requirements. See Anderson, [Emphasis added] 2 American Law of Zoning 2d, § 9.55 at 227 (1976). The only provisions as to corner lots in the ordinance read as follows: 14-9.2 Corner Lots. Any principal or accessory building located on a corner lot shall have a minimum setback from both street lines equal to the required front yard. and shall not interfere with any required sight triangle. 14-9.3 Yards. No area set aside for the purpose of meeting front, side, or rear yards for one building shall be con- sidered as meeting the yard provisions of another building. On a lot extending through a block resulting in frontage on two or more streets, including corner lots, the building setback from each street shall not be less than the required front yard. Analogous to the present case was the situation in Trush v. Township of Bensa- lem, 56 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 232, 424 A.2d 988 (1981), reversing a lower court determination that a minimum frontage re- quirement was applicable to both streets in the case of a corner lot, notwithstanding the ordinance requirement of front yards on both streets similar to required front yards for lots facing on only one street. The appellate court noted that the terms "frontage" and "front yard" have separate meanings and may not be used inter- changeably. Id. 424 A.2d at 989. Similar- ly, a restrictive covenant precluding erec- tion of a building within 35 feet of the front or street line of the property was held inapplicable to the side street of a 704 N. J. 511 ATLANTIC REPORTER, 2d SERIES corner lot. Schlichting v. Winter, 17 N.J. Super. 395, 86 A.2d 133 (Ch.Div.1952). [1, 2] Finally, statutes are to be read sensibly rather than literally, Schierstead v. Brigantine, 29 N.J. 220, 230, 148 A.2d 591 (1959), and interpretations which lead to absurd or unreasonable results are to be avoided. State v. Gill, 47 N.J. 441, 444, 86 A.2d 133 (1966). Since the front yard, set- back, and all other bulk and related re- quirements are met as to both streets, no reason appears why the lot frontage re- quirement should be applicable to both Yel- lowbrook Road and Cranberry Road. As defendants have also pointed out, they could probably avoid any such requirement by simply conveying a small strip of land, say two feet, along Cranberry Road and then they would no longer have "frontage" on that street. Reversed and remanded for the entry of a judgment reinstating the site plan ap- proval. w O S Rn NOMKR SYSTEM T 211 NJ.Super. 221 STATE of New Jersey, Plaintiff -Respondent, V. Fred LARRY, Jr., Defendant -Appellant. Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division. Submitted May 27, 1986. Decided June 18, 1986. Defendant was found guilty in the Su- perior Court, Law Division, Warren Coun- ty, of first -degree robbery and theft and, following merger of the theft with the rob- bery, was sentenced to a custodial term of 18 years with seven years of parole ineligi- bility, and he appealed. The Superior Court, Appellate Division, Coleman, J.H., J.A.D., held that defendant, who filled out form requesting a public defender at county jail after being informed by jail guard that he could fill out a form requesting a public defender, executed the form while no one was interrogating him and before arraign- ment and, thus, did not make explicit or implicit request for an attorney that would have precluded interrogation of defendant thereafter in the absence of counsel, where defendant stated at time he was given the form that he might want to fill it out and did not request an attorney during custodi- al interrogation the next day and did not advise investigator that he had filled out the form for a public defender. Affirmed. 1. Criminal Law e-412.2(4) Rule that all questioning must cease after accused requests counsel is not appli- cable unless and until accused asserts dur- ing custodial interrogation the right to have counsel present. U.S.C.A. Const. Amend. 5. 2. Criminal Law 9-412.2(4) Suspect's request for counsel must be given a broad, rather than a narrow, inter- pretation, and an equivocal assertion of the right to counsel must be interpreted in the light most favorable to the suspect. 3. Criminal Law e-412.2(5) Defendant, who filled out form re- questing a public defender at county jail after being informed by jail guard that he could fill out a form requesting a public defender, executed the form while no one was interrogating him and before arraign- ment and, thus, did not make explicit or implicit request for an attorney that would have precluded interrogation of defendant thereafter in the absence of counsel, where defendant stated, at time he was given the form, that he might want to fill it out and, during custodial interrogation the next day, did not request an attorney or advise inves- tigator that he had filled out the form for a STATE v. LARRY N. J. 705 Cite m 511 A.2d 704 (NJ.Super.A.D. 1986) public defender. U.S.C.A. Const.Amends. 2C:20-3 a. In a jury trial, defendant was 5, 6. found guilty of first degree robbery t and 4. Criminal I.aw a 412.2(4) Once defendant asserts right to coun- sel at arraignment or similar proceeding, defendant may not be questioned there- after in absence of counsel unless he initi- ates conversation with the authorities. U.S.C.A. Const.Amend. 6. Thomas S. Smith, Jr., Acting Public De- fender, for appellant (Raymond J. Burke, Designated Counsel, Merchantville, of counsel and on letter brief). W. Cary Edwards, Atty. Gen., for re- spondent (Gilbert G. Miller, Deputy Atty. Gen., of counsel and on brief). Before Judges J.H. COLEMAN and HA- VEY. The opinion of the court was delivered by COLEMAN, J.H., J.A.D. The novel issue raised by this appeal is whether executing an application for a pub- lic defender at a county jail at the request of a jail guard is a request for counsel within contemplation of Edwards v. Arizo- na, 451 U.S. 477, 101 S.Ct 1880, 68 L.Ed. 2d 378 (1981), The trial judge held that it did not. For the reasons which follow, we affirm. A Warren County grand jury returned a two count indictment against defendant and codefendant Gilbert Peterson. The first count charged Larry and Peterson with robbery which occurred on August 13, 1983 when ir., the course of committing a theft, they "did threaten immediate bodily injury to Thomas D. Marzano and/or did purposely put Thomas D. Marzano in fear of immediate bodily injury," contrary to N.J.S.A. 2C:15-1 a(2). Defendant was also charged under the second count of the in- dictment with theft, contrary to N.J.S.A. I. On this appeal defendant has not argued that the language of the indictment charged second degree robbery and that his first degree convic- tion should therefore be reduced to a second theft. At the time of sentencing, the theft was merged with the robbery and defend- ant was sentenced to a custodial term of 18 years with seven years of parole ineligibili- ty. Defendant has appealed, contending: 1. THE ADMISSION OF BOTH THE OUT -OF -COURT IDENTIFICATION OF DEFENDANT BASED ON IM- PERMISSIVELY SUGGESTIVE PHOTOGRAPHIC LINEUPS AND THE RESULTANT IN -COURT IDENTIFICATION DENIED DE- FENDANT DUE PROCESS AT LAW. 2. ADMISSION OF DEFENDANT'S STATEMENT CONFESSION DE- NIED THE DEFENDANT HIS RIGHTS GUARANTEED BY THE STATE AND FEDERAL CONSTI- TUTIONS. 3. SERIES OF IMPROPER COM- MENTS IvfADE BY THE. PROSECU- TOR IN HIS SUMMATION TO THE JURY COMBINED TO DEPRIVE DEFENDANT OF A FAIR TRIAL AND IT WAS ERROR FOR THE TRIAL JUDGE TO DENY DE- FENDANT'S RESULTANT MO- TION FOR MISTRIAL. 4. THE TOTAL SENTENCE OF 18 YEARS IMPOSED UPON DEFEND- ANT WAS MANIFESTLY EXCES- SIVE AND AN ABUSE OF DISCRE- TION. On August 13, 1983 Thomas Marzano, an employee of the Hudson Street Market in Phillipsburg, was robbed of money and food items at gun point. Defendant and Peterson were identified as the robbers by three teenagers, William Hornbaker, age 17, Melisa Lynn, age 14, and Stephanie Nixon, age 14, who observed defendant and degree conviction. See State v. Catlow, 206 NJ.Super. 186, 194-195, 502 A.2d 48 (App.Div. 1985). We decline to raise the issue sua sponte. DECLARATION OF COVENANTS, RESTRICTIONS EASEMENTS AND CONDITIONS This Declaration is made on this g,:2Wday of � l / 1985 by Mrs. Evelyn W. Lamplough of Burlington, Irmont. WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, I, Evelyn W. Lamplough (the "Declarant"), am currently the legal and record owner of a parcel of land in the City of South Burlington, situated on the north side of Williston Road and identified as "Parcel C" on a plan entitled "Topographic Plan of Land of Holiday Inn, South Burlington, Vermont", dated December 13, 1962 and revised July 6, 1966, and recorded in Volume 80 at Page 29 of the South Burlington Land Records, which Plan is made a part hereof by reference, (the "Land"); and WHEREAS, the "Land" is a portion of the land and premises conveyed to William J. Lamplough (now deceased) and Evelyn W. Lamplough by warranty deed of Horace Brand and Jennie E. Brand, dated April 23, 1936 and recorded in Volume 13 at Page 77 of the South Burlington Land Records, which deed and all prior deeds and references of record are made a part hereof; and WHEREAS, I have previously subjected this property to certain protective covenants in a lease with Paul R. Graves and Walter B. Levering, Jr., dated November 1, 1976, a memorandum of which is duly recorded in the South Burlington Land Records, which served to enhance the commercial value of other properties I own and lease to Mr. Graves and Mr. Levering; and WHEREAS, in memory of my loving huband, William, I wish to insure that the "Land" remains in its current, undeveloped, open state in perpetuity; and WHEREAS, I wish to provide for the continued and perpetual enjoyment of the "Land" by the general public and the owners of surrounding land, including but not limited to Harper Hotels, its successors and assigns, and Mr. Paul R. Graves and Mr. Walter B. Levering, Jr., their successors and assigns; and NOW, THEREFORE, I hereby declare the "Land" shall from this date forward be held, sold, transferred and conveyed subject to the following covenants, restrictions, easements and conditions, to the end that said covenants, restrictions, easements and conditions shall run with, bind and burden the "Land", in perpetuity. 1. No buildings, parking lots, driveways, signs or any other structures or improvements of any kind shall be constructed or placed upon any portion of the "Land", except as specifically allowed herein; -2- 2. No motorized vehicles of any kind shall be allowed on the "Land" other than those necessary for the reasonable and necessary maintenance of the "Land"; 3. No fence shall be built on or around the "Land" that is over four feet in height; 4. If a fence is built along or near the southern border of the "Land" which abuts Williston Road, there shall be gates located in said southerly boundary fence providing for pedestrian access to and across the "Land"; 5. If a fence is built along the northerly boundary of the "Land", there shall be gates located in said northerly boundary fence providing for direct pedestrian access to the Econo Lodge, so-called, which is located to the north of the "Land"; 6. The pedestrian paths which currently exist on the "Land" running from Williston Road to the Econo Lodge, so-called, shall remain open and maintained; 7. The park benches now located on the "Land" shall be maintained and remain as located and, if desired, more benches may be added on the "Land"; 8. The "Land" shall always be reasonably maintained and groomed including lawn mowing as needed, snow removal from pedestrian paths, and maintenance and trimming of trees and shrubs; it being the intention of the "Declarant" to keep the "Land" open and attractive as a mini -park and pedestrian -3- way for the benefit of the public and the remainder of my land in South Burlington; 9. All trees and shrubs shall be trimmed and maintained as is necessary to provide for reasonable visibility (as it presently exists) of the Econo Lodge, so-called, from all points along Williston Road which abut the "Land". To this end, the owner of the Econo Lodge, so-called, may at any time and from time to time designate whatever vegetation must be trimmed or removed to provide for reasonable visibility from Williston Road. If the vegetation is not trimmed by the record owner of the "Land" as specified in this paragraph, then the current owner or tenant of the Econo Lodge may come upon the "Land" from time to time and trim or remove the vegetation without any approval from the record owner or tenant of the "Land"; and 10. In the event the City of South Burlington needs a portion of the "Land" for purposes of building a public street or for widening Williston Road, then these covenants shall not apply to that portion of land necessary for the construction of said public road or said widening of Williston Road. These covenants and restrictions shall hereby forever run with the land, in full force and effect, and shall be binding upon all parties either laying claim to the "Land" or making any claim under these covenants. -4- These covenants, restrictions, easements and conditions may be enforceable by any proceeding at law or in equity, by any record owner of the "Land" or by any adjoining landowner or by any other resident of South Burlington. Failure by anyone to enforce any provision in this Declaration shall in no event be deemed a waiver of the right to do so thereafter. In any proceeding arising out of an alleged failure to comply with this Declaration, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover the costs and expenses of the proceeding, and reasonable attorneys' fees. -�itness Evelyn W. Lamplough =Witn STATE OF VERMONT CHITTENDEN COUNTYr SS. AI,Burlllngton, Vermont, this day of /,( 0, i 60-1� Il *_ %) , 1985, personally appeared Evelyn W. Lamplough and she acknowledged this instrument, by her sealed and subscribed, to be her free act -a-nd deed. Before me, , TNo ary P I -5- r CITY CLERK'S OFFWA So. BurMngton, Vt _ i9S7 recevied for record af IP%�36 o'clock . ^ M., and recorded in Vol, of Wi!zton p e �- Attest itY Cleric c� \0i 0 © so G 0 0 0 O 19 0 0 PPP: jF Iff oil' p` xrM 1 a Rif g q 41I it �a '� is r if I I; RlR1 1A14 [itA A I r. 1, iq 41 4c if if 9. ; 1.1 [oil au N gs mW � 0 VW"O" SURVEY, and ENGINEERING, INC. Surveyors and Civil Engineers — (802-222-9138) (FAX: 802-229-9130) 79 River Street #301 — Montpeiler, Vermont 05602 Q� G r. FYl 14 R� a y_ F I s,, 1;1411� �C.- R *4000-gof t© I i m m I� C0>> MgZNZ-�m�m s g��jpiQog �8m59 >Z>z *OCpCZ��g $ 0 m tTt 7f m m v i F f*n1 = m M Z —1 �zZ Z� 0 T u 15 g g u I ; I I if �A 'N fit • 0_ ', Otis 4 I S�- g g u I ; I I if �A 'N fit • 0_ ', Otis 4 I S�- 0 m0 0 O 0 0 © O 4 0ut f I 1 11,115) [fit ff -44 ag t I= a aI111 r 5 Z t 4fW T�* 0) IF ¢ C csi hn z z p�o rn z a z v N mW W�� 0 VERMONT SURVEY and ENGINEERING, INC. Surveyors and Civil Engineers — (802-229-9138) (FAX: 802-229-9130) 79 River Street #301 — Montpeiier, Vermont 05602 al i$° a � _ �ygf¢ >f a >t • I rl it I I %I I % If f €€�€_€ €€€€€ €€1.€q€ %€ € cg T r S� � • 9F � S r �C 9 e s • e � • e a s R a f ra ! �a g � a r 10 19 t City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 FAX (802) 658-4748 PLANNING (802)658-7955 July 22, 1998 Dennis Webster Wiemann-Lamphere Architects 30 South Park Drive Colchester, Vermont 05446 Re: Add Parking, 1076 Williston Road Dear Mr. Webster: ZONING (802)658-7958 Enclosed is a copy of the June 9, 1998 Planning Commission meeting minutes. Please note the conditions of approval including the requirement that a zoning permit be obtained within six (6) months or this approval is null and void. If you have any questions, please give me a call. Joe City JW/mcp 1 Encl c �),D s v✓t./ f t/'c PLANNING COMMISSION The South Burlington Tuesday, 9 June 1998 Hall, 575 Dorset St. Members Present: 9 JUNE 1998 Planning Commission a held a meeting on at 7:30 pm, in the Conference Room, City William Burgess, Chair; Mac Teeson, Dan O'Rourke, John Dinklage, Gayle Barone, Marcel Beaudin Also Present: Joe Weith, City Planner; Dennis Webster, Walt Levering, Dave Conger, Ann Griswold, Alan Palmer, Paul O'Leary, Stuart Bennett, R. Lawrence Roberts, Holly Keeler, Mike Bean 1. Other Business: No issues were raised. 2. Review Minutes of 19 May 1998: Mr. Dinklage moved to approve the Minutes of 19 May as written. Mr. Beaudin seconded. Motion passed 5-0 with Ms. Barone ab- staining. 3. Report on recent site plan decisions by the City Planner: a. Site plan application of Champlain Water District to amend a previously approved plan for a 950 sq. ft. addition to an 11,000 sq. ft. drinking water treatment facility. The amendment consists of adding an electrical transformer in the front yard, 403 Queen City Park Road. APPROVED. b. Site plan application of John Larkin, Inc, to amend two previously approved plans for: 1) a 60 unit congregate housing facility at 90 Allen Road, and 2) a 48 unit con- gregate housing facility at 16 Harbor View Road. The amendment consists of reducing the width of the re- creation path that is proposed to cross both properties. APPROVED. The Chair asked if there were any concerns from the Commission or the audience. None were forthcoming. 4. Continued site plan application of Tygate Companies to amend a previously approved plan for a 176 room motel and 250 seat restaurant. The amendment consists of adding 50 parking spaces and making landscaping modifications, 1076 Williston Road: Mr. Webster said that customers have requested more parking near the restaurant. Parking in front fills up and people won't walk f PLANNING COMMISSION 9 JUNE 1998 page 2 from farther away parking. Mr. Levering said they were not sure when the work would be done. Mr. Dinklage raised the question of long-term car storage that is occuring on the site. Mr. Levering said people park as if they're staying at the hotel. He said it also causes them a problem, especially in winter when they try to plow. Most of this parking occurs in the back. He said he tried to charge the long-term parkers, and they went away, but then the city said this couldn't be done because it's not allowed in the zoning of the area. So the parkers are back. Mr. Dinklage asked if they would give up some of the more distant spaces. Mr. Lovering said he would consider giving them up if they could build the new spaces. Mr. Dinklage stressed that the city does not want a car -parking business there. Ms. Barone moved the Planning Commission approve the site plan application of Tygate Companies to amend a previously approved plan for a 176 room motel and 250 seat restaurant. The amendment consists of adding 50 parking spaces and makiqj landscaping mod- ifications, 1076 Williston Road, as depicted on a three Page set of plans, page one entitled_ "Tygate Properties Parking Lot Addition, South Burlington, Vermont," prepared by Wiemann- Lamphere Architects, dated 5/1/98, with the following stipulations: 1. All Previous approvals and stiuplations which are not super- seded by this approval shall remain in effect. 2. The plan shall be revised to show the changes listed below and shall require approval of the City Planner. Three copies of the approved revised plan shall be submitted to the City Planner prior to permit issuance: a) The site plan (sheet Sl) shall be revised to show a bike rack as required under Section 26.253(b) of the zoning reg- ulations. b) The site plan (sheet Sl) shall be revised to note the correct number of existing and proposed parking spaces. c) The site plan (sheet Sl) shall be revised to note the correct number of motel rooms is 176 not 177. d) The site plan (sheet Sl) shall be revised to reflect the landscaping as -built to date which was associated with the indoor pool addition. • � I PLANNING COMMISSION 9 JUNE 1998 page 3 3. The applicant shall obtain a zoning permit within six months pursuant to Section 27.302 of the zoning regulations or this approval is null and void. 4. The applicant_ shall obtain a Certificate of Occupancy/ Compliance from the Administrative_ Officer prior to use of the expanded areas. 5. Any changes to the site plan shall require approval by the South Burlington Planning Commission. Mr. Beaudin seconded. Motion passed 5-1 with Mr. T_e_e_s_o_n_ voting against. 5. Continued site plan application of Brian Waxler to raze two buildings and construct a 12,000 sq. ft. building for retail use, 1242 Shelburne Road: Mr. O'Rourke stepped down during this application due to a conflict of interest. Mr. Conger said the issues raised at the previous meeting included maintaining 2 fir trees, combining access with Sleep Quarters, and relocation of the dumpsters. The trees can be maintained by adjusting the building and parking. The building has been moved a little further from the R-4 zone. The applicant has an agreement with Sleep Quartersfor a single access. The dumpsters have been relocated away from parking and vehicle access. Mr. Beaudin was concerned with leaving so much land vacant. Mr. Conger said they need to leave it open to meet the traffic overlay. Ms. Griswold asked if there will be any change in the drainage to the north or any fences. Mr. Conger said everything they are doing is on their property. There will be no fences. Mr. Weith suggested more landscaping near the parking lot, possibly a 5 foot strip. Mr. Conger said they will do something there, maybe some bushes. Ms. Barone moved the P_lanning Commission approve the site plan application of Brian Waxler to raze two buildings and_ c_o_nstruc_t_ a 12,000 sa. ft. building for retail use, 1242 Shelburne Road, as City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 FAX 658-4748 MANNER 658- 7955 June 29, 1998 Dennis Webster Wiemann-Lamphere Architects 30 South Park Drive Colchester, Vermont 05446 Re: Add Parking, 1076 Williston Road Dear Mr. Webster: ZONING ADMINIS7RAT '�F 658-7958 Enclosed is a copy of the Findings of Fact and Decision on the above referenced project approved by the Planning Commission on June 9, 1998 (effective 6123198). Please note the conditions of approval including the requirement that a zoning permit be obtained within six (6) months or this approval is null and void. If you have any questions, please give me a call. JW/mcp 1 Encl MEMORANDUM To: South Burlington Planning Commission From: Joe Weith, South Burlington City Planner Re: June 9, 1998 agenda items Date: June 5, 1998 3) CITY PLANNER REPORT Enclosed are the Findings of Fact and Decisions for the following site plan applications: a) Site plan application of Champlain Water District to amend a previously approved plan for a 950 square foot addition to an 11,000 square foot drinking water treatment facility. The amendment consists of adding an electrical transformer in the front yard, 403 Queen City Park Road. APPROVED b) Site plan application of John P. Larkin, Inc., to amend a two (2) previously approved plans for: 1) a 60 unit congregate housing facility at 90 Allen Road, and 2) a 48 unit congregate housing facility at 16 Harbor View Road. The amendment consists of reducing the width of the recreation path that is proposed to cross both properties from nine (9) feet to eight (8) feet in general, and to a minimum of five (5) feet for a short section along the retaining wall on 90 Allen Road. APPROVED 4) TYGATE COMPANIES - ADD PARKING - SITE PLAN This application was continued from the 5/12/98 meeting (minutes enclosed) to hear the owner's response to long-term parking and other issues. Specifically, whether he is using his parking lot for airport transient and long term parking, which is not a permitted use in the district. Also, the Commission wanted more information on why more parking is needed when the supply of parking already exceeds requirements. Stafl's May 12, 1998 memo is enclosed for your review. Landscaping: During the past week, landscaping has been planted on the site to satisfy the pool building addition requirement. This site plan should be revised to reflect the landscaping as -built. 1 i' 6/9/98 MOTION OF APPROVAL TYGATE COMPANIES I move the South Burlington Planning Commission approve the site plan application of Tygate Companies to amend a previously approved plan for a 176 room motel and 250 seat restaurant. The amendment consists of adding 50 parking spaces and making landscaping modifications, 1076 Williston Road, as depicted on a three (3) page set of plans, page one (1) entitled "Tygate Properties Parking lot Addition, South Burlington, Vermont," prepared by Wiemann-Lamphere Architects, dated 5/i/98, with the following stipulations: 1. All previous approvals and stipulations which are not superseded by this approval shall remain in effect. 2. The plan shall be revised to show the changes listed below and shall require approval of the City Planner. Three (3) copies of the approved revised plan shall be submitted to the City Planner prior to permit issuance. a) The site plan (sheet S 1) shall be revised to show a bike rack as required under Section 226.253(b) of the zoning regulations. b) The site plan (sheet S 1) shall be revised to note the correct number of existing and proposed parking spaces. c) The site plan (sheet S 1) shall be revised to note that the correct number of motel rooms is 176 not 177. d) The site plan (sheet S 1) shall be revised to reflect the landscaping as -built to date which was associated with the indoor pool addition. 3. The applicant shall obtain a zoning permit within six (6) months pursuant to Section 27.302 of the zoning regulations or this approval is null and void. 4. The applicant shall obtain a Certificate of Occupancy/Compliance from the Administrative Officer prior to the use of the expanded areas. 5) Any change to the site plan shall require approval by the South Burlington Planning Commission. -The -VINPJAMMER H u S. v r4 A L I T V G R O Il p - Fax Cover Sheet - Date. Pages: To:Qc. 11�e i ati't, Fax Phone: � 56--- From: -y)A Subject: -�plwALd L� ~� r-� l � u l Al �c 1 i C-L AI CL'YO z.--O) bLi JtI1�/' L/.A (YI �U�- C �� -- Y . �flt t 1 l �., Lin �� t clCt C. J ..% Bcono Lodge • Windianunrr Conference Ccntcr • Windjammer Restaurant 1076 Wdligon Road, South Hurlington VT 0540j • Tei (802) 86i- 1125 fax (802) 658- i 296 TOTAL F. u1 City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 FAX 658-4748 PLANNER 658-7955 June 5, 1998 Dennis Webster Wiemann-Lamphere Architects 30 South Park Drive Colchester, Vermont 05446 Re: Add Parking, 1076 Williston Road Dear Mr. Webster: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Enclosed is the agenda for next Tuesday's Planning Commission meeting and my comments to the Planning Commission. Please be sure someone is present on Tuesday, June 9, 1998 at 7:30 P.M. to represent your request. If you have any questions, please give me a call. Sincerely, /oeWeith,``� City Planner JW/mcp Encls PLANNING COMMISSION 12 May 1998 page 2 2. Review Minutes of 17 February, 14 April and 21 April: Mr. Dinklage moved to approve the Minutes of 17 February as written. Ms. Barone seconded. Motion passed 5-0 with Mr. Beaudin abstaining. Ms. Barone moved to approve the Minutes of 14 April as written. Mr. Dinklage seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Ms. Barone moved to approve the Minutes of 21 April as written. Mr. Dinklage seconded. Motion passed 4-0 with Messrs. Teeson and Crow abstaining. 3. Report on recent site plan decision issued by City Planner: a. Site plan application of Alexander Rose to amend a previously approved plan for a 30,600 sq. ft. building and 6,000 sq. ft. building for multiple uses and multiple tenants. The amendment consists of adding the following uses to the list of permitted uses: general office, per- sonal service, and transportation services, 3060 Williston Rd., as depicted on a plan entitled "3060 Williston Rd." APPROVED. No issues were raised by the Commission or Audience. 4. Site Plan Application of Tygate Companies to approve a pre- viously approved plan for a 176 room motel and 250 seat restaurant. The amendment consists of adding 50 parking spaces and making landscaping modifications, 1076 Williston Rd: Mr. Webster said the number of spaces in front of the restaurant makes it appear the restaurant is full, and people are leaving. Mr. Burgess expressed concern that the property is being advertised for long-term Airport parking which is not an allowed use in the district. Mr. Webster said he could not address that issue, and the property owner was not present. Mr. Webster said there are 82 spaces up front and 20 in another area. The problem is mainly at lunch time. He said there are enough spaces, but people only see the spaces in front which appear to be full. Mr. Burgess said he didn't think people would see them in the proposed new location either. Mr. Teeson said he felt it is a signage issue. Mr. Dinklage said many service stations and auto repair facilities are allowing long-term parking for travellers, and this may be the problem here with the gas station using this parking lot. He said he wanted to hear from the owner before PLANNING COMMISSION 12 May 1998 page 3 voting. Mr. Teeson said he saw no compelling argument to add parking and would vote against it. Mr. Dinklage moved to table the application until 9 June to hear the owner's response to long-term parking and other issues. Ms. Barone seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 5. Sketch plan application of William Wessel to subdivide a 41.8 acre parcel into 4 lots of 5.5 acres (lot #1), 5.5 acres (lot #2), 18.5 acres (lot #3) and 12.3 acres (lot #4). A portion of the parcel to be subdivided lies within the Town of Williston, 250 Van Sicklen Rd: Mr. Crow stepped down due to a conflict of interest. Mr. Boyle said the project will be served by a private road. Because of the wetland, the road would be longer than allowed in the regulations, and they are seeking a waiver. Mr. Boyle also noted a change in flood plain calculations which should show an elevation of 324 instead of 326. Mr. Boyle said that the CO District boundary cuts through the property. The original Southeast Quadrant study was a "broad brush overview," he said, and there is language in the zoning ordinance that allows the Commission to adjust the boundary if data is presented to warrant and support it. They are asking to do that as part of the prd process. Wetlands experts have determined where the wetlands are, and they have approved a prd as the applicant has laid it out. The applicant needs to delineate areas of maximum disturbance to the site. This will be shown with plantings and there will also be pins to mark the area. They feel the locations for footprints and houses are reasonable, but they could be moved. One home would be in the buffer zone, but this was done to create a yard. Mr. Dinklage said he would want a stipulation that if there were any further subdivision, the road would be upgraded to city standards. Mr. Wessel said he thought that could be done. Members expressed no objections to the 20 foot wide road or to the length of the road. Mr. Teeson wanted language that the road would never be maintained by the city. Mr. Wessel said that was OK. Mr. Weith noted there is a requirement for street trees along private roads. The applicant wants a waiver from this and is asking for plantings around the wetland instead. Staff would like some street trees, perhaps in groupings. Say, Park & Fly at the # 1 Econo Lodge in the Nation Stay, Park & Fly ' at the Econo Lodge is Simple: ' ■ Guests must stay overnight at the beginning or end of their trip 1 ■ Cars may stay on the property up to one month, at $2 per day ■ We provide complimentary shuttle service to and from the airport' i You'll Enjoy All These Amenities and More: ' ■ Complimentary Continental Breakfast Daily from 6am-10am ■ Windjammer Restaurant and Upper Deck Pub on the Premises ■ New Indoor Pool, Jacuzzi, Sauna, Exercise Equipment ' ■ FREE Cable, HBO and ESPN � . Econo.L„odg� � 1076 Williston Rd., 1-89 Exit 14 East South Burlington, VT 05403 ' (802)863-1125 or1-800-371-1125 _______J a ED CC z 0 J s: RECEIVED MAY 011"8 City of So. Burlington l� RELOCATE HYN DRADI PAl"16 TO NEW SWALE W/ 114 SLOPED ZAIiC PRIJFED�'�D�oc'" r� , EXIST. LIGW RELOCATE FDITURE NE- f I � RAMSEY a GULF OILAccEss To I SERVICE STATION .� N \\ ` \ \ \ _ _ \ I CILLEY TOUTANT �y NORTH PROJECT NAKE SIZE I REMAUS QTY- COST EA. TOTAL WHITE CEDAR HEDGE a' STOCK 3' SPACMO 145 $75.00 $10.875-00 RELOCATED TREES vAAIES — 3 S200.00 1a00.00 WOODEN PUNIER DOX 2Vv B'U4'H — a $1000.00 t8000.00 f 19,�75.00 177 MOTEL ROOMS 250 SEAT RESTAURANT 1500 SF FOR PATRON USE LOT COVERAGE BUILDING, 45,372 SF - 1.8% LANDSCAPE, 88,1% PARKING, BUILDING, STORAGE, 282,879 SF - 11.9% PROPOSED PLANTD9G ARKDOG / ".. / RELOCATED TREES �.Zz AREA O FDRE HYDRANT FH SITE LIO(TIM XISTING UTILITY KE — SEWAGE - TELEPHONE ----- WATER — ELECTRIC — SITE DRAIN �m- 2 W O Wo Q E O a-J W z_ Q Y �0- DATE: 5-1- DRAWN BY: KMO SITE PLAN S1 City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 FAX 658-4748 PLANNER 658-7955 June 3, 1998 Dennis Webster Wiemann-Lamphere Architects 30 South Park Drive Colchester, Vermont 05446 Re: Add Parking, 1076 Williston Road Dear Mr. Webster: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Enclosed is a copy of the May 12, 1998 Planning Commission meeting minutes regarding the above referenced project. If you have any questions, please give me a call. City Planner JW/mcp 1 Encl M E M O R A N D U M To: South Burlington Planning Commission From: Joe Weith, South Burlington City Planner Re: May 12, 1998 agenda items Date: May 8, 1998 3) CITY PLANNER REPORT Enclosed is the Findings of Fact and Decision for the following site plan application: Site plan application of Alexander Rose to amend a previously approved plan for a 30,600 square foot building and 6,000 square foot building for multiple uses and multiple tenants. The amendments consists of adding the following uses to the list of already permitted uses; general office, personal service and transportation services, 3060 Williston Road. APPROVED 4) TYGATE COMPANIES - ADD PARKING - SITE PLAN This project consists of amending a plan previously approved on 1/14/97 (minutes enclosed) for a 176 room motel and 250 seat restaurant. The amendment consists of adding 50 parking spaces and making landscaping modifications. This property located at 1076 Williston Road lies within the Cl and CO Districts. It is bounded on the west by Holiday Inn, on the south by a single family dwelling, service station, medical office, photo shop and Williston Road, on the east by auto sales and undeveloped land, and on the north by undeveloped land. Access/circulation: Access is provided by a signalized 30 foot curb cut on Williston Road and access to the service station property. No changes proposed. Circulation on the site is adequate. Coverage/setbacks: Building coverage is 1.8% (maximum allowed is 30%). Overall coverage is 11.9% (maximum allowed is 70%). Front yard coverage is 12% (maximum allowed is 30%). Setback requirements are met. 1 Memorandum - May 12, 1998 May 8, 1998 Page 2 Planning agenda items Landscaping: There is no minimum landscaping requirement, based on building cost, for this project. Applicant is proposing to relocate three (3) trees and add a cedar hedge with a value of $3335. Landscape plan is adequate. Parking: A total of 285 spaces are required and 313 spaces in addition to 50 overflow spaces for a total of 363 spaces are available. A bike rack should also be provided as required. The note on sheet S1 should be revised to note the correct number of existing and proposed spaces. Traffic: No additional traffic expected. Sewer: No additional sewer allocation needed. Dumpster: A screened dumpster storage area is provided. Lighting: No additional lighting proposed. Several pole lights will be relocated to accommodate the additional parking. Other• — the applicant has been advertising his property for airport transient and long term parking (see enclosed). Staff notified the applicant that this was a zoning violation because this is not an allowed use in the Cl District. Staff is concerned that the need for the additional parking results from long term parkers taking up spaces creating a need for additional parking. — the site plan should be revised to note that there are 176 motel rooms not 177. 5) WILLIAM WESSEL - 4 LOT SUBDIVISION- SKETCH PLAN This project consists of the subdivision of a 41.8 acre parcel into four (4) lots of 5.5 acres (lot #1), 5.5 acres (lot #2), 18.5 acres (lot #3) and 12.3 acres (lot #4). A portion of the parcel to be subdivided lies within the Town of Williston. The last review of this property was on 11/17/92 (minutes enclosed) at which time a 20 unit PRD was proposed. 2 I fie s' /"i"aL ��"✓a Iu �j v1A� T G«w-K AM CZIL/ 4A,-, "-Vt� Ajyo , O-VA- t,✓ I:::�7 00 5/12/98 ice, MOTION OF APPROVAL TYGATE COMPANIES I move the South Burlington Planning Commission approve the site plan application of Tygate Companies to amend a previously approved plan for a 176 room motel and 250 seat restaurant. The amendment consists of adding 50 parking spaces and making landscaping modifications, 1076 Williston Road, as depicted on a three (3) page set of plans, page one (1) entitled "Tygate Properties Parking Lot Addition South Burlington, Vermont," prepared by Wiemann-Lamphere Architects, dated 5/l/98, with the following stipulations: 1. All previous approvals and stipulations which are not superseded by this approval shall remain in effect. 2. The plan shall be revised too show the changes below and shall require approval of the City Planner. Three (3) copies of the approved revised plan shall be submitted to the City Planner prior to permit issuance. a) The site plan (sheet S 1) shall be revised to show a bike rack as required under Section 26.253(b) of the zoning regulations. b) The site plan (sheet S l) shall be revised to note the correct number of existing and proposed parking spaces. c) The site plan (sheet S I) shall be revised to note that the correct number of motel rooms is 176 not 177. 3. The applicant shall obtain a zoning permit within six (6) months pursuant to Section 27.302 of the zoning regulations or this approval is null and void. 4. The applicant shall obtain a Certificate of Occupancy/Compliance from the Administrative Officer prior to the use of the expanded parking area. 5. Any change to the site plan shall require approval by the South Burlington Planning Commission. PLANNING COMMISSION 14 January 1997 The South Burlington Planning Commission held a meeting on Tuesday, 14 January 1997, at 7:30 pm, in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset St. Members Present: William Burgess, Chair; Mark Crow, John Dinklage, Gayle Barone, Dan O'Rourke, Mac Teeson Also Present: Joe Weith, City Planner; Albert Audette, Street Dept; Shelley Snyder, Bill Schuele, Natural Resources Committee; Dennis Webster, David Flagg, Doug Hoar, Nile & Julie Duppstadt, Betty Ellis, Mr. & Mrs. Fife, Bill & Michelle Auclair, Andy Rowe, Cathy & David Gage, Vicky Fraser, John & Deborah Alden 1. Other Business: Mr. Weith advised members that pictures for the Annual Report will be taken on 28 January. 2. Review Minutes of 26 November, 3 December, 10 December and 17 December: Ms. Barone moved the Minutes of 26 November be approved as written. rir. Dinklage seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Ms. Barone moved the Minutes of 3 December be approved as written. Mr. Dinklage seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Mr. Dinklage noted that on p.8, paragraph 2, the first sentence should read: " Mr. Dinklage said the only reason the Planning Commission had allowed..." Mr. Dinklage then moved that the Minutes of 10 December be ap- proved as amended. Ms. Barone seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Ms. Barone moved the Minutes of 17 December be approved as written. Mr. Dinklage seconded. Motion passed unanimous y. 3. Site plan application of Tygate Companies to amend a pre- viously approved site plan to construct a 4000 sq. ft. indoor p000l addition to a 76 room motel and 250 seat restaurant. The amendment consists of reducing the size of the addition from 4000 sq. ft. to 2002 sq. ft., 1076 Williston Road: Mr. Webster said there had not been enough money to do the pro- ject as originally intended. The pool was made smaller and turned slightly. The link to the restaurant was eliminated. PLANNING COMMISSION 14 Janury 1997 page 2 Mr. Burgess noted that landscaping had not been reduced. (Mr. Crow arrived at this time.) Mr. Teeson_moved the_Planning Commission_a2prove_the site plan ap1p ication of�Tygate Companies to amend a_ previously_a12pK ved site plan to construct a 4,000 sq. ft. iindoor.pool addition to a 76 room motel and 250'seat restaurant. The amendment consists of reducingthe _size _ooff_the _addition from_4,000 sq._ft. to 2002 sq.. ft. , 1076 Williston Road, as deoicted_on a_olan entitled: "Site Plan, Tygate Properties 1076 Williston Road South Burlington, Vermont," prepared by Wiemann-Lamphere, Architects, Inc, dated 12/12/96, with the following stipulations: 1. All previous approvals and stipulations which are not sj er- seded by_this approval shall remain in effect.' 2. The site plan shall be revised to show the changes below and shall -require approval of the City Planner. Three copies of the a22roved revised plans shall be submitted to the City Planner prior to permit issuance. a. The site plan shall be revised to_show the updated coverage information. _ 3. The applicant shall obtain a Certificate of Occupanp=/Com lii-- ance_from the Administrative Officer prior to use of the new ad- dition. ~� 4. Any changes to the site plan shall require approval by the South Burlington Planning Commission. Mr. Dinklage seconded. Motion passed 5-1 with Mr. Crow_ab- staining. Mr. Dinklage raised the question of whether something like this could be handled administratively. Mr. Burgess said a procedure could be adopted for that. Mr. Weith noted that this question is on the agenda for the next work session. 4. Site plan application of David Flagg to amend a previously approved site plan for a 4608 sq. ft. building for auto service and auto/marine sales. The amendment is to increase the size of the parking area by 2040 sq. ft., 10 Gregory Drive: Mr. Flagg said Daves Automotive is asking to increase the back edge of the parking area because with the business they are getting, they need to park cars for a period of time while parts are ordered. There was also a problem with landslides due to all the wet weather in recent months. City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 FAX 658-4748 PLANNER 658-7955 May 8, 1998 Dennis Webster Wiemann-Lamphere Architects 30 South Park Drive Colchester, Vermont 05446 Re: Add Parking, 1076 Williston Road Dear Mr. Webster: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Enclosed is the agenda for next Tuesday's Planning Commission meeting and my comments to the Planning Commission. Comments from City Engineer Bill Szymanski and the Fire Department were sent to you at an earlier date. Please be sure someone is present on Tuesday, May 12, 1998 at 7:30 P.M. to represent your request. If you have any questions, please give me a call. City Planner JW/mcp Encls i z h c� a a s 1361 S ii x 1 W 10 44 ?vcc n z (^4 ^L� �{ MAl•L1.ZON CtryJ o P A �i q Am" NYZO °°O w V /ji \ •,�� o f ,0�. .A —•N 3y cn • �. ej2 4k man" Q 'A� ' � � L �-s � Z Z 8 ' �* / rn 9 N ;j a, s iQ P Igir j $ �• z z9 g a his = g A v z Y' $R g Q z ' g tic g Q Q® a O a a 0© ® O o U) �f-I fill P11 0 W Fn 9 jpeo. � Z wiry aa tr�oA© ■ °°° °°° kc a$E^ v' #NlzA E Q 6 �$ �yP i 3 I S •G.�< �Or01' NrE6$ z ° IR }¢jo:; �Q CTO � ZW�CC�r;+t � 'Fi 3; ! �P 6 T 1 Dm<m m�?; r �i j � m m m p v2ii-4 6 Pg 7 m m Z a� 1 v oz 2v v yy . P. $iQ 4 1! Y• iggdi11 r if I '['-' i, It it -" ["I'll! g �� 9^�� S4 g4 3 � ` ' age � •'8��A<� � TI'd - 4 R 3 a J 11,111[2� $� fig' $ � 1111i, 9 A g VER.MONT SURVEY and ENGINEERING, INC. Surveyors and Civil Engineers — (802-229-9138) (FAX: 802-229-9130) 79 River Street #301 — Montpelier, Vermont 05502 $rn ©0 0 0 [WI PFPI I 1i OR [it 1111 Iff zo y, p �A8ps`g Kau1" oil �g �Fp Ft n R A$ q3 Axis L Z Q A 6 jg 3 iEE a R i3 tic IH Y �r� _ tt _ a l cgs ?� o ell 9 7aQ�- till S ¢ r at ; Z :# + Z '� r 'QZ4r �ssi ww }` M Y■ ti >a �Sam c�Tm4 "�� boo; t �{{ o _ rm*rn�zWg>�ya�ovzi''mmmr� �W �444yySpp SAD z Z Ap��m �f-t _0Btr " mm C�o�o cnz a��m�mr1*p�� f�II'' E� ��.� Ft m z r^ g I -n (%i "� m O rn cz E o ®. w Ill g4B��: � � 1 1 plot sae * � D I jjzj 11 ;1 Ill 11 �j g, I lit T lit J 'lit 11F a r FS n VERMONT SURVEY and ENGINEERING, INC. Surveyors and Civil Engineers — (802-229-9138) (FAX: 802-229-9130) 79 River Street #301 — Montpelier, Vermont 05602 0 D r r- f RANSEY i i i GULF OIL L _ CILLEY TOUTANT i RECEIVED MAY011"5 City of So. gurlingtor DRAIN PAR1O16 TO NM W/ IM SLOPED DANK PId/CD TO"3''�'�ot'" TYP. E30ST. LDGIIT RFlOGTE FncnIRE RELOCATE A)_ c3 I\ t►r- � i -- p 177 MOTEL ROOMS 250 SEAT RESTAURANT 1500 SF FOR PATRON USE LOT COVERAGE BUILDING, 45,372 SF - 1.8% PROJECT LANDSCAPE: 88.1% NORTH PARKING, BUILDING, ST❑RAGE1 282,879 SF - 11.9% N SIZE REXAM qrY. COST EA. TOTAL WHITE CEDAR HEDGE a' STOCK 3' SPACING 145 $75.00 $10,875,00 RELOCATEO TREES VARIES - 3 $200.00 f500.00 WOOOEN PUNTER BOX 2'W,E'U4'H - 5 $1000.00 SM00.00 f 19.I75,00 PROPOQED PLANTING �KE.V AWm6 / / RELOCATED TREES lz AREA OFH FEE HYDRANT SITE LIGHTDIG XISTING UTILITY KE — SEWAGE - TELEPHONE ----- WATER — ELECTRIC — SITE DRAIN w x a z i Cn W_ �- o Lu CL OQ _ wo CL W z_ bi Q Y d DATE: 5—T DRAW BY. K'�o CHECKED BY: DeR SITE PLAN City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 FAX 658-4748 PLANNER 658-7955 March 30, 1998 Walter Levering Econo Lodge 1076 Williston Road South Burlington, Vermont 05403 Re: Zoning Violation Dear Mr. Levering: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Please be advised that you are in violation of Section 27.10 of the South Burlington Zoning Rgulations and 24 VSA §4443(a)(1). Specifically, you have initiated the following activity on the above described property without a zoning permit: Airport transient and long term parking. This use is not permitted in the Commercial 1 District (see enclosed). We were made aware that your property is being used for this purpose by an add in the Free Press (see enclosed). You have two (2) weeks from the date of this letter to discontinue this violation or be subject to legal action by the City of South Burlington. If you wish to discuss this matter, please give me a call. Since Raymond J. Belair, Zoning and Planning Assistant RJB/mcp 2 Encls MEMORANDUM To: Applicants/Project Files From: Raymond J. Belair, Zoning & Planning Assistant Re: Preliminary Comments, May 12, 1998 agenda items Date: April 20, 1998 TYGATE COMPANIES - ADD PARKING - SITE PLAN — sheet S 1 should show the land that was bought from Summerwoods and merged with this Tygate property. — scale on plan should be 1 " = 40' not 1 " = 20'. — all loss of landscaping should be offset with the planting of new landscaping. — staff is concerned with the loss of green area for this parking lot which essentially serves as the property's front yard. Landscaping should be planted along the new parking lot in order to screen it from view from Williston Road. WILLIAM WESSEL - 4 LOT SUBDIVISION - SKETCH PLAN — four (4) single family lots are proposed to be served by a private road 1300 feet long. Section 401.10)(1)(a) of the subdivision regulations requires that a roadway serving four (4) or more separate residential lots be publically owned. — Section 401.1(g) of the subdivision regulations limits the length of a cul-de-sac street to 850 feet. The length of the street proposed is 450 feet greater than allowed. — the house on lot #3 is proposed within a restricted area as shown on the SEQ zoning map. The applicant should address the criteria in Section 6.606 of the zoning regulations. — encroachment into wetland buffer C.O. District is proposed. Applicant should address Section 3.503(a)-(e) of the zoning regulations with a statement from a wetland expert. — the house on lot #3 is proposed to be constructed partially within the 100 year floodplain. This is not permitted under Article XX of the zoning regulations. — Section 412.4 of the subdivision regulations requires street trees along the private road. This should be shown on the preliminary plat. — the preliminary plat should include a sewer allocation request. — if a public r.o.w. is proposed, a connection to the property to the north should be reserved. M E M O R A N D U M To: South Burlington Planning Commission From: William J. Szymanski, South Burlington City Engineer Re: May 12, 1998 Agenda Items Date: April 17,1998 L&M PARK, BUILDING NO. 6 & 7 - SHELBURNE ROAD 1. Surplus excavation, if any, should be removed from site. 2. Site plans prepared by Llewellyn, Inc., dated March, 1998 are well done and are acceptable. BILL WESSEL - 4 LOT SUBDIVISION - VAN SICKLEN ROAD The private gravel road should be opposite the street (Old Stone House Road) planned for the Duppstadt development. TYGATE PROPERTIES - PARKING LOT EXPANSION - WILLISTON ROAD Site plan prepared by Wiemann-Lamphere dated 4/13/98 is acceptable. BRIAN WAXLER - SHELBURNE ROAD 1. Water Department should get a set of plans for their review of the proposed water service line. 2. Site plans prepared by DuBois & King dated March, 1998 are acceptable. MEMORANDUM To: South Burlington Planning Commission From: South Burlington Fire Department Re: May 12, 1998 agenda items Date: April 16, 1998 1) 2) L&M Partnership Fayette Road Dated 3/27/98 The new buildings should be sprinklered. Our concern is that the emergency access road be well maintained so that it is available when needed. The key for the gate should be placed in the knox box. William Wessel Dated 4/13/98 Van Sicklen Road Acceptable 3) Tygate Properties 1076 Williston Road Acceptable 4) Brian Waxler 1242 Shelburne Road Acceptable 5) Ying Liu Hinesburg Road These buildings should have sprinklers. Dated 4/13/98 Dated 4/13/98 Dated 4/13/98 City of South Burlington 575 DORSET STREET SOUTH BURLINGTON, VERMONT 05403 FAX 658-4748 PLANNER 658-7955 April 20, 1998 Dennis Webster Wiemann-Lamphere Architects 30 South Park Drive Colchester, Vermont 05446 Re: Tygate - 1076 Williston Road Dear Dennis: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 658-7958 Enclosed are preliminary comments on the above referenced project from City Engineer, William Szymanski, the Fire Department and myself. Please respond to these comments with additional information and/or revised plans, if appropriate, no later than Friday, May 1, 1998. If you have any questions, please give me a call. Sincerely, r r Raymond Belair, Zoning and Planning Assistant RJB/mcp Encls c f-- Wiemann -Lamphere Architects, Inc. .� Date: Proj. No. Project: We are transmitting the following items: Items transmitted as follows: Items sent by: Reviewed Make Revisions Noted Revise & Resubmit Rejected - See Remarks Furnish _ correctd copies For your files By: Our Messenger Your Messenger First Class Mail KrIemann -Lamphere Architects, Inc. 30 South Park Drive, Colchester, VT 05446 - TELE: (802) 655-5020 - FAX: (802) 655-6567 i � I i i / I i i I aIi w" Q V sF 3 �ns��. sfNn��gswisw v I J V I, % r r- O.y� �;i f:1A,tNC:ItrIG LOT• A®Df710r� 50UN BURLINGTON. \RRMONT --' -- _ _ca �5. i•� _ �, ,, 611! Architects 70 South Park EriW. ...... CdehosW. VT 05"6 Tel: $02 65 5020 VVIIEWINN L,"TPHERE LIRL 1 o, kw1,-co'r` CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON APPLICATION FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW All information requested on this application must be completed in full. Failure to provide the requested information either on this application form or on the site plan will result in your application being rejected and a delay in the review before the Planning Commission. 1) OWNER OF RECORD (Name as Oown on deed, mailing address, phone and fax #) 2) APPLICANT (Name, mailing address, phone and fax #) CONTACT PERSON (Name, mailing address, phone and fax #) 4) PROJECT STREET ADDRESS: 5) TAX MAP NUMBER (can be obtained at Assessor's Office) 6) PROJECT DESCRIPTION a) Existing Uses on Property (incl,uding description and size of each separate use) aa: t t� G� I/ rLO�%e' b) Proposed Uses (inc ude description and size of each new use a d xisting uses. to remain) i' c) Total building square fo /otag� (proposed buildings and existing buildings to remain) d) Height of building & number of floors (proposed buildings and existing buildings to remain, specify if basement and me�zani_ne) j\ {L e) Number of residential units (if applicable, new units and existing units to remain) %i,J�, ...- L G, ,'-I A i f) Number of employees (existing and proposed)- g) Other (list any other information pertinent to this application not specifically requested above): -- - 7) LOT COVERAGE a) Building: Existing 1 % Proposed % b) Overall (building, parking, outside storage, etc) q� �� Existing _ % Proposed I L-�— % c) Front yard (along each street) 8) COST ESTIMATES a) Building: $ 4 b) Landscaping: $ Z- 1 Existing 00 Proposed % c) Other site improvements (please list with cost): 9) ESTIMATED TRAFFIC a) Average daily traffic (in and out):�1Z b) A.M. Peak hour (in and out):_ c) P.M. Peak hour (In and out):_ 10) PEAK HOURS OF OPERATION: 11) PEAK DAYS OF OPERATION: 12) ESTIMATED PROJECT COMPLETION DATE:��- 13) SITE PLAN AND FEE A site plan shall be submitted which shows the information listed on Exhibit A attached. Five (5) regular size copies and one reduced copy (11" x 17") of the site plan must be submitted. A site plan application fee shall be paid to the City at the time of submitting the site plan application (see Exhibit A). I hereby certify that all the information requested as part of this application has been submitted and is accurate to the best of my kno ledge. SIGNA O AP LICANT SIGNATURE OF CO -APPLICANT Do not write below this line DATE OF SUBMISSION: REVIEW AUTHORITY: Dll�planning Commission ® City Planner I have reviewed this site plan application and find it to be: Complete ncomplete City Planner lov Designee D t (Apfrmsp) 56 EXISTING PARKING SPB E. T � RAMSEY PARK N T \� TT R PARKI� r H/C H!c GULF OIL -a- - 6 — H/C-- H/C o ACCESS TO SERVICE H/C STATION ` — — — — I\ -----_ \ I \ xn ocoF \ CILLEY — I uaa o�.� I 1 ram• I F TOUTANT 6s 22 EXISTINU I k� PARKIN \ 265 \ SegoSC so - / \ \29095 1 /! c:D�05 3�E XISTING L- PARKING S \ / APR 1 3,\19W L / 177 MOTEL ROOMS 4 EXISTING PARKING UNPSTE�ji 1' FOR /50 CARS / SORE 33 PARKIIGTI PROJECT NORTH 250 SEAT RESTAURANT 1500 SF FOR PATRON USE LOT COVERAGE BUILDING: 45,372 SF - 1.8% LANDSCAPE: 88.1% PARKING, BUILDING, STORAGE: 282,879 SF - 11.9% PROPOSED PLANTING NEW PARKING / / RELOCATED TREES PAVED AREA, O FIRE HYDRANT F.H. i SITE LIGHTING EXISTING UTILITY KEY SEWAGE TELEPHONE WATER ELECTRIC SITE DRAIN --- 2E R SCALE: 1"=20 DATE: PROG 04/13/9E DRAWN BY: DON CHECKED BY: DBW PROJECT: 96030.1 SHEET TITLE: DEMOLITION PLAN DRAWING NO. C .I